rec.autos.simulators

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

Warlock

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Warlock » Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:35:57

Ok. First, I would like to say that I flat-ass lied. Accidentally,
anyhow. When I said I had the Smoothvision all maxxed out on the highest
resolution my monitor could handle? I lied. It was late, I was drinking
Absolut while I was putting my new system together. I didn't even have
Smoothvision enabled. I would have sworn that I enabled it, but when
questioned on another forum that it was hard to believe that it ran that
good with 6x fsaa turned on, I began to doubt myself. Anyhow, I checked
last night and it was off. So, I maxxed it out.

Ouch. 6x with game detail on max and 21 opponents was playable, if
you're a ***. Framerates fluctuated between (I'm guessing) 3-8 fps
at the start. That was enough 6x testing for me. If it doesn't pull good
framerate at the start of a race when you really need it, it's time to
adjust. So I took it down a step.

Smoothvision slider set to 4x. Start another race. Better, but still not
something I want to start a race with. Prolly about 10 fps at the start.
Remember. Graphics maxxed with mirrors on. I'm sure it would have gone
over 20 fps after the 1st few turns, but that's not when I need the
framerates so much. One more step down...

Slider to 2x, and into a race. LOTS better. No noticeable stutter in the
engine note sitting at the light, and just the *slightest* hit on the
framerate. gotta be over 20 fps when the light goes out, and after the
first turn it's silky smooth again. And gorgeous. Still... I thought
after the first night that my computer was invincible, but alas, not
quite. :( For me though, it looks so goddamn good without Smoothvision
while racing at high resolution, I don't even notice it. You don't
really have time to notice microscopic "jaggies". IMHO, Smoothvision is
for screenshots.

Okay. Onto the peripherals. I got my speakers and my serial LWFF hooked
up last night. I know it's easy to set up a controller in GPL, but I
guess I don't see what all the crying was for when setting up a
wheel/pedals/control method in this game. Enter an action to turn left.
Enter an action to turn right. Enter an action for acceleration. For
braking. For shifting. Etc. Etc. Etc, until you've got all 12-15 options
accounted for. You can scroll thru different screens on your LED on the
wheel, call for a pitstop, etc. Pretty cool. Oh, separate brake and
accel was no problem either. You also have 10 different options for
deadzones and sensitivities as well. I didn't have any problem coming up
with something I was completely comfortable with.

The sound. It's pretty sweet. Almost identical to the in-car sound you
get while watching the race. A slightly muffled whine, with road,
gravel, rumblestrip, and contact sounds seeming very accurate. The tire
scrub sound is cool, but I'd like to have a bit of tire squeal as well.
I also miss the backfiring of CS 2000, but all in all, it's very
realistic. With the Klipsch 4.1's cranked up, it's outstanding! ;)

Physics. Not GPL like, but close. Obviously you can't compare these two
very different cars, but everything I learned in GPL transfers to F1
2001 very well. You can just tell what's going  on at all times. You
don't lose control of your car for some reason and wonder, "Why the fock
did it do that?" You *know* why the fock it did that. I would think
there is a bit more torque at the very lowest rpms, but once you get
past the bottom 1500-2000 grand on the motor's bottom, look out! The
player's Car seems pretty tough as well. I was racing, banging wheels
with a Prost (hey, I'm just getting the feel of it! ;) for about a half
of a lap, and I noticed, with as much as I'm driving my front wheels
into his sidepods in the corners, I must have been in invulnerable mode.
However, once I finally got around him I took the following corner to
hot and stuffed it into the tires. Off popped my left side tires and
rear wing. I guess I wasn't invulnerable after all. Maybe the Prost's
sidepods just 'give' a little. Also, I was never able to get the car to
break in half or flip or even jump a little due to tire on tire contact
with another car ala GP3. But that 's the *only* thing GP3 has over this
game, IMO.

All in all, I'd recommend this game as a "must have" for anyone with a
modern, fast computer and a love for modern F1 racing. This game and GPL
are the only real racing games I have on my puter for now. Rally Trophy
will be on there soon. Porsche Unleashed is installed for the fun-factor
and beauty. Unreal Tournament will get some play, too. ;)

Warlock!

Olav K. Malm

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Olav K. Malm » Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:14:24


> Ok. First, I would like to say that I flat-ass lied. Accidentally,
> anyhow. When I said I had the Smoothvision all maxxed out on the highest
> resolution my monitor could handle? I lied. It was late, I was drinking
> Absolut while I was putting my new system together.

LOL! I had a beer when building my new system and thought that was
risky ;)

Great read however. I really like to have that Radeon card. My V5
gives around 30 fps with everything maxed out mirrors off on
1280x1024. Without fsaa that is on a athlon xp 1600. However as you
said, during the start from back of the grid at Spa I got 7 fps. With 2xfsaa
I was down to 17 fps on the same resolution, and around 20-25 on
1024x768.

Just for fun i tried 800x600 4xfsaa. Picture looked gorgeous with no
jaggies whatsoever, but at 20 fps it was kind of undrivable.


1600 or my system is wrong. I feel there is no or very little increase
in performance.

--
Olav K. Malmin
remove .spam when replying

Goy Larse

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Goy Larse » Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:25:06



> > Ok. First, I would like to say that I flat-ass lied. Accidentally,
> > anyhow. When I said I had the Smoothvision all maxxed out on the highest
> > resolution my monitor could handle? I lied. It was late, I was drinking
> > Absolut while I was putting my new system together.

> LOL! I had a beer when building my new system and thought that was
> risky ;)

> Great read however. I really like to have that Radeon card. My V5
> gives around 30 fps with everything maxed out mirrors off on
> 1280x1024. Without fsaa that is on a athlon xp 1600. However as you
> said, during the start from back of the grid at Spa I got 7 fps. With 2xfsaa
> I was down to 17 fps on the same resolution, and around 20-25 on
> 1024x768.

> Just for fun i tried 800x600 4xfsaa. Picture looked gorgeous with no
> jaggies whatsoever, but at 20 fps it was kind of undrivable.


> 1600 or my system is wrong. I feel there is no or very little increase
> in performance.

Just curious Olav, what kind of score do you get in 3DMark 2001 ?

Not that I use this to compare different video cards, but since our
systems is fairly similar, we should at least be able to tell if there's
anything major going on, I'll start a test right away

I have an Athclon 1400 (T-Bird) running at 1490 with 512 MB DDR-Ram,
Win98SE with DX8 and a V5 card which is not OC'ed, I'll run the test in
1024x768x32 with "fastest performance" setting in AA and post it here in
a while

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

"The Pits"    http://www.theuspits.com/

* Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way *
"Spamkiller"    http://www.spamkiller.com

Olav K. Malm

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Olav K. Malm » Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:39:07




> > > Ok. First, I would like to say that I flat-ass lied. Accidentally,
> > > anyhow. When I said I had the Smoothvision all maxxed out on the highest
> > > resolution my monitor could handle? I lied. It was late, I was drinking
> > > Absolut while I was putting my new system together.

> > LOL! I had a beer when building my new system and thought that was
> > risky ;)

> > Great read however. I really like to have that Radeon card. My V5
> > gives around 30 fps with everything maxed out mirrors off on
> > 1280x1024. Without fsaa that is on a athlon xp 1600. However as you
> > said, during the start from back of the grid at Spa I got 7 fps. With 2xfsaa
> > I was down to 17 fps on the same resolution, and around 20-25 on
> > 1024x768.

> > Just for fun i tried 800x600 4xfsaa. Picture looked gorgeous with no
> > jaggies whatsoever, but at 20 fps it was kind of undrivable.


> > 1600 or my system is wrong. I feel there is no or very little increase
> > in performance.

> Just curious Olav, what kind of score do you get in 3DMark 2001 ?

> Not that I use this to compare different video cards, but since our
> systems is fairly similar, we should at least be able to tell if there's
> anything major going on, I'll start a test right away

> I have an Athclon 1400 (T-Bird) running at 1490 with 512 MB DDR-Ram,
> Win98SE with DX8 and a V5 card which is not OC'ed, I'll run the test in
> 1024x768x32 with "fastest performance" setting in AA and post it here in
> a while

Ok, AMD XP 1600, 512 MB DDR Ram, V5. Nothing overclocked (yet)

Fastest performance : ~2300
2xfsaa              : ~1300


fp     : ~~1300
2xfsaa : yeah, something like 800

So there is definately an improvement, but just like Tom Pabst (can I
mention his name now :) ) said, I wouldn't be too impressed by just a
cpu upgrade.

Another benchmark : N4 1024x786 2xfsaa, testing session, c***te :
30-35

--
Olav K. Malmin
remove .spam when replying

Goy Larse

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Goy Larse » Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:55:57


> Ok, AMD XP 1600, 512 MB DDR Ram, V5. Nothing overclocked (yet)

> Fastest performance : ~2300
> 2xfsaa              : ~1300


> fp     : ~~1300
> 2xfsaa : yeah, something like 800

> So there is definately an improvement, but just like Tom Pabst (can I
> mention his name now :) ) said, I wouldn't be too impressed by just a
> cpu upgrade.

> Another benchmark : N4 1024x786 2xfsaa, testing session, c***te :
> 30-35

Well, 3DMark is the only thing I have available right now, but I got

Fastest Performance     : 2550
2XFSAA                  : 1520

So if your system is a 1600+, which runs at 1400, then I guess the
difference is about what we should expect from my slight OC'ing or
something like that....

Yeah, the V5 is getting a bit long in the tooth, but at least it
outperforms that old GF1 DDR board I have lying about here somewhere :-)

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

"The Pits"    http://www.racesimcentral.net/

* Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way *
"Spamkiller"    http://www.racesimcentral.net/

Joe Marque

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Joe Marque » Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:06:48

It's the V5.  I have the same XP 1600+ and started with the V5.  After the
upgrade the fps didn't jump enough in F1 2001.  Only 30 fps racing on medium

enough.  I popped in a GF3 Ti 500 and now I'm good for close to 50 fps
racing on full detail. Smoooooooth!  I loved the V5 but it was time to
retire her to greener pastures. ;-)

--
Joe Marques




> > Ok. First, I would like to say that I flat-ass lied. Accidentally,
> > anyhow. When I said I had the Smoothvision all maxxed out on the highest
> > resolution my monitor could handle? I lied. It was late, I was drinking
> > Absolut while I was putting my new system together.

> LOL! I had a beer when building my new system and thought that was
> risky ;)

> Great read however. I really like to have that Radeon card. My V5
> gives around 30 fps with everything maxed out mirrors off on
> 1280x1024. Without fsaa that is on a athlon xp 1600. However as you
> said, during the start from back of the grid at Spa I got 7 fps. With
2xfsaa
> I was down to 17 fps on the same resolution, and around 20-25 on
> 1024x768.

> Just for fun i tried 800x600 4xfsaa. Picture looked gorgeous with no
> jaggies whatsoever, but at 20 fps it was kind of undrivable.


> 1600 or my system is wrong. I feel there is no or very little increase
> in performance.

> --
> Olav K. Malmin
> remove .spam when replying

Joe Marque

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Joe Marque » Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:09:01

AMD 1600+
512 MB Ram
GF3 Ti 500 (replaced beloved V5)


--
Joe Marques



> > Ok, AMD XP 1600, 512 MB DDR Ram, V5. Nothing overclocked (yet)

> > Fastest performance : ~2300
> > 2xfsaa              : ~1300


> > fp     : ~~1300
> > 2xfsaa : yeah, something like 800

> > So there is definately an improvement, but just like Tom Pabst (can I
> > mention his name now :) ) said, I wouldn't be too impressed by just a
> > cpu upgrade.

> > Another benchmark : N4 1024x786 2xfsaa, testing session, c***te :
> > 30-35

> Well, 3DMark is the only thing I have available right now, but I got

> Fastest Performance : 2550
> 2XFSAA : 1520

> So if your system is a 1600+, which runs at 1400, then I guess the
> difference is about what we should expect from my slight OC'ing or
> something like that....

> Yeah, the V5 is getting a bit long in the tooth, but at least it
> outperforms that old GF1 DDR board I have lying about here somewhere :-)

> Beers and cheers
> (uncle) Goy

> "The Pits" http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way *
> "Spamkiller"    http://www.racesimcentral.net/

Dave Henri

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Dave Henri » Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:47:47

     The 3dmark 2001 was not designed for the V5.  You will get more
meaningful results testing the V5 with 3dmark 2000.  However...Joe is
right...the old 3dfx mare is getting pretty old...
dave henrie

> It's the V5.  I have the same XP 1600+ and started with the V5.  After the
> upgrade the fps didn't jump enough in F1 2001.  Only 30 fps racing on
medium

> enough.  I popped in a GF3 Ti 500 and now I'm good for close to 50 fps
> racing on full detail. Smoooooooth!  I loved the V5 but it was time to
> retire her to greener pastures. ;-)

> --
> Joe Marques




> > > Ok. First, I would like to say that I flat-ass lied. Accidentally,
> > > anyhow. When I said I had the Smoothvision all maxxed out on the
highest
> > > resolution my monitor could handle? I lied. It was late, I was
drinking
> > > Absolut while I was putting my new system together.

> > LOL! I had a beer when building my new system and thought that was
> > risky ;)

> > Great read however. I really like to have that Radeon card. My V5
> > gives around 30 fps with everything maxed out mirrors off on
> > 1280x1024. Without fsaa that is on a athlon xp 1600. However as you
> > said, during the start from back of the grid at Spa I got 7 fps. With
> 2xfsaa
> > I was down to 17 fps on the same resolution, and around 20-25 on
> > 1024x768.

> > Just for fun i tried 800x600 4xfsaa. Picture looked gorgeous with no
> > jaggies whatsoever, but at 20 fps it was kind of undrivable.


> > 1600 or my system is wrong. I feel there is no or very little increase
> > in performance.

> > --
> > Olav K. Malmin
> > remove .spam when replying

Goy Larse

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Goy Larse » Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:37:50


>      The 3dmark 2001 was not designed for the V5.  You will get more
> meaningful results testing the V5 with 3dmark 2000.  However...Joe is
> right...the old 3dfx mare is getting pretty old...

Yeah, the only reason I suggested running it was to see if there was
something wrong with his system as I had my *** PC at hand and we
could do a direct comparison, apparently Olav's system is up to scratch
and he basically needs a new vid card....:-)

And no, I'm not going to advice against getting an nVidia card :-)

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

"The Pits"    http://www.racesimcentral.net/

* Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way *
"Spamkiller"    http://www.racesimcentral.net/

Ken Bear

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Ken Bear » Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:43:46


> It's the V5.  I have the same XP 1600+ and started with the V5.  After the
> upgrade the fps didn't jump enough in F1 2001.  Only 30 fps racing on
medium

> enough.  I popped in a GF3 Ti 500 and now I'm good for close to 50 fps
> racing on full detail. Smoooooooth!  I loved the V5 but it was time to
> retire her to greener pastures. ;-)

> --
> Joe Marques

Same here.  The V5 got somewhat of a boost, but not quite enough, when I
went from my Athlon 700 to my T-Bird 1.2Ghz.  N4 was decent, but I had to

Ti-200 allowed me to turn everything to max (or close) in the graphics

QUITE beautiful and smooth now, although a few places I still miss the V5's
FSAA.  I do think the GF3 does textures quite a bit better, and seems more
vibrant color-wise, in addition to the big speed boost.  The Ti-200 is a

people's computers in the past, I have no complaints about the 2D on this
one vs. my V5.

--

Ken's sig 4.0

9/11/01 - Never forget......

Joe Marque

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Joe Marque » Mon, 19 Nov 2001 08:21:38

I agree, 2D is sweet considering I've heard some negative things about GF 2D
(GF3 Ti 500, the same as your Ti 200 other than the ram if I'm not
mistaken).  I had the chance to do a sort of A/B comparison since I
uninstalled my V5 and installed the GF3 minutes later.  To me the GF looked
the same or better.  Probably better since it's the new girl in town. ;-)

--
Joe Marques




> > It's the V5.  I have the same XP 1600+ and started with the V5.  After
the
> > upgrade the fps didn't jump enough in F1 2001.  Only 30 fps racing on
> medium

> > enough.  I popped in a GF3 Ti 500 and now I'm good for close to 50 fps
> > racing on full detail. Smoooooooth!  I loved the V5 but it was time to
> > retire her to greener pastures. ;-)

> > --
> > Joe Marques

> Same here.  The V5 got somewhat of a boost, but not quite enough, when I
> went from my Athlon 700 to my T-Bird 1.2Ghz.  N4 was decent, but I had to

GF3
> Ti-200 allowed me to turn everything to max (or close) in the graphics

It's
> QUITE beautiful and smooth now, although a few places I still miss the
V5's
> FSAA.  I do think the GF3 does textures quite a bit better, and seems more
> vibrant color-wise, in addition to the big speed boost.  The Ti-200 is a

> people's computers in the past, I have no complaints about the 2D on this
> one vs. my V5.

> --

> Ken's sig 4.0

> 9/11/01 - Never forget......

STP

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by STP » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 15:17:49


Yes, the 2D on the GF3 Ti cards is very good. But, I must also add that
after installing an R8500 the 2D quality is just slightly better than the
GF3 Ti cards. Only noticeable at really high res though.

Olav K. Malm

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Olav K. Malm » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:18:28



> >      The 3dmark 2001 was not designed for the V5.  You will get more
> > meaningful results testing the V5 with 3dmark 2000.  However...Joe is
> > right...the old 3dfx mare is getting pretty old...

> Yeah, the only reason I suggested running it was to see if there was
> something wrong with his system as I had my *** PC at hand and we
> could do a direct comparison, apparently Olav's system is up to scratch
> and he basically needs a new vid card....:-)

> And no, I'm not going to advice against getting an nVidia card :-)

If (when) I buy a new video card it will be the Radeon. But I have to
rethink my finacial situation first :) Of course, I will do some
guest lecturing at the university on friday, which means nice extra
cash :)

--
Olav K. Malmin
remove .spam when replying

Dave Henri

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Dave Henri » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:44:13

"Olav K. Malmin"> If (when) I buy a new video card it will be the Radeon.
But I have to
   And the topic of this guest lecture will be?   I'm guessing "How to scam
the public outta funds via Guest Lecturing so I can feed my sim-***ion."
  Am I close?
dave henrie
Goy Larse

F1 2001... Beautiful & perfect...kinda long Update, night 2

by Goy Larse » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:49:41




> > >      The 3dmark 2001 was not designed for the V5.  You will get more
> > > meaningful results testing the V5 with 3dmark 2000.  However...Joe is
> > > right...the old 3dfx mare is getting pretty old...

> > Yeah, the only reason I suggested running it was to see if there was
> > something wrong with his system as I had my *** PC at hand and we
> > could do a direct comparison, apparently Olav's system is up to scratch
> > and he basically needs a new vid card....:-)

> > And no, I'm not going to advice against getting an nVidia card :-)

> If (when) I buy a new video card it will be the Radeon. But I have to
> rethink my finacial situation first :) Of course, I will do some
> guest lecturing at the university on friday, which means nice extra
> cash :)

Atta boy Olav :-)

I'm going to ge a Radeon 8500 myself, but right now the only game I play
on my PC is more than fast enough on my V5, so I can wait

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

"The Pits"    http://www.racesimcentral.net/

* Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way *
"Spamkiller"    http://www.racesimcentral.net/


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.