rec.autos.simulators

by **AJB** » Mon, 02 Feb 1998 04:00:00

I just picked up CPR on a whim (and major sale) to give it a try. I
have a K6-200, 32M RAM, and Monster 3D card - I'm getting about 12-15
fps and a really ugly looking game. What's up? I was expecting a much
better looking and faster running game than this - what am I missing?
(Post patch, using D3D rendering in game) When I use software
rendering, I'm not really getting a different frame rate - just a little
uglier graphics. Is this as good as it gets?

AJB

by **Target** » Mon, 02 Feb 1998 04:00:00

I don't know what's up with your computer.
On a P233(no video card), the game play is smooth as silk.

by **Victor Cha** » Mon, 02 Feb 1998 04:00:00

Have you tried to enable Direct 3D hardware acceleration and as well as a
full screen play? Yes, it is ugly when trying to run CPR with D3D software.
--
Check out my website at:
http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Campus/1315
Enjoy! :-)

by **Clark Arch** » Tue, 03 Feb 1998 04:00:00

Hmm, I run an AMD K6/200 at 233MHz with a Diamond M3D card
and see over 40 fps with the***pit off, low 20s with the***pit
on. Sounds like D3D is using your 2D card or something, because
I bought the M3D after C:PR and the framerate difference is huge.

Clark

On Sun, 01 Feb 1998 11:51:15 -0700, AJB

>I just picked up CPR on a whim (and major sale) to give it a try. I
>have a K6-200, 32M RAM, and Monster 3D card - I'm getting about 12-15
>fps and a really ugly looking game. What's up? I was expecting a much
>better looking and faster running game than this - what am I missing?
>(Post patch, using D3D rendering in game) When I use software
>rendering, I'm not really getting a different frame rate - just a little
>uglier graphics. Is this as good as it gets?

>AJB

by **Donald R. Chapm** » Thu, 05 Feb 1998 04:00:00

On Sun, 01 Feb 1998 11:51:15 -0700, AJB

>I just picked up CPR on a whim (and major sale) to give it a try. I
>have a K6-200, 32M RAM, and Monster 3D card - I'm getting about 12-15
>fps and a really ugly looking game. What's up?

I have a P166, 32mb ram, and Pure 3D and I experience the same thing.
Patch or no patch. I have tweaked all the settings - clipping set to
15, full screen, no***pit, no sky, no roadside objects, poll
interrupts turned off, etc. This will get my frames rates up to 25,
but it is hardly smooth and missing alot of detail. Depending on
traffic and where I am on any given track, the frame rate will jump up
and down from the mid ***s to 25. This is not smooth. Smooth is the
consistent 30fps I can get in Rendition Indycar 2(Cart Racing) with
full detail and a full field of cars. People in this newsgroup will
tell you its your setup, problem with your video card, your 3D
accelerator is not kicking in etc., but the bottom line is what you
see is what you get. I have experienced similar results on 3 different
machines from a P133 Monster 3D to a PII300 STB Velocity 128. And
while the PII300 is faster and allows more detail, the frame rate
still jumps around from high ***s to high 20's and even with full
detail its not that spectacular. CPR is definitely a preference/taste
thing. Some people will tell you its the greatest, while others say
"Huh?".

I tried using software rendering as well. This was actually
recommended by The Pits, and they called the 3D full screen mode
unusable. However, this did not increase my frame rate that much
either, just provided uglier graphics.

You are not missing anything, just realizing that all the good reviews
and hype spread on many *** sites was not exactly true.

Don Chapman

rec.autos.simulators

CPR: Butt-ugly?

CPR: Butt-ugly?

CPR: Butt-ugly?

CPR: Butt-ugly?

CPR: Butt-ugly?

CPR: Butt-ugly?