rec.autos.simulators

by **Andrew Dayto** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:34:45

Trust me, the green smoke is NOT correct. I don't want to get into all of
the details, but it has to do with the fact that in 16 bit color, green has
1 more bit of color (6) than red or blue (5).

Again, thanks for everybody's input.

Mud

by **Andrew Dayto** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:36:46

Understand. Don't ever tell me computers are fast enough until we can run
everything at 32 bit color/depth at 60fps. :)

Mud

by **Andrew Dayto** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:38:30

Oh good, there are 32 bit fans out there!!

Mud

by **Stephen Powel** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:35:22

On the Sun, 24 Jun 2001 02:29:36 GMT in article

(I of course, believe none of it)

You can definately force the Geforce cards to use a 16-bit Z-buffer in
32-bit colour.

You cant apparently do it the opposite way around.

--
SteveP

http://www.naplesfl.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

by **Stephen Powel** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:55:40

On the Sun, 24 Jun 2001 02:38:30 GMT in article

(I of course, believe none of it)

Yep, though personally I was amazed there are still 16-bit fans out there
:)

--
SteveP

http://www.naplesfl.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

by **Stephen Powel** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:57:00

On the Sun, 24 Jun 2001 02:34:45 GMT in article

(I of course, believe none of it)

You can add that the human eye is more sensitive to changes in green too,
hence why people can really notice that extra bit :)

--
SteveP

http://www.naplesfl.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

by **Dave Henri** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 12:14:05

Not so much 16bit fans as realists...not too many systems can run 32bit
games without ***...As more users get fasters systems, you'll probably
see a gradual shift to all things 32bit.
dave henrie

bit fans out there!!

by **Stephen Powel** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 12:18:31

On the Sun, 24 Jun 2001 03:14:05 GMT in article

(I of course, believe none of it)

> bit fans out there!!

> > Yep, though personally I was amazed there are still 16-bit fans out there
> > :)

> Not so much 16bit fans as realists...not too many systems can run 32bit
> games without ***...As more users get fasters systems, you'll probably
> see a gradual shift to all things 32bit.
> dave henrie

Personally I wouldnt call it that realistic on modern systems. As I
said, I do *all* my *** in 32 bit, because I can pretty much always

Geforce2MX, I find the performance hit preferable to the image quality
degradation. YMMV of course.

As for the gradual change, I'd have thought we were definately on the
side of 32bit now. Especially with cards like the Kyro2 and Rage128 up
to Radeon that take only a marginal hit going from 16->32bit, and with
developers like John Carmack pushing for 64bit precision.

--
SteveP

http://www.racesimcentral.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

by **Dave Henri** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 12:38:56

Dvorak(pcmag.com) has an interesting piece about Broadband and how it
'should' have been more popular by now...I think the same logic applies to
32 bit...sure it can be done, but as long as the masses move through AOL and
off the shelf computer systems, the bulk of programming will be pointed at
that end of the market. Even after the scale starts tilting toward
increased broadband use or inclusion of 32bit color, it will still take some
time to overcome the installed base of dial ups or slower systems using
16bit vs 32bit. While you may be more than ready to move up to 32bit, until
the largest groups of non-computer-savy buy their way into faster systems,
you won't see the big shift.
dave henrie

> On the Sun, 24 Jun 2001 03:14:05 GMT in article

> (I of course, believe none of it)

32
> > bit fans out there!!

> > > Yep, though personally I was amazed there are still 16-bit fans out
there
> > > :)

> > Not so much 16bit fans as realists...not too many systems can run
32bit
> > games without ***...As more users get fasters systems, you'll
probably
> > see a gradual shift to all things 32bit.
> > dave henrie

> Personally I wouldnt call it that realistic on modern systems. As I
> said, I do *all* my *** in 32 bit, because I can pretty much always

> Geforce2MX, I find the performance hit preferable to the image quality
> degradation. YMMV of course.

> As for the gradual change, I'd have thought we were definately on the
> side of 32bit now. Especially with cards like the Kyro2 and Rage128 up
> to Radeon that take only a marginal hit going from 16->32bit, and with
> developers like John Carmack pushing for 64bit precision.

> --
> SteveP

> http://www.racesimcentral.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

by **Ian** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 19:51:07

I run N4 , F1RC and MBTR in 32 bit with my radeon 64DDR, there is virtually

--

Ian P
<email invalid due to spammers>

> On the Sun, 24 Jun 2001 03:14:05 GMT in article

> (I of course, believe none of it)

32
> > bit fans out there!!

> > > Yep, though personally I was amazed there are still 16-bit fans out
there
> > > :)

> > Not so much 16bit fans as realists...not too many systems can run
32bit
> > games without ***...As more users get fasters systems, you'll
probably
> > see a gradual shift to all things 32bit.
> > dave henrie

> Personally I wouldnt call it that realistic on modern systems. As I
> said, I do *all* my *** in 32 bit, because I can pretty much always

> Geforce2MX, I find the performance hit preferable to the image quality
> degradation. YMMV of course.

> As for the gradual change, I'd have thought we were definately on the
> side of 32bit now. Especially with cards like the Kyro2 and Rage128 up
> to Radeon that take only a marginal hit going from 16->32bit, and with
> developers like John Carmack pushing for 64bit precision.

> --
> SteveP

> http://www.racesimcentral.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

by **Stephen Powel** » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 23:12:53

On the Sun, 24 Jun 2001 03:38:56 GMT in article

(I of course, believe none of it)

Thats a good point, you always need to cater to the lowest common
denominator, and while developers to that, theres less reason to upgrade.
But I'd still say 32bit has been the more popular choice for quite some
time, certainly not enough to dissalow the use of 16bit modes, but
definately enough to make it worth using 32bit.

--
SteveP

http://www.naplesfl.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

by **Aaron Turne** » Tue, 26 Jun 2001 02:04:18

: I don't believe any of Nvidia's cars support mixed rendering modes (16 bit
: color/32 bit depth or 32 bit color/16 bit depth).

For one it only has 16 or 24 bit Z buffer depths! You can do 32 bit
colour, 16 bit Z, though, but 32 bit colour makes for quite a hit on frame
rates, but 24 bit or more Z is required for WB3 coastlines.

Aaron Turner

by **F r e** » Tue, 26 Jun 2001 04:36:33

the first TNT card ran 32 bit at 600x800 in Unreal/H-L on a 300Mhz
PentiumMXX i was enjoying it...
At those 'dark times' we already talked shitloads of 'shifting from 16 to32'
... Haha
--
F r e e

/ <-I like this

by **nobod** » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:13:28

I have a question about 16, and 32bit color. When I play Counter-Strike in
16bit, all the detail looks great, and things look good. but if I switch
over to 32bit, all the walls and textures look smeared, and the text for the
scores is not as sharp. I don't get a noticeable performance hit in 32bit
mode, so is this a setting that I have wrong in my graphics card properties?
My system specs. are as follows:

Asus K7V bios 1008
Athlon Classic 950mhz not OCed
Guillemot 3dprophet DDR/DVI
Aureal Vortex 2500
256MB Crucial CL2
Western Digital 20gig invaderXL 7200rpm ATA100
Win98

I am using all the latest drivers for everything. I have tried the det.3
drivers and have had problems, so I reverted back to the vendors latest. I
pull a 5600max in 3DMARK2000 and this is a good score from what I can see.
any info would be great. thanks guys!!!

Ryan

by **Devo** » Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:53:35

Counterstrike doesn't have support for 32 bit color as it used Half
Life engine. 16 bit is all you are going to get. It's a very dated
engine nowdays.

--------------
Devo

rec.autos.simulators

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode