GeForce4- Helping N2002 Framerates?

It will be interesting to see the differences in framerates between ATI, GF3 Ti200 and Ti500's and GF4's under all settings optimized in N2002? Matt

I'd guess it'd be something like this. Taking a Ti200 as a bench mark at 100% Ti500 130% GF4 MX 420 80% GF4 MX 440 100% GF4 Ti4600 - probably around 150% Doug "Matt Miraglia" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> It will be interesting to see the differences in framerates between > ATI, GF3 Ti200 and Ti500's and GF4's under all settings optimized in > N2002? > > Matt > > > >

That's all gonna depend on the rest of your system. If you put them all on a 500 mhz CPU they will all be pretty close since they are limited by the CPU. For example a friend of mine and I are running both the same motherboard and processor. He just bought a Gainward GF3 Ti450, which is based on the Ti200 chip with faster ram. I have a Gainward GF3 golden sample running at Ti500 clock speeds. We both pull the same frame rates in NR2002, and score almost the same in benchmark tests. If you have run a 3dmark test on your system use their CPU and Video card comparisons and see which will give you more bank for the buck. MadDAWG

I have to sort of disagree because if you're getting low fps with a GF4 you can just turn of the FSAA or AnisoFiltering until your video card is giving the same fps as the CPU. It'll be like GPL, capped FPS but you can go nuts with the graphics. "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3c751a39$[email hidden]... > That's all gonna depend on the rest of your system. If you put them all ona > 500 mhz CPU they will all be pretty close since they are limited by theCPU. > For example a friend of mine and I are running both the same motherboardand > processor. He just bought a Gainward GF3 Ti450, which is based on theTi200 > chip with faster ram. I have a Gainward GF3 golden sample running at Ti500 > clock speeds. We both pull the same frame rates in NR2002, and scorealmost

Quoted text (7 lines)

> the same in benchmark tests. If you have run a 3dmark test on your system > use their CPU and Video card comparisons and see which will give you more > bank for the buck. > > MadDAWG > >

There will always be a bottleneck caused by whatever component is restricting you. NO vid card can overcome a processor bottleneck. Your scenario doesn't work if you already have FSAA and/or anisotropic already turned off and youcan't get an increase in fps. -- Biz "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and the....." - Ash Kirk House <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3c753425$0$495$[email hidden]... > I have to sort of disagree because if you're getting low fps with a GF4 you > can just turn of the FSAA or AnisoFiltering until your video card is giving > the same fps as the CPU. It'll be like GPL, capped FPS but you can go nuts > with the graphics. > > > "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:3c751a39$[email hidden]... > > That's all gonna depend on the rest of your system. If you put them all on > a > > 500 mhz CPU they will all be pretty close since they are limited by the > CPU. > > For example a friend of mine and I are running both the same motherboard > and > > processor. He just bought a Gainward GF3 Ti450, which is based on the > Ti200 > > chip with faster ram. I have a Gainward GF3 golden sample running at Ti500 > > clock speeds. We both pull the same frame rates in NR2002, and score > almost > > the same in benchmark tests. If you have run a 3dmark test on your system > > use their CPU and Video card comparisons and see which will give you more > > bank for the buck. > > > > MadDAWG > > > > > >

Right that's what I was trying to get at. To over simplify what I was try to say- If your video cars is not the bottle neck a faster one will do no good. In all honesty the reverse of Kirk's post MIGHT be true. If something like A-Filtering is only handled by the video card a faster video card may allow you to enable that without a penalty because it "stuck" in low gear by another part of the system. Again this would only be the case for something that ONLY ran on the video card, and to be honest I have no idea if anything like that even exists. MadDAWG

I meant to say turn ON fsaa :p If your processor will only give a max of 50 fps and a GF4 will give 150fps at 1024 it makes sense to increase the resolution or FSAA or both. "Kirk House" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3c753425$0$495$[email hidden]... > I have to sort of disagree because if you're getting low fps with a GF4you > can just turn of the FSAA or AnisoFiltering until your video card isgiving > the same fps as the CPU. It'll be like GPL, capped FPS but you can gonuts > with the graphics. > > > "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:3c751a39$[email hidden]... > > That's all gonna depend on the rest of your system. If you put them allon

Quoted text (8 lines)

> a > > 500 mhz CPU they will all be pretty close since they are limited by the > CPU. > > For example a friend of mine and I are running both the same motherboard > and > > processor. He just bought a Gainward GF3 Ti450, which is based on the > Ti200 > > chip with faster ram. I have a Gainward GF3 golden sample running at

Ti500 > > clock speeds. We both pull the same frame rates in NR2002, and score > almost > > the same in benchmark tests. If you have run a 3dmark test on yoursystem > > use their CPU and Video card comparisons and see which will give youmore

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > bank for the buck. > > > > MadDAWG > > > > > >