rec.autos.simulators

by **Andrew MacPhers** » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 17:24:00

> If I back off to 800x600, turn off trees & flags,
> use a simple sky, I'm into the 70s.

But if you race online with those settings does it help at all?

In your other reply you talk about justifying the cost of adsl/cable.
Here in the UK I pay 24/39euro for adsl (most ISPs are more like
30/48e) and I was very reluctant to commit myself to the extra cost...
after all, modem access did everything I really wanted for almost half
the price, and I didn't *need* adsl. It felt like an unnecessary luxury.

I was wrong :-) Now I couldn't live without it. It makes me shudder even
to *think* about going back to modem access, even though I haven't done
much online *** at all since I got it.

I'll shut up now, I probably shouldn't be tempting you. I'm sure you
have far better things to spend the money on :-)

Andrew McP

by **Stephen F** » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 18:18:49

> > If I back off to 800x600, turn off trees & flags,
> > use a simple sky, I'm into the 70s.

> But if you race online with those settings does it help at all?

No, so I think it is the connection...

You're right, but I guess if we only spent money on what we *need*, we'd
live in straw houses and eat porridge. Now, a cable feed with a wireless
base station would be something nice for my notebook, and I could justify it
to my girlfriend by saying that I would no longer be tied to the phone
cable...

Stephen

by **Andrew MacPhers** » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 18:44:00

> I could justify it to my girlfriend by saying that I would no
> longer be tied to the phone cable...

This is probably *very* dangerous for your credit cards, but you could
also tell her how easy it is to go shopping on the web once you have
broadband. In fact if I was to say there was a downside to adsl it's the
fact that I've made far too many impulse buys in the middle of the
night, or straight after a bad day at work purely because it's so quick
& painless to go surfing hardware-*** sites :-)

Andrew McP

by **Uwe hoover Schuerkam** » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 20:02:32

thanks Andrew & Stephen,

I'll try turning off replays and see if that solves the fps
problem during the starts.

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

by **Uwe hoover Schuerkam** » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 20:06:18

> p.s. I'll try the speedup option...

so what kind of frame rates should I expect from LFS S1 on the
following rig?

Athlon 1800XP+
GeForce 4 MX 440 (64MB, I believe)
SBLive! Value
ECS K7S5A / LAN
384MB SD-RAM (PC-133)
Windows 98SE (just explorer and systray running)
TSW2Mod (FF disabled in-game)

Thanks in advance,

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 **Uwe hoover Schuerkam** » Wed, 30 Jul 2003 20:07:46

>> Disagree. The first thing to rule out is a bad connection to the host.
> Did
>> the guy say that his low frames happen all the time online? Or was it

I'm on DSL (1Mbit / 256kbit), and the slowdown at the start
happens each and every time (ping times in the low 50-60)

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

by **Remco Moe** » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 00:39:40

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 21:20 +0100 (BST),

>> After I exchanged the joystick for a wheel it improved a bit

>Losing the GTI helped a bit as well :-)

Hehe. Actually, with a joystick it's hard to correct a loose tail.
That's why I choose a FWD. I left the race to hook up the wheel,
but you were gone when I returned. Wussy.... <g>

I turned FF off, it made me fishtail the car too much.

Remco

by **Dalibor Bauernfrajn** » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 05:16:03

Schuerkamp says...

> > p.s. I'll try the speedup option...

> so what kind of frame rates should I expect from LFS S1 on the
> following rig?

> Athlon 1800XP+
> GeForce 4 MX 440 (64MB, I believe)
> 384MB SD-RAM (PC-133)
> Windows 98SE (just explorer and systray running)

Some problems during the start (20fps) but never under 40 later
on.

--
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
ICQ: 138579247

by **Right** » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:02:56

I have a 640/272 dsl connection, 850MHz Athlon and an GF2MX. If there are 10
cars in the race (Blackwood GTI) at turn 1, I get 7.6fps (A slide show). If
I enter a game with a max of 8 cars with 6 or 7 playing I can make it
through turn 1 without noticing any problems.

by **epste** » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 11:12:55

I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was the
limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics card.
There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though adding more AI
cars or a big field online slowed the car.

I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB with
dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a full field
of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing, etc.).
Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30 FPS,
which is still smooth.

> > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution;
> > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768.

> That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local hardware
> issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or out
> as a cause.

> Andrew McP

by **Andrew MacPhers** » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 15:31:00

> I left the race to hook up the wheel,
> but you were gone when I returned. Wussy.... <g>

Ah, it was late and I assumed you'd gone to bed. I wandered off to go
annoy some paper with a paintbrush.... much better for the heart rate
than dodging sideways LX6s.

Interesting. I haven't tried LFS without FF but I still prefer GPL
without FF... though that's probably because I spent so many hours
driving with an un-forced wheel.

Andrew McP

by **Uwe hoover Schuerkam** » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:19:30

> thanks Andrew & Stephen,

> I'll try turning off replays and see if that solves the fps
> problem during the starts.

> Cheers!

> uwe

I disabled replays, flags and trees, made sure the multiplayer
speedup is enabled and tried again... still slow as molasses
during multiplayer starts, esp. when many different makes are
on the track.

I don't think it's a problem with my setup (I get 60fps at F1C
Hockenheim test day and 90 in N2003 practise), so I wonder if
anybody has managed to improve fps in LFS during multiplayer
starts?

Thanks again for your suggestions,

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 **wasso** » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 19:09:21

What a increase!! What Motherboard/chip/ram did you get and where??
My Gateway GHz laptop is about double the frame rate of my GHZ
with T4 4200 home built computer. I guess it is time for an upgrade.

Bob

> I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was the
> limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics card.
> There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though adding more
AI
> cars or a big field online slowed the car.

> I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB with
> dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a full
field
> of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing, etc.).
> Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30 FPS,
> which is still smooth.

> > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution;
> > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768.

> > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local hardware
> > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or out
> > as a cause.

> > Andrew McP

by **wasso** » Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:51:48

Correction!!! The laptop is 2Ghz, and the Desktop is 1Ghz. So even thou
the desktop has a much better video card, the laptop is twice as fast which
confirms that a fast CPU is the key to good frame rates.

Bob

> What a increase!! What Motherboard/chip/ram did you get and where??
> My Gateway GHz laptop is about double the frame rate of my GHZ
> with T4 4200 home built computer. I guess it is time for an upgrade.

> Bob

> > I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was the
> > limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics
card.
> > There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though adding
more
> AI
> > cars or a big field online slowed the car.

> > I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB with
> > dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a full
> field
> > of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing,
etc.).
> > Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30
FPS,
> > which is still smooth.

message

> > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution;
> > > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768.

> > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local
hardware
> > > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or
out
> > > as a cause.

> > > Andrew McP

by **epste** » Fri, 01 Aug 2003 02:43:13

ok.. Specs of upgrade are as follows:

Gigabyte 8KNXP M/board (P875 Chipset) supporting Dual Channel DDR RAM.
2 x Kingston HyperX PC3500 (DDR 434) double sided DIMMS
Intel P4 3.0c 800Mhz FSB CPU
Subzero4G peltier CPU cooler

FWIW, I'm also running 3x Seagate Cheetah 15KRPM 18GB HDs running RAID0,
connected to an Adaptec Dual Channel Ultra 160 SCSI RAID Controller with
128MB writeback cache. Believe it not I found the HDs and Adaptec controller
in server that a company had thrown out into a skip. So.. LFS loads pretty
quickly as well :-)

Cheers,
Tim

> What a increase!! What Motherboard/chip/ram did you get and where??
> My Gateway GHz laptop is about double the frame rate of my GHZ
> with T4 4200 home built computer. I guess it is time for an upgrade.

> Bob

> > I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was the
> > limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics
card.
> > There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though adding
more
> AI
> > cars or a big field online slowed the car.

> > I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB with
> > dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a full
> field
> > of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing,
etc.).
> > Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30
FPS,
> > which is still smooth.

message

> > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution;
> > > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768.

> > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local
hardware
> > > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or
out
> > > as a cause.

> > > Andrew McP

rec.autos.simulators

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer