Why does this game still run like **** on this computer?

[Marscaleb]

Okay, I've got a bunch of old computers that I bring to a Gaming Con to play old games on. UT99 has been the crowd favorite, but I've had a bunch of titles available from Doom to UT2k4. I'm testing out UT3 on some of the machines that should be able to run it. I'm buying some old and cheap graphics cards to increase their capability anyway just to get UT2k4 to run at a better framerate.
I've got one that I just installed a GeForce 9300GE into. It's running a dual core 2.6 processor and has 3.24 gigs of memory. (Running windows XP, sp3.)

Now the recommended specs for UT3 are all beneath those numbers. 2.4 Ghz dual core, 1 gig RAM, and at least a GeForge 7800. I should have no problems running this game.
But yet it still runs like ****.

The only settings I can find in the menu are to adjust the percentage of the screento render, and a slider for world detail and a slider for texture detail. If I crank everything up to its max, the game looks beautiful, but I chug the game at less than 20 fps. If I drop everything down to their lowest settings, it looks horrid but runs at a good 50 +/- 5. And I can't find a good way to split the difference. Honestly, the game doesn't really look good if I don't have everything at the max; the textures in this game just don't scale well. And really I don't get good framerate if I push the settings even a little bit past the lowest. All the middle-ground settings just give me the worst of both worlds.

I was about to write this off as "oh well, I guess this old computer isn't good enough" but then I saw the recommended stats, and I'm flabbergasted. If I am exceeding all of those stats, then why does it look like ****?
I'm wondering if there is something else I'm missing. Is there some other setting I need to adjust that I missed? Was there a critical update that was needed? (I didn't apply any updates because I just wanted to see if it would run at all.) Is there something I forgot to tweak in my computer's settings? (It has almost nothing running on it except for windows and a bunch of games.)

While I'm on the subject, I also was disappointed at the framerate I was getting for UT2k4. It was still good, but I had another machine with this same GeForce card (and I think about the same kind of stats) and it was getting more than twice the framerate. I mention this because maybe this is a clue as to what the problem is.
I'm looking for any suggestions for something I can look into and try. Windows XP is about as updated as it can get, and the GeForce driver was the latest downloaded today.
Thanks in advance for your time.

[Bobba_Novis]

When this game first came out, I had a 2.6Ghz Athlon X2, 4 gb ram, and 7900GTX SLI. When I turned all video settings to lowest possible, I could get 40-90 fps pretty much most of the time at 1600x1200 on my Trinitron.

Just because the 9300GE starts with a 9 does not have anything to do with performance. the 7800 is way faster than the 9300GE and has 2X the vram. The 9300GE is a **** card for anything more than browsing the internet. If you use a 9600GT or 8800GT, you will get 5X the performance. That means all the used $25 cards on ebay like the very old GTX270, 275, 280, and higher will also run 10X better than your 9300GE. GTX580 and GTX780 cards are cheap on ebay, likely about the same as the slower cards due to it's age. Take a look at the GPu benchmarks at techpowerup to compare GPu performance.

You do need to watch out for counterfeit cards on ebay. if it comes from China, it's likely counterfeit. No such thing as 128 bit GTX780. All performance cards are 256 bit or higher.


---------------------------

Weekly Warfare Matches. We play every Fri and Sat 12:00 Midnight to 03:00 AM, US East Coast Time, GMT -5 hrs, EPIC Warfare #2 or if 2 is down, then #3 or BGE server

TIMES FROM 10 March 2019 to 03 Nov 2019, GMT -4 hrs (Daylight Savings Time)
TIMES FROM 03 Nov 2019 to 08 March 2020, GMT -5 hrs (US Eastern Time)

My Gaming Rig - Win7 Pro - ASUS Z68, I7 2600K @4.6Ghz, 16Gb ram, GTX780Ti WindForce GHZ edition, ASUS VG248

The Intel core i7 2600K @ 4.6Ghz is still as fast or faster than all that came before or after.

[Skaa3z]

yes, UT3 o UE3.0 consumption GPU. IF the gpu doesn't have enough vram and shader clocks. You enter to play with the dynamic directional light off.

7900GT, 8600GT or 9500GT recomended to play olds machines

[Marscaleb]

So that second digit in the GeForce is having a greater say in its (relative) performance than the first one? I guess I'm not completely surprised; I always knew the lower values were the cheaper versions; I had figured a 9300 would be better than an 8700, but the more I think about it, the more sense it makes that it wouldn't be so...
When UT3 came out, I had a... I think it was 6300 or 6400 or something. I could run the game but never got it looking good nor running smooth. It irks me that this scrap-heap-rescue computer doesn't fair that much better.

Yeah, I'd like to grab something a bit more powerful for a few dollars more, but part of the problem is the power supply. These are all mini-towers and they use these compact power supplies, and the last time I went hunting for those I found it to be a harder and more expensive process than I had expected.
And I don't want to go full tower (or even mid) because then they take up more space when I store them for 50 weeks a year, plus transporting them. Honestly I've been thinking about replacing these with some micro PCs, if I could get some cheap enough. I was really hoping I could get UT3 on the list, but I don't think it is going to be worth this much hassle...

Also, you can knock the card all you want, but it is still better than the on-board video that I was using before; I'll certainly take that for six bucks.

I'm still curious why it is that UT2K4 isn't blazing with this new graphics card though. I've got another two mini towers that I'm positive use the same card, and they get framerates over 100, and I would be honestly surprised if their other stats were any better than this one. (Should be worse, really.) This is really leading me to think that there is something wrong with this machine that is keeping it from running 3D acceleration at its best. But I have no idea what that could be; these are all running fresh installs of WinXP; it's not like they got a bunch of AOL **** chugging down the system.

[Skaa3z]

The X300 series of geforeces are for basic office boards. The range of 8 to 9 improves only in cutting-edge technologies. from DX9 to DX10.

A 9800 GT is superior in performance and power to a 230Gt or a 430GT. But the 430GT series for example supports the dx11. that the 230 and 9800GT series has no support. For something more modern.

I have a 9500GT Pure HD. In a dual core AMD 64 +6600 550W +80pluss semytower. (not supor P expres external pins ).
On a pc of 2007. With which I play crysis 1 and ut3. with mods in medium high and high quality. In native 800x600 and 1600x1900. And I try mods and compare them to a more modern 460gtx gpu and a phenomx4

so that the mods that manufactures can operate them in gpus of low and high range. Anyway ut3 is limited to 4gb of ram and 2GB vram. Which has better pc I will not take more advantage. Because the engine closed it like this. The same happened with gear of war 1 and mass effect 1 to 3. And udk is a reconstruction of ue3.5, so eic games did not want to modify more ut3. And it is obsolete for an entry to dx11. Then he dies in the DX10.

on the other hand you see that epic games. left us thrown to fans of the ut saga. By fortnite.

When ut3 came out shortly after midway broke, so ut3 is a dark title that did not end its development but the engine is very good because it gave life to gear of war 1 and biosock among others. The engine is very flexible if you know how to operate it. Too bad that epic games did not use ut3 as it was ut2004 in the visual section and took a more gear of war style that is why it feels weird. But for me it is a very good engine for its 2008 era. And the engine has certified the 2k native resolution. The problem I have with HUD is that at that time we didn't have 16: 9 willscreen monitors (and the 20Grades interface is outdated). but the other standard resolutions are taken without problem. As for ut3, it requires gross power, due to real-time rendering. Something really impressive. The rendering scale affects the normal map, the reflection, the particles and the physics (clothing or hair may be the case).
The ut2004. it can be the vsync or some driver that does not respond well. but it should a 9300gt run ut2004 in ultra at 2k. And it doesn't demand raw power

ah Ut3 makes the most of win7 by dx10. But the dx9 is for winXP mode.

another variant the blur effect and the bloom hd also consume vast gpu. Maybe disable this. improve the consumption of fps.

You can try running ut3. play and ask for the console guide
to see how much more and fps you are consuming.

ut3 commands Press T in game.

Say. delete all text now write

Information Commands

Stat FPS - Toggles the display of your framerate

Stat Engine - Toggles information about the rendering system

[Marscaleb]

So I pulled out the other computer that was getting way better framerate in UT2K4. I must be going crazy because I could have sworn this exact machine was getting around 100-120 fps on CTF Maul, but I just tested it and I was hitting the same 50-60 that my other computer did. Oh well.

I've started looking for some geForce 8400's to put in these machines; I've been looking around and I think that's about the most powerful I can get without replacing these weird L-shaped power supplies. I guess I'm not going to be able to run UT3 on them; oh well.

[HEDRumple]

Stop trying to run the game with an Atari 2600.

[Marscaleb]

Stop trying to run the game with an Atari 2600.

Excuse me, but I am NOT running an Atari 2600. What do you think I am, made of money? Please, I'm not upgrading to such luxurious equipment while I can still replace my vacuum tubes this cheap.

[D21K2]

Excuse me, but I am NOT running an Atari 2600. What do you think I am, made of money? Please, I'm not upgrading to such luxurious equipment while I can still replace my vacuum tubes this cheap.

how cheap are you getting those cards though? aren't the R5 240 WAY better and probably the cheapest thing around? I though everyone wanting to get a cheap card did go with those OEM kind of stuff, also they don't even require a psu connection.