Having recently installed a P4 1.7 and added the relevant processor patch to
GPL I downloaded a replay file from somewhere. But, when I run it it looks
very fast! In normal mode in GPL the fps counter just flashes 9's after the
processor speed patch, using FRAPS however I have discovered that GPL is
running between 60 and 70 fps.
My question is, what exactly does the processor patch do? does it unlock GPL
from it's 36fps limit? Could anyone use it to get more than 36fps? would it
be worth it?
Andi.
I haven't used it...and I'm not a programmer of any means, but from what I
understood, it merely extended an internal timing feature out in size from
say a 16 bit number to a 32bit number(or increased the size of the register
that stored that info)
Would that be close?
dave henrie
"Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:9ji1rn$p7b$[email hidden]...
> Having recently installed a P4 1.7 and added the relevant processor patchto
> GPL I downloaded a replay file from somewhere. But, when I run it it looks
> very fast! In normal mode in GPL the fps counter just flashes 9's afterthe
> processor speed patch, using FRAPS however I have discovered that GPL is
> running between 60 and 70 fps.
>
> My question is, what exactly does the processor patch do? does it unlockGPL
> from it's 36fps limit? Could anyone use it to get more than 36fps? wouldit
> be worth it?
>
> Andi.
>
>
>
Someone a few weeks ago had this problem, can't remember the answer
tho. The patch doesn't alter the 36 fps limit, or be used to alter it.
Why would you want to anyway, really? The old "if it aint broke, don't
fix it" line works. Of course, your particular example does need
fixing tho...
Rafe Mc
On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:00:54 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]>
wrote:
Quoted text (27 lines)
> I haven't used it...and I'm not a programmer of any means, but from what I >understood, it merely extended an internal timing feature out in size from >say a 16 bit number to a 32bit number(or increased the size of the register >that stored that info) > Would that be close? >dave henrie >"Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:9ji1rn$p7b$[email hidden]... >> Having recently installed a P4 1.7 and added the relevant processor patch >to >> GPL I downloaded a replay file from somewhere. But, when I run it it looks >> very fast! In normal mode in GPL the fps counter just flashes 9's after >the >> processor speed patch, using FRAPS however I have discovered that GPL is >> running between 60 and 70 fps. >> >> My question is, what exactly does the processor patch do? does it unlock >GPL >> from it's 36fps limit? Could anyone use it to get more than 36fps? would >it >> be worth it? >> >> Andi. >> >> >> >I think I'm quite happy with 65fps (although I probably can't see that fast)
however the replay problem is not much fun. I love watching others do it
properly, now it's a bit 'funny'.
I wonder if Papy would like to comment?
Andi.
"Rafe McAuliffe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
what I
> >understood, it merely extended an internal timing feature out in sizefrom
> >say a 16 bit number to a 32bit number(or increased the size of theregister
> >that stored that info)
> > Would that be close?
> >dave henrie
> >"Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> >news:9ji1rn$p7b$[email hidden]...
> >> Having recently installed a P4 1.7 and added the relevant processorpatch
> >to
> >> GPL I downloaded a replay file from somewhere. But, when I run it itlooks
> >> very fast! In normal mode in GPL the fps counter just flashes 9's after
> >the
> >> processor speed patch, using FRAPS however I have discovered that GPLis
> >> running between 60 and 70 fps.
> >>
> >> My question is, what exactly does the processor patch do? does itunlock
> >GPL
> >> from it's 36fps limit? Could anyone use it to get more than 36fps?would
