How much of a resource hog are Shadows??

**SuperDudeBT** · 03-26-2006, 05:08 PM

With my system, I've got to run everything on low (I think maybe one thing is one medium)-- Inspiron 6000 w/ 128 MB ATI x300, 1 GB RAM. It makes me feel stupid when I see a BF2 video of a helocopter and I think, WOW, those shadows look cool... wish I could use them. So, is it a big resource hog to turn them on? Think my lappy could take it??

**SuperDudeBT** · 03-26-2006, 07:00 PM

oops, didnt think about this should be in this thread. my bad!

**SuperDudeBT** · 03-26-2006, 11:16 PM

I tried it, and it sent my game to a screeching halt.

**sordavie** · 03-27-2006, 12:07 AM

Yeah, your video card is the weak point. I couldn't get bf2 to run in any playable fashion with graphics settings other than low/off with a geforce 5500fx. It's a similar to the x300 but with double the ram.

**Pvt_Meister** · 03-27-2006, 09:39 AM

I have a 6600G 256 meg nvidia and 1.5 gig ram and I don't get good performance at medium. I have to have most items on low for continuous smooth video.

**BHack** · 03-27-2006, 09:45 AM

shadows are the # 1 frame rate butcher.

I had them off until I got the 6800. Turning them off and turning lighting to low actually helps you competitively though. Less things going on to distract you. When I had the old settings it was easier to be aware of what was going on around you because there was a lot less movement and 'special effects'.

I'm a competitive guy but, after thinking about it for awhile, I decided to just leave the eye candy on. Guess I'm not as hardcore as I used to be.

**JimmyTwoHand** · 03-27-2006, 11:37 AM

I used to have the x300 until i upgraded except i had the SE version which is a little worse. I had everything on low and still had the occasional spot of system lag. As Bhack says though, as soon as i got my new card and turned shadows on it made it difficult to spot guys in shadow and buildings, especially the construction site which is a nightmare at the best of times. I likewise came to the conclusion that the odd death from the shadows was worth the prettiness factor.

I tried tweaking most of the settings on my x300 to see if i could get better graphics but never could find anything that made a visible difference and that didnt turn the game into a slideshow.

If you cant stretch to a new card you can at least feel content that you have an advantage over some of us.

**SuperDudeBT** · 03-27-2006, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Pvt_Meister

I have a 6600G 256 meg nvidia and 1.5 gig ram and I don't get good performance at medium. I have to have most items on low for continuous smooth video.

Thanx for all the responses. lol, when I turned the shadows onto low, I still didn't see the slightest hint of a shadow, even tho the game was a slideshow.

I was wondering, if you have a card w/ 256 MB memory, and u can't be at medium, what's the spec on the card that's holding u back?? cuz 256 is pretty good. is it the cache or something? like u want 2 MB cache instead of 512 KB?

and, unfortunately, upgrading isn't possible (or doable by me) for my system. I'm on a lappy =(

**sordavie** · 03-28-2006, 01:12 AM

Originally Posted by SuperDudeBT

I was wondering, if you have a card w/ 256 MB memory, and u can't be at medium, what's the spec on the card that's holding u back?? cuz 256 is pretty good. is it the cache or something? like u want 2 MB cache instead of 512 KB?

and, unfortunately, upgrading isn't possible (or doable by me) for my system. I'm on a lappy =(

I take it that's a reply to me and my old geforce 5500fx with 256megs of ram. Yeah, that card had a decent amount of ram, but it had a slow clock, something like ~250mhz, and it only has 2 pixel pipes. Basically, it didn't have enough processing power (i.e. it's too slow). So it didn't matter whether there was plenty of memory on the card.

**SuperDudeBT** · 03-28-2006, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by sordavie

I take it that's a reply to me and my old geforce 5500fx with 256megs of ram. Yeah, that card had a decent amount of ram, but it had a slow clock, something like ~250mhz, and it only has 2 pixel pipes. Basically, it didn't have enough processing power (i.e. it's too slow). So it didn't matter whether there was plenty of memory on the card.

Ya, it was. I was just wondering which spec on the GPU was making the difference. So, it's the clock speed? and whatre the pixel pipes?

**Thierry** · 03-29-2006, 03:38 AM

Yeh, shadows/shadres are the real killers when it comes to FPS as it takes a lot of power.
I do keep the normal lighting on as I rather die enjoying the scenery then killing guys with Pacman-quality. Also, never set anything to high except texture filtering and view distance (always keep to 100%, lower other things instead). The texture filtering on high is the only setting in which I noticed a small difference between medium and high, everthing else...medium and high is almost the same.