Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Laptop acts sluggish even after all attempts are made to increase speed...

<< < (2/3) > >>

jgpaiva:
f0dder: notice that he plays with the detail at the minimum setting.
Also, i've played this game on a very very similar compaq laptop, but with 1.5ghz, and a ati radeon 9200 and it played fairly well, with much more detail than the conditions wreckedcarzz mentioned.
There shouldn't be any problem, the problem must be elsewhere.

wreckedcarzz:
Have the game every run okay on your laptop? It *is* a relatively demanding game for a 9600 card when details are set to highest. Also, does the video chip have dedicated memory, or do your system use a unified memory model?

And... why two installations of XP? Does SP2 give any measurable speed impact anywhere? (apart for possibly a bit longer bootup time).

-f0dder (October 13, 2006, 03:42 AM)
--- End quote ---
SP2! OMG SP2! I HATE IT (rant rant rant here I come)! OK, from the download time I knew it was bad (I get all my "Microsoft Updates" manually. Security Measure :)). So I get it downloaded. While im downloading I order it on CD. (I am NOT waiting to download this on 3 computers!!!). The installation starts. (I HATE PROGRAMS THAT SAY THAT YOU MUST RESTART YOUR COMPUTER IN ORDER TO GET THE ANNOYING BOX TO GO AWAY!!!) It says I have to restart. So, I'm waiting. You ever look at your new SP2 boot screen if you had Home Edition? They too the Pro boot screen, took out the words "Home Edition" or "Professional" and left you with "Windows XP -bar-"! Then there is this new blue screen that says "Please Wait..." for about 10 lines! Then once you get into XP (finally!) There is this Security Center that they put in. I HONEST TO GOD TRIED TO DELETE ITS EXE FROM THE WINDOWS FOLDER. I SEARCHED AND SEARCHED AND SEARCHED. I WAS INSULTED THE SECOND I SAW THAT. I'M 13 AND I KNOW MORE THEN THE AVERAGE USER (or most users) AND THEY WANT TO PUT A SECURITY CENTER ON MY COMPUTER. AND THEN WHEN I TRY TO RUN GAMES, "AVG is turned off", "Avast is off", "ZoneAlarm is off", "3,000 other things are off". And then, they add a firewall. This is the most retarded addition to an OS I have ever seen. I swear to god...here is my idea of what they do at Microsoft Corp. "OK, here is what we're gonna do. We're gonna add a firewall to all the suckers running Windows XP SP1. Then, it wont do anything. It will be just for show! All in favor? IIIIIIIIIIIIII. All who oppose? _____. Ok." So I actually got so pissed I almost asked Microsoft how to delete the SP2 and still get updates & such.
But those were my 2 cents about SP2 (and not all of the problems with it).

Back to Underground 2 and the SLOW computer.
I play the game in 640x480 or something. No res problems. I played the game ALL the time on it. (I actually used it to "benchmark" my computer. If it went too slow, I tuned up my computer.) And according to the games HORRIBLE graphics detail meter, I used to run it in 1/4 full mode. Now it is at 0/4 mode and it is still slow (the reason I put up this topic). The graphics does have its own independant memory. Any help?
(trying AGAIN to see if updating/reinstalling drivers helps...)

wreckedcarzz:
AND SP2 USES A LOT MORE SYSTEM RESOURCES.

wreckedcarzz:
Well, not exactly sure why, but I guess you need SP2 to update the drivers on my graphics card... :o
so I went with my "hybrid" idea, using the gaming data on the normal partition...
It actually hit some nice FPS on better detail then I used to have it set to... :huh:
Anyways, thanks to everyone that posted & tried to help. At least I got it running again  :D
-Wreckedcarzz

JavaJones:
Sp2 not so bad after all? :D

I know a lot of people had/have problems with it, but I for one always advocate people upgrade to it. The security center is definitely annoying and I wish it could easily be *completely* disabled, but it's not hard to turn off the warnings anyway (and I bet you could slipstream that setting in somehow). As for the built-in firewall I think it's far from useless and in fact I applaud MS for including it. After the Sasker (I think?) and other similar worm problems, that were due to vulnerabilities in various systems, but were nonetheless preventable by a generic firewall, I think it only makes sense to include one. I suppose it seems stupid if you believe it does nothing, but that is quite clearly not true. Personally I think ZoneAlarm and similar more "full featured" firewalls are really bloated and unnecessary. To each their own I guess?

- Oshyan

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page