GF4 4200-128MB F12002 Framerates...

Is anyone out there running the GF4 4200 on a 800 mhz P3? If so what framerates are you getting in F1 2002??? Just curious...my card should be arriving soon.. -- Dale Floyd, Floyd Racing #38 - #83

I'm running it with a 900 mhz PC. Frame rates depend on whether your new card causes you to go nuts with the detail level or not. IIRC I am typically getting barely 20 fps on the starting grid, mid 20's in the pits, and 30's to 40's while racing. I am running at 1024x768x16 with most details turned up to the max recommended (i.e. not in the red) and Quincuncx FSAA (30.82 drivers). A little bit of playing with detail level or perhaps turning off FSAA would speed it up a bit, but I don't care. It's quite playable, except at the start, but more importantly (to me) it is near photo-realistic at times and I find that that, combined with the full rate physics and excellent sound and force feedback, gives me more of a feeling of immersion than any other game. Besides, the frame rate comes back up quickly as the other cards disappear around the next bend. ;o) "D. Floyd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:mjza9.226593$[email hidden]... > Is anyone out there running the GF4 4200 on a 800 mhz P3? If so what > framerates are you getting in F1 2002??? Just curious...my card shouldbe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> arriving soon.. > > -- > Dale Floyd, > Floyd Racing #38 - #83 > >

I get 60-90fps with no AI on my own, on a GF2 and 868 P3.... thats with most detail off, but as we know about f12002, unless your getting upwards of 50fps, its unplayable compared to 70-90 or at best 150fps... Hit a curb at 30fps, then hit the same one at 90fps....the car hardly moves at 90, flies into the sky at 30, stupid physics lag.... A good aim is to be sure your game is running near properly is above 70.... Above a 100 i'd think its starting to work in a sweet zone....and driving is a damn sight easier at higher FPS due to lack of physics delay.... Haqsau <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:akehok$1hmrmg$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> I'm running it with a 900 mhz PC. Frame rates depend on whether your > new card causes you to go nuts with the detail level or not. IIRC I am > typically getting barely 20 fps on the starting grid, mid 20's in the > pits, and 30's to 40's while racing. I am running at 1024x768x16 with > most details turned up to the max recommended (i.e. not in the red) and > Quincuncx FSAA (30.82 drivers). A little bit of playing with detail > level or perhaps turning off FSAA would speed it up a bit, but I don't > care. It's quite playable, except at the start, but more importantly > (to me) it is near photo-realistic at times and I find that that, > combined with the full rate physics and excellent sound and force > feedback, gives me more of a feeling of immersion than any other game. > Besides, the frame rate comes back up quickly as the other cards > disappear around the next bend. ;o) > > "D. Floyd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:mjza9.226593$[email hidden]... > > Is anyone out there running the GF4 4200 on a 800 mhz P3? If so what > > framerates are you getting in F1 2002??? Just curious...my card should > be > > arriving soon.. > > > > -- > > Dale Floyd, > > Floyd Racing #38 - #83 > > > > >

also why just have nice graphics where you could have 100FPS without FSAA and thats at 1600x1200, why run 1024x768 and FSAA when you can run 1600x1200 with none :) and get 40more FPS and have physics that arent lagged to hell making your life as hard as hell behind the wheel....! turn all that rubbish off and try the game at 100fps :) Haqsau <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:akehok$1hmrmg$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> I'm running it with a 900 mhz PC. Frame rates depend on whether your > new card causes you to go nuts with the detail level or not. IIRC I am > typically getting barely 20 fps on the starting grid, mid 20's in the > pits, and 30's to 40's while racing. I am running at 1024x768x16 with > most details turned up to the max recommended (i.e. not in the red) and > Quincuncx FSAA (30.82 drivers). A little bit of playing with detail > level or perhaps turning off FSAA would speed it up a bit, but I don't > care. It's quite playable, except at the start, but more importantly > (to me) it is near photo-realistic at times and I find that that, > combined with the full rate physics and excellent sound and force > feedback, gives me more of a feeling of immersion than any other game. > Besides, the frame rate comes back up quickly as the other cards > disappear around the next bend. ;o) > > "D. Floyd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:mjza9.226593$[email hidden]... > > Is anyone out there running the GF4 4200 on a 800 mhz P3? If so what > > framerates are you getting in F1 2002??? Just curious...my card should > be > > arriving soon.. > > > > -- > > Dale Floyd, > > Floyd Racing #38 - #83 > > > > >

Id expect your CPU to be the main factor in not getting the maximum potential from this card, as its too slow to fill it, youll prolly 60-90FPS same as my GF2 id imagine....as your CPU wont feed it fast enough for it to sing... Id think a 13-1500mhz processor would get be needed to see any great improvements in fill rates, hope the card doesnt suck your CPU dry... The GF2 still sucks my 868 dry, as for putting a GF4 in an 800 machine unless your previous card was a V3, id think youll not see any where near the optimum output levels from it..... sorry :) It would prolly dish out 130+fps or maybe higher CPU, on your maybe youll only see 80ish.....but thats just my feelings on using the lastest GFX cards in slow machines.... backlog and CPU jam time.... D. Floyd <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:mjza9.226593$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Is anyone out there running the GF4 4200 on a 800 mhz P3? If so what > framerates are you getting in F1 2002??? Just curious...my card should be > arriving soon.. > > -- > Dale Floyd, > Floyd Racing #38 - #83 > >

The physics are not any faster at higer fps in f12002 as you either set it to 100hz or 200hz (high or normal) phsyics. I aslo very much doubt if you can see any diffence visually in frame rate between 50 and 100fps unless you've got weird inhuman eyes. 36fps in GPL is certainly more thasn good enough for all us simmers anything above is a waste of power which is better spent on visual quality. Some Call Me Tim

have you played it? i take it you havent? the difference is MASSIVE... and the way it samples the physics when the game is 100+FPS is awesome, any monkey thats played some F12002 on a fastmachine knows this.... please re-read my posts, as they are based ON FACT, not belief.... the engine is VERY frame rate dependant, ive never experienced a sim like it.. Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > The physics are not any faster at higer fps in f12002 as you either set it > to 100hz or 200hz (high or normal) phsyics. I aslo very much doubt if you > can see any diffence visually in frame rate between 50 and 100fps unless > you've got weird inhuman eyes. 36fps in GPL is certainly more thasn good > enough for all us simmers anything above is a waste of power which isbetter > spent on visual quality. > > Some Call Me Tim > >

also...its not FPS for the eye, its Frame Per Meter on the road, this is why at 150fps F12002 looks outstnading compared to 50 or so.... at 50fps you get 1 frame per metre of track at 200mph.....at 150fps you get 3 frames per metre, this makes a MASSIVE difference in visual smoothness and makes games like GPL look like slomo replays of poorly recorded low budget low FPS movies.... Its not what the eye can see, its how many times get a refresh per metre... To this point find a GPL replay at 200mph (down to stavelot at spa) pause it click the frame forward and it skips maybe 2metres between frames it 70metres per second on the road, is 0.5frames per metre.... now watch F12002 at 200mph with 150fps.....LOL the difference is fucking massive!!.... But this still doesnt explain why at 30fps in f12002 you hit a curb and it reacts twice as bad as a guy running 90fps.....the model is running better, and f12002s model just gets better the faster it runs, any PC lag of low FPS it runs and reacts to high pressure impacts with curbs with bizarre results.... Any with a trick machine try a slowmo program to give you 50% processor usuage, try taking the curbs at monza T1 with 25fps, then try it with 100.... night and day.... Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > The physics are not any faster at higer fps in f12002 as you either set it > to 100hz or 200hz (high or normal) phsyics. I aslo very much doubt if you > can see any diffence visually in frame rate between 50 and 100fps unless > you've got weird inhuman eyes. 36fps in GPL is certainly more thasn good > enough for all us simmers anything above is a waste of power which isbetter > spent on visual quality. > > Some Call Me Tim > >

also tell me the 36fps is fine, with a number of GPLers suffering eye problems in GPL, they dont or are no longer suffering in F12002...more FPS the better... GPL great sim, but jesus christ does it look slow and nasty at high speed after seeing what 3x the FPS looks like..... David Powell clara.co.uk> <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > also...its not FPS for the eye, its Frame Per Meter on the road, this iswhy > at 150fps F12002 looks outstnading compared to 50 or so.... > > at 50fps you get 1 frame per metre of track at 200mph.....at 150fps youget > 3 frames per metre, this makes a MASSIVE difference in visual smoothnessand > makes games like GPL look like slomo replays of poorly recorded low budget > low FPS movies.... > > Its not what the eye can see, its how many times get a refresh permetre... > > To this point find a GPL replay at 200mph (down to stavelot at spa) pauseit

Quoted text (8 lines)

> click the frame forward and it skips maybe 2metres between frames it > 70metres per second on the road, is 0.5frames per metre.... > > now watch F12002 at 200mph with 150fps.....LOL the difference is fucking > massive!!.... > > But this still doesnt explain why at 30fps in f12002 you hit a curb and it > reacts twice as bad as a guy running 90fps.....the model is running

better, > and f12002s model just gets better the faster it runs, any PC lag of lowFPS

Quoted text (13 lines)

> it runs and reacts to high pressure impacts with curbs with bizarre > results.... > > Any with a trick machine try a slowmo program to give you 50% processor > usuage, try taking the curbs at monza T1 with 25fps, then try it with > 100.... > > night and day.... > > > Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > The physics are not any faster at higer fps in f12002 as you either set

it > > to 100hz or 200hz (high or normal) phsyics. I aslo very much doubt ifyou

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > can see any diffence visually in frame rate between 50 and 100fps unless > > you've got weird inhuman eyes. 36fps in GPL is certainly more thasn good > > enough for all us simmers anything above is a waste of power which is > better > > spent on visual quality. > > > > Some Call Me Tim > > > > > >

Hey, weren't you the guy slamming F1 2002 a couple of months ago? ;o) "David Powell clara.co.uk>" <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > also tell me the 36fps is fine, with a number of GPLers suffering eye > problems in GPL, they dont or are no longer suffering in F12002...moreFPS > the better... > > GPL great sim, but jesus christ does it look slow and nasty at highspeed > after seeing what 3x the FPS looks like..... > > > David Powell clara.co.uk> <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > also...its not FPS for the eye, its Frame Per Meter on the road,this is > why > > at 150fps F12002 looks outstnading compared to 50 or so.... > > > > at 50fps you get 1 frame per metre of track at 200mph.....at 150fpsyou > get > > 3 frames per metre, this makes a MASSIVE difference in visualsmoothness > and > > makes games like GPL look like slomo replays of poorly recorded lowbudget > > low FPS movies.... > > > > Its not what the eye can see, its how many times get a refresh per > metre... > > > > To this point find a GPL replay at 200mph (down to stavelot at spa)pause > it > > click the frame forward and it skips maybe 2metres between frames it > > 70metres per second on the road, is 0.5frames per metre.... > > > > now watch F12002 at 200mph with 150fps.....LOL the difference isfucking > > massive!!.... > > > > But this still doesnt explain why at 30fps in f12002 you hit a curband it > > reacts twice as bad as a guy running 90fps.....the model is running > better, > > and f12002s model just gets better the faster it runs, any PC lag oflow > FPS > > it runs and reacts to high pressure impacts with curbs with bizarre > > results.... > > > > Any with a trick machine try a slowmo program to give you 50%processor > > usuage, try taking the curbs at monza T1 with 25fps, then try itwith

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > 100.... > > > > night and day.... > > > > > > Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > The physics are not any faster at higer fps in f12002 as you

either set > it > > > to 100hz or 200hz (high or normal) phsyics. I aslo very much doubtif > you > > > can see any diffence visually in frame rate between 50 and 100fpsunless > > > you've got weird inhuman eyes. 36fps in GPL is certainly morethasn good > > > enough for all us simmers anything above is a waste of power whichis

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > better > > > spent on visual quality. > > > > > > Some Call Me Tim > > > > > > > > > > > >

Frankly I didn't think it even had the potential to run that fast on my machine, which is why I haven't tweaked it much. Sounds like I should try it once to see how it feels, but to be honest the immersion factor is just as important to me as good game performance. Unless it feels orders of magnitude better I will probably go back to the high detail settings. Thanks for the tip though. "David Powell clara.co.uk>" <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I get 60-90fps with no AI on my own, on a GF2 and 868 P3.... > > thats with most detail off, but as we know about f12002, unless yourgetting > upwards of 50fps, its unplayable compared to 70-90 or at best150fps... > > Hit a curb at 30fps, then hit the same one at 90fps....the car hardlymoves > at 90, flies into the sky at 30, stupid physics lag.... > > A good aim is to be sure your game is running near properly is above70.... > > Above a 100 i'd think its starting to work in a sweet zone....anddriving is > a damn sight easier at higher FPS due to lack of physics delay.... >

>I get 60-90fps with no AI on my own, on a GF2 and 868 P3.... > There may be an obvious answer to this question, but so far I haven't found it in the manual or in the control assignments! What is the frame rate key for F12002? Sorry! -pw

ermm not played it for a while cntrl f? or alt f? shift f.... pw <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:akk8pb$193$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >I get 60-90fps with no AI on my own, on a GF2 and 868 P3.... > > > > There may be an obvious answer to this question, but so far I haven't > found it in the manual or in the control assignments! > > What is the frame rate key for F12002? > > Sorry! > > -pw

Im still slamming it (dont play it):) but it works as example of Frames per metre theory perfectly :) Haqsau <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:akk2f1$1j6oj7$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (89 lines)

> Hey, weren't you the guy slamming F1 2002 a couple of months ago? ;o) > > > "David Powell clara.co.uk>" <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > also tell me the 36fps is fine, with a number of GPLers suffering eye > > problems in GPL, they dont or are no longer suffering in F12002...more > FPS > > the better... > > > > GPL great sim, but jesus christ does it look slow and nasty at high > speed > > after seeing what 3x the FPS looks like..... > > > > > > David Powell clara.co.uk> <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > also...its not FPS for the eye, its Frame Per Meter on the road, > this is > > why > > > at 150fps F12002 looks outstnading compared to 50 or so.... > > > > > > at 50fps you get 1 frame per metre of track at 200mph.....at 150fps > you > > get > > > 3 frames per metre, this makes a MASSIVE difference in visual > smoothness > > and > > > makes games like GPL look like slomo replays of poorly recorded low > budget > > > low FPS movies.... > > > > > > Its not what the eye can see, its how many times get a refresh per > > metre... > > > > > > To this point find a GPL replay at 200mph (down to stavelot at spa) > pause > > it > > > click the frame forward and it skips maybe 2metres between frames it > > > 70metres per second on the road, is 0.5frames per metre.... > > > > > > now watch F12002 at 200mph with 150fps.....LOL the difference is > fucking > > > massive!!.... > > > > > > But this still doesnt explain why at 30fps in f12002 you hit a curb > and it > > > reacts twice as bad as a guy running 90fps.....the model is running > > better, > > > and f12002s model just gets better the faster it runs, any PC lag of > low > > FPS > > > it runs and reacts to high pressure impacts with curbs with bizarre > > > results.... > > > > > > Any with a trick machine try a slowmo program to give you 50% > processor > > > usuage, try taking the curbs at monza T1 with 25fps, then try it > with > > > 100.... > > > > > > night and day.... > > > > > > > > > Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > The physics are not any faster at higer fps in f12002 as you > either set > > it > > > > to 100hz or 200hz (high or normal) phsyics. I aslo very much doubt > if > > you > > > > can see any diffence visually in frame rate between 50 and 100fps > unless > > > > you've got weird inhuman eyes. 36fps in GPL is certainly more > thasn good > > > > enough for all us simmers anything above is a waste of power which > is > > > better > > > > spent on visual quality. > > > > > > > > Some Call Me Tim > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Seems like your're getting very confused David. As I said F1-2k and most sims for that matter run at a certaint physics update 200 or 400hz in the case of F1-2k as this has no bearing on fps. You get the same physics if you run 10fps or 100fps. The only diference is that at higher fps it looks smoother although above a point the eye cannot disecern ant improvement. Also your controls wheter it be FF wheel, keyboard or mouse only update at a ceratin rate, 40hz is standard for a mouse but 80 to 200 is better for FPS games such as Quake etc. Some Call Me Tim

>ermm not played it for a while cntrl f? or alt f? shift f.... ctrl-f - thanks David -pw

Quoted text (13 lines)

>pw <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:akk8pb$193$[email hidden]... >> >I get 60-90fps with no AI on my own, on a GF2 and 868 P3.... >> > >> >> There may be an obvious answer to this question, but so far I haven't >> found it in the manual or in the control assignments! >> >> What is the frame rate key for F12002? >> >> Sorry! >> >> -pw >

Okay I tried 800x600x16, FSAA and vsync off, and all details set to low, and the best I can get at Spa is 67 fps on the straight after Eau Rouge. Not only did the physics not feel a bit different, but I actually had more of a problem with frame rate hitches than I did when running at higher detail. BTW are you using the full rate or half rate physics? I am using full rate. Anyway I then set it to 1024x768x16, FSAA on, and medium detail. Frame rate dropped to 57 fps on the same straight. Then I set it to the detail level I had been using previously, and I still get 57 fps. And it still doesn't feel any different. I guess I should have tried Monaco, where I take a little more of a hit on frame rate. But I don't think I will, I'm perfectly satisfied with it the way it is right now. I am wondering how you managed 90 fps with your machine spec though. On which track did you get that high of a frame rate? Also you are apparently overclocked, what FSB are you using? Faster RAM from the faster FSB (mine is running at 100) might be helping you some. Although at low detail it really shouldn't matter. Very puzzling. "David Powell clara.co.uk>" <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I get 60-90fps with no AI on my own, on a GF2 and 868 P3.... > > thats with most detail off, but as we know about f12002, unless yourgetting > upwards of 50fps, its unplayable compared to 70-90 or at best150fps... > > Hit a curb at 30fps, then hit the same one at 90fps....the car hardlymoves > at 90, flies into the sky at 30, stupid physics lag.... > > A good aim is to be sure your game is running near properly is above70.... > > Above a 100 i'd think its starting to work in a sweet zone....anddriving is

Quoted text (7 lines)

> a damn sight easier at higher FPS due to lack of physics delay.... > > > > Haqsau <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:akehok$1hmrmg$[email hidden]... > > I'm running it with a 900 mhz PC. Frame rates depend on whether

your > > new card causes you to go nuts with the detail level or not. IIRC Iam > > typically getting barely 20 fps on the starting grid, mid 20's inthe > > pits, and 30's to 40's while racing. I am running at 1024x768x16with > > most details turned up to the max recommended (i.e. not in the red)and > > Quincuncx FSAA (30.82 drivers). A little bit of playing with detail > > level or perhaps turning off FSAA would speed it up a bit, but Idon't > > care. It's quite playable, except at the start, but moreimportantly > > (to me) it is near photo-realistic at times and I find that that, > > combined with the full rate physics and excellent sound and force > > feedback, gives me more of a feeling of immersion than any othergame. > > Besides, the frame rate comes back up quickly as the other cards > > disappear around the next bend. ;o) > > > > "D. Floyd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:mjza9.226593$[email hidden]... > > > Is anyone out there running the GF4 4200 on a 800 mhz P3? If sowhat > > > framerates are you getting in F1 2002??? Just curious...my cardshould

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > be > > > arriving soon.. > > > > > > -- > > > Dale Floyd, > > > Floyd Racing #38 - #83 > > > > > > > > > >

run the game at the same size as your desktop ie 1024x768 :) it gets you more FPS:) suzuka was the track, running no detail, no lightening, blocky wheels etc... Im at 124FSB and my Geforce is overclocked by 25mhz or so, my machine always beena rocket, built from good bits you see, no startup items bar sound control etc..... I get better FPS at 1240x1024 than 640x480, the games puzzling!!!.... Haqsau <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:akmjs2$1k8o74$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (82 lines)

> Okay I tried 800x600x16, FSAA and vsync off, and all details set to low, > and the best I can get at Spa is 67 fps on the straight after Eau Rouge. > Not only did the physics not feel a bit different, but I actually had > more of a problem with frame rate hitches than I did when running at > higher detail. BTW are you using the full rate or half rate physics? I > am using full rate. Anyway I then set it to 1024x768x16, FSAA on, and > medium detail. Frame rate dropped to 57 fps on the same straight. Then > I set it to the detail level I had been using previously, and I still > get 57 fps. And it still doesn't feel any different. I guess I should > have tried Monaco, where I take a little more of a hit on frame rate. > But I don't think I will, I'm perfectly satisfied with it the way it is > right now. I am wondering how you managed 90 fps with your machine spec > though. On which track did you get that high of a frame rate? Also you > are apparently overclocked, what FSB are you using? Faster RAM from the > faster FSB (mine is running at 100) might be helping you some. Although > at low detail it really shouldn't matter. Very puzzling. > > > "David Powell clara.co.uk>" <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I get 60-90fps with no AI on my own, on a GF2 and 868 P3.... > > > > thats with most detail off, but as we know about f12002, unless your > getting > > upwards of 50fps, its unplayable compared to 70-90 or at best > 150fps... > > > > Hit a curb at 30fps, then hit the same one at 90fps....the car hardly > moves > > at 90, flies into the sky at 30, stupid physics lag.... > > > > A good aim is to be sure your game is running near properly is above > 70.... > > > > Above a 100 i'd think its starting to work in a sweet zone....and > driving is > > a damn sight easier at higher FPS due to lack of physics delay.... > > > > > > > > Haqsau <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:akehok$1hmrmg$[email hidden]... > > > I'm running it with a 900 mhz PC. Frame rates depend on whether > your > > > new card causes you to go nuts with the detail level or not. IIRC I > am > > > typically getting barely 20 fps on the starting grid, mid 20's in > the > > > pits, and 30's to 40's while racing. I am running at 1024x768x16 > with > > > most details turned up to the max recommended (i.e. not in the red) > and > > > Quincuncx FSAA (30.82 drivers). A little bit of playing with detail > > > level or perhaps turning off FSAA would speed it up a bit, but I > don't > > > care. It's quite playable, except at the start, but more > importantly > > > (to me) it is near photo-realistic at times and I find that that, > > > combined with the full rate physics and excellent sound and force > > > feedback, gives me more of a feeling of immersion than any other > game. > > > Besides, the frame rate comes back up quickly as the other cards > > > disappear around the next bend. ;o) > > > > > > "D. Floyd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:mjza9.226593$[email hidden]... > > > > Is anyone out there running the GF4 4200 on a 800 mhz P3? If so > what > > > > framerates are you getting in F1 2002??? Just curious...my card > should > > > be > > > > arriving soon.. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Dale Floyd, > > > > Floyd Racing #38 - #83 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

come to VROc and speak to anyone who plays F12002, try Marc Royal (darkgreen) or Kevin Firlien, im sure they will explain my throery to you perfectly if your still in doubt... and agree with anything and everything I say, as THEY PLAY THE GAME alot, and weve had this debate a million times and FPS dicates the whole manner in which the sim runs, maybe this is just over your head.... just like GPL its not on song till the meter is pegged at 36fps and CPU occupancy at 50%...try F12002 at 10fps and itll be about 200% CPU occ, ie huge lag in the system try it at 50% CPU occ itll be a new sim... EVPhelps is also the original theorist on CPU occupancy and FPS being directly related to each other in a physics model as FPS is a good sign of how well the model is running, you forget these are directly connected. As for 10FPS and 100 the same your talking complete bolox! :) Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Seems like your're getting very confused David. As I said F1-2k and most > sims for that matter run at a certaint physics update 200 or 400hz in the > case of F1-2k as this has no bearing on fps. You get the same physics ifyou > run 10fps or 100fps. The only diference is that at higher fps it looks > smoother although above a point the eye cannot disecern ant improvement. > Also your controls wheter it be FF wheel, keyboard or mouse only update ata > ceratin rate, 40hz is standard for a mouse but 80 to 200 is better for FPS > games such as Quake etc. > > Some Call Me Tim > >

"David Powell clara.co.uk>" <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > come to VROc and speak to anyone who plays F12002, try Marc Royal > (darkgreen) or Kevin Firlien, im sure they will explain my throery to you > perfectly if your still in doubt... > > and agree with anything and everything I say, as THEY PLAY THE GAME alot, > and weve had this debate a million times and FPS dicates the whole mannerin > which the sim runs, maybe this is just over your head.... > > just like GPL its not on song till the meter is pegged at 36fps and CPU > occupancy at 50%...try F12002 at 10fps and itll be about 200% CPU occ, ie > huge lag in the system try it at 50% CPU occ itll be a new sim... > You still don't get it do you? The physics engines on most sims update at a certain fequency eg 200hz ttahts 200 times per secong, this does not change! You cannot have 200% cpu occupancy (you've been playing GP games haven't you?) Unless you limit the frame rate you'll be getting 100% cpu usage most of the time (except when stationary) as the pc tries to bang out as many pfs as possible. GPL limits itself to as sensible 36fps which means if you have decent PC the cpu will not be maxed out so it will have spare cpu cycles to respond quicker. The same result can be effected by switching on vsync. Ask any FPS player and they'll tell you they get better control response with vsync on, what the point of rendering frames you can't see anyway? For instance my monitor does 85hz at 1280x1024 so it utterly pointless running 100+ fps. Basically for best playability you need to have vsync on and have a few spare cpu cycles and not run as fast as possible. I hope you'll understand this better now. Some Call Me Tim

you dont it get it dude :) are you aware of the fact F12002 uses polygonal physics unlike GPL? this is why its so effected by CPU occupancy and frame rate cycles, as the physics operate on a polygon system related to the GFX side of the model, unlike papysims. The track structure is made of polyies not longitudinal lines this is a completely different type of physics model where if your having FPS troubles the track curbs etc are made of polyies, and as you hit them with low FPS, you get a totally different reaction to the system used in papy sims as your reacting to polyies in the GFX system not set of fixed and linear line structures. Remember F12001? how you got mad effects hitting bumps and curbs at odd angles, this is due to the inferiorities in the polygon system. All that happens in a 100FPS machine over a 10FPS machine is you get a realtime reaction to the polyies your hitting and at 10FPS theres a much stronger reaction to bumps and curbs because of the use of this type of polygon model not a lateral and longitudinal line system used in papy sims or in future projects like racing legends. As I've said before F12002 is totally frame rate dependant, but this is due to the way its been programmed, poorly....using a polygon GFX related physics system is a bizarre idea, and unless your getting the game hammering on 150FPS theres always room for improvements in feel.... therefor FPS is tied in the physics model regardless of the cycles and htz its working at... I suggest you actually try out my thoeries before waffling more!... You live in Worcester i'm only 15miles away, you wanna try F12002 at 10FPS on my machine then at 90FPS? be a good way to end this argument, I hope someone else who knows there arse from there elbow will come in aid me in explaining this to you, maybe its just the fact you havent even played F12002??? cause if you had youd know exactly what im talking about... which Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > "David Powell clara.co.uk>" <DavidPowell@<nospam> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > come to VROc and speak to anyone who plays F12002, try Marc Royal > > (darkgreen) or Kevin Firlien, im sure they will explain my throery toyou > > perfectly if your still in doubt... > > > > and agree with anything and everything I say, as THEY PLAY THE GAMEalot, > > and weve had this debate a million times and FPS dicates the wholemanner > in > > which the sim runs, maybe this is just over your head.... > > > > just like GPL its not on song till the meter is pegged at 36fps and CPU > > occupancy at 50%...try F12002 at 10fps and itll be about 200% CPU occ,ie > > huge lag in the system try it at 50% CPU occ itll be a new sim... > > > > You still don't get it do you? The physics engines on most sims update ata > certain fequency eg 200hz ttahts 200 times per secong, this does notchange! > You cannot have 200% cpu occupancy (you've been playing GP games haven't > you?) Unless you limit the frame rate you'll be getting 100% cpu usagemost > of the time (except when stationary) as the pc tries to bang out as manypfs > as possible. GPL limits itself to as sensible 36fps which means if youhave > decent PC the cpu will not be maxed out so it will have spare cpu cyclesto > respond quicker. The same result can be effected by switching on vsync.Ask

Quoted text (13 lines)

> any FPS player and they'll tell you they get better control response with > vsync on, what the point of rendering frames you can't see anyway? For > instance my monitor does 85hz at 1280x1024 so it utterly pointless running > 100+ fps. > > Basically for best playability you need to have vsync on and have a few > spare cpu cycles and not run as fast as possible. > > I hope you'll understand this better now. > > Some Call Me Tim > >

I actually a have Geforce 4400ti and can get very high frame rates if I wanted and play it quite a lot. You really still don't seem to understand that the number of frames projected on screen per second has no relation to what the physics engine is calculating. As I've tried to point out the phyics is calculted at a fixed numer of times per second as this does not change!!! This figure is altered in the .plr file "Half Rate="0" // 0 = super-high physics rate, 1 = normal" What you are getting confused with is the apperance of what is going on not the physics calculating that movement. The only differnce you're seeing is that the movement looks smoother rather than jerky. You should stop mixing up physics calcualtions and the apperance of movement. True the visual rection is going to be quicker at 150 than 50 but your're not going to actually see it because your monitor might only be displaying 85 or 100 of those. Why don't you try switching vsync on to limit the frame rate to say 85hz, this will give you all the smooth movement and if your system could display even more frames than that there will be spare cpu cyles going which will mean the controls should react quicker. Some Call Me Tim

As a top sim driver I along with the others can feel the difference to the car handling with every 5-10fps extra in F12002. There is a marked link, end of story. This has been commented on more times than I can remember since people started commenting on the difference FPS makes to the way the car handles bumps and curbs, there a very defined difference to a copy running at 20fps and a copy running at 100fps, its nothing to do with human eyes, looks, v-sync, or the Half/Full rate physics (turned that on to Full before I even played it) its a direct connection between the way the car handles and the way reacts and feels, at different FPS. Any drivers Ive played GPL against can tell you the same story, maybe you dont have any feel, to me I feel the game improving in response and the models agility increasing with every FPS. Just as In GPL I feel that improving and becoming more responsive and sharp (the point is that if the model is running well within the CPU's power, the reactions of your inputs in the gameport arent becoming lagged slighty by high CPU load, each time i've upgrade my CPU in GPL I've felt a maked change in the timing and speed at which my reactions are transfered in the game). To a person at the very top of the time sheets this feeling is very pronouced both in GPL and F12002, but F12002s has a direct link to FPS, as FPS seem to give an overall impression that the higher they are the faster the whole package is working, and so the sharper and more quickily the seem reacts to your input. With a slow PC its like you have a slighty delay as you input a movement, then a slight delay after before it reacts onthe track. This then means the sim is no longer in 100% realtime if you like, theres a slight ammount of lag in the system and model this is scaleable from the fastest PC available to the slowest that will run it. With a PC of 2100mhz and a GF4 Ti4600 where you get 150FPS no effort, this means the whole model, your CPU, your gameport are working in lag free harmony and the results on the feel are scaleable from 20FPS all the way up the roof at 150FPS, and through that range it just gets better, and its at its perfect state on a machine where its running 150FPS full detail full everything and still not straining the PC, the model can then 100% as a whole package. Its the same for GPL and F12002 in that respect of system speed, but in GPL the visual aspect stays the same but the feel of the model gets sharper with more CPU, GPL is feeling at its best on a 1000mhz machine. Ive tried 233 awful lag in the controls and model, 564 better but still not quite realtime as such, a tiny annoying delay, 868 just about spot on, much improved agility and reactions from the model, making the driving sharper and the model behave better as everything is 100% in sync. This is nothing to do with graphics or FPS as its fixed, but the model being allowed to work freely, here its the same in F12002 but you have unlimited FPS, so not only with a faster machine do you get the improvement as with all software as its allowed to run freely and not be restrained by CPU power in any way. The base unit for GPL feeling at its peak is a 1000ghz machine with a GF3. In F12002 the top machine appears to be a XP2100 and GF4 card. All Im saying tim is things feel different until the model can run free, anything under 150FPS is straining the system of reactions that can improve the model to a state of perfect realtime. But F12002 has an added problem because of the poly system. Because the way F12002's tracks are created your driving on polyies so the better the model is running the faster and more accurate the reacts to each poly, without the delays I talk about above due to the sim being strained by the system and not running 100% shown by it reading 150FPS. Its a feeling happens in all sims connected to system speed and the way the model can run, just becuase of the different makeup of EA ISI model compared to Papy, it seems alot more effected by the speed of your system. Anyway I give up, if you can see/tell the difference this is pointless! its painly fecking obvious both in visual aspect and a feel gained from the model improving with FPS as FPS is an indicator in nascar 4, 2000 and F1 2002 of how well your machine is dealing with the information from both model and graphics regardless of how many htz the model is running at. The final word is that the faster it runs and the more FPS you get the better it feels, which is painly obvious to any mug. Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I actually a have Geforce 4400ti and can get very high frame rates if I > wanted and play it quite a lot. You really still don't seem to understand > that the number of frames projected on screen per second has no relationto > what the physics engine is calculating. As I've tried to point out the > phyics is calculted at a fixed numer of times per second as this does not > change!!! This figure is altered in the .plr file "Half Rate="0" // 0 = > super-high physics rate, 1 = normal" > What you are getting confused with is the apperance of what is going onnot

Quoted text (8 lines)

> the physics calculating that movement. The only differnce you're seeing is > that the movement looks smoother rather than jerky. You should stop mixing > up physics calcualtions and the apperance of movement. True the visual > rection is going to be quicker at 150 than 50 but your're not going to > actually see it because your monitor might only be displaying 85 or 100 of > those. Why don't you try switching vsync on to limit the frame rate to say > 85hz, this will give you all the smooth movement and if your system could > display even more frames than that there will be spare cpu cyles going

which > will mean the controls should react quicker. > > Some Call Me Tim > >

By jove after all that I think you're finally managing to get an understanding of this. Some Call Me Tim

Dave, you don't need to be a top sim driver to feel the difference. If I'm getting 60+ FPS I can't put two wheels off the track at most turns without a problem, but during a race where the FPS drops to 30 the car will get incredible air if I don't modify my line. The esses at Magny Cours are a great place to demonstrate this... during qualifying and testing I can take both of them with almost full throttle, during a race if I try that the car will skip off the curbs and fly off the track, even though I'm taking the exact same line. I always assumed this was due to a heavier fuel load, so I tried running a few race laps with my qualifying setup and it does the same thing. Jason On Sat, 31 Aug 2002 00:26:14 +0100, "David Powell" <DavidPowell@<nospam>clara.co.uk> wrote:

Quoted text (102 lines)

>As a top sim driver I along with the others can feel the difference to the >car handling with every 5-10fps extra in F12002. There is a marked link, end >of story. This has been commented on more times than I can remember since >people started commenting on the difference FPS makes to the way the car >handles bumps and curbs, there a very defined difference to a copy running >at 20fps and a copy running at 100fps, its nothing to do with human eyes, >looks, v-sync, or the Half/Full rate physics (turned that on to Full before >I even played it) its a direct connection between the way the car handles >and the way reacts and feels, at different FPS. > >Any drivers Ive played GPL against can tell you the same story, maybe you >dont have any feel, to me I feel the game improving in response and the >models agility increasing with every FPS. Just as In GPL I feel that >improving and becoming more responsive and sharp (the point is that if the >model is running well within the CPU's power, the reactions of your inputs >in the gameport arent becoming lagged slighty by high CPU load, each time >i've upgrade my CPU in GPL I've felt a maked change in the timing and speed >at which my reactions are transfered in the game). To a person at the very >top of the time sheets this feeling is very pronouced both in GPL and >F12002, but F12002s has a direct link to FPS, as FPS seem to give an overall >impression that the higher they are the faster the whole package is working, >and so the sharper and more quickily the seem reacts to your input. With a >slow PC its like you have a slighty delay as you input a movement, then a >slight delay after before it reacts onthe track. This then means the sim is >no longer in 100% realtime if you like, theres a slight ammount of lag in >the system and model this is scaleable from the fastest PC available to the >slowest that will run it. With a PC of 2100mhz and a GF4 Ti4600 where you >get 150FPS no effort, this means the whole model, your CPU, your gameport >are working in lag free harmony and the results on the feel are scaleable >from 20FPS all the way up the roof at 150FPS, and through that range it just >gets better, and its at its perfect state on a machine where its running >150FPS full detail full everything and still not straining the PC, the model >can then 100% as a whole package. > >Its the same for GPL and F12002 in that respect of system speed, but in GPL >the visual aspect stays the same but the feel of the model gets sharper with >more CPU, GPL is feeling at its best on a 1000mhz machine. Ive tried 233 >awful lag in the controls and model, 564 better but still not quite realtime >as such, a tiny annoying delay, 868 just about spot on, much improved >agility and reactions from the model, making the driving sharper and the >model behave better as everything is 100% in sync. This is nothing to do >with graphics or FPS as its fixed, but the model being allowed to work >freely, here its the same in F12002 but you have unlimited FPS, so not only >with a faster machine do you get the improvement as with all software as its >allowed to run freely and not be restrained by CPU power in any way. The >base unit for GPL feeling at its peak is a 1000ghz machine with a GF3. In >F12002 the top machine appears to be a XP2100 and GF4 card. All Im saying >tim is things feel different until the model can run free, anything under >150FPS is straining the system of reactions that can improve the model to a >state of perfect realtime. > >But F12002 has an added problem because of the poly system. Because the way >F12002's tracks are created your driving on polyies so the better the model >is running the faster and more accurate the reacts to each poly, without the >delays I talk about above due to the sim being strained by the system and >not running 100% shown by it reading 150FPS. > >Its a feeling happens in all sims connected to system speed and the way the >model can run, just becuase of the different makeup of EA ISI model compared >to Papy, it seems alot more effected by the speed of your system. > >Anyway I give up, if you can see/tell the difference this is pointless! its >painly fecking obvious both in visual aspect and a feel gained from the >model improving with FPS as FPS is an indicator in nascar 4, 2000 and F1 >2002 of how well your machine is dealing with the information from both >model and graphics regardless of how many htz the model is running at. > >The final word is that the faster it runs and the more FPS you get the >better it feels, which is painly obvious to any mug. > > > > > >Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> I actually a have Geforce 4400ti and can get very high frame rates if I >> wanted and play it quite a lot. You really still don't seem to understand >> that the number of frames projected on screen per second has no relation >to >> what the physics engine is calculating. As I've tried to point out the >> phyics is calculted at a fixed numer of times per second as this does not >> change!!! This figure is altered in the .plr file "Half Rate="0" // 0 = >> super-high physics rate, 1 = normal" >> What you are getting confused with is the apperance of what is going on >not >> the physics calculating that movement. The only differnce you're seeing is >> that the movement looks smoother rather than jerky. You should stop mixing >> up physics calcualtions and the apperance of movement. True the visual >> rection is going to be quicker at 150 than 50 but your're not going to >> actually see it because your monitor might only be displaying 85 or 100 of >> those. Why don't you try switching vsync on to limit the frame rate to say >> 85hz, this will give you all the smooth movement and if your system could >> display even more frames than that there will be spare cpu cyles going >which >> will mean the controls should react quicker. >> >> Some Call Me Tim >> >> > >

----- GPLRank 24.50 N2002Rank -12.995

lol yes the esses at magny, i tried those day 1 i got the game, at 35fps at max detail id hit the esses inside curb and be fired into the gravel trap each lap due to the huge polyies on the curb, after about 20mins id changed FPS to get 70+ and could nail that curb without any bad physics problems... its just curbs and bumps....maybe they will use a linear model for tracks in future editions..... jason moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> Dave, you don't need to be a top sim driver to feel the difference. > If I'm getting 60+ FPS I can't put two wheels off the track at most > turns without a problem, but during a race where the FPS drops to 30 > the car will get incredible air if I don't modify my line. The esses > at Magny Cours are a great place to demonstrate this... during > qualifying and testing I can take both of them with almost full > throttle, during a race if I try that the car will skip off the curbs > and fly off the track, even though I'm taking the exact same line. > > I always assumed this was due to a heavier fuel load, so I tried > running a few race laps with my qualifying setup and it does the same > thing. > > Jason > > On Sat, 31 Aug 2002 00:26:14 +0100, "David Powell" > <DavidPowell@<nospam>clara.co.uk> wrote: > > >As a top sim driver I along with the others can feel the difference to

the > >car handling with every 5-10fps extra in F12002. There is a marked link,end > >of story. This has been commented on more times than I can remember since > >people started commenting on the difference FPS makes to the way the car > >handles bumps and curbs, there a very defined difference to a copyrunning > >at 20fps and a copy running at 100fps, its nothing to do with human eyes, > >looks, v-sync, or the Half/Full rate physics (turned that on to Fullbefore

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >I even played it) its a direct connection between the way the car handles > >and the way reacts and feels, at different FPS. > > > >Any drivers Ive played GPL against can tell you the same story, maybe you > >dont have any feel, to me I feel the game improving in response and the > >models agility increasing with every FPS. Just as In GPL I feel that > >improving and becoming more responsive and sharp (the point is that if

the > >model is running well within the CPU's power, the reactions of yourinputs > >in the gameport arent becoming lagged slighty by high CPU load, each time > >i've upgrade my CPU in GPL I've felt a maked change in the timing andspeed > >at which my reactions are transfered in the game). To a person at thevery > >top of the time sheets this feeling is very pronouced both in GPL and > >F12002, but F12002s has a direct link to FPS, as FPS seem to give anoverall > >impression that the higher they are the faster the whole package isworking, > >and so the sharper and more quickily the seem reacts to your input. Witha > >slow PC its like you have a slighty delay as you input a movement, then a > >slight delay after before it reacts onthe track. This then means the simis > >no longer in 100% realtime if you like, theres a slight ammount of lag in > >the system and model this is scaleable from the fastest PC available tothe > >slowest that will run it. With a PC of 2100mhz and a GF4 Ti4600 where you > >get 150FPS no effort, this means the whole model, your CPU, your gameport > >are working in lag free harmony and the results on the feel are scaleable > >from 20FPS all the way up the roof at 150FPS, and through that range itjust > >gets better, and its at its perfect state on a machine where its running > >150FPS full detail full everything and still not straining the PC, themodel > >can then 100% as a whole package. > > > >Its the same for GPL and F12002 in that respect of system speed, but inGPL > >the visual aspect stays the same but the feel of the model gets sharperwith > >more CPU, GPL is feeling at its best on a 1000mhz machine. Ive tried 233 > >awful lag in the controls and model, 564 better but still not quiterealtime > >as such, a tiny annoying delay, 868 just about spot on, much improved > >agility and reactions from the model, making the driving sharper and the > >model behave better as everything is 100% in sync. This is nothing to do > >with graphics or FPS as its fixed, but the model being allowed to work > >freely, here its the same in F12002 but you have unlimited FPS, so notonly > >with a faster machine do you get the improvement as with all software asits > >allowed to run freely and not be restrained by CPU power in any way. The > >base unit for GPL feeling at its peak is a 1000ghz machine with a GF3. In > >F12002 the top machine appears to be a XP2100 and GF4 card. All Im saying > >tim is things feel different until the model can run free, anything under > >150FPS is straining the system of reactions that can improve the model toa > >state of perfect realtime. > > > >But F12002 has an added problem because of the poly system. Because theway > >F12002's tracks are created your driving on polyies so the better themodel > >is running the faster and more accurate the reacts to each poly, withoutthe > >delays I talk about above due to the sim being strained by the system and > >not running 100% shown by it reading 150FPS. > > > >Its a feeling happens in all sims connected to system speed and the waythe > >model can run, just becuase of the different makeup of EA ISI modelcompared > >to Papy, it seems alot more effected by the speed of your system. > > > >Anyway I give up, if you can see/tell the difference this is pointless!its

Quoted text (16 lines)

> >painly fecking obvious both in visual aspect and a feel gained from the > >model improving with FPS as FPS is an indicator in nascar 4, 2000 and F1 > >2002 of how well your machine is dealing with the information from both > >model and graphics regardless of how many htz the model is running at. > > > >The final word is that the faster it runs and the more FPS you get the > >better it feels, which is painly obvious to any mug. > > > > > > > > > > > >Some Call Me Tim <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> I actually a have Geforce 4400ti and can get very high frame rates if I > >> wanted and play it quite a lot. You really still don't seem to

understand > >> that the number of frames projected on screen per second has norelation > >to > >> what the physics engine is calculating. As I've tried to point out the > >> phyics is calculted at a fixed numer of times per second as this doesnot > >> change!!! This figure is altered in the .plr file "Half Rate="0" // 0 = > >> super-high physics rate, 1 = normal" > >> What you are getting confused with is the apperance of what is going on > >not > >> the physics calculating that movement. The only differnce you're seeingis > >> that the movement looks smoother rather than jerky. You should stopmixing > >> up physics calcualtions and the apperance of movement. True the visual > >> rection is going to be quicker at 150 than 50 but your're not going to > >> actually see it because your monitor might only be displaying 85 or 100of > >> those. Why don't you try switching vsync on to limit the frame rate tosay > >> 85hz, this will give you all the smooth movement and if your systemcould

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >> display even more frames than that there will be spare cpu cyles going > >which > >> will mean the controls should react quicker. > >> > >> Some Call Me Tim > >> > >> > > > > > > > ----- > GPLRank 24.50 > N2002Rank -12.995