F12001 vs. 2002 graphics issue

I just got F12002 today. I have been playing the hell outta 2001 and saw mostly good reports for the new one, so I said what the hell. First: system specs: Athlon XP 1600 (1.4ghz) 512 mb ram geforce 2 gts 32mb hercules muse xl sound TSW2 wheel and pedals ***System just formatted and restored**** Now, when I was running F12001, I ran at 1024x768x16 and FSAA 2x. When using the "3d analyzer" to setup, I see that the video card is processing 47.5 m/tri per sec. Now in the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure how that ranks. I realize the card isnt state of the art. I also run most detail settings in game at either "high" or "full". When running a full race I am running around 35-40 fps and the game seems smooth with no stutter. When I switch to F12002, I use the exact same settings and now see that the card is only processing 12.6 m/tri per sec and the in game fps is unk, near 12-15 fps. If I switch off the FSAA, it jumps to 17m/tri per sec and a slight fps increase. My question is this, are graphics really THAT much more demanding? It doesn;t look that much better. Are there any "tweaks" that can be applied or suggestions offer to improve the game speed, other than the "get a new video card". NR2002 runs in the high 80's fps at 1024x768 and all details on and it looks 100% better than F12002 does, so I don't think the card is the major problem right now. Lawman

"Lawman_02766" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> I just got F12002 today. I have been playing the hell outta 2001 and > saw mostly good reports for the new one, so I said what the hell. > > First: > > system specs: > > Athlon XP 1600 (1.4ghz) > 512 mb ram > geforce 2 gts 32mb > hercules muse xl sound > TSW2 wheel and pedals > ***System just formatted and restored**** > > Now, when I was running F12001, I ran at 1024x768x16 and FSAA 2x. When > using the "3d analyzer" to setup, I see that the video card is > processing 47.5 m/tri per sec. Now in the grand scheme of things, I'm > not sure how that ranks.

Hmmm, I'm using a GF3 ti 200 and F1 2001 and only get 28m/tri per sec. (with no fsaa) Sounds like I have some tweeking to do...But great framerates tho in the game.. dave henrie

So how exactly does this relate to F1 2002? -- [email hidden] "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:hN%09.152070$[email hidden]... > > "Lawman_02766" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I just got F12002 today. I have been playing the hell outta 2001 and > > saw mostly good reports for the new one, so I said what the hell. > > > > First: > > > > system specs: > > > > Athlon XP 1600 (1.4ghz) > > 512 mb ram > > geforce 2 gts 32mb > > hercules muse xl sound > > TSW2 wheel and pedals > > ***System just formatted and restored**** > > > > Now, when I was running F12001, I ran at 1024x768x16 and FSAA 2x. When > > using the "3d analyzer" to setup, I see that the video card is > > > > processing 47.5 m/tri per sec. Now in the grand scheme of things, I'm > > not sure how that ranks. > > Hmmm, I'm using a GF3 ti 200 and F1 2001 and only get 28m/tri per > sec. (with no fsaa) Sounds like I have some tweeking to do...But great > framerates tho in the game.. > dave henrie > >

"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:hN%09.152070$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> > "Lawman_02766" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I just got F12002 today. I have been playing the hell outta 2001 and > > saw mostly good reports for the new one, so I said what the hell. > > > > First: > > > > system specs: > > > > Athlon XP 1600 (1.4ghz) > > 512 mb ram > > geforce 2 gts 32mb > > hercules muse xl sound > > TSW2 wheel and pedals > > ***System just formatted and restored**** > > > > Now, when I was running F12001, I ran at 1024x768x16 and FSAA 2x. When > > using the "3d analyzer" to setup, I see that the video card is > > > > processing 47.5 m/tri per sec. Now in the grand scheme of things, I'm > > not sure how that ranks. > > Hmmm, I'm using a GF3 ti 200 and F1 2001 and only get 28m/tri per > sec. (with no fsaa) Sounds like I have some tweeking to do...But great > framerates tho in the game.. > dave henrie >

His 47.5 m/tps figure just doesn't sound right, hey Lawman can you run it again and post the results? IIRC I was getting in the low to mid 20's (m/tps not frames per second) running the F12001 3D utility on my AMD 1600/GF3 Ti 500 combo running at 1280x1024 32-bit with no FSAA. I tested 16-bit and didn't get anything over 30m/tps (at least as far as I remember). In F12K2 I'm getting the same measurements with the same settings I mentioned earlier BUT the actual game runs much smoother for me than F12K1. Usually with a full field of cars from the back of Catalunya I'm at 25-30 with CONSISTENT high-30's to high-40's during the race (all graphics high nothing set to full). -- Joe Marques

"Greg Cisko" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3d44b5e4$[email hidden]... > So how exactly does this relate to F1 2002? > > -- > > [email hidden] > Greg BUDDY!!! a) this is me...it DOESN'T have to relate to anything. b) He did mention using F1 2001 as a base comparison c) I have ONLY f1 2001 not 2002 so I merely threw in my info for: c1> comparing his older slower card to mine, yet he got better numbers. So he shouldn't feel too bad about the results c2> seeing how badly my card apparently SUCKED compared to his I was hoping somebody would offer some free advice to juice up the GF3. d) Vini Vene Repliee [I came, I saw, I replied] e) I needed an excuse to use all the different { } bracket symbols on my keyboard for a reply...thanks for the opening. // dave henrie \\

Quoted text (11 lines)

> "His 47.5 m/tps figure just doesn't sound right, hey Lawman can you run it > again and post the results? > > IIRC I was getting in the low to mid 20's (m/tps not frames per second) > running the F12001 3D utility on my AMD 1600/GF3 Ti 500 combo running at > 1280x1024 32-bit with no FSAA. I tested 16-bit and didn't get anything over > 30m/tps (at least as far as I remember). In F12K2 I'm getting the same > measurements with the same settings I mentioned earlier BUT the actual game > runs much smoother for me than F12K1. Usually with a full field of cars > from the back of Catalunya I'm at 25-30 with CONSISTENT high-30's to > high-40's during the race (all graphics high nothing set to full)."

Hey guys: Yep, ran the f12001 3d setup again and got basically the same result, 46.7 m/tri per sec at 1024x768x16 and 2x FSAA. This is so wierd. I have the screenshot if anyone wants it in their email. So, is there an answer to the F12002 problem? such as which options eat up FPS more than others? I saw that someone started to compile a spreadsheet of different resolutions and options and their effects, but couldn't find a finished product. TIA, Lawman

Ok, here's a new twist. Now when I go to the track, all I get is a gray/lt. blue screen with the HUD at the top of the screen. I can hear all the sounds but cannot see anything. Any ideas? Lawman

"Lawman_02766" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Ok, here's a new twist. > Do you have dx 8.1 installed??? dave henrie

Are you taking Viagra? "Lawman_02766" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > ...all I get is a gray/lt. blue screen ... > > Lawman

"Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<ai4fj6$10atpj$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Are you taking Viagra? > > "Lawman_02766" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > ...all I get is a gray/lt. blue screen ... > > > > Lawman

All set now......did an online chat with EA tech and tried a newer video driver. Weird, cuz it worked before....... Lawman