rec.autos.simulators

by **blorc** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 01:47:25

I have an older PC that was a good *** rig in its day. Due to problems
with my right foot I had to stop sim racing for a while (tendonitis, gout,
ouch!). I just started looking into this group again and saw all the
exictement about GTR2002 so I went out and grabbed a copy of F12002 (for
14.99) and then downloaded this mod. Very thorough job I must say. I can't
get it to look and run too well on my computer though and wondered if some
of you nice people can offer advice to me since i have forgotten everything
I once knew.

I have a Pentium 3 1G, the one with the 133 Mhz FSB. I also have 512 meg of
ram. My video card is a Visiontek Xtasy 5864, which has a GeForce2 Ti. My
wheel is an old MSFF with a gameport connector.

I tried running the resolution pretty high 1600x1024 and turning down
details and particles and things like that but it ran too slow. Slow
framerate. I tried running it at 800x600 with 4X FSAA and higher details
and it still looked awful. I even tried shutting off the Force feedback
because in some games the MSFF could drag down frame rate and image quality
(Like SCGT) Even though it was ugly I did manage to best everyone in an
offline race at Monza using the ferarri 360 though.

I guess I would like a suggestion on how to get a good frame rate and make
it look good. I value good basic visuals as highly as decent frame rate. I
dont want an ugly sim that runs at 60fps, I also dont want a pretty one that
runs at 10fps. What does anyone think my best bet would be to get a happy
medium. I am one of those people who thinks 30fps is fine, BTW. I will keep
playing around with it but wondered if any of the people more familiar with
common configs might be willing to offer a suggestion. I want to have some
fun before my foot and ankle get all screwed up again and its only a matter
of time. Thanks. Blorch

by **b..** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 03:09:05

Pretty simple. Your video card is way obsolete. The bargain choice
is a Ti4200.

by **frederickso** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 06:08:02

Use 1024x768, 16 bit, and turn off shadows and the lighting stuff

by **Gerry Aitke** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 06:34:45

> Pretty simple. Your video card is way obsolete. The bargain choice
> is a Ti4200.

Won't help much unless he upgrades hid CPU too.

Gerry

by **Andre Warring** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 07:18:55

>medium. I am one of those people who thinks 30fps is fine, BTW.

I don't think 30fps is enough for GTR2002.. I have a p3 866 GF2 GTS,
and the mod runs -really- bad on my pc. So I set the resolution to
640x480, turned ALL the details to off or low, and during a practice
run on Monza I now have 70-80 fps. And the driving feels MUCH better
than driving with 30 fps..
The only negative thing is that GTR2002 now looks like a Commodore 64
game, but at least I can enjoy the physics now :)

I don't have to try a race however, even with all the settings off, I
get about 25fps during a race with 16 cars, of which I set 6 cars to
visible :-/

Andre

by **blorc** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 07:08:14

thank you. that's good info. Blorch.

> > I have an older PC that was a good *** rig in its day. Due to
problems
> > with my right foot I had to stop sim racing for a while (tendonitis,
gout,
> > ouch!). I just started looking into this group again and saw all the
> > exictement about GTR2002 so I went out and grabbed a copy of F12002 (for
> > 14.99) and then downloaded this mod. Very thorough job I must say. I
> can't
> > get it to look and run too well on my computer though and wondered if
some
> > of you nice people can offer advice to me since i have forgotten
> everything
> > I once knew.

> > I have a Pentium 3 1G, the one with the 133 Mhz FSB. I also have 512
meg
> of
> > ram. My video card is a Visiontek Xtasy 5864, which has a GeForce2 Ti.
> My
> > wheel is an old MSFF with a gameport connector.

> > I tried running the resolution pretty high 1600x1024 and turning down
> > details and particles and things like that but it ran too slow. Slow
> > framerate. I tried running it at 800x600 with 4X FSAA and higher
details
> > and it still looked awful. I even tried shutting off the Force feedback
> > because in some games the MSFF could drag down frame rate and image
> quality
> > (Like SCGT) Even though it was ugly I did manage to best everyone in an
> > offline race at Monza using the ferarri 360 though.

> > I guess I would like a suggestion on how to get a good frame rate and
make
> > it look good. I value good basic visuals as highly as decent frame
rate.
> I
> > dont want an ugly sim that runs at 60fps, I also dont want a pretty one
> that
> > runs at 10fps. What does anyone think my best bet would be to get a
happy
> > medium. I am one of those people who thinks 30fps is fine, BTW. I will
> keep
> > playing around with it but wondered if any of the people more familiar
> with
> > common configs might be willing to offer a suggestion. I want to have
> some
> > fun before my foot and ankle get all screwed up again and its only a
> matter
> > of time. Thanks. Blorch

by **Ed Whit** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 07:52:13

> >medium. I am one of those people who thinks 30fps is fine, BTW.

> I don't think 30fps is enough for GTR2002.. I have a p3 866 GF2 GTS,
> and the mod runs -really- bad on my pc. So I set the resolution to
> 640x480, turned ALL the details to off or low, and during a practice
> run on Monza I now have 70-80 fps. And the driving feels MUCH better
> than driving with 30 fps..
> The only negative thing is that GTR2002 now looks like a Commodore 64
> game, but at least I can enjoy the physics now :)

> I don't have to try a race however, even with all the settings off, I
> get about 25fps during a race with 16 cars, of which I set 6 cars to
> visible :-/

> Andre

64m, and GTR2002 runs pretty well for me....I'm also using a tweaker for the
vid card to o'clock it some(core to 235mhz, memory to 400 mhz) and under d3d
options, mipmapping is set to "Blend".....what I found, which makes no
sense, is that there is no fps penalty for higher resolutions, I found this

produces nice graphics at 50-60 fps, which is plenty for smooth feel, but
most graphics options are set to low, and of course, no AA or anisotropic.
If I leave all other settings alone, and redo 3D setup at 640 or 800, I get
no higher fps as a result,and these low rez's with either AA or aniso kill
frames......so far, my best all around setup is 1600x1200 as described.
PS ver28.32 drivers for the card, and Win XP Pro
Ed

by **Jo?o Gonzale** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 08:47:11

If your monitor isn't larger than 15", 800x600 will do nicely and you will
gain a lot of performance. Also sound quality low and turn off all extra
sounds (commentaries not used in the Mods anyway) and also the visuals. Make
sure your Windows desktop is set for 16 bit colour too and use EndItAll to
get rid of memory resident programs that slow your PC down.

1G Hz is slow but usable. I have a friend that uses a AMD 700MHz and he gets
about 40 fps on a Geforce 2 at 800x600x16 all settings low/medium.

The Geforce 4 Ti 4200 is a good advice though. Even with your GF2 make sure
your drivers are fairly recent (I prefer the 30.82s even if there are new
ones around).

Good luck and enjoy.

Jo?o

by **Uwe Schuerkam** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 17:20:07

>> Use 1024x768, 16 bit, and turn off shadows and the lighting stuff

> thank you. that's good info. Blorch.

Track detail set at "medium" or low should help a good bit, too.
Also turn down the number of AI drivers to 16-20 or so.

Regards,
Uwe

--
mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox)
Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/
Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E)
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

by **Some Call Me Ti** » Mon, 09 Dec 2002 20:59:18

Unfortunately as almost always the only real way to make GTR2002 look nice
and run fast is to spend loads of cash. fortunatley for me I've just had a
pay rise and decided to blow it on building myself a new pc with a P4
2.53Ghz, 512Mb 4200 Rdram (very expensive but very fast!) and a GeForce
4600Ti. Thankfully all this expense means I can run GTR2002 at 1280x1024
full detail and Quincunx FSAA at a decent*** and of course it looks simply
splendid. I'm very happy that GTR2002 came out because it's only that and
Unreal Tournament 2003 that justify my huge expense.

--
Some Call Me Tim

by **Andre Warring** » Tue, 10 Dec 2002 04:48:22

>64m, and GTR2002 runs pretty well for me....I'm also using a tweaker for the

You're system is faster than mine overall, perhaps just enough to make
GTR2002 run smooth enough.. To compare, I have a P3 866, 256mb, GF2
GTS with 32mb, and using Win98. But thanks for the resolution tip, I
allready suspected this, didn't see any difference when switching from
1024 to 800, but just to make sure I set everything as low as
possible, so I chose the 640 resolution.

Andre

by **Uwe Schuerkam** » Tue, 10 Dec 2002 02:52:59

Not true ;-) I traded my GF2MX, 256MB RAM and an old hard drive
and gave it to my son for his GF4 (he had bought it used from a
friend), stuck that into my game machine, turned a couple of
details down ("track detail" on "medium", for instance), and am
enjoying a happy 40-50fps at 1024x768x32bit. And it sure looks
nice too.

Cheers, uwe

--
mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox)
Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/
Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E)
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

rec.autos.simulators

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice

GTR2002 - help make it look nice