rec.autos.simulators

http://www.racesimcentral.net/

8 games benchmarked...two different speed processors...geeez up the
wazoo with choices. Only me you heathens....you ALL owe me a drink.

Naturally I expect that both camps will be pissed off given my
abilities at pissing off people...if that happens I will have been
successful. <VBG>

PAPA DOC

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
Flanker Target
Grand Prix Legends Crash Test Dummy
Aim-120 Propellent ***
Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...<VBG>
Rants, Bullshit and Help Guides availible at
www.papadoc.net

Oooh...on my way now. I already know the outcome though.
--
Nos

[snip]

You really, REALLY should consider using 5.32 drivers to test the FSAA
on the GF2, instead of 5.22. The D3D FSAA performance is
*considerably* better in 5.30 and above.

/Magnus

It was a comparison between two cards...the 3dfx ran with what came in
the box...I see no reason not to expect the Nvidia to do the same. But
like I said in the article the Nvidia plainly would not run with what
came in the box so I gave it some slack and used the Non Beta 5.22's.

Btw I did benchmark the 5.30 drivers...its in the article...

PAPA DOC

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
Flanker Target
Grand Prix Legends Crash Test Dummy
Aim-120 Propellent ***
Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...<VBG>
Rants, Bullshit and Help Guides availible at
www.papadoc.net

Hardiharhar. :)

But seriously, the 5.32s has been out for a 4 weeks.

Ok, didn't look too closely it appears, but if you're putting that
much emphasis on FSAA, it's pretty unnecessary sticking with 5.22,
just because it's "non-beta".

The D3D FSAA in 5.22 is "alpha" at best, IMHO.

http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/detonator530/default.asp

/Magnus

(it's a joke dammit!)

You missed his point completely. Ignore this *** PD. He's one of
those zealots from the video card news group. One of Petey's pals.
--
Nos

From my standpoint releasing a card then expecting the consumer to
sort thru your drivers trying to find ones that work is not good.
Especially when you consider what a chore it is for most people to
change drivers...especially when you see some of the extreme measures
that some drivers (both 3dfx and Nvidia are guilty here) require the
user to go thru to make sure the new drivers are installed correctly.

PAPA DOC

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
Flanker Target
GPL Crash Dummy
Video Card Wizard
www.papadoc.net
FALCON 4 Benchmarks
Rants, Bullshit and Reviews

First, THANK YOU. I have been looking for an article
not beating me over the head with techincal jargon. I really
am not that concerned with 'extreme' fps, as I don't play
frag-a-thons, or, am impressed with techinal jargon, Can
spout it with the best of 'em.

On this, I completely agree. I am really tired of being the
beta tester for hardware and software just because the company
is so desperate to get it to market. I don't have the time or
patience to mess with ***like that anymore. Spent too many
months continuously updating my rendition based card to keep
it funtional. I really want one that goes good right out of the box,
on multiple pieces of software.

You're completely correct here. Although, it was only some
flavors of the Voodoo2 drivers that had problems letting go.
I put a Diamond V2 in mine when the price dropped to
get some more compatibiltiy(glide), and wound up wiping
the system to make the V3 work right.  Oh well. It has
worked right ever since with the drivers right off the CD.
Now, your review has the one thing that almost none of
the reviews paid attention to, much less actually went into
detail about, actually installing both onto a system. Some
just gave a brief snippet, or a rating, but none actually
went step by step to see how painless/painful the hookup
was. And you gave multiple tests on multiple game types.
Those were the two things I wanted to hear. NOT
winmark/stone/bench/whatever numbers. Those are
totally meaningless to me. Again, I appreciate the info
from the real world.
Later. -Mark Gums

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
Flanker Target
GPL Crash Dummy
Video Card Wizard
www.papadoc.net
FALCON 4 Benchmarks
Rants, Bullshit and Reviews

Notice they use Quake3 once again as a benchmark. Q3 takes advantage
of the GPU on the GTS. Just how is that relevant to people who play
GPL, Nascar3 etc.? These review sites like the above need to take
their heads out of their asses.
--
Nos

I just pointed out that the GF2 had much better FSAA performance with
newer drivers and thus I'm a ***. Now who's the zealot.

/Magnus

The FSAA in the GeForce1/2 is hardly new. It's a pretty simple
approach and even the TNT had it way back(albeit horrendously slow, so
it got removed). The problem has always been compatibility, and I
don't think we will ever see full D3D compatibility because of the way
2D graphics is handled. The D3D compatibility seems to only get better
on a handcrafted per-title basis.

That they reopened the FSAA-file just now is of course because they
can take a little wind out of 3dfx's sails, no argument about that.

As true as that is, well, for better or worse I'm afraid that is
something one have to live with when using a GeForce card. But at
least they update their drivers, unlike other companies(listening S3,
ATI?) :)

Yup, that can certainly be made smoother, agreed.

/Magnus
P.S. Sheesh, all I did was pointing out that the newer drivers had
better performance and compatibility, and already I'm a technofiliac
elitist, a *** and a zealot. ;) Phew. D.S.

I was talking about *D3D FSAA*, and if you look well enough, lo and
behold, there *are* D3D FSAA scores there. Compared to the 5.22 there
are in some cases 200-250% improvement.

/Magnus

I'm all out. Gotta see the doc.

I had the Geforce2 and returned it for the V5. I made the right
choice. 'Nuff said.

--
Nos