rec.autos.simulators

I have just replaced an 8 Mbyte Voodoo 2 and an 8 Mbyte AGP Thriller with a 3dfx Voodoo 3 3000 AGP and am very disappointed with the frame rate I am getting.

My PC has a PII 450 with 128 Mbytes RAM and a PDPI game port card.  Using a full Monaco starting grid and my preferred graphics settings (Most things turned on except in the mirrors and 50% detail level) as my benchmark I was previously getting 32 FPS with the Thriller and somewhere in the 20s with the Voodoo 2.  I thought this was pretty good and that everything was working optimally.

I now get a benchmark reading of only 24 FPS with the new Voodoo 3.  I know that Voodoos are more processor dependent than Thrillers but I did expect that the PII 450 would not be limiting.

I am wondering if there may be something I have overlooked.  Can anybody make any suggestions or does the frame rate seem about right?  What sort of things can cripple a Voodoo 3?

Mark Croasdale
ICQ 21549408

For comparison:Using your settings at Monaco I get 22FPS at back of grid
dropping to approximately 20 as field starts to move and rising to 36 when
there are about 6 cars still visible. This on 433 Celeron,128Mb Ram, V3 3000
not overclocked at 1024x 768 resolution and sounds set to 4. This is only at
start and rest of race is at 36FPS or very close to it.

David

I have just replaced an 8 Mbyte Voodoo 2 and an 8 Mbyte AGP Thriller with a
3dfx Voodoo 3 3000 AGP and am very disappointed with the frame rate I am
getting.

My PC has a PII 450 with 128 Mbytes RAM and a PDPI game port card.  Using a
full Monaco starting grid and my preferred graphics settings (Most things
turned on except in the mirrors and 50% detail level) as my benchmark I was
previously getting 32 FPS with the Thriller and somewhere in the 20s with
the Voodoo 2.  I thought this was pretty good and that everything was
working optimally.

I now get a benchmark reading of only 24 FPS with the new Voodoo 3.  I know
that Voodoos are more processor dependent than Thrillers but I did expect
that the PII 450 would not be limiting.

I am wondering if there may be something I have overlooked.  Can anybody
make any suggestions or does the frame rate seem about right?  What sort of
things can cripple a Voodoo 3?

Mark Croasdale
ICQ 21549408

yeah - at start of race the performance is inferior to the Thriller,
but as the field thins out and separates, the V3's advantages become
clearer. BTW I have  a V3 2000 oc to V3 3000

Mark,

Uncheck the box that says something like "sync monitor to video card" or
some such thing. This should fix your problem.

Wayne Hutchison

I have just replaced an 8 Mbyte Voodoo 2 and an 8 Mbyte AGP Thriller with a
3dfx Voodoo 3 3000 AGP and am very disappointed with the frame rate I am
getting.

My PC has a PII 450 with 128 Mbytes RAM and a PDPI game port card.  Using a
full Monaco starting grid and my preferred graphics settings (Most things
turned on except in the mirrors and 50% detail level) as my benchmark I was
previously getting 32 FPS with the Thriller and somewhere in the 20s with
the Voodoo 2.  I thought this was pretty good and that everything was
working optimally.

I now get a benchmark reading of only 24 FPS with the new Voodoo 3.  I know
that Voodoos are more processor dependent than Thrillers but I did expect
that the PII 450 would not be limiting.

I am wondering if there may be something I have overlooked.  Can anybody
make any suggestions or does the frame rate seem about right?  What sort of
things can cripple a Voodoo 3?

Mark Croasdale
ICQ 21549408

I did that with my Voodoo2 but I don't seem to have that option with the new adapter.

According to the other replies to my post, it looks like I am getting about as high a frame rate as I can expect.

Mark Croasdale
ICQ 21549408

80% of the frame rate is because of the AI cars (very complex calculations),
only 20% because of the graphics.  Try running a training session with no AI
and you'll see what I mean.  You can waste a lot of time fiddling with
graphics with very little effect.

Marc.

I have just replaced an 8 Mbyte Voodoo 2 and an 8 Mbyte AGP Thriller with a
3dfx Voodoo 3 3000 AGP and am very disappointed with the frame rate I am
getting.

My PC has a PII 450 with 128 Mbytes RAM and a PDPI game port card.  Using a
full Monaco starting grid and my preferred graphics settings (Most things
turned on except in the mirrors and 50% detail level) as my benchmark I was
previously getting 32 FPS with the Thriller and somewhere in the 20s with
the Voodoo 2.  I thought this was pretty good and that everything was
working optimally.

I now get a benchmark reading of only 24 FPS with the new Voodoo 3.  I know
that Voodoos are more processor dependent than Thrillers but I did expect
that the PII 450 would not be limiting.

I am wondering if there may be something I have overlooked.  Can anybody
make any suggestions or does the frame rate seem about right?  What sort of
things can cripple a Voodoo 3?

Mark Croasdale
ICQ 21549408

graphics and AI but what about the very demaning physics model?I also
have a Thriller and will get the V3 but I know from reading at
Allison's site that I need more than my 450mhz to be able to give the
V3 what it wants.Get a 600 mhz and youll feed the V3 what it wants and
at 1024/768 full everything and full field AND full anti-aliasing:)

  I have been looking into buying a 400mhz celeron tha runs at 600mhz
for a measly $75.---$75 plus another $75 for a V3 2000 and Ill be able
to have all this is unbelievable to me.
   Later

On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 16:18:13 GMT, "Marc Collins"

I agree.  It seems that with a PII 450 and a Voodoo 3, GPL is processor limited when running a full field of cars.  
Now I have to decide whether to put my Thriller back in or go and get a faster chip.

Mark Croasdale
ICQ 21549408

The "physics model" and the AI are the same thing.  Unlike most racing
games, the AI in GPL are subject to the same or almost the same modelling
that you are (which is already more complex than most).

The graphics in GPL are great in some ways, but it is obvious that they are
not photo-realistic or over-the-top...yet people spend countless hours
trying to tweak graphics to yield better frame rates because that's what
works in games whose content is 80% pretty pictures.  Just trying to help
save some wasted effort.

Marc.

I had a V2, then swapped my main card for a Thriller--which never worked
properly due to bad driver support.  Despite the problems, I would have kept
it because of GPL.  I disliked the graphics as compared to the V2 and now
with a V3, there is no comparison.  The frame rates I got with the V3 3000
and the Thriller are almost identical, except that the V3 looks better and
works perfectly with every game and app. I own, whereas the Thriller was a
pain in the butt.  I would save your money for a better CPU!!!

Marc.
.

I agree.  It seems that with a PII 450 and a Voodoo 3, GPL is processor
limited when running a full field of cars.
Now I have to decide whether to put my Thriller back in or go and get a
faster chip.

Mark Croasdale
ICQ 21549408

My guess is that the AI physics model is quite a lot simpler than player's
because:
- Although the AI driving looks very good, it isn't totally convincing (IMHO
of course) and I don't mean their spin recovery here.
-  The frame rate hit is MUCH bigger, when the AI cars are visible - if they
are not, I usually get 36 fps with 19 AI cars. Still, at Monaco and
Vancouver tunnels, for example, the fps goes below 36 fps even when training
alone.
- This is no chess:) The AI must only look convincing - it is hard to detect
cheating. I find it hard to believe, that GPL is doing 20 times (or even
close to that) more physics calculation when running with full field AI. If
I was David Kaemmer, I would use that kind of CPU horsepower to improve the
player physics model (dynamic camber anyone?), rather than to AI.

A side-note: There may be some other tricks GPL uses for AI cars like
pre-calculated sub-patches...

Jari Jokinen

: My guess is that the AI physics model is quite a lot simpler than player's

  You're right I think.

: because:
: - Although the AI driving looks very good, it isn't totally convincing (IMHO
: of course) and I don't mean their spin recovery here.
: -  The frame rate hit is MUCH bigger, when the AI cars are visible - if they
: are not, I usually get 36 fps with 19 AI cars. Still, at Monaco and
: Vancouver tunnels, for example, the fps goes below 36 fps even when training
: alone.

  Turn the detail level very low

: - This is no chess:) The AI must only look convincing - it is hard to detect
: cheating. I find it hard to believe, that GPL is doing 20 times (or even
: close to that) more physics calculation when running with full field AI. If
: I was David Kaemmer, I would use that kind of CPU horsepower to improve the
: player physics model (dynamic camber anyone?), rather than to AI.

: A side-note: There may be some other tricks GPL uses for AI cars like
: pre-calculated sub-patches...

  Um... the AI cars can get away with things the player could never do.
That's why you'll sometimes find the AI scooting up the inside of you
without locking up in a way that a real person never could.  I think you
can get away with being more brutal to the AI cars than you ever could
to a real player because they are allowed to brake and swerve without
skidding.

  Also, some people have reported ridiculous lap tims from the AI after
having got artificially low qual times from a clock smash - the global
hype can overcompensate and produce absurd times from the AI.  I've
never seen that myself so I can't confirm that it does happen.

--
Richard G. Clegg       Only the mind is waving
    Networks and Non-Linear Dynamics Group
      Dept. of Mathematics, Uni. of York
     UPDATED WWW: http://manor.york.ac.uk/

Mark

I can confirm without a doubt that its your P2 450 holding you back. I

the celeron I was getting 19-20fps at the start of a race, then back to
36 after the start. With my P3 600 + V3 im getting 32-33 at the start

time.

Ivan

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.