rec.autos.simulators

by **Morris Jone** » Sun, 09 Feb 2003 11:25:22

Okay, we just replace the Geforce 2 Ultra in my friends P4 1.5ghz system
with the Ti4600, it made zero difference in FPS, explain this to me please.
At 1600x1200x32 fps in back of field on pit road 23
same as GF2 using the excact same settings and the 41.09 drivers on both
cards. Weird thing is his poly rate never changes still on 496 and mine on a
2.53P4 system and the Ti4600 only 350.30 but I get faster FPS by about 10
FPS. What does this game need, something not yet out?

by **Larr** » Sun, 09 Feb 2003 12:35:08

I have a Ti4400 with everything but Solar Flares and Shadows turned on and
in a FULL FIELD at Daytona I am pulling 40-60fps depending on where I am.

1280X1024X16 no FSAA D3D.

Just sitting in one place is not a good test for fps. You need to get out
in a full field of traffic and test that way.

If you are not getting WAY better performance out of a Ti4600 than a
Geforce2 Ultra, then something is very, very wrong.

The most consistent way to test is to pick one track, set it to full field,
skip all the way to the race so you always start at the rear, and then watch
the readings during the pace lap to the green.

That's the most consistent, repeatable test you can do, and most importantly
it's under a real-time load, not just sitting in the pits where things are
changing around you.

Larry

by **Joe M** » Sun, 09 Feb 2003 15:21:33

Larry, you should try 32-bit. I tested both and my fps were nearly
identical (D3D). No sense missing the higher quality textures if it makes
not difference.

AMD 1600+
512MB Ram
GF4 Ti 4400

--
Joe M.

by AG » Mon, 10 Feb 2003 02:21:56

please.

The bottleneck is the CPU.

rec.autos.simulators

Geforce 2 Ultra More Test NR2003

Geforce 2 Ultra More Test NR2003

Geforce 2 Ultra More Test NR2003

Geforce 2 Ultra More Test NR2003

Geforce 2 Ultra More Test NR2003