SOF2 requires directx-9

I'm not sure that's the case as my box copy say it comes with direct x 8.1 which my card supports.

It was released right on the cusp of dx9 coming out ... if it's using direct3D it'll bog ... maybe have a look here -> https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Soldier_of_ … I:_Double_Helix

giantclam wrote on 2023-09-23, 02:38:

SOF2 requires directx-9

DX9 wasn't out when SOF2 came out and SOF2's an OpenGL 1.x game.

SOF2 does feature a lot of large textures though, enabling texture compression can help the thrash. Raven were putting plenty of 1024x1024 JPEGs into JK2 and SOF2 at this time.

r_primitives is another important cvar to play with (defaults to 0 for 'auto', but can be the worst setting. 1 or 2 may be better depending on drivers. 3 is a slow failsafe)

Mattmanrx99 wrote on 2023-09-23, 02:23:

Hello […]
Show full quote

Hello

These are my specs

MSI 4200 TI 128 AGP card
Intel Pentium III 933 MHZ
256 MB RAM

I am getting FPS in the low teens on Soldier of Fortune II no matter what settings I use and then in Max Payne I get decent frames when not a whole lot is going on but once the action starts it drops to the high teens low 20s.

Is this normal for what I'm running? My drivers are 45.23 and I thought maybe my ram is too low but I'm not sure that's the issue.

Any help would be appreciated and I can provide more info if I'm missing anything I'm just a noob at explaining these things.

I only have experience with Max payne and from research it was a very intensive game for its time, and more so on the cpu side. I believe even with a 1.4ghz p3 and the very early pentium 4's it still drops frames to at least the low 30s during shootouts. The framerate tank you're experiencing is definitely normal especially with that 933mhz p3. Ram at 256mb is fine, maybe having 512mb would give it a bit more stretch. I would say try overclocking your p3 to squeeze all you can out of it but i have no idea how to oc a cpu 🤣

From my own testing I've found that the best cpu to pair with a gf4 ti 4200 (overclocked mine) would at least be a p4 2.8+ (period correct too) - i have a 3.06ghz build with said gf4 and it blazes through max payne.

https://youtu.be/QUNO4DY8h7I?t=986 - Check this video out for proof of frame drops during combat on a faster p3 and the same gpu, skip to 17.10

https://youtu.be/pJawkVX--I4?t=955 - Digital foundry done a retrospective on max payne too running with a 1.5ghz pentium 4, standing still in the subway level gets you about 40fps and throughout the video it lags a lil during combat

Cpu is the bottleneck. Athlon xp 2000+ or pentium 4 2.4 is a deal as well as for videocard and game itself too

Times were brutal for hardware back then.
$744 for May 2000 Intel Pentium III 933 MHZ https://akiba-pc.watch.impress.co.jp/hotline/ … 0527/p_cpu.html
then two years later when SOF2 comes out Northwood Pentium 4 2.4B is $270 https://akiba-pc.watch.impress.co.jp/hotline/ … 0629/p_cpu.html and slowest $160 Northwood Pentium 4 1.60A is still faster than P3 933! Hell, $90 Celeron 1.30GHz is faster than that P3 😀 so are $80 Athlon XP 1500+ and $73 Duron 1.3GHz. So you are trying to run SOF2 on a budget CPU at the time the game came out.

Interesting I didn’t know all this !

Looks like I may do an upgrade to the cpu or keep this build for the older games and find another PC. Thanks for the answers and insight everyone.

Mattmanrx99 wrote on 2023-09-23, 09:01:

Interesting I didn’t know all this !

Looks like I may do an upgrade to the cpu or keep this build for the older games and find another PC. Thanks for the answers and insight everyone.

People recommend pairing a a late P3 with a Gf4Ti to ensure that the CPU is never GPU limited and you can hook it up to a TFT via DVI. That's sound advice - but categorically does not mean that such a system will play stuff (well) from around the time the Gf4Ti itself came out. Your CPU is almost 2 years older than your GPU so will be the bottleneck. The idea with this pairing is to be able to play 2000-era games perferctly smoothly on a modern screen, not 2002 games.

Ironically that means that despite their popularity and nostalgia for people of a certain age, late P3 CPUs actually aren't very good for a wide-spectrum build: they're too fast (and not flexible enough in terms of clocking) for speed-sensitive DOS stuff and they're too slow for late Win98 games. As already suggested 'ultimate' Win98SE systems tend to have late P4 or AthlonXPs. I have a beautiful dual P3-933 system (literally, in an acrylic case, with Golden Orb coolers on the CPUs) that basically just sits there looking pretty and being booted only to show off how fast Win2k feels on a period correct but ludicrously high-end SCSI setup. Same for my Tualatin build. For actually running stuff I spend more time on my late DOS P3-500 system or my Athlon64 late Win98 to WinXP build.

The only good use for a p3 is to be a socket protector before putting a via c3 in there.

kolderman wrote on 2023-09-23, 10:50:

The only good use for a p3 is to be a socket protector before putting a via c3 in there.

Ehehe.....

kolderman wrote on 2023-09-23, 10:50:

The only good use for a p3 is to be a socket protector before putting a via c3 in there.

😁 😁 😁
mean, but kind of accurate.

The only skt 370 P3's I've been satisfied with in 1999-2000(ish) games are the 1400MHz P3-S 512k and an overclocked Tualeron 1200 running at 1600MHz (12x133). On the other hand the C3 provides great flexibility despite being quite a bit slower clock per clock.