PhysX Assitance!
#1
Posté 29 janvier 2010 - 12:09
Could someone tell me what the right PhysX software system is, that will allow me to play this game! I'm on a windows vista, with a NVIDIA Geforce 8300 GS!
#2
Posté 29 janvier 2010 - 12:13
#3
Posté 29 janvier 2010 - 12:23
#4
Posté 29 janvier 2010 - 12:32
Be aware that while the 8300 does technically contain the feature set required, it is slower than the better onboard video chips (and in many cases, is just such a chip anyway), and doesn't qualify for support. It is a quite bad card / chip, and in my opinion, no PC including one in it is capable of "running" this game (a sedate "walk", perhaps).KurtZisa92 wrote...
I just bought and installed Mass Effect 2, but now it won't work. It says it doesn't have the right physics.
Could someone tell me what the right PhysX software system is, that will allow me to play this game! I'm on a windows vista, with a NVIDIA Geforce 8300 GS!
Perhaps such a slow walk is sufficient to satisfy you, but even that will only be at a rather low screen resolution, else the environmental interaction system will fail).
Gorath
Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 26 mars 2010 - 09:08 .
#5
Posté 29 janvier 2010 - 04:58
#6
Posté 29 janvier 2010 - 05:03
Failing that, perhaps check out the 8800/9800 GT.
#7
Posté 26 mars 2010 - 08:39
#8
Posté 26 mars 2010 - 09:12
Compared to various far better video cards with moderate current demands, the 8500 GT is crap. The are many excellent Radeons, such as the HD 4670, with comparatively low demands on current, and there is even a Geforce 9800 GT that has been specially modified to run on reduced current that was put into production.subsider34 wrote...
If you have a power supply with a rating of 350 Watts a nVidia GeForce 8500 GT 512MB is about the best card you can get.
I believe that the 8300 video chip is roughly on a par with the Geforce 7300 GS (real video card), so here is how that compares with an HD 4650:
www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php
Just for comparison's sake, even though the HD 3n00 cards were really a weak year for ATI, discounting the 3870, here is the 8500 GT next to an HD 3650 (which also runs on low current):
www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php
Modifié par Gorath Alpha, 26 mars 2010 - 10:07 .
#9
Posté 30 mars 2010 - 04:19
but all the x500 nvidia cards are not good for gaming...
#10
Posté 30 mars 2010 - 08:45
nVIDIA was responsible for the "n-hundreds" naming convention, but with the 9n00 generation, they had reached the end, and there were only going to be a single pair of actually new video cards numbered with 9000s, the 9600 GSO, and the 9800 GTX+. All the rest were the same cards as the 8000s, just moved to a new and thinner die wafer, and renamed. One more 9n00 card was "almost new" in a way.jakal66 wrote...
I have the 9800 gt with a 550 real w power supply and a core 2 duo and I can run this game max and perfectly smooth( not super high resolutions though),cheap and good card although I will uograde before the end of this year to a new gtx one
but all the x500 nvidia cards are not good for gaming...
It was already the end of the 8n00 production run when the 8800 GS was released on the next generation's thin wafer technology (and then when the 9n00s arrived, the 8800 GS quietly disappeared, and the 9600 GT showed up, with the exact same specifications. The Geforce 9500 GT is / was the second year for the 8600 GT, and unlike the prior year's 8500 GT, wasn't really a "500" in spite of its name.
The Geforce 9400 GT was the same card as the 8500 GT, although same as the rest of the 9n00s, on the newer wafer, and the Geforce 9300 was the renamed 8400 GS.





Retour en haut







