rec.autos.simulators

> No issues with framerate. The lowest is think I have seen is 45-50 on the
> front straight of Indy with all cars in front of me at the start of a
> race. Once the field stretches out the rate is typically in the 70s if my
> memory serves me correctly. In other words even the min framerate is more
> than enough.

> Your X800XT should handle the high res quite well.

> Norman

>> Been fiddling around with my settings, getting ready to try NSR tomorrow.
>> I have A8V, FX53 and X800XT and have been running all sims at 1024/768,
>> 6xAA and 16xAF and  with all game options totally maxed out.

>> I was thinking of trying 1600x1200 with all other settings the same and
>> did a few tests. The change in N2k3 was only a 4% fps drop. Similarly in
>> GTP (not really surprising). I thought 'this is worth doing' but as it
>> would involve swapping my monitors about I thought I'd just test it on
>> rFactor and GTR. They both showed a massive fps drop of 18% when I
>> switched resolutions and I would therefore suspect that NSR will do
>> likewise.

>> I guess what I'm asking is: has anyone noticed this before and, if so, is
>> it likely to be my settings or do ISI-type sims really struggle at higher
>> resolutions?

>> Regards

> Interesting since the game has nothing to do with this. AA is a
function of
> the driver and video hardware. AA does increase the resolution that
the game
> renders to. For example 4xAA at 1600x1200 means the game renders to a
> resolution of 3200x2400. This also means the frame buffers take up
more
> video ram so there is less room for texture storage. If all textures
cannot
> fit in video ram then things will slow down.

> Norman

> > Interesting since the game has nothing to do with this. AA is a
> function of
> > the driver and video hardware. AA does increase the resolution that
> the game
> > renders to. For example 4xAA at 1600x1200 means the game renders to a

> > resolution of 3200x2400. This also means the frame buffers take up
> more
> > video ram so there is less room for texture storage. If all textures
> cannot
> > fit in video ram then things will slow down.

> > Norman

> Thanks for pointing this out Norman.  Old-school supersample modes like
> 2x and 4x can consume HUGE amounts of video RAM.  In fact, it may be
> better to use modes like 6x AA, since they use multisampling, which
> does not use a supersized frame buffer.  And avoid 8x or 16x AF if
> possible, these filters burn fill rate like mad.

> joe
> image space

> > > Interesting since the game has nothing to do with this. AA is a
> > function of
> > > the driver and video hardware. AA does increase the resolution
that
> > the game
> > > renders to. For example 4xAA at 1600x1200 means the game renders
to a

> > > resolution of 3200x2400. This also means the frame buffers take
up
> > more
> > > video ram so there is less room for texture storage. If all
textures
> > cannot
> > > fit in video ram then things will slow down.

> > > Norman

> > Thanks for pointing this out Norman.  Old-school supersample modes
like
> > 2x and 4x can consume HUGE amounts of video RAM.  In fact, it may
be
> > better to use modes like 6x AA, since they use multisampling, which
> > does not use a supersized frame buffer.  And avoid 8x or 16x AF if
> > possible, these filters burn fill rate like mad.

> > joe
> > image space

> With NSR, if I use anything higher than 2xAA, I get sudden dramatic
drops in
> frame rates for a few seconds. 60fps to 20, or 40 to 10 for example.

> Since you are here :-) I've always been a little disappointed with
the
> rFactor demo frame rates on my  P4 3.0 512ram Radeon 9700Pro and a
19" LCD
> at 1280x1024x32 with 2xAA and 2AF.

> With everything set at high in qualifying, I never get out of the
30's alone
> on the track. Graphics set to medium , I'm in the mid 40's at best,
with or
> without other cars.

> Any chance we'll see improvement in fps with the full release?

> --
> David G Fisher

> > joe
> > image space

> We want RFActor, we want RFactor, we want RFactor....  Please please
please
> give us RFACTOR....  Im gonna write a Country Western song about it
if you
> wait too much longer ;)

> On the serious side I was wondering if RFactor plans on supporting
the
> TrackIR and the vector exp?

> Thx joe!

> Mitch
> --
> Remove "nospam." to reply.
> SuSE 9.2 Pro KDE 3.3.2a

> joe
> image space

> > > > Interesting since the game has nothing to do with this. AA is a
> > > function of
> > > > the driver and video hardware. AA does increase the resolution
> that
> > > the game
> > > > renders to. For example 4xAA at 1600x1200 means the game renders
> to a

> > > > resolution of 3200x2400. This also means the frame buffers take
> up
> > > more
> > > > video ram so there is less room for texture storage. If all
> textures
> > > cannot
> > > > fit in video ram then things will slow down.

> > > > Norman

> > > Thanks for pointing this out Norman.  Old-school supersample modes
> like
> > > 2x and 4x can consume HUGE amounts of video RAM.  In fact, it may
> be
> > > better to use modes like 6x AA, since they use multisampling, which
> > > does not use a supersized frame buffer.  And avoid 8x or 16x AF if
> > > possible, these filters burn fill rate like mad.

> > > joe
> > > image space

> > With NSR, if I use anything higher than 2xAA, I get sudden dramatic
> drops in
> > frame rates for a few seconds. 60fps to 20, or 40 to 10 for example.

> > Since you are here :-) I've always been a little disappointed with
> the
> > rFactor demo frame rates on my  P4 3.0 512ram Radeon 9700Pro and a
> 19" LCD
> > at 1280x1024x32 with 2xAA and 2AF.

> > With everything set at high in qualifying, I never get out of the
> 30's alone
> > on the track. Graphics set to medium , I'm in the mid 40's at best,
> with or
> > without other cars.

> > Any chance we'll see improvement in fps with the full release?

> > --
> > David G Fisher

> Hi David -

> Your system is almost exactly like one of mine, and i get 60-100 fps in
> the demo at 1024x768, 32-bit, no AA or AF.  AA and AF are purely
> functions of the video hw - if your card can do them cheaply, fine, if
> not, they will kill your FPS.  The 9700 Pro (great card in its day,
> still no slouch) will pay the price for both AA and AF, especially at
> 1280.  If you're after pure speed, skip these options.  Sad thing about
> LCDs, they sort of lock you in to a fixed res, usually quite high.  The
> full release already *is* faster then the demo ;).

> joe
> image space

>> > > > > This game does NOT like AA at all!  They don't hide this fact.
>> > > The
>> > > > > Read-Me even says you should turn it off.

>> > > > Interesting since the game has nothing to do with this. AA is a
>> > > function of
>> > > > the driver and video hardware. AA does increase the resolution
>> that
>> > > the game
>> > > > renders to. For example 4xAA at 1600x1200 means the game renders
>> to a

>> > > > resolution of 3200x2400. This also means the frame buffers take
>> up
>> > > more
>> > > > video ram so there is less room for texture storage. If all
>> textures
>> > > cannot
>> > > > fit in video ram then things will slow down.

>> > > > Norman

>> > > Thanks for pointing this out Norman.  Old-school supersample modes
>> like
>> > > 2x and 4x can consume HUGE amounts of video RAM.  In fact, it may
>> be
>> > > better to use modes like 6x AA, since they use multisampling, which
>> > > does not use a supersized frame buffer.  And avoid 8x or 16x AF if
>> > > possible, these filters burn fill rate like mad.

>> > > joe
>> > > image space

>> > With NSR, if I use anything higher than 2xAA, I get sudden dramatic
>> drops in
>> > frame rates for a few seconds. 60fps to 20, or 40 to 10 for example.

>> > Since you are here :-) I've always been a little disappointed with
>> the
>> > rFactor demo frame rates on my  P4 3.0 512ram Radeon 9700Pro and a
>> 19" LCD
>> > at 1280x1024x32 with 2xAA and 2AF.

>> > With everything set at high in qualifying, I never get out of the
>> 30's alone
>> > on the track. Graphics set to medium , I'm in the mid 40's at best,
>> with or
>> > without other cars.

>> > Any chance we'll see improvement in fps with the full release?

>> > --
>> > David G Fisher

>> Hi David -

>> Your system is almost exactly like one of mine, and i get 60-100 fps in
>> the demo at 1024x768, 32-bit, no AA or AF.  AA and AF are purely
>> functions of the video hw - if your card can do them cheaply, fine, if
>> not, they will kill your FPS.  The 9700 Pro (great card in its day,
>> still no slouch) will pay the price for both AA and AF, especially at
>> 1280.  If you're after pure speed, skip these options.  Sad thing about
>> LCDs, they sort of lock you in to a fixed res, usually quite high.  The
>> full release already *is* faster then the demo ;).

>> joe
>> image space

> Thanks for the reply.

> Here's something strange. I just did a number of tests with *no AA or AF*
> (just trilinear filtering) like your system setup described above, and it
> doesn't seem to matter what in game settings I choose.

> If I set the graphics to basic, alone on the track, I get fps ranging from
> 40 to 50. If I set it to ultra, I am in the 30's with a high of about 40.

> Something strange is going on here.

> Good news is I tried a different steering lock setting and shattered my
> old
> track record while testing. :-)
> --
> David G Fisher