rec.autos.simulators

CPR in need of CPR

Scott B. Huste

CPR in need of CPR

by Scott B. Huste » Sat, 08 Nov 1997 04:00:00

I just finished my first experience of CPR on my P166 MMX with 32megs of
ram and an ATI 3D 2mg board (which stinks).  Anyway...  as my subject
line indicates... CPR needs CPR.  I hope the developement team along
with M$ are listening to everyone who has tested this product.  There
are some nice features to the game.  Graphics arent as bad as I
thought.. but from what ive seen wont come close to the Ubisoft F1 sim.
Framerate.... lets use an anology...  The framerate in Winblows95 felt
like trying to suck a bowling ball through a 1/16th inch coffee straw.
I felt like my computer was running 15 seconds behind the game itself.
Im not sure exactly what my framerate was... but it wasnt too good.
Turning off all "eye and ear candy" did help significantly....  but if
you have to do that....  Who wants the game ??!!??!!  To reiterate a
point...  minimum requirements are ***and recommended is truly the
minimum here.

Again... some very good features to the game...  I thought the driving
itself wasnt too bad... some improvement needed... but not too bad.  Id
like to see some other tracks before I make an opinion on the realistic
aspects of the tracks.

Just my .02

Scott B. Husted

Greg Cisk

CPR in need of CPR

by Greg Cisk » Sun, 09 Nov 1997 04:00:00


As long as you do not use a 3dfx card, this is the type of framerate to
expect. With 3dfx you can max out the details in the Trial version and get
over 20fps (type 'frame' while driving to find the framerate) as long as you
keep the draw ahead (CNTL-F/CNTL-H) distance set to 15. The demo is
actually quite fun then. But the graphics suffer from the short draw ahead
distance. I have decided I can tolerate it in the Trial version. The real game
with 20+ cars? Who knows how the performance will be? I really do not
know what to expect.

IMHO without 3dfx you have no hope of having a playable game even on
a PII-266. A friend has such a machine with no 3dfx card, and I get better
framerates with my P5-166/3dfx.

--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.


Ron

CPR in need of CPR

by Ron » Sun, 09 Nov 1997 04:00:00




>> I just finished my first experience of CPR on my P166 MMX with 32megs of
>> ram and an ATI 3D 2mg board (which stinks).  Anyway...  as my subject
>> line indicates... CPR needs CPR.  I hope the developement team along
>> with M$ are listening to everyone who has tested this product.  There
>> are some nice features to the game.  Graphics arent as bad as I
>> thought.. but from what ive seen wont come close to the Ubisoft F1 sim.
>> Framerate.... lets use an anology...  The framerate in Winblows95 felt
>> like trying to suck a bowling ball through a 1/16th inch coffee straw.

>As long as you do not use a 3dfx card, this is the type of framerate to
>expect. With 3dfx you can max out the details in the Trial version and get
>over 20fps (type 'frame' while driving to find the framerate) as long as you
>keep the draw ahead (CNTL-F/CNTL-H) distance set to 15. The demo is
>actually quite fun then. But the graphics suffer from the short draw ahead
>distance. I have decided I can tolerate it in the Trial version. The real game
>with 20+ cars? Who knows how the performance will be? I really do not
>know what to expect.

>IMHO without 3dfx you have no hope of having a playable game even on
>a PII-266. A friend has such a machine with no 3dfx card, and I get better
>framerates with my P5-166/3dfx.

Greg, I am having a very different experience with CPR on my P166MMX
w/ a Pure 3d 3dfx/Voodoo. I have to turn just about every graphic
option off in order to sustain anywhere close to 25+ fps. I have also
found that if I want to rid myself of the miserable dips in fps, I
must turn off the dashboard/cockpit. I may be a bit spoiled but I just
can't race any where consistent with these types of drops which seem
related with "Direct 3d" performance. I bench over 40fps in GLQuake
and many other 3dfx ported games work very nicely on my system. I have
played around with the CTRL-F/H and have it at 15 to try to achieve my
goal of a sustained 25-30 fps which is what I need to sustain control
in simracing. I just don't see this happening with CPR and it is
really turning me away. I have re-installed the demo twice. I have
also re-installed the latest Canopus drivers with no improved results
in Direct 3d. BTW, if I actually "Max out" the details in CPR with my
3dfx, framerate is around a 18-20 fps with many dips as low as the
single digits. I am lost as to how a select few seem to be seeing much
higher performance from CPR using 3dfx. I'm still searching for the
answer...

Ron L.


(Please remove the extra letter(s) to respond)

Home of the SSC http://www3.pgh.net/~lazer/    
For Nascar2 & Winston Cup Fans!

Greg Cisk

CPR in need of CPR

by Greg Cisk » Sun, 09 Nov 1997 04:00:00


Isn't that a 6MB 3dfx card? There was a rumor in the flightsim
newsgroup that some programs (EF2000) may have problems
with performance because it was made specifically for 4MB 3dfx
cards. The extra texture memory got everything out of sync or
something. Anyway I have a Monster3D and it seems OK.

I think the driving model is really good and the sound is probably
the best (so far). But with the graphics problems that have been
mentioned here, I probably would not get the game. I would have
to try a demo with a full field to see how the performance was.

--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.


John

CPR in need of CPR

by John » Sun, 09 Nov 1997 04:00:00

Are you in full screen mode without the title bar? If you are not you are in
software rendering mode instead of hardware.

John
The APEX - The source for CART Precision Racing info, setups, fast laps,
editing and more!
http://www.quiknet.com/~joja/

Dani

CPR in need of CPR

by Dani » Sun, 09 Nov 1997 04:00:00



I understand the RIVA 128 achieves better performance than the 3DFX
voodoo under Direct3D.

It would be interesting to hear from someone with a RIVA 128 and 3DFX
voodoo to compare the performance of Cart PR  with the 2 cards

Daniel.

Greg Cisk

CPR in need of CPR

by Greg Cisk » Tue, 11 Nov 1997 04:00:00




> >IMHO without 3dfx you have no hope of having a playable game even on
> >a PII-266. A friend has such a machine with no 3dfx card, and I get better
> >framerates with my P5-166/3dfx.

> I understand the RIVA 128 achieves better performance than the 3DFX
> voodoo under Direct3D.

Perhaps, but that isn't saying much :-) Direct3D is not the answer yet.
Plus how much support in DOS type games will the RIVA128 have? 3dfx
is getting a fair amount.

Agreed!

--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.



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.