Originally Posted by vinea
Those are the games he listed. Pick different ones.
I finished single player of World in Conflict on medium on the 7300GT. The ATI HD 2K series sucks but the 2400XT should be on par. Don't have one to test so I'll try it on my old X1600 but I bet it at least runs in low. I was running medium.
WIC is hardly a wimp when it comes to graphics.
Let's see here for instance:http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/ind...=449&Itemid=27
The 2400XT can pretty much run Oblivion at 1024x768. Need for Speed: Carbon has it struggling. It does far worse in Company of Heroes. I can't find 1024x768, all effects off Bioshock benches now but I suspect it'd be somewhat painful to play.
All those are games I think you can expect someone to grab off the store shelf. It seems the 2400XT is not quite as bad as I thought, and by all means if you have one you can play a lot of existing stuff with it, but the verdict stands: too weak to be advertised
for gaming. Games in spring will kill it. The 2600Pro would be okay for now. It'll probably struggle in spring like the 2400XT does now, but at least it could run them.
Except that on the PC the hardcore is differentiated by the level of hardware they have.
Here's some real life counterexamples: one guy I know who held nation's #3 or so Starcraft spot and had a then old computer, and my neighbor playing insanely complicated and difficult strategy games on an old computer. These guys are hardcore players period.
On the other hand, I see casual players on arstechnica and other sites that like to play a little fps or WoW now and then, don't sink a lot of time in that, aren't necessarily very good at those games, but have a Geforce 8800GTX ticking alongside a watercooled quad Conroe. Because they like machines, overclocking, running pifast (!!!). Being a hardcore player not required.
And the 2400XT is about par for what the casual player has right? Its a lower middle of the pack chip. Other than ATI/AMD suckage at the moment the older iMacs were middle of the pack at the time as well.
ATI/AMD suckage is no excuse. If they can't make parts, Apple shouldn't buy them. It really is that simple.
When Oblivion came out no "casual" gaming PC was going to run that sucker with 20 FPS. The X1600 is fine for current games at low settings on any but the most hardcore engines.
Sometimes a game that has freaky hardware requirements comes out. Oblivion was one of those games. There's nothing particularly "hardcore" about it as a game - it was released for the 360 right?
- but it takes a while for average graphics cards to catch up to these things. I don't know of a particularly problematic game right now.
The 20 minimum fps limit was probably too strict. It really depends on the game and the player, too - WoW for instance gets pretty decent average framerates on GMA 950, but is unplayable because it fails where you most need the frames. Usually single player doesn't need as much as multiplayer.