Doom3 running problems

Alan153

Can anyone help me with the problems I am having running Doom3. It runs very slowly and is very jumpy. It makes the game unplayable.

My spec is as follows:
Intel P4 2.2Ghz
512mb Ram
DirectX 9.0c installed
Nvidia GeForce 4 MX420/64mb with the latest drivers installed

Any help in solving this is greatly appreciated as I think there should be no issues on a PC of this spec.

Goodshape

Your specs are better than mine, so it should run alright.

Have you tried messing around with the video / display options? Make sure Vertical Sync is turned on as well (in advanced video options) - that can make a big difference; could be whats wrong.

Alan153

I am trying to run it in 1280x1024. Would that cause any problems?

kasintahan

Alan153 wrote:

Can anyone help me with the problems I am having running Doom3. It runs very slowly and is very jumpy. It makes the game unplayable.

My spec is as follows:
Intel P4 2.2Ghz
512mb Ram
DirectX 9.0c installed
Nvidia GeForce 4 MX420/64mb with the latest drivers installed

Any help in solving this is greatly appreciated as I think there should be no issues on a PC of this spec.

I've hightlighed your problem.

Otherwise the machine is fine.

Horsefumbler

Your specs are actually shit mate by todays standards. Also your trying to run it in a pretty high resolution. try 800x600 and tone down the graphic details as needed. Doom3 is one of the most demanding games out at the moment. Need a pretty high spec machine to run it in high res and high detail. Also its a game you really need 1024mb of ram for other wise you'll get occasional pauses when you enter new areas.

If you've got the money get a new everything tbh

Alan153

I ain't gonna buy a new card just to run his game as it says on the box that this card is on of the supported chipsets.
Any more hints?

Horsefumbler: if my spec is so bad why does it run on lesser PC's?

Goodshape

When I said it should run alright, I didn't mean 1280x1024.

800x600 if your lucky. 640x480 will probably work OK. And turn some graphical features off.

FFS, just hit the 'low quality' button. It'll still look good; just not THAT good.

And make sure anti-aliasing is turned off on your card (right-click desktop, properties / settings / advanced).

koneko

Lower the resolution, lower all the graphics settings. An MX420 is pretty much a poor card, and won't run new games at a high resolution and look good. Try 800x600 with lower graphics details turned off, if it's still slow, go to 640x480. People running the game on lower spec systems, will be doing so with a better graphics card. Gfx make a big big difference here.

IIRC Doom3 has an option to recommend settings for you, or test your system and set it up automatically. It'll be a really low setting in any case.

(You're not missing much btw).

Alan153

Wouls a graphics card upgrade be the way to go then? If so, what one would you all recommend?

I have changed some of the game settings and it is running better now but the quality is cr@p. How come I could run HL2 without any issues and it looked amazing.

Thanks for the help folks. Keep it coming.

koneko

What is your budget for an upgrade? That would really define what card is best to get.

Alan153

How about €200 - €250

koneko

Cool, a 6600GT should be pretty good, and I think it falls in that pricerange (just over 200 IIRC).

I believe a few people here have that card aswell so perhaps they can post up their experiences and average FPS and settings they get with games.

Alan153

Excuse the ignorance but waht does IIRC mean?

Goodshape

If I Recall Correctly.

Used to get me too. You are excused.

Alan153

Cheers GoodShape. You are a fountain of knowledge.

petes

Alan153 wrote:

I ain't gonna buy a new card just to run his game as it says on the box that this card is on of the supported chipsets.
Any more hints?

Horsefumbler: if my spec is so bad why does it run on lesser PC's?

Just cos it says it on the box doesnt really mean much. I was running it on my laptop ok..with a centrino 1.7, gig of ram and an ati 9600 mobile...it was ok on the lower settings..and if you can get your hands on some of the tweaks was even better..but stopped playing it when got hl2...it was designed to work even on the lower end machine and still look pretty sweet.

Prior Of Taize

its a crap game but my god does it need a big system to run properly (except for that system that used a Voodoo 3 and ran it fine...lmfao

LoGiE

I recently put a Gainward 6600GT into my machine and it plays Doom3 and HL2 on high detail. I also upgraded to a gig of Ram and saw a huge boost in perfomance. CPU is a P4 2.4

Alan153

Thanks for the help folks. I was able to play HL2 out of the box on the standard disply settings at 1280x1024 without turning down the graphic quality and in my opinion it is a far better looking game that Doom3.
However, I finished HL2 a few weeks ago and now need something to play. I will make my PC struggle on with the demainding graphics until a game that really blows me away comes out and then I will upgrade my Ram and graphics card.

gamer

my advice is get a 128meg card directx 9 compatible ,stay away from anything with 5700or 5500 in the model no ,u shud be able to get sumthing 4 150 to 200 ,make sure to check benchmarks for farcry and callof duty in toms hardware website, be4 u buy anything,i had that card in 2000 and even then it was slow, get rid of it asap.u have a good fast pc there 4 gaming ,its being dragged down by the graphics card,turn off vsync ,and aa antialising, in grahics card options,turnoff detailed shadows textures ,u cud try running hl2 in 640by 480 resolution,it might look better in that resolution with higher frame rate,, 800by 600 is the best u cud do with that card anyway to be honest.on modern games.the 5500card is 128meg but its very slow for games,even slower than my 64meg ti400.

po0k

I finished Doom3 on my P3 800, 512Meg PC100 and GF4 Ti4800.
It was barely playable, but I was happy it ran at all.

Alan153 - I'm guessing you bought a Dell or some other OEM machine?

TerrorFirmer

800mhz?

Why an earth would you waste a GF titanium 4800 on that? You are indeed very lucky it ran at all :eek:

My older pc (2ghz) had a GF4 mx 420...still did ok...

Now, I am running 3.4ghz w-ht, 1gb dual channel ram and a ati x800se.....doom 3 is the shiit

Although Half life 2 is kinda more fun, i perfer the darkness and lighting effects of doom3...

Prior Of Taize

Athlon 64 3200+
2 gigs corsair ddr400
radeon x800 xt

and its still a crap game

po0k

MobileInfantry wrote:

800mhz?

Why an earth would you waste a GF titanium 4800 on that? You are indeed very lucky it ran at all :eek:

My older pc (2ghz) had a GF4 mx 420...still did ok...

Now, I am running 3.4ghz w-ht, 1gb dual channel ram and a ati x800se.....doom 3 is the shiit

Although Half life 2 is kinda more fun, i perfer the darkness and lighting effects of doom3...

Because I'm a masochist.

And the €70 I spent on the card is far less than what would have been needed to get a new core system

petes

Feck as i mentioned I got it to run on laptop. Have a home system - P4 2Ghz, 512ram and a ti 4600 wouldnt even feckin run. Still think it was a waste of money. First few levels were good but it was all the same after that.

murfie

I had the same problem when i first started the game, very jumpy, not nice to play at all. I upgraded my graphics card drivers and the game ran perfect after that!

morbo

I think the biggest problem with Doom 3 is that it is so bad! Revolutionary lighting my bottom! You can see anything! ANYWHERE! It is pitch ‘diddily-ditch’ black everywhere you go! And the flashlight issue. WOW! Now there was a stupid call. Here's what I think the head developers team pep talk went like:

"I know it's possible to carry a hand gun and a flash light, at the same time, one in each hand, but I just want to make the game that little bit less usable and fun. And I know that now-a-days, every assault riffle and shotgun and so forth comes with an attachable light, or even one built in. Perhaps even night vision. And this game is based well into the future, when these now-a-day extras, will obviously be standard issue, especially for a marine in a professional, private army! But again, that would make the game just a little too playable. Now what we're looking for is the year’s biggest disappointment! Hell, we've already made bucket loads of money from the merchandise. Speaking of money, did everyone get their free company Ferrari this morning?"

God I've never been so disappointed with a game. And I agree that the first few levels are good, but that's because you expect so much more to happen. But it just... doesn’t.

Giblet

You must be blind or something.

BloodBath

Doom3 is far more advanced graphically than HL2. HL2 just has very nice textures. Not a lot in the way of 3d modelling or lighting but it still looks excellent. It was a disapointment but it's not complete shlte. It could have been so much more but it's still a decent game with some very nice effects.

Get yourself a 6600gt if your getting a new card. It's the best mid range card on the market. It's basically the new 9800pro. Every card company is making them and a lot of people are buying them.


BloodBath

morbo

Nope. I'm just in a bad mood and get quite worked up about little things when I'm annoyed. But it IS a stupid problem in the game. I also hate how bloody linear the game is. Here's a user's guide to the game: Go in a straight line, shot something, and continue in a straight line. Repeat as necessary. I know this is all a bit exaggerated. But that's sarcasm baby!

TerrorFirmer

The game may be slightly disappointing, but if you think the graphics and in particular lighting are very bad, then either

1) You have a really terrible PC
2) You are blind
3) You are playing the wrong game
4) You are actually playing Doom II

Prior Of Taize

BloodBath wrote:

Doom3 is far more advanced graphically than HL2. HL2 just has very nice textures. Not a lot in the way of 3d modelling or lighting but it still looks excellent.

BloodBath

:eek: :eek: :eek:

your talking out your arse here...about both games...

Giblet

Actually most people on this board haven't a clue what they're talking about, including yourself. Making up things about games and passing them off as fact is a regular thing seen by most fanboys. "Doom III doesn't have true dynamic lighting is the sense there is no radiosity, but HL2 DOES have radiosity" is a quote I seem to remember seeing.

Which, while "technically" right, is also very very very very very wrong.

Prior Of Taize

why would you even bother comparing HL2 and Doom3?!?!?!

Giblet

Prior Of Taize wrote:

why would you even bother comparing HL2 and Doom3?!?!?!

Why not, they're both popular sequels to games within the same genre.

po0k

The general consesus seems to be that D3 paid attention to the lighting, HL2 made use of physics. Both games used their respective strengths as gameplay features.

Having played and finished both games on my machine (within a short period of time) I'd have to agree.

I'd still like to come back in a few months and play each all over again on 'proper' hardware.

po0k

morbo wrote:

But that's sarcasm baby!

Much like the last bastion of the weak-minded.

Swifty

Playing this at the moment, it'll run perfectly smooth for about 45 minutes but then it'll get a little bit choppy like pausing for a second or two entering new areas and lower fps during firefights. Anyone know what could be causing that? My first guess it's cause I've only 512 MBs of ram.. Heard D3 is fairly ram hungry. Should really invest in more RAM anyway

Playin it at 800X600 w/ medium detail, v sync on, no AA.

Athlon 64 2800+
512 ram
Radeon 9800 pro.

TerrorFirmer

I can run Doom3 at max detail on everything, save for the resolution (but its still at 1024 x 768, it actually seems to work generally ok on higher res but sometimes stutters in big areas for a few seconds)

For ages I was using a 2ghz p4, 256ddr ram and geforce 4 mx 420.....in the end, it was an amazing struggle to play new games at any respectable level. its amazing how fast it went downhill from purchase date. Games are advancing wayyyyy faster then they used to!

tman

Swifty wrote:

Playing this at the moment, it'll run perfectly smooth for about 45 minutes but then it'll get a little bit choppy like pausing for a second or two entering new areas and lower fps during firefights. Anyone know what could be causing that? My first guess it's cause I've only 512 MBs of ram.. Heard D3 is fairly ram hungry. Should really invest in more RAM anyway

Playin it at 800X600 w/ medium detail, v sync on, no AA.

Athlon 64 2800+
512 ram
Radeon 9800 pro.

i noticed a massive difference when i stuck a stick of 256 in (had 512 to start with)
whacking in another 512 should keep you sweet for the next while

Swifty

Yeah looks like I'll have to order in another 512 stick from Komplett soon. Thanks tman.

Deadwing

On my old rig i had d3 playing in 800 x 600, and it ran well with a few occasional stutters (the huge boss fight with the guardian was almost unplayable tho). That was on an AMD 2400, 512ram, radeon 9800 pro.
On my new system, AMD 64 3000+, 1gb ram, radeon 9800 pro it ran fine in 1024 X 768, with the occasional slowdown when ALOT of stuff was happening on screen.
Just upgraded to a geforce 6800 LE yesterday and had a quick blast on D3, running perfectly now in 1024 (monitor only goes as high as 1024, but tbh i dont mind, find it hard to read anything on higher resolutions!). But did the finaly cyberdemon boss fight and had a good constant FPS, no slowdown, jerking, nothing. 1gb of ram is definitely the way to go if you want to experience d3 as it wa meant to be played. It might not seem like much, but the difference between 800 X 600 & 1024 X 768 is almost like playing a new game.

Swifty

I think it still looks fairly nifty in 800X600.. Those cut-scenes with closeups of the monsters are bloody jaw dropping.

Deadwing

Yeah, i loaded the caverns entrance last night when i was testing my new card, you step out of the elevator to be greeted by 2 hellknights, i got my ass kicked motly because i was like 'wow..look at the detail on those bastards' lol. i gotta say it really is some of the most impressive graphics around. Its a pain tho, i used rivatuner to unlock the extra pipelines on my new card and ran the doom timedemo, scored 50 fps! sadly it also cause graphical corruption so had to go back to original clock speeds..but still, i was impressed lol

gamer

that graphics card is waaaay out of date very slow its holding back ur pc drastically , get a 128 meg 9600 at least or a 9800 make sure get fastest version there are various models out some are faster than others,its a shame to run that card in such a fast pc as u have.9600 wud be 10times faster at least.

gowldoleer

great game, but yes it's a serious resource hog - I have a new laptop with a pretty good spec and I still have to run it with all the shadows etc turned off just to make it playable. Its annoying as the visual effects really add to the atmosphere.

Think I'm going to have to come back to it in about 5 years when super spec PCs are selling for very cheap...