What resolution do you play with?

[Landiin]

Post what resolution you play with, I’m trying to get a list of the most common used resolutions that are used.

[Nitefang]

I play in 1600x1200 - hard to find "sets" for my resolution.

[maddbomber83]

1152 x 864 On Desktop
1200 x 800 on Laptop

[bakes]

1920x1200 on my 24" dell

anyone wanna give me the 2.5k for the 30" so i can play in like 20x19 =P

[perk]

1600x1200 normally, but when I wanna boast I do 3 screen at 3840x1024

[Zhaal]

1280x1024 most of the time, but i'm looking for 1024x768 ui's too..

[Frisco]

1280 x 1024

[luizofoca]

I play at 1024x768 gonna try at 1152x864 ...
its hard to find a ui that supports this low resolutions

[Houldintank]

Wow, you must have kick-butt platforms to play on. I have an AMD Dual-Core 3K (64) Processor, 4G Ram, and an Nvida 6100 512Mb Video card. My system starts to drop to pathetic frame rates at anything above 1280 x 1024. Bleh.

Is there some secret optimization process I'm missing out on? Is there another thread/site someone can recommend that might cover that?

Thanks for the great work on modding for us. Some of the stuff here is just extraordinary!

Peace.

[Stranger]

I play on 1280*960.
Houldintank: your graphics card are way too slow to play on high resolutions, even with 512 mb ram.

[Landiin]

Originally Posted by Houldintank

Wow, you must have kick-butt platforms to play on. I have an AMD Dual-Core 3K (64) Processor, 4G Ram, and an Nvida 6100 512Mb Video card. My system starts to drop to pathetic frame rates at anything above 1280 x 1024. Bleh.

Is there some secret optimization process I'm missing out on? Is there another thread/site someone can recommend that might cover that?

Thanks for the great work on modding for us. Some of the stuff here is just extraordinary!

Peace.

If you start getting pathetic frame rate above 1280x1024 with that system then you have some real optimization issues. I have a AND 3200+ (64) 1G Ram and a NVIDIA 5950 and can run 1600x1200 easy at balanced in raids, Normal group I can high and even extreme if it's not a big open area.

I would start by seeing how many task processes you have running Ctrl+Alt+Del then click on process. Then Google the name of the process you have running and see if you really need them or not. But with 4G my goodness you would have to have a fracken lot of processes running to bog you down.
.

[Vblackwolf]

Originally Posted by luizofoca

I play at 1024x768 gonna try at 1152x864 ...
its hard to find a ui that supports this low resolutions

Tihs is so true. I play at 1024x768 as well.

[acecia]

1600x1200 FTW

[nemojohan]

Turn of anisotropic filtering and anti-aliasing.. that helped my framerate enormously and didn't take away much in terms of graphics. You can't do it in-game so you'll have to check out the graphics driver settings in windows.

[Landiin]

Originally Posted by acecia

1600x1200 FTW

lol well my monitor will not go higher then 1200 My good one bit it and the one I picked up from Wally World wasn't the best of choices but it was the only option I had unless I wanted to set out to the weekend. Now the wife giving me that look when I talk about replacing a new monitor. lol..

[riddellj]

1440 x 900 (laptop)

[depechenode]

1600 x 1200 on my Viewsonic 21" LCD VP211b Pro monitor. The only reso to play in

[calman]

1600x1200 here.

[Tarrant]

Originally Posted by Landiin

If you start getting pathetic frame rate above 1280x1024 with that system then you have some real optimization issues. I have a AND 3200+ (64) 1G Ram and a NVIDIA 5950 and can run 1600x1200 easy at balanced in raids, Normal group I can high and even extreme if it's not a big open area.

I would start by seeing how many task processes you have running Ctrl+Alt+Del then click on process. Then Google the name of the process you have running and see if you really need them or not. But with 4G my goodness you would have to have a fracken lot of processes running to bog you down.
.

The 5950 is actually faster than the 6100, strangely enough...especially at higher resolutions.

The bottleneck in Houldintank's system is definitely that video card. Not sure why they'd slap 512MB on a 6100. Guess to use high resolution textures on a low resolution screen size?

Oh...and I use 1600x1200.

[Zonx]

1600x1200 on a P3 800 with 768 RAM and a Geforce4 Ti 4600.

That's darn near minimum spec and the game is playable at better than extreme perf... Well when its not crashing due to lowsey memory management, but that has almost nothing to due with vid reso

Raids and some zones do require extreme perf with this settup.

----- The following is a brain dump of optimization info ----

EQ2 (and 3D games in general) are all about the vid card speed, vRAM and RAM, processor is hardly an issue.

Low vRAM means the vid card can hold less model and texture data so will attempt to offload some of that to standard (slower) RAM. Also, alot of 3D rendering fx are optimized by storing commonly used calculation results in vRAM, thus avoiding the need to spend processing time recalcualting the same formula.

Slow vcard means lowsey frame rates when alot of stuff is changing on screen and/or running at higher reso. Some fx will also suffer further if their optimization data can't be held in vRAM along with all the models and textures. This is why a slower card with more vRAM can perform better than a faster card with less vRAM when running some apps.

Low standard RAM means more disk swapping in general and longer zone times. Disk swapping causes lag spikes when new resources are loaded. If your vid card also has low RAM, the poblem is compounded as almost every change is pulled off the hard drive.

The last major factor is disk speed/access time. No matter how good all your other specs are, your machine will eventually need to pull data off disk. Faster seek and read times will speed data loads. This is most noticable when zoning. Isolating various proccess to seperate disks/partitions can help access time allot. If possible, issolate your OS to its own disk or partition. Also give your swap file its own little dedicated partition.

Processor and bus speed are usually the least important and the most expensive to upgrade. Even the cheepest machines sold in the last 4 yrs have good enough specs. However, if most of your components are near minimum spec, you might get a bigger performance boost for your buck buying a new packaged deal.

In order of importance:

1) vCard (you want at least 128 vRAM and all the speed you can afford)

2) RAM (512 is hardly playable, 768 is tolerable, 1 gig is highly recomended, more than 2 gig is a marginal improvement)

3) Hard Drive (7200+ RPM with EQ2 running on a partition no larger than 80gig defragged regularly) Its best to have EQ2 installed on a seperate physical drive than your OS.

Of course there are cost tradeoffs to make. If you have to choose, always upgrade whatever component is closest to minimum spec. You'll get more bang for your buck upgrading from 512 RAM to 2 gig than from a 128 vcard to 256 even though your vCard has the biggest impact in general.

Allot of disk optimization can be done for free, just takes time and some way to backup any data you don't want to loose reformatting. If you have a free drive bay, you can pickup an extra drive cheep and avoid much of the reformat hassle

[PancakeAbuse]

1280x1024.

[iceyshadows]

1024x 768

I need a new Mobo for my system

The best card my current mobo will support is a Geforce FX 5500 PCI.

Any ideas on what kind of Mobo I should be looking for?

[Dolby]

1920x1200

[ShadowProwler420]

1280 x 1024

[jaetee]

I have a 23 inch LCD Monitor and I try to play in 1900x1200. Unfortuneately, I have to modify all the UI's cuz nobody makes UI's for this res <sigh>