stripe :)
> It'll run even faster painted red with bright yellow, orange & white
stripes
> :)
stripes
> :)
> | It'll run faster painted red :)
> | It'll run faster painted red :)
| Since I'm an English gent it would have to be racing green with a yellow
| stripe :)
|
| > It'll run even faster painted red with bright yellow, orange & white
| stripes
| > :)
| >
| > | It'll run faster painted red :)
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 12:48:13 GMT, "Simon Brown"
>I was also surprised, I expected since GPL works fine with 16 MB cards and
>doesn't use a lot of textures, that it wouldn't need or use any AGP memory.
>It's probably just a peculiarity of the drivers.
>> Pretty good explanation Simon, but one point that I'll disagree on.
>> Non-local video memory is a LOT slower than local memory, not a
>> little. Accessing memory via the agp aperature happens at 66mhz (agp
>> bus speed) whereas local memory is 166mhz for v3, up to 266 for a
>> Geforce3.
>> Pretty surprised that there should be any change with any game, let
>> alone gpl. You will always end up running the game at whatever
>> settings which DON'T use the agp aperature, cos the performance hit is
>> so big.
>> From N4 readme.txt:
>> "Because of the large amount of textures used in NASCAR? Racing 4, it
>> is recommended that 32-bit color only be used on video cards with 64
>> MB or more texture memory."
>> Manually setting texture size:
>> "Increasing this value above the detected value may prevent the game
>> from dropping mip levels as more textures are loaded, but note that
>> setting too large of a value may result in SIGNIFICANT performance
>> hits as textures begin to swap in and out of memory."
>> So it's got me ***ed as to why you would find any difference. But
>> if it works, what the hell!
>> Rafe Mc
Strange, my new Athlon tbird runs GP3 fine, overclocked or not. Very
odd, but can happen.
Rafe Mc
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 20:18:58 +0100, Derek James
>>Its amazing how much system specs can affect the feel of a sim/game. I have
>>the DTR games from Ratbag. My system is an AMD k7 950 overclocked to 997mhz.
>I'm not so sure that you've got this right. Clearly there is a
>difference in feel between a fast and a slow system because the frame
>rate is better and the joystick/wheel can be polled more often or
>something but overclocking the system does not directly affect the
>physics in a game. It's just a guess but maybe at certain overclock
>speeds (on your system) other factors came into play, such as bad USB
>performance or a dodgy joystick port etc. What's good for a benchmark
>might not be good for the overall feel of a game?
Windows ME is pathetically unstable...
> > As far as WinME vs. Win98SE goes I feel that ME is better. I know alot
of
> > people have had problems with ME and my guess on that would be that like
> any
> > newer software you will need more hardware to run it. As I said before I
> > have a 950 mhz AMD k7 Athlon, 256 ram and a Geforce 2 GTS 64 meg video
> card.
> > I have seen alot of people recommending that you turn of PC health, but
I
> > have not done so and have had no performance problems. I think it also
has
> > to do with what type of system you are running. I built my own so I know
> all
> > the system drivers that are used a what settings they are in stalled at.
> My
> > parents have a Compaq and there is no way I would consider doing
anything
> to
> > that system because of the way its set up. I run a 56k dial up and I
feel
> > that my connection quality for *** has gotten better in ME over
> Win98SE.
> > One thing that may be a problem for some people is the lack of a DOS
mode.
> > So if you have any old software that requires a "restart in Dos mode" to
> run
> > don't even think about ME. I know there is alot of bad press about ME
but
> > I'm pretty happy with it. Granted this is just my experience and yours
may
> > vary.
> > MadDAWG