rec.autos.simulators

Nascar 2003

Nige

Nascar 2003

by Nige » Wed, 05 Mar 2003 01:35:22

Hi,
In the process of getting a new pc, can you let me know the system reqs. for
the game.

cheers
Nige

--
Nige
remove SUNGLASSES  to reply

ThreeWid

Nascar 2003

by ThreeWid » Wed, 05 Mar 2003 07:49:15

I think the minimum reqs are an 800mhz machine.

There is no exact answer to this, but here is a point of reference.

My system is rather ancient by today's standards:

Intel P3 900Mhz
256mb DRAM
Ti4400 128mb
Windows 2000

It runs the game pretty well, BUT my video card is severely bottlenecked by
the fact my machine does not have DDR memory.  Because of that, I cannot use
all aspects of the video such as a full 42-car field with all the eye candy
on.  It takes some tweaking to keep the FPS up on my machine .  If my
machine was just a tick faster, say 1.2Ghz with DDR memory it would be much
more capable.

I would say any new P4 machine on the market today with DDR memory and the
same or similar video card I have would really rock with N2003.

By the way, I really like Windows 2000 because of the ability to really
tweak the system to run bare minimum services.  Win98 never had that level
of granularity for us gamers.  I have not used XP, but I 'd expect it to be
just as configurable.


Nige

Nascar 2003

by Nige » Wed, 05 Mar 2003 18:37:41

Thanks for the reply,
I am looking at the following spec. pc
AMD Athlon  XP 1800
512 mb DDR  266mhz
128mb Ge Force 4 4200
Windows 2000

How does that look?

cheers
Nige

Jaso

Nascar 2003

by Jaso » Wed, 05 Mar 2003 22:25:01

Your machine is NOT bottlenecked because you don't have DDR. Your CPU
is severly the bottleneck of your system.



>I think the minimum reqs are an 800mhz machine.

>There is no exact answer to this, but here is a point of reference.

>My system is rather ancient by today's standards:

>Intel P3 900Mhz
>256mb DRAM
>Ti4400 128mb
>Windows 2000

>It runs the game pretty well, BUT my video card is severely bottlenecked by
>the fact my machine does not have DDR memory.  Because of that, I cannot use
>all aspects of the video such as a full 42-car field with all the eye candy
>on.  It takes some tweaking to keep the FPS up on my machine .  If my
>machine was just a tick faster, say 1.2Ghz with DDR memory it would be much
>more capable.

>I would say any new P4 machine on the market today with DDR memory and the
>same or similar video card I have would really rock with N2003.

>By the way, I really like Windows 2000 because of the ability to really
>tweak the system to run bare minimum services.  Win98 never had that level
>of granularity for us gamers.  I have not used XP, but I 'd expect it to be
>just as configurable.



>> Hi,
>> In the process of getting a new pc, can you let me know the system reqs.
>for
>> the game.

>> cheers
>> Nige

>> --
>> Nige
>> remove SUNGLASSES  to reply

Jaso

Nascar 2003

by Jaso » Wed, 05 Mar 2003 22:27:51

Not sure what your cash flow is for the system...

A) Get XP home or office

B) Xp1800 is nice but for a few more bucks roughly $15 you can get a
Athlon XP 2100(prices dropping daily)

C)Ram should hold you

D) Video card is good...but once again hard to say unless we know how
much you want to spend. There are better options.

If your trying to keep the cost down, the system below is a nice
midrange computer, and it wont break the bank :)

MadDAW

Nascar 2003

by MadDAW » Wed, 05 Mar 2003 22:52:48

Since you are looking at AMD make sure you get a motherboard using the
Nforce2 chipset. I have the leadtek version in a new system I built and only
jumping from an XP1800 to an XP2100 (long story for such a small step) the
performance jump was great.

Another reason to go higher than an XP1800 is to get to the T-Bred core
instead of the Palomino core of the XP1800. The T-Breds run cooler than the
Palominos.  Well worth it for an extra few bucks.

MadDAWG

ThreeWid

Nascar 2003

by ThreeWid » Wed, 05 Mar 2003 23:22:17

I thought that too until I did some 3dmark benchmark testing and compared my
results to machines of similar speed.

Since my performance numbers were lacking, the public opinion was the
non-DDR memory being the limiting factor.


> Your machine is NOT bottlenecked because you don't have DDR. Your CPU
> is severly the bottleneck of your system.



> >I think the minimum reqs are an 800mhz machine.

> >There is no exact answer to this, but here is a point of reference.

> >My system is rather ancient by today's standards:

> >Intel P3 900Mhz
> >256mb DRAM
> >Ti4400 128mb
> >Windows 2000

> >It runs the game pretty well, BUT my video card is severely bottlenecked
by
> >the fact my machine does not have DDR memory.  Because of that, I cannot
use
> >all aspects of the video such as a full 42-car field with all the eye
candy
> >on.  It takes some tweaking to keep the FPS up on my machine .  If my
> >machine was just a tick faster, say 1.2Ghz with DDR memory it would be
much
> >more capable.

> >I would say any new P4 machine on the market today with DDR memory and
the
> >same or similar video card I have would really rock with N2003.

> >By the way, I really like Windows 2000 because of the ability to really
> >tweak the system to run bare minimum services.  Win98 never had that
level
> >of granularity for us gamers.  I have not used XP, but I 'd expect it to
be
> >just as configurable.



> >> Hi,
> >> In the process of getting a new pc, can you let me know the system
reqs.
> >for
> >> the game.

> >> cheers
> >> Nige

> >> --
> >> Nige
> >> remove SUNGLASSES  to reply

MadDAW

Nascar 2003

by MadDAW » Thu, 06 Mar 2003 00:55:37

Keep in mind that 3dmark results are usually on highly tweaked machines.
These benchmarkers are out for the highest score no matter what the cost.
So the bench mark is good for comparing changes on your own systems I
wouldn't  put to much weight on them. For NR2003 your CPU is the big bottle
neck for sure.

MadDAWG

Ed Solhei

Nascar 2003

by Ed Solhei » Thu, 06 Mar 2003 01:38:38

"Nige" said:

Dont hope for extreme miracles in the performance department..

I've got a system thats slightly better than yours and my framerate ican
drop as low as under 15fps in extreme cases (sun-glare).  Most of the time
it's in the '50's - 70's when I'm alone or just got a few cars on the
track... With a decent field of cars 20+ it can drop as low as 30 at times
(this is without sun-glare).

My system:
AMD XP 2200+ (1800mhz)
Asus A7N8X motherboard (Nforce chipset)
512 mb PC2700 ram
128mb GF4 Ti4600 (o/c to 310 /650)
DirectX 9.0 and Win XP Pro.

My N2003 settings: OpenGL 1024x760x16, 2xFSAA, 2xAF, world detail set to
medium (I think), View distance to 70%, All options bar sunglare,
reflections on buildings and steeringwheel is turned on, 15 car ahead
drawn - 4 or 5 behind. Mirror detail set to medium and IIRC all shadows are
turned on (few cars tho)

A few suggestions for you:
1. Get a motherboard that use the Nforce chipset and support 8 x AGP.
2. Get a videocard that support 8 x AGP.
3. Buy the fastest AMD you can afford (as dont shoot for anything less then
the XP2200+ (And if you want to overclock it - be sure you get hold of a CPU
that got the correct stepping (look around on the net for more info on this)

Last but not least -  go for Windows XP instead of Win2K - XP's just so much
more easier to setup and work with - Imho.

--
ed_

Rod

Nascar 2003

by Rod » Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:55:52


> Thanks for the reply,
> I am looking at the following spec. pc
> AMD Athlon  XP 1800
> 512 mb DDR  266mhz
> 128mb Ge Force 4 4200
> Windows 2000

> How does that look?

Have a XP 1700+ running XP, rest of the specs are pretty much the
same, on the settings I have I range from around 40fps to 110fps
with average around 60 with most options on high but shadows just
on cars. Sim looks spectacular to me (but then I might be easy to
please), you shouldn't be dissapointed with your setup except I
don't know how well it runs on 2000.

Good luck though!

Cheers,
Rod.


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.