Halo 2 displaying udderly bad performance.

**Reaper Man** · August 24th, 2007 10:42 PM

By the way, an "udder" is this:

I believe the word you were looking for was "utterly".

**Vicky** · August 25th, 2007 04:19 PM

You can disable a lot of services too, i had these disabled before i upgraded my pc. (if u don't run a 3rd party firewall don't disable the windows firewall)

Windows update
Windows Time
Windows Search
Themes
Windows firewall
Security center
Windows defender
Server (computer browser too)
Application experience
functions discovery resource publication
functions discovery provider host properties
windows error reporting service
KrmRm
Superfetch
remote access connection manager
telephony

**Vicky** · August 26th, 2007 09:14 AM

I'd like to know and have control over programs that want internet access. It's not the incoming i worry about but the outgoing.

**Mr Buckshot** · August 26th, 2007 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by KIWIDOGGIE

Well GET A NEW PC.

did you see his specs? Do you even know the slightest thing about PCs? Bear in mind that Halo 2 cannot keep up when the framerates are too high.

Look at moi. I have a Geforce 7600 GT. If I go to 800x600 resolution on lowest settings, Halo 2 should perform admirably well, right? Well, my FRAPS counter shows that I get almost 200 fps. But the game can go too fast and freeze for no reason. As a result, I now run at 1680x1050 on lowest, while fooling around with antialiasing until I can lock myself between 30 and 60 fps for ideal performance.

This guy's laptop is heads and knees above my desktop and my laptop. My desktop has an AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 1 GB RAM, and a Geforce 7600 GT - certainly not a slouch, but nowhere near his laptop.

**Vicky** · August 26th, 2007 09:07 PM

I think it's nvidia, i've played h2v on 3 different cards, all ati chipsets, and never had a problem.

**Mr Buckshot** · August 26th, 2007 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by Vicky

I think it's nvidia, i've played h2v on 3 different cards, all ati chipsets, and never had a problem.

it depends on your settings and so on. Nvidia does not 100% own ATI, and ATI does not 100% own Nvidia. Sure you have cases where the Geforce 7600 GT kills it main competitor, the Radeon X1650, but you also have cases where the Radeon X1950 XTX owns SLI'ed Geforce 7900 GTs.

The reason why you had no problems was because you ran H2V at the right settings, that's all. The settings that a game automatically puts you on are not always ideal. For me, I was placed at 1024x768, high settings, and I switched to 1680x1050 on low, 4x AA.

by the way

Originally Posted by Reaper Man

By the way, an "udder" is this:

I believe the word you were looking for was "utterly".

Originally Posted by accelleron

Yes, udderly. As in, sucking a cow tit.

**Mr Buckshot** · August 28th, 2007 04:01 AM

Originally Posted by KIWIDOGGIE

Once AGAIN ITS A LAPTOP and Your pc will out perform his at any time cause its a LAPTOP. Laptop are always going to perform less than there pc counterparts because if it wanted to perform as well or better then it would need to be a huge psu and better parts(not made to run off of battery or charger) And if you can swap out your GPU chipset i would do it. GFX card is all your problem is. I had the same pc and a X300 and the perfomance sucked more than my laptops 9600. I put a 8800 in that puppy and it took off running everything at high.

he uses a desktop replacement laptop, which is better described as a portable computer since it's really meant to run off AC power.

shut the fuck up before posting tech nonsense, ok? His laptop GFX card is a Geforce Go 7900 GS. It's faster and renders better than my desktop's 7600 GT in every aspect.

A laptop will perform worse than a desktop with the EXACT same hardware or BETTER. For example, a laptop with an ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 will never perform as well as a desktop with a real Radeon X1600 XT. But that laptop will out-perform a desktop with a Radeon X1300. Same for processors - a mobile AMD Athlon 64 3500+ will not be as good as a desktop AMD Athlon 64 3500+, but it will beat a desktop 3000+ for sure.

by the way, Kiwidoggie, Zeph has the same computer, and Masters had one until it broke (Dell's fault). Both of them had superb H2V performance.

What this guy needs to do is to double his RAM and toy with the settings.

just so you know, Kiwidoggie, I have a laptop with a 2.13 Ghz Intel Centrino Solo, 2 GB DDR2 (yeah I just upgraded), and a Geforce Go 6600 256 MB. I use the wowloader hack since I only have one copy of Vista (for my desktop) and I can run at 1280x720 on high, everything fine.

**Skyline** · August 28th, 2007 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by Mr Buckshot

just so you know, Kiwidoggie, I have a laptop with a 2.13 Ghz Intel Centrino Solo, 2 GB DDR2 (yeah I just upgraded), and a Geforce Go 6600 256 MB. I use the wowloader hack since I only have one copy of Vista (for my desktop) and I can run at 1280x720 on high, everything fine.

Windows vista takes up more then windows XP, so if you ever get vista on your laptop it would run slower.

**Mr Buckshot** · August 29th, 2007 08:15 AM

Actually, when all those new effects like Aero are turned off, the performance hit is not really noticeable :P I plan to get Vista for my laptop once a service pack comes out (Vista insecurities caused me to use a dual boot partition in my desktop so I can use XP just in case).

accelleron, 2 GB of RAM is still highly recommended for high-end Vista gaming due to the increasingly demanding requirements. I've already seen the benefits of 2 GB in Windows XP (I haven't upgraded my desktop RAM though since the local sale was only on DDR2 notebook RAM). While 1 GB is great in XP, it will just suffice in many cases for Vista.

**legionaire45** · September 1st, 2007 10:39 PM

lollers 32% ram usage with Firefox dl'ing something in the background. Without FF, 29%.

Mind you, I'm using 4 gigs of ram xD. Also better then when I have AIM, xfire, etc. running, which brings that up to like 45%.

[edit]meh, putfile sucks.