|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
07-21-2003, 03:14 PM
|
#1 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 262
|
Is it to slow to run 3d makr 2001
I have a 300mhz, 256mb system. It has a geforece 2 in it. Is htis to slow to run 3d makr 2001. i have seen some poepel run it on a 300mhz wiht a voodoo graphic card.
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 08:40 PM
|
#2 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 611
 |
You won't get a very good score if that's what your asking. It should run though...maybe...
|
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 08:51 PM
|
#3 |
|
iTroll
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 818
Posts: 2,252
|
itll run for sure its just liek david said u wont get a good score
|
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 08:53 PM
|
#4 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 262
|
i jsut installed it and it said the minimum requirements on your 3d accelerator were not found.
what does this mean. |
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 08:55 PM
|
#5 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 611
|
It means it won't run. Your graphics card doesn't support the.....features? the 3DMark program needs to run.
You'd have gotten under a 1000 score....probably under 500 too. |
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:07 PM
|
#6 |
|
iTroll
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 818
Posts: 2,252
|
thats odd i would think that any geforce 2 would be able to run it because my 16mb nvidia riva tnt2 pro runs it fine and its a piece of crap. the geforce 2 series should be able to run it. try downloading the drivers from nvidia.com
|
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:09 PM
|
#7 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 262
|
i have the latest nvdia drivers. could it be that i only have direct x 8 i odnt know if that matters
|
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:10 PM
|
#8 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 611
|
no, directx 8 is ok for 3dmark2001.
|
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:13 PM
|
#9 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 262
|
So what shgpuld i do now, ri have tried reainstalling it.
|
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:21 PM
|
#10 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 611
|
You could build a new computer
 Your current system may not be fast enough to run 3DMark....even if it would run it, you'd get under a 500 I suspect. |
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:23 PM
|
#11 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 262
|
Ye aive already started saving up for a new amd buidl i just wanted to try to run 3d makr 2001 on this one
|
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:26 PM
|
#12 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 611
|
AMD? eek.
'Intel Lover for Life' (well, until something better comes along) |
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:28 PM
|
#13 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 611
|
You could try tracking down an older version of 3DMark...I believe there is a 2000 version. I don't believe they offer it for download on their website anymore, but you may be able to find it somewhere.
Update: There is a 3DMark2000 and 3DMark99 which you can download from http://www.futuremark.com/download/ |
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:28 PM
|
#14 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 262
|
It doesnt matter to me which one i get but im on a low budget so i figured go with amd
|
|
|
|
|
07-21-2003, 09:38 PM
|
#15 |
|
iTroll
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 818
Posts: 2,252
|
im sure its not the system thats wrong its the video card. i would still recommend buying a new system. i myslef am an intel fan but there is no significant difference between the two chipsets.
|
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Linear Mode
