rec.autos.simulators

by **Greg Cisk** » Wed, 14 Jul 1999 04:00:00

>System PIII450, 128Mb, V3K.

I have a P2-450, 128MB, TNT (16MB) and V2 (12MB)

D3D is terrible on my system and Glide rocks so I don't
have the same perspective on this as you do.

Not if it is done improperly.

It was done properly.

I have always used Glide with max details and max cars with
outstanding performance. What wheel are you using?

--

Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

by **Adam Zerli** » Wed, 14 Jul 1999 04:00:00

When scgt was written, the glide was written for support for V2 and V1. V3
hadnt come out yet, which is the reason why it's slower. I have no idea if
they will come out with a patch for it or not.

Adam Zerlin
GT Insider WebMaster
http://www.racesimcentral.net/***.com

>>System PIII450, 128Mb, V3K.

>I have a P2-450, 128MB, TNT (16MB) and V2 (12MB)

>D3D is terrible on my system and Glide rocks so I don't
>have the same perspective on this as you do.

>>What gives? Surely writing 'to the metal' - Glide - should give
>performance
>>gains over having to use an interpretation layer - D3D.

>Not if it is done improperly.

>>I'm confused. This is the opposite of what is supposed to happen. F1RS
>was
>>noticably better using Glide than D3D.

>It was done properly.

>>Is this a result of the patch? I bought and patched immediately so never
>>played version 1.

>I have always used Glide with max details and max cars with
>outstanding performance. What wheel are you using?

>--

>Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

>cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

by **Mark Daviso** » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

System PIII450, 128Mb, V3K.

What gives? Surely writing 'to the metal' - Glide - should give performance
gains over having to use an interpretation layer - D3D.

I'm confused. This is the opposite of what is supposed to happen. F1RS was
noticably better using Glide than D3D.

Is this a result of the patch? I bought and patched immediately so never
played version 1.

Mark
Reading, UK

by **Nathan Wo** » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

On Wed, 14 Jul 1999 21:49:31 +0100, "Mark Davison"

Celeron 300A clocked to 450, 128MB, 32MB Asus TNT2 (not Ultra), and
12MB Voodoo2

Runs perfectly fine under Glide, in fact slightly better than the
TNT2.

--
Nathan Wong http://www.nectar.com.au/~alfacors
Super Touring - Club Cars - Alfa Romeo

http://fullspeed.to/astc
Australian Super Touring News and Information

by **Mark** » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

> Celeron 300A clocked to 450, 128MB, 32MB Asus TNT2 (not Ultra), and
> 12MB Voodoo2

> Runs perfectly fine under Glide, in fact slightly better than the
> TNT2.

> On Wed, 14 Jul 1999 21:49:31 +0100, "Mark Davison"

> >System PIII450, 128Mb, V3K.

That's really odd. Folks around here generally recommend the TNT2 as the
card to go for right now - unless you -really- want glide (I did. and
couldn't afford TNT2+V2), which that implies that the TNT2 should be the
faster all rounder (OpenGL/D3D in other words) So there's a couple of
possibilities here: If we assume that a V3 is will run SCGT better than a V2
then the TNT2 is slower in D3D than a V3 - for this title at least. If we
assume that the TNT2 is better than the V3 for D3D (and it should be given
the hype), that means that a V2 can outperform a V3 for this particular Glide
app.

My brain hurts.

Mark
Reading, UK

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

by **Steve Blankensh** » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

>If we assume that a V3 is will run SCGT better than a V2
>then the TNT2 is slower in D3D than a V3 - for this title at least. If we
>assume that the TNT2 is better than the V3 for D3D (and it should be given
>the hype), that means that a V2 can outperform a V3 for this particular Glide
>app.
>My brain hurts.

------------------------------------------------------
Yowch. You're giving me a headache!
Couple of data points here:

1. The V3 DOES run SCGT better in Glide than the V2
2. The V3 DOES run SCGT better in D3D than Glide

Can't say about the TNT2. As an aside, I tried to reinstall MGPRS2(4th
go-round for this p.o.s.) to try the D3D version to see if it showed similar
differences, but with the V3, I couldn't get the installer to install the D3D
version; it just flat refused. Anyone managed to work around this? I still
get annoying frame stutters in MGPRS2 with the 450/V3 combo, even in training
mode with replay turned off, which seems ridiculous!

Steve B.

remove "edy" from address for email

by **Steve Blankensh** » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

Can't give a good answer to that one, as the D3D version defaulted to my old
Stealth 3D-4MB primary card, which isn't a real comparison.

The e-mapping seems ok with the V3 in either mode, though I'm relying on memory
about Glide mode. It WAS funky with the V2, though.

Steve B.

remove "edy" from address for email

by **Jay** » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

I've had the same problem... When running with 3dfx/glide the cars have a
shinny/psychadlic paint effect, but with the Riva it's ok....

And actually I seem to get slightly better framerates with my STB velocity
4400 (TNT 1) card, than my Creative Labs Voodoo II 12meg card...

But... I've only got a PII 266 w/64 meg of RAM, so the additional RAM of the
TNT might be making the difference, also the fact that it's an AGP card,
rather than PCI too?

by **Steve Blankensh** » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

OOPS. Just went back and had another look. The E-Mapping's still
crazy-looking in Glide. The tire smoke is lousy as well; pure garbage compared
to how it looks in D3D. So: running SCGT in D3D is definitely better in every
respect on a V3; framerate, appearance, affects. No contest. I can see why
everyone seems to be going to D3D.

Cheers,

Steve B.

remove "edy" from address for email

by **Tim** » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

I haven't noticed any frame rate difference between Glide and D3D with my V3
P2-450 setup, but I too have the kaleidoscope look with the Emapping under
glide. But, the graphics are slightly better overall under glide so that's
what I run with.

-Tim

by **Mark Daviso** » Fri, 16 Jul 1999 04:00:00

>>If we assume that a V3 is will run SCGT better than a V2
>>then the TNT2 is slower in D3D than a V3 - for this title at least. If we
>>assume that the TNT2 is better than the V3 for D3D (and it should be given
>>the hype), that means that a V2 can outperform a V3 for this particular
Glide
>>app.
>>My brain hurts.
>------------------------------------------------------
>Yowch. You're giving me a headache!
>Couple of data points here:

>1. The V3 DOES run SCGT better in Glide than the V2
>2. The V3 DOES run SCGT better in D3D than Glide

Can you remember if the same applied to V2 - did it run SCGT better in D3D
than Glide, too?
If not it points to some sort of v3+glide prob, and if that was sorted...
well v3 SCGT would be just fabulous.
Also, when I apply e-mapping in 3dfx mode the cars go psychadelic, in D3D it
does what I suspect it should - give that shiny effect that seems so
popular. Doesn't do too good a job with it, tho, as it highlights
individual polys that make up the cars.

Cheers

Mark
Reading, UK

by **Nathan Wo** » Fri, 16 Jul 1999 04:00:00

>That's really odd. Folks around here generally recommend the TNT2 as the
>card to go for right now - unless you -really- want glide (I did. and
>couldn't afford TNT2+V2), which that implies that the TNT2 should be the
>faster all rounder (OpenGL/D3D in other words) So there's a couple of
>possibilities here: If we assume that a V3 is will run SCGT better than a V2
>then the TNT2 is slower in D3D than a V3 - for this title at least. If we
>assume that the TNT2 is better than the V3 for D3D (and it should be given
>the hype), that means that a V2 can outperform a V3 for this particular Glide
>app.

I really want Glide, I don't wanna muck around with Beta patches and
reduced mirrors for my GPL (not that I'm that serious about my GPL,
but why compromise when I can have it all on Glide?).
I would assume that the D3D simply isnt coded quite as well as the
Glide, or that the Glide one has some advantages in SCGT.
I can't notice any colour difference between the TNT I used to have,
the TNT2 now, or the V2......not in SCGT anyway. All I get now is the
ultra high res with TNT2, not that my monitor can support it.
Anyway, it's been shown that V3 can outrun a TNT2 in many games, as
it's the speed king, but the TNT2 is the image king and nearly the
speed king.
--
Nathan Wong http://www.nectar.com.au/~alfacors
Super Touring - Club Cars - Alfa Romeo

http://fullspeed.to/astc
Australian Super Touring News and Information

by **MeatWate** » Wed, 21 Jul 1999 04:00:00

Reinstall the INDEO drivers from the CD prior to attempting an installation.

Mea***er

still

by **MeatWate** » Wed, 21 Jul 1999 04:00:00

All there is to do is wait for the next V3 drivers. They mentioned a
performance increase of up to 15%.

Mea***er

rec.autos.simulators

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D

SCGT - Why is Native 3dfx slower than D3D