G400 ut2k3

[ganyaik]

Hi,
Did anyone try to run the ut2k3 on a G400? Is it playable in 640x480?
I'm about to put my G200 in another machine and I'm thinking on buying a used G400(I have an RR-G which I'd like to keep for a while).
I'm not a hardcore gamer, so I don't need 235fps at 2048x1536. The machine would be: AsusA7V with 640MB RAM and an XP @ 1920MHz.
Thanks in advance. I hope I'm not that offtopic with this question.

[GNEP]

You may as well stick with the original UT on a G400 - would be more "fun" IMHO (although maybe not so easy to find people to play against)

[Tjalfe]

I tried fireing up UT2003 on the G400 once.. don't

[bsdgeek]

It's almost playable with everything off and at 640x480 on my old G400Max, but some maps make my G400 flip me the bird and die.

It might be more workable in 320x240 though...

[Chrono_Wanderer]

don't bother a G400... on that kind of machine...

it would be a waste of your CPU power and stuff...

get a Radeon 9600 if u can afford one (Sapphire R9600... they have good 2D and quality build, running at like 160 canadian dollars) and you will be much happier.

Or if u dun need TV-in

Get what I got, an Asus GeForce FX 5200 Video Suite. It has video in, video out. Just no TV-in.

It is much much better in 3D than a G400, and u dun need great frame rates right? This card is ok at it. (1024x768 with medium quality in UT2003 is ok)

edit: corrected the "DV-in" typo... it should be "TV-in"

[ganyaik]

Hmm. Thanx for the answers. What about the TVO of the alternatives(G400 vs ATI&NV)? Are they comparable?
EDIT: I use my machine for sw development mostly and it's running MCU emulation or is compiling most of the time. Sometimes I watch movies, browse the net, do some A/V proessing etc... As for games: I hardly have time for them. That's why I said if it runs acceptable(25+ fps) then it's fine for me.

[Nowhere]

Well, you have a powerfull cpu, so perhaps this will work good enough for your needs?