>> I was still looking forward to CPR in a "fixed" and "true accelerated" state,
> Do I smell a religion forming here? Is D3D no longer "true"
> acceleration? Does the church know about this? BURN THE INFIDELS!
> <G>
simply when I take for instance ICR2. Non-accelerated may yield say
15-25 fps and look fair but nothing to blow your socks off. Now, I
load it with "Rendition" support and see brilliant graphics come alive
along with very consistent 30 fps framerates. Now, lets take a more
current title ported to a different chipset: UBI F1 on the "Voodoo". I
could continue to state further examples: N2, VQuake, GLQuake,
TombRaider, NHL 98', JF3, ect... which all just happen to support hdw.
acceleration through other obvious means than D3D. Now lets take MTM
and CPR both heavily endorsed & published by/through Microsoft and
both also being a form of an auto-sim racer using D3D as acceleration
support. Hmmm, MTM getting around 20 'ish fps with dips on my P166MMX,
64Meg EDO, Pure3d. CPR getting around 18-30 fps on same system with
all extra graphics off including the***pit. My conclusion as to this
date, D3D is obviously not yet developed to a point of performance to
handle a "racer" at anywhere equal to what can and has been presented
by "Rendition" and/or "Glide" support. Just my opinion and I hope the
tide turns a bit but I can only present and argue what I have actually
experienced so far.
True to a point but when the issue I am most frustrated by is getting
over the extreme letdown of "fps" consistency and amount in CPR vs.s
the gratifying experience I have encountered in UBI F1, the fruit(s)
become a much easier choice ;).
Ron L.
(Please remove the extra letter(s) to respond)
Home of the SSC http://www.racesimcentral.net/~lazer/
For Nascar2 & Winston Cup Fans!