N2002, PIII 800Mhz & V5 worth it?

I have a PIII 800Mhz and a Voodoo5. I have N4 set to where it is the best mix of frame rate, trackside objects, detail and clarity for my liking. Is it worth me getting N2002? Will I be scaling back even more graphics settings to keep my current frame rate? If I were to replace the V5, what would be a good choice to better run N2002? If N2002 is a step up (in the reality aspect), but a step backwards in graphics/frame rates (for me), I'd rather just stay with N4. Thanks, Russell

V5 sucks, get a GeForce2 Ultra, thats what i have and i get 80fps in n2k2 with no FSAA but 1024x760 all details high...20 ahead 3 behind....sounds down to 8. my system is p3 866mhz 512mb RDRAM gef2 ultra -- M. Main [email hidden] [email hidden] RacersEdge Motorsports Inc. http://members.rogers.com/racersedge/ #69 2002 LoA/CoA Chevy Monte Carlo Sim-racecar www.LordsOfAcid.com / www.ChildrenOfAcid.com Maturation makes liars of us all. "R Keating" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:abpcqq$8ne$[email hidden]... > I have a PIII 800Mhz and a Voodoo5. I have N4 set to where it is the best > mix of frame rate, trackside objects, detail and clarity for my liking. Is > it worth me getting N2002? Will I be scaling back even more graphics > settings to keep my current frame rate? If I were to replace the V5, what > would be a good choice to better run N2002? > > If N2002 is a step up (in the reality aspect), but a step backwards in > graphics/frame rates (for me), I'd rather just stay with N4. > > Thanks, > Russell > >

Or for roughly the same price you could get the new geforce 4 64 mb I got the geforce 2 mx 400 64mb, but with a xp1700 cpu all i know is that I am able to run all race games that i have at the highest detail setting's and get a smooth race sorry no idea what my fps is, or if you dont mind waiting get the new 128mb cards when they drop in price ie geforse 4 or Radeon both score pretty high on 3dmark as far as i can tell "M. Main" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3ce0404c$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> V5 sucks, get a GeForce2 Ultra, thats what i have and i get 80fps in n2k2 > with no FSAA but 1024x760 all details high...20 ahead 3 behind....sounds > down to 8. > > my system is p3 866mhz 512mb RDRAM gef2 ultra > > -- > M. Main > [email hidden] > [email hidden] > RacersEdge Motorsports Inc. http://members.rogers.com/racersedge/ > #69 2002 LoA/CoA Chevy Monte Carlo Sim-racecar > www.LordsOfAcid.com / www.ChildrenOfAcid.com > Maturation makes liars of us all. > "R Keating" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:abpcqq$8ne$[email hidden]... > > I have a PIII 800Mhz and a Voodoo5. I have N4 set to where it is the

best > > mix of frame rate, trackside objects, detail and clarity for my liking. > Is > > it worth me getting N2002? Will I be scaling back even more graphics > > settings to keep my current frame rate? If I were to replace the V5,what

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > would be a good choice to better run N2002? > > > > If N2002 is a step up (in the reality aspect), but a step backwards in > > graphics/frame rates (for me), I'd rather just stay with N4. > > > > Thanks, > > Russell > > > > > >

Stay with Nascar 4, I have a P3-866 GeFarce 2 Pro, and the N2002 demo is just garbage to me. Maybe (like with N4) the second patch will make N2002 run better, I don't know but I'm just tired of these graphic issues to get these games running, never had this many problems with the VooDoo cards. Sierra is just shooting themselves in the foot putting out a game with system requirements that are so far off from what is really need to make the game run enjoyable. Sierra.com Website Demo: Min: Pentium II 266 MHz processor, Preferred: Pentium III� 800 MHz+ N2002 Demo Readme: Min: Pentium II 266 MHz processor. <<< Yea Right! And then there is the issue of the erratic controller operation that has plagued this game engine since GPL. BTW my system runs Return To Castle Wolfenstein, and EA's Medal of Honor Allied Assault with no problems. just my 2 cents. -- 1907 - Daytona Beach Florida Glenn H. Curtiss rode a V8 powered motorcycle to a 136.30 mph record in the measured mile. The Chicago Daily News headline reads: "Fastest Mile On Earth, Bullets Are The Only Rivals Of Glenn Curtiss"

the demo gave everybody problems. -- M. Main [email hidden] [email hidden] RacersEdge Motorsports Inc. http://members.rogers.com/racersedge/ #69 2002 LoA/CoA Chevy Monte Carlo Sim-racecar www.LordsOfAcid.com / www.ChildrenOfAcid.com Maturation makes liars of us all. "REDLINE426" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Di0E8.20218$[email hidden]... > Stay with Nascar 4, I have a P3-866 GeFarce 2 Pro, and the N2002 demo is > just garbage to me. > Maybe (like with N4) the second patch will make N2002 run better, I don't > know but I'm just tired of these graphic issues to get these games running, > never had this many problems with the VooDoo cards. > Sierra is just shooting themselves in the foot putting out a game with > system requirements that are so far off from what is really need to make the > game run enjoyable. > > Sierra.com Website Demo: Min: Pentium II 266 MHz processor, Preferred: > Pentium III� 800 MHz+ > N2002 Demo Readme: Min: Pentium II 266 MHz processor. <<< Yea Right! > > And then there is the issue of the erratic controller operation that has > plagued this game engine since GPL. > > BTW my system runs Return To Castle Wolfenstein, and EA's Medal of Honor > Allied Assault with no problems. > > just my 2 cents. > > -- > 1907 - Daytona Beach Florida > > Glenn H. Curtiss rode a V8 powered motorcycle > to a 136.30 mph record in the measured mile. > > The Chicago Daily News headline reads: > "Fastest Mile On Earth, Bullets Are The Only Rivals Of Glenn Curtiss" > > >

the demo gave everybody problems. -- M. Main RacersEdge Motorsports Inc. http://members.rogers.com/racersedge/ #69 2002 LoA/CoA Chevy Monte Carlo Sim-racecar www.LordsOfAcid.com / www.ChildrenOfAcid.com Maturation makes liars of us all.

hence the term...DEMO. -- M. Main [email hidden] [email hidden] RacersEdge Motorsports Inc. http://members.rogers.com/racersedge/ #69 2002 LoA/CoA Chevy Monte Carlo Sim-racecar www.LordsOfAcid.com / www.ChildrenOfAcid.com Maturation makes liars of us all. "M. Main" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3ce099c0$[email hidden]... > the demo gave everybody problems. > > -- > M. Main > [email hidden] > [email hidden] > RacersEdge Motorsports Inc. http://members.rogers.com/racersedge/ > #69 2002 LoA/CoA Chevy Monte Carlo Sim-racecar > www.LordsOfAcid.com / www.ChildrenOfAcid.com > Maturation makes liars of us all. > "REDLINE426" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Di0E8.20218$[email hidden]... > > Stay with Nascar 4, I have a P3-866 GeFarce 2 Pro, and the N2002 demo is > > just garbage to me. > > Maybe (like with N4) the second patch will make N2002 run better, I don't > > know but I'm just tired of these graphic issues to get these games > running, > > never had this many problems with the VooDoo cards. > > Sierra is just shooting themselves in the foot putting out a game with > > system requirements that are so far off from what is really need to make > the > > game run enjoyable. > > > > Sierra.com Website Demo: Min: Pentium II 266 MHz processor, Preferred: > > Pentium III� 800 MHz+ > > N2002 Demo Readme: Min: Pentium II 266 MHz processor. <<< Yea Right! > > > > And then there is the issue of the erratic controller operation that has > > plagued this game engine since GPL. > > > > BTW my system runs Return To Castle Wolfenstein, and EA's Medal of Honor > > Allied Assault with no problems. > > > > just my 2 cents. > > > > -- > > 1907 - Daytona Beach Florida > > > > Glenn H. Curtiss rode a V8 powered motorcycle > > to a 136.30 mph record in the measured mile. > > > > The Chicago Daily News headline reads: > > "Fastest Mile On Earth, Bullets Are The Only Rivals Of Glenn Curtiss" > > > > > > > >

I have a Celeron 850, 64mb GF2 MX400, 256mb ram and i can play in opengl @ 1024x768x32, max detail except cars ahead drawn to 21 and mirror objects to med and trackside obj's to med aswell (everything is there except some infield stuff like trucks etc which really doesnt make a diff, but all the grandstands/signs are there. I get in testing up to 50fps and minimum of 35 and racing isnt effected much more than that, proberly minimum of 27 at starts. So yes, its worth it, far better than N4 Luke "R Keating" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:abpcqq$8ne$[email hidden]... > I have a PIII 800Mhz and a Voodoo5. I have N4 set to where it is the best > mix of frame rate, trackside objects, detail and clarity for my liking.Is

Quoted text (11 lines)

> it worth me getting N2002? Will I be scaling back even more graphics > settings to keep my current frame rate? If I were to replace the V5, what > would be a good choice to better run N2002? > > If N2002 is a step up (in the reality aspect), but a step backwards in > graphics/frame rates (for me), I'd rather just stay with N4. > > Thanks, > Russell > >

I get about the same ratings as on my system. I have a PIII 1Ghz, the same Geforce and 'only' 128mb. When I turn everything to max I get a minimum framerate of about 20 fps. I'd go for N2002. I was still using N3 untill I played the N2002 demo. I liked it so much that I bought the entire game. Masa "Luke Phillips" <(NOSPM)[email hidden]> schreef in bericht news:0c3E8.127991$[email hidden]... > I have a Celeron 850, 64mb GF2 MX400, 256mb ram and i can play in opengl @ > 1024x768x32, max detail except cars ahead drawn to 21 and mirror objectsto > med and trackside obj's to med aswell (everything is there except some > infield stuff like trucks etc which really doesnt make a diff, but all the > grandstands/signs are there. I get in testing up to 50fps and minimum of35

Quoted text (8 lines)

> and racing isnt effected much more than that, proberly minimum of 27 at > starts. So yes, its worth it, far better than N4 > > Luke > > "R Keating" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:abpcqq$8ne$[email hidden]... > > I have a PIII 800Mhz and a Voodoo5. I have N4 set to where it is the

best > > mix of frame rate, trackside objects, detail and clarity for my liking. > Is > > it worth me getting N2002? Will I be scaling back even more graphics > > settings to keep my current frame rate? If I were to replace the V5,what

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > would be a good choice to better run N2002? > > > > If N2002 is a step up (in the reality aspect), but a step backwards in > > graphics/frame rates (for me), I'd rather just stay with N4. > > > > Thanks, > > Russell > > > > > >

"M. Main" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3ce099c0$[email hidden]... > the demo gave everybody problems. >Yes! The DEMO ran like CRAP on my system, but the full version is sweet! Runs great. 1024x768 everything on max, world at 1/2 i get 50-80 fps p4 1.6 GeFarce2Mx400