The Official Graphics Card and PC gaming Thread

Mmm, you make some good points. I'm afraid I'm gonna have to agree LOL!

 

It's designed by Eugene Stoner, the same guy who designed the AR series of rifle ie M-16.

The M-16 model is the military designation of the AR-15. The AR-10 was the original prototype with wood furniture and firing full size NATO 7.62x51s(.308) like the G3 and M14(not related). There is also an AR-16, 17 and 18 which are different guns with similar design concepts.

The XM22 Stoner was actually very rare over in Vietnam. It was in prototype stages and only about 20 or so were used by the Navy SEALS. The actual links for the ammo were very hard to get because the XM22 was the only weapon they had firing linked 5.56/.223. The SEALS loved them, but they were fancy and needed extra care to keep them functioning in jungle conditions. The main downfall of most weapons in Vietnam was the environmental conditions. Even AKs stopped working in the jungle. The Navy SEALS were simply more professional and better trained than our regular forces in Vietnam, and many guns the grunts complained about, they loved. The XM22 NEVER got used by the US Military after the Vietnam War. They are still in limited production for use by private security contractors though.

975 m/s or 3,200 ft/s give or take depending on bullet grain and barrel length.

The 45 is the length in millimeters.

Example:

NATO 7.62x51(NATO standard full-power rifle round)

7.62x53(American .308, most guns can use both the .308 and the NATO 7.62, also what we mostly used in Vietnam)

7.62x39(mid length round for AK-47s. These are the old standard),

5.54x39(competitor to the lighter 5.56 for use in newer AKs ie AK-74, AN-94 AK-100
series. These are the new standard)

7.62x54(used in everything from machine guns, to Mosin Nagants, to Dragunovs. Guns made for this can also sometimes use the American and NATO rounds. It's all down to round length.)

It's open-mic. Simply open a chat with someone, and there's an option to invite more people to the conversation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_of_view_in_video_games

The field of view is how much of the screen you can see at your given resolution. 16:10 or 16:9 resolutions should increase horizontal field of view. Wide screen is literally WIDER than non-widescreen. But what's often the case is that the original 4:3 image is having the top and bottom cut off instead of the sides expanded to fit the screen. So this results in a decrease in both vertical and horizontal fields of view. It's like looking down a tunnel. It also blows the graphics up bigger than they should be for a given resolution and highlights the ugliness if any is there. After a few hours, narrow FOVs can give me motion sickness. Imagine trying to walk around looking through a pair of binoculars. Same principle. Lots of games have this issue too.

Again, most definitely not an XM22 Stoner or even closely related. They were a prototype some 40 years ago.

He most likely has an M249 LMG ie the SAW(Squad Automatic Weapon). Firing the same linked 5.56 NATO as the XM22. More rarely he could have its 7.62 NATO big brother the M240 but those are mostly used for mounted positions. The M249/SAW is basically the de-facto LMG for American forces.

If you're really interested Rich, wikipedia has a wealth of info on the subject of guns. What's more interesting is some 50-60% of automatic weapons ever made are in some way based on the M-16, MG42 or AK-47.

 

Hey DDP, thanks for the bullet links. Very interesting reading. Lots of stuff about yawing and increased tissue damage - plus stopping power concerns about the 5.56x44 ammo. The red cross thought the 5.56x44 ammo was inhumane.

One part was funny - where they mentioned that the bullet was unlikely to yaw - which I guess is a type of tumbling action - if it hit a "malnourished man" (that's a direct quote) and thereby passed all the way through his body without yawing. LOL

So if you're firing at a "skinny" you might have to hit the SOB a couple of extra times to knock him down. Haha.

Thanks for the clarification about the open mic steam "chat" Jeff. I'll have to organize some people and give it a try one day.


RED RIVER

I've been doing some more red river, and I am increasingly impressed by the game. Jeff - you mentioned that only about 20 of those xm22 weapons - all by special forces - were used in Vietnam.

The weapon in Red River that Balletto uses, looks virtually identical to the XM22 of BC2 Vietnam maps, when you are holding the gun, but you're right, the various Red River Weapons sites say it's the one you mentioned, the SAW, or FN Herstal M249, with the same 5.56x44 ammo on a 200-round belt. I have tried it a few more times since the last post and gotten much better at handling it. You have to force it down - the muzzle tends of course to rise up. Once you get the hang of it I have been able to get some of the same results that Balletto gets.

The class setup on the main 3-round M16A1 burst weapon, allowed me to put a sound suppressor on it, reducing the sound signature, at a slight expense of velocity, and I much prefer the gun semi-silent like that. While more silent, it doesn't appear to be any less deadly. And I am enjoying the Red River "true" bullet drop over distance. If you can see the enemy, you can kill the enemy, if the bullet drops into his head.

Using the long-distance scope upgrade (but I kept the short-range holographic sight on the other full-auto weapon that I carry as my secondary, because the scope takes a fraction of a second longer to engage) I have scored some kills with the enemy just a tiny figure in the wee distance, maybe 1500-2000 feet.

For example on the observatory map that I just finished, level 9 I believe, I was far away when I took out the APC guarding the distant AA rockets, using the anti-tank SMAW. The amphibious vehicle was crushed, so I waited for the 4 AA riflemen to march back near the vehicle, then I tried the same range on them - 3 were killed. One lone AA guy marching around with his rocket sticking up behind his back, inspired me to try to shoot him with the M16. When I got a lucky hit after about 10 attempts, and a little red X appeared on the screen with his gun flying in one direction and his body in another, I was almost as surprised as he was.

I had to chuckle as I headed back to the jeep. It was a "game moment."

Speaking of game moments, in that same map, right after that, I drove the jeep up a road at the base of a 20 foot hill with a single observatory on it. I wanted to get close enough to where the main AA rockets were, but not too close. I had already been killed one time, and there was still one more amphibious vehicle around there somewhere.

To my great pleasure, the shed at the base of the observatory mound, 20 feet down the little hill, was stocked full of anti-tank weaponry. While it didn't contain additional ammo for the SMAW, which is what I had been hoping for, it did contain the Queen Bee, which I have used in other games, and which appears to be a similar but maybe older style anti-tank rocket launcher.


So now I'm up on top of the observatory mound, my squad sitting where I left them in the jeep, and I can see way down below on my left, that 4-man Charlie Squad is prone, with Sorenson screaming as usual "We're taking fire! It's raining lead over here."

I looked around to see what his problem was, and started M16 target practice. It's interesting to see how high you have to lift the gun to compensate for the drop, and still get a head shot.

Then I switched to SMAW, took out the second APC vehicle, and stayed with the SMAW, targeting a nearby compound filled with PLA enemy. When the SMAW ran out, a quick trip down the hill equipped me with a 5-rocket Queen Bee.

The compound lit up in a series of anti-tank explosions. Bodies were flying in the air. A couple of idiots decided to try to rush my overwatch position - those bodies flew really high.


So now, Charlie squad, no longer pinned down, is standing somewhere down there on the left, just admiring the carnage. All of a sudden, Sorenson starts yelling, "F*ck up their sh*t, Bravo." More explosions - more flying bodies.

Again, "F*ck up their sh*t, Bravo!"

Hahaha.

It was gratifying. Somehow a little bit of cheerleading really helps personalize the game. For me, it added an extra element of realism. We're all communication-equipped - we're all on the radio, with open mics and headsets - he knew who was up on that hill blasting away, and he knew who just picked off the guys who had his squad pinned.

(It reminded me of Medal of Honor, Pacific Assault, where the guys used to yell "Tommy smoked another one!") For once his screaming sounded beautiful.

Between the Queen Bee and the M16, pretty soon there were no more targets. I ambled down the hill, almost forgetting to call my squad still sitting there in the jeep. There was no opposition. Boom! The rockets disintegrated, and it's time to wait for the 'copter.

Sorenson miced out twice more "I give you points on sniper, Bravo, no enemies as far as the eye can see." "I give you points on sniper, Bravo, no enemies as far as the eye can see."

Hahaha. Thanks buddy. That's a lot better than you complaining about me being "teacher's pet" and getting the plum "high road" killing assignments while you're left with suppression and support. (And then Alpha dog squad yelling at Charlie "That's cause you can't hit the fat side of an elephant with a hippo.")

I'm beginning to like this game. They said 9 months ago in the development days that their aim was to "put you into the boots of a marine." It has an authentic feel to it.

Rich

 

I really liked the dialog too Rich.

 

5.56x44 ammo is garbage, its ok for a fast refiring short to medium range weapon, but it doesn't belong in rifles. there are better pistol rounds that easily out class the 5.56x44 with better stopping power and less recoil. the M4 is a piece of crap as well, i held one once....it felt like the thing was gonna fall apart in my hands.

 

Ahem 5.56x45 guys, not 44. It's lightweight, powerful, no recoil at all, and I'm not sure what M4 you've ever held DXR88 because I own(and built myself) 2 AR-15s made by ArmaLite and they are excellent quality. That's a baseless claim, really, because any AR owner will attest to their quality. The AR-15 has basically set the standard of quality and precision for small arms. Also have an AK in 7.62x39 so I know the difference.

No pistol round currently in existence has more kinetic power than the 5.56 either barring specialty rounds like the .454 Casull, .45 Long Colt or .500 S&W Magnum. Also because of the size of the round, the 5.56 has almost zero recoil. Small children could fire one all day without a problem. So that throws pistols being lower recoil right out the window because most simply aren't. Having fired and being the owner of several pistols in different chambers from .357 Magnum right down to the 9x18 Makarov. Anything from a .357 and up has wild recoil. And in close quarters, where you would use a pistol, no pistol is going to outgun it, except in handling.

All military designated weapons use metal jacket rounds, including the pistols, so any advantage you gain in size of the bullet is negated by the fact that it goes right through the target. The 5.56 has higher muzzle velocity and thus better hydrostatic shock characteristics not to mention better armor penetration. So the stopping power argument, out the window. No common pistol round is comparable to the 5.56. Also the 5.56x45 is stupidly accurate and is one of the most commonly used targeting rounds in the world.


An AR is as powerful as an AK(if you understand how the ammo works yes it is), the rounds weigh less, the gun itself is actually more reliable when properly taken care of, it's several times more accurate, etc etc. The AR-15/M-16/M4 is an extremely high quality gun and the 5.56x45 easily has enough stopping power for personnel. Anyone who tells you different, doesn't know what they're talking about because they've never used it in combat. Should I take advice from someone who doesn't even know the proper name of the round or from the several military veterans I know who have used it to defend their lives? hmm. My great uncle, who served 2 tours with the 101st Airborne including during the Tet Offensive in '68, will tell you the same.

I mean, far be it for me to straight up tell someone they're wrong. But I've done tons and tons of research on the subject, including personal experience firing thousands of the rounds out of weapons I own, and can definitively say what I know to be true. Tip number 1: bullet size doesn't count for jack, it's the shape of the round and the charge behind it that give you power.

 

sorry it is x45. its what i get for copying it from somebody else.

i should never have to put more than three rounds into a target to stop it i classify that as trash. its accuracy is only good in short to medium firefights as the round falls out of trajectory at 300~350 Meters and that's if your one hell of a rifleman.

the round lacks the power, and the accuracy to be used in a rifle where long to medium kill ranges are a must. the military itself is concerned with its lack of stopping power and accuracy at long ranges are testing the 6mm AR round to be used to fill that role.

Ive used the round as well i didn't like it, it took 3 shots to drop a hog and took 2 shots to drop a buck. i didn't use my .308 that day because the bolt got stuck go figure.

The M16 is an excellent rifle, i like the weight and the feel to it and could almost forgive its use of 5.56 munitions. its the M4 that's garbage it was made to be cheap to save war funds at least that's what id like to believe.

your uncle i salute, and respect.

 

This has a lot to do with the configuration of the rifle as well. ARs are 100% modular so you can have everything from a 10" to a 20" barrel and a whole range of cartridge grains and designs. I do agree on long-range stopping power though. The 7.62 NATO takes care of that, only, you try to fire a 7.62 NATO for hours at a time. That thing kicks, and it hurts.

Your opinions are valid but the M4 is no different from any other AR pattern rifle. If it was a semi-auto civilian model, it was likely built of cheap components or simply had a lot of frame rattle, which can be fixed. Guns are no different than computers, you get what you build or buy.

I just dropped a good sized whitetail this last autumn in one shot, with a short barrel M4 configuration AR. It's about location, not stopping power. Don't mean to talk myself up here but I'm not a bad shot.

I know that was a crappy card to pull but I really respect my uncle too and he does have a lot of experience even using the earlier, more problematic rifles. He says they had plenty of stopping power for dropping a human being at the ranges they were at. And what's more, the Navy SEALs were using civilian AR-15s converted to full auto in Vietnam before the military adopted them. They loved them.

 

I know i have a Grandfathered M14 chambered for 7.62x51. used it at the range one day was sore for a week... i couldn't imagine running threw a jungle Carrying an all wood furnished steel milled firearm let alone fire it in its fully auto mode if it wasn't the bad guys kicking your ass it was your gun.

 

lol...way to make me feel like i'm old and decrepit.

 

On another note the latest Crossfire application profile doesn't seem to make much sense...

From AMD's site:

New profiles added to this release:
- Medieval 2 Total War: New CrossFire Profile
- Drakensang: The River of Time: New CrossFire Profile
- Sanctum: New CrossFire profile
- Shogun 2: Forced on Anti-Aliasing through the Catalyst Control Center has been disabled
- Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine: Forced on Anti-Aliasing through the Catalyst Control Center has been disabled
- WinDVD: Forced on Anti-Aliasing through the Catalyst Control Center has been disabled
- Men or War: Assault Squad: Disables CrossFire support
- Age of Empires Online: Disables CrossFire support

Why would you remove features guys? Is this the same as when I lost 16xAA for a few months because they didn't think I'd need it or what? They need to stop messing with our gaming experience and start fixing bugs. I'm tired of the features of my video hardware being controlled by whether AMD has competent people at work today.

I mean first they play with my AA settings and limit me to 8x, which makes no sense. Now all these Application Profiles that disable one entire half of my graphics hardware. Come one guys, I kinda bought two cards for Crossfire so I could USE CROSSFIRE. And that 16xAA, I use that too.

 

Actually, fixing bugs is exactly what they're doing. Bear in mind that now there is no disable crossfire feature for dual-GPU users, if crossfire completely fails to function in a game, then it needs to be written out of the driver. Likewise for forced AA, it's caused a few problems for some games, most typically the ones where AA code detects Radeons and disables (usually unreal engine games).

 

Well explain to me why my AA is limited to 8x in the control panel at seemingly random times. Yesterday I was playing Battlefield 2 totally maxed with 16xAA. Today, I go to my control panel and it's limited to 8x. Even if I reboot, start BF2, then open the control panel while in-game. This is an entirely stock driver install on a fresh format and it has been happening on other formats as well.

And just in case you ask, yes Crossfire is enabled.(which is a stupid reason for limiting it anyway)

 

High AA levels have always seemed buggy in Catalyst. 11.6 is the first driver I can remember seeing the 16x setting in the control panel. It's been limited to 8x prior to this as far as I can tell.

 

i really wish intel had gotten into the gpu wars.

 

They were going to, remember Larrabee?

 

Haha - this from the guy who posted those two links to very detailed and informative pieces on the 5.56x45 ammo. LOL.

I would like to take advantage of my right of free speech, as limited by AfterDawn rules, to make the following counter-argument:

I would just like to chime in, DDP, with all due respect to your responsibility for keeping the thread on track, that in my opinion, the rather short technical discussion about ammo seemed to me to be completely relevant to the discussion about the game, Red River. Perhaps you were concerned it would just keep going - I agree, for sure, this is not a gun thread.

But this is a thread that discusses video games. Interogative: what percentage of those games use guns? Would that be fifty percent?

Not to be a trouble-maker, but I have to make the counter-argument, that Jeff and DXR's discussion was totally relevant, because in watching the teaser trailers and interviews about the Red River game 9 months ago - Codemasters stated that their desire was to "put you into the boots of a marine."

They even refused to allow the user to modify the language and blood and gore settings. For example, the parents of a 12 year old, cannot adjust the game settings and eliminate all the motherf**kers and every other foul thing coming out of the mouths of Knox and Sorenson and Alpha squad.

But by doing that they limited distribution of the game - younger age groups can't buy it. You get the full foul-mouthed marine experience, or you play something else. That is a level of integrity that I applaud.

To me, the game banter is authentic. Whether it's guys in a pro football game, or guys in a life and death battle with enemy soldiers, the polite civilities of a mixed group cocktail party with beautiful ladies present, goes right out of the window. I have been around soldiers in a military setting, and that's how they talk.

Valve, with its 30 million subscribers, many of them quite young, could never have developed the game, although they do distribute it. So my hat is off to Codemasters - and I hope they end up making a lot of money, so that they are inspired to make more chapters in the Operation Flashpoint series.

So, getting back to the subject matter of the posts between DXR and Jeff, those posts seemed to me to be quite relevant to the purpose of this thread, to my way of thinking, exactly because Red River lays claim to being authentic.

Let's look at the game from the standpoint of the main purpose of this thread - graphics cards and hardware to run a game.

Red River is a challenging game - hardware-wise. It requires quite a bit of horsepower to run on all high settings. Graphically, it is quite nice in my opinion. But I have to overclock my 8800GTX to just barely achieve 30 fps at full 2560x1600, with high textures, but medium on a lot of other things, like smoke and airborne debris and shadows.

If anybody reading this thread wants to play the game, as a result of the discusion around it, they are going to have to refer to the AfterDawn resident techno experts, like Jeff and Sam and DXR, and Shaff, including yourself, DDP, to make sure their hardware is up to the challenge.

So, in conclusion, as a side discussion about the quality of a game, the banter, like we just had between DXR and Jeff, about the authenticity of a game - I would argue that is surely relevant to what we are doing on this forum. (If it had gone on for pages and pages - yes, we aren't a gun thread - but the short exchange was eye-opening and informative and thoroughly enjoyable, in my opinion.)

Now, let me tell you all about MY uncle, who served in 'Nam. Unca Charlie was born in .....................

LOL

All kidding aside, thanks Jeff and DXR for some interesting stuff. Those hogs you are shooting, DXR, I assume are not in Farmer John's pig pen, are they? You're not that mysterious pig pen shooter I read about, are you?

While we're at it, let's have a nice discussion about pecarry and elk hunting, so DDP can object again,

Rich

 

No there quite a uncivilized bunch with those tusks and teeth an all. lost my dog to one and swore id never lose another, so i don't hunt with dogs anymore.

Anyway DDP is quite right, time to move on.