How AGP aperture can change your life!

Well, it changed mine! :-) I have a duron 750, hercules GF2 mx 32meg, 128 meg memory, and MSFF gameport. Somewhere I read to set the AGP aperture in the bios to 256, and if it worked, leave it alone. After hearing other rumours, I decided to have a play last night. Before - I was getting glitches in GPL. I'm currently at Monaco, and they occurred leaving the pits, 'till half way up the hill. At the start of the race, they would settle down once through the first corner. I changed the aperture to 128, then 64 to see the difference. At 64, it was the same as at 256, but setting it to 128 made an enormous difference! The glitches disappeared completely, and I was able to run full details in the mirrors at 1600, but that's not the most important bit. This is - I suddenly found that driving 'round Monaco was much easier, and I was much more consistent. It's made a huge difference to the feel of the car! Try it. I then wondered how it would affect GP3. Straight in, I discovered at 10% drop in PO! I then discovered I could run it at absolute max, in the highest res - EVEN IN THE RAIN!!! Yet again, the car felt much better, and I could drive much more consistently. Now I don't know what the aperture is, and how it should be set depending on one's system, but getting it right's made such a difference, that I would say it's well worth having a quick fiddle with. R. -- Posted from motgate4.mot.com [144.189.100.102] via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

For me, changing it 64 -> 16 cured the freezes that crashed the game occasionally. Theoretically that should drop the performance, but it didn't, at least noticeably. -- /K-P

Everyone seems to get different results with AGP Aperture size. I found that with it on 64MB, GPL crashed quite regularly. I also found that with it on 32MB (which is the same size as the amount of VRAM on my 32MB GF2 gts), GPL and 3DMark2000 all performed better, so i've left it on 32 MB since. I'll have a go at explaining what I believe AGP Aperture size does- Basically you have local VRAM, this is the memory on your video card. Then you have system memory, this is your normal main memory. AGP Aperture enables your video card to have extremely fast access to a portion of your system memory. This memory is then refered to as non-local video memory (because your video card can access it, but it's not physically on your video card). Non-local video memory is slower than local-video memory, but faster than system memory (in terms of how quickly it can be accessed by your video card). Say your video card has 32 MB, and a game needs 50 MB of video card memory to run with high-res textures. Your video card can use the non-local video memory (AGP memory) along with the local video memory to act like a card that has more memory than it really does. The results would be a little slower than using a genuine 64MB video card, but at least the high-res textures would work. And obviously the aperture size controls how much system memory can be controlled this way by your video card. Anyway, those are interesting results you got, I think I'll try a little experimenting myself :) "Beckett Richard-qswi266" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Well, it changed mine! :-) > > I have a duron 750, hercules GF2 mx 32meg, 128 meg memory, and MSFF > gameport. ><snip> > > Now I don't know what the aperture is, and how it should be set dependingon > one's system, but getting it right's made such a difference, that I would > say it's well worth having a quick fiddle with. > > R.

Its amazing how much system specs can affect the feel of a sim/game. I have the DTR games from Ratbag. My system is an AMD k7 950 overclocked to 997mhz. In Win98SE The games would run fine, but it felt like the cars had no grip. I just accepted that as the way it was and adjusted my setups accordingly. I just recently switched to Windows ME. At first the Ratbag games wouldn't even run at all. Every thing else I had ran just fine, including GPL, N4, F12K, etc. After much experimentation with settings and drivers I had come to the conclusion that the Ratbag games just did not like ME. Well after a suggestion from a former Ratbag employee I set my clock speeds back to default, and low and behold every thing runs great. The cars even feel like they have more grip now as well. It blows my mind that the bus speed made such a big difference in the physics of the game. At this point when I see someone running really well I wonder now if its their skill or their system. Now don't get me wrong a bad driver will always be a bad driver, but it might be the difference in those few extra tenths in lap times. MadDAWG

On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:32:09 GMT, "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (30 lines)

>Everyone seems to get different results with AGP Aperture size. > >I found that with it on 64MB, GPL crashed quite regularly. I also found >that with it on 32MB (which is the same size as the amount of VRAM on my >32MB GF2 gts), GPL and 3DMark2000 all performed better, so i've left it on >32 MB since. > >I'll have a go at explaining what I believe AGP Aperture size does- > >Basically you have local VRAM, this is the memory on your video card. Then >you have system memory, this is your normal main memory. AGP Aperture >enables your video card to have extremely fast access to a portion of your >system memory. This memory is then refered to as non-local video memory >(because your video card can access it, but it's not physically on your >video card). Non-local video memory is slower than local-video memory, but >faster than system memory (in terms of how quickly it can be accessed by >your video card). > >Say your video card has 32 MB, and a game needs 50 MB of video card memory >to run with high-res textures. Your video card can use the non-local video >memory (AGP memory) along with the local video memory to act like a card >that has more memory than it really does. The results would be a little >slower than using a genuine 64MB video card, but at least the high-res >textures would work. > >And obviously the aperture size controls how much system memory can be >controlled this way by your video card. > >Anyway, those are interesting results you got, I think I'll try a little >experimenting myself :)

Ditto . . . which makes me wonder how many of us are going to REALLY screw up our systems in the next day or so! ;-)

Where can you set these alternative "AGP Apertures"? (Win98SE, GF2) I guess it would be best that I do not know it, though... ;-) Arto -- -------------------- [email hidden] http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/wikla/

I should mention that from what I've read here, that 3dfx users 'should' get zero benefit from changing the AGP Aperature size since those cards access the memory in a different way. I hope I'm correct about that info. dave henrie "Beckett Richard-qswi266" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> Well, it changed mine! :-) > > I have a duron 750, hercules GF2 mx 32meg, 128 meg memory, and MSFF > gameport. > > Somewhere I read to set the AGP aperture in the bios to 256, and if it > worked, leave it alone. > > After hearing other rumours, I decided to have a play last night. > > Before - I was getting glitches in GPL. I'm currently at Monaco, and they > occurred leaving the pits, 'till half way up the hill. At the start of the > race, they would settle down once through the first corner. > > I changed the aperture to 128, then 64 to see the difference. At 64, it

was > the same as at 256, but setting it to 128 made an enormous difference! > > The glitches disappeared completely, and I was able to run full details in > the mirrors at 1600, but that's not the most important bit. > This is - I suddenly found that driving 'round Monaco was much easier, andI > was much more consistent. It's made a huge difference to the feel of the > car! Try it. > > I then wondered how it would affect GP3. Straight in, I discovered at 10% > drop in PO! I then discovered I could run it at absolute max, in thehighest > res - EVEN IN THE RAIN!!! Yet again, the car felt much better, and I could > drive much more consistently. > > Now I don't know what the aperture is, and how it should be set dependingon

Quoted text (9 lines)

> one's system, but getting it right's made such a difference, that I would > say it's well worth having a quick fiddle with. > > R. > > > -- > Posted from motgate4.mot.com [144.189.100.102] > via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Simon thanx for the info on AGP Aperture size and the use of it.. I never knew this and now I too can fiddle a bit..lol :-) Thom_j. "Simon Brown" wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

| Everyone seems to get different results with AGP Aperture size. | | I found that with it on 64MB, GPL crashed quite regularly. I also found | that with it on 32MB (which is the same size as the amount of VRAM on my | 32MB GF2 gts), GPL and 3DMark2000 all performed better, so i've left it on | 32 MB since. | | I'll have a go at explaining what I believe AGP Aperture size does- | | Basically you have local VRAM, this is the memory on your video card.

Then | you have system memory, this is your normal main memory. AGP Aperture | enables your video card to have extremely fast access to a portion of your | system memory. This memory is then refered to as non-local video memory | (because your video card can access it, but it's not physically on your | video card). Non-local video memory is slower than local-video memory,but | faster than system memory (in terms of how quickly it can be accessed by | your video card). | | Say your video card has 32 MB, and a game needs 50 MB of video card memory | to run with high-res textures. Your video card can use the non-localvideo

Quoted text (10 lines)

| memory (AGP memory) along with the local video memory to act like a card | that has more memory than it really does. The results would be a little | slower than using a genuine 64MB video card, but at least the high-res | textures would work. | | And obviously the aperture size controls how much system memory can be | controlled this way by your video card. | | Anyway, those are interesting results you got, I think I'll try a little | experimenting myself :)

<snip> --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001

I did get around a 5% speed increase in GPL by switching to 128 MB AGP Aperture Size. I tried 32, 64, 128 and 256, and they were all identical apart from 128 MB. Don't know if it's reliable yet though. "John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:32:09 GMT, "Simon Brown" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > Ditto . . . which makes me wonder how many of us are going to REALLY > screw up our systems in the next day or so! > > ;-)

Great info!! "MadDAWG" I wonder if this is definative? Does any of the RAS Gurus know about what "MadDAWG" wrote below? I wonder as ever since GPL' went from their original version to their upgrade v1.1 or whateverthe #s was? I was doing 2+secs a lap faster with the old version of GPL i.e. Monza, Spa, Mexico etc and when the upgrade came out my lap times turtled!! Really Turtle'd.. Phew.. So I heard so many bad things about ME I did not upgrade [even tho I have ME, it just sits here] from Windows98SE. Now it seems that my laptimes are a bit slow as per my 'System Clock' via Win98SE... Can this happen?? And are there alot of bugs from SE to ME as my SE system runs 'great' under my current SE and I'm very reluctant to load it & then find out it has made all 50 of my sims/games screwed'up!! Any ideas, suggestions, coomnets on all this? Tia... Thom_j. P.S. Yes!! "50 of my sims/games"...lol "MadDAWG" wrote: | Its amazing how much system specs can affect the feel of a sim/game. Ihave | the DTR games from Ratbag. My system is an AMD k7 950 overclocked to997mhz. | In Win98SE The games would run fine, but it felt like the cars had nogrip. | I just accepted that as the way it was and adjusted my setups accordingly.I | just recently switched to Windows ME. At first the Ratbag games wouldn't | even run at all. Every thing else I had ran just fine, including GPL, N4, | F12K, etc. After much experimentation with settings and drivers I had come | to the conclusion that the Ratbag games just did not like ME. Well after a | suggestion from a former Ratbag employee I set my clock speeds back to | default, and low and behold every thing runs great. The cars even feellike | they have more grip now as well. It blows my mind that the bus speed made | such a big difference in the physics of the game. At this point when I see | someone running really well I wonder now if its their skill or theirsystem.

Quoted text (7 lines)

| Now don't get me wrong a bad driver will always be a bad driver, but it | might be the difference in those few extra tenths in lap times. | | | MadDAWG | |

--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001

You change it in the BIOS. Usually, getting into the BIOS involves holding down the 'del' key when the second screen comes up in your system boot-up procedure. The first screen that comes up when you switch the PC on is your video card init screen, then the next screen should have a message on it somewhere telling you how to get into the bios. "Arto Wikla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wikla.993160308@kanasaari...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Where can you set these alternative "AGP Apertures"? (Win98SE, GF2) > I guess it would be best that I do not know it, though... ;-) > > Arto > -- > -------------------- > [email hidden] > http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/wikla/

What card, cpu and ram etc are you using Simon? If you already posted it, sorry but I must of missed it...Tia.. Thom_j. "Simon Brown" wrote: | I did get around a 5% speed increase in GPL by switching to 128 MB AGP | Aperture Size. I tried 32, 64, 128 and 256, and they were all identical | apart from 128 MB. | Don't know if it's reliable yet though. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001

Ah good, seems to be reliable as well, no crashes. "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QHuY6.71163$[email hidden]... > I did get around a 5% speed increase in GPL by switching to 128 MB AGP > Aperture Size. I tried 32, 64, 128 and 256, and they were all identical > apart from 128 MB. > > Don't know if it's reliable yet though.

HWG Simon!! We'll all be swaring at you soon..lol only j/k ;-) "Simon Brown"wrote: | You change it in the BIOS. Usually, getting into the BIOS involvesholding | down the 'del' key when the second screen comes up in your system boot-up | procedure. | The first screen that comes up when you switch the PC on is your videocard | init screen, then the next screen should have a message on it somewhere | telling you how to get into the bios. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001

Err...P3-650 / Creative Labs GF2 GTS 32 MB / 256 MB pc133 / Win98 first edition / cool looking speakers / go-faster stripes / furry dice / racing socks ;) "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:5ZvY6.30828$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> What card, cpu and ram etc are you using Simon? If you already posted > it, sorry but I must of missed it...Tia.. Thom_j. > > "Simon Brown" wrote: > | I did get around a 5% speed increase in GPL by switching to 128 MB AGP > | Aperture Size. I tried 32, 64, 128 and 256, and they were all identical > | apart from 128 MB. > | Don't know if it's reliable yet though. > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001 > >

On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 22:25:12 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote: >3dfx users 'should' >get zero benefit from changing the AGP Aperature size since those cards >access the memory in a different way. Thanks Dave -- just break my heart... :)

nono Paul it's just ONE less thing to break... Trust me I'm an expert in breaking computers.... dave henrie "The Black Cat =^..^=" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 22:25:12 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >3dfx users 'should' > >get zero benefit from changing the AGP Aperature size since those cards > >access the memory in a different way. > > Thanks Dave -- just break my heart... :) >

Yup, 3dfx cards have a VERY minimal usage of agp memory transfers. But it will only affect games when the textures are unable to be held in local memory, gpl not being one of them. N4 is tho... On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 22:25:12 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (50 lines)

> I should mention that from what I've read here, that 3dfx users 'should' >get zero benefit from changing the AGP Aperature size since those cards >access the memory in a different way. > I hope I'm correct about that info. >dave henrie >"Beckett Richard-qswi266" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Well, it changed mine! :-) >> >> I have a duron 750, hercules GF2 mx 32meg, 128 meg memory, and MSFF >> gameport. >> >> Somewhere I read to set the AGP aperture in the bios to 256, and if it >> worked, leave it alone. >> >> After hearing other rumours, I decided to have a play last night. >> >> Before - I was getting glitches in GPL. I'm currently at Monaco, and they >> occurred leaving the pits, 'till half way up the hill. At the start of the >> race, they would settle down once through the first corner. >> >> I changed the aperture to 128, then 64 to see the difference. At 64, it >was >> the same as at 256, but setting it to 128 made an enormous difference! >> >> The glitches disappeared completely, and I was able to run full details in >> the mirrors at 1600, but that's not the most important bit. >> This is - I suddenly found that driving 'round Monaco was much easier, and >I >> was much more consistent. It's made a huge difference to the feel of the >> car! Try it. >> >> I then wondered how it would affect GP3. Straight in, I discovered at 10% >> drop in PO! I then discovered I could run it at absolute max, in the >highest >> res - EVEN IN THE RAIN!!! Yet again, the car felt much better, and I could >> drive much more consistently. >> >> Now I don't know what the aperture is, and how it should be set depending >on >> one's system, but getting it right's made such a difference, that I would >> say it's well worth having a quick fiddle with. >> >> R. >> >> >> -- >> Posted from motgate4.mot.com [144.189.100.102] >> via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG >

Pretty good explanation Simon, but one point that I'll disagree on. Non-local video memory is a LOT slower than local memory, not a little. Accessing memory via the agp aperature happens at 66mhz (agp bus speed) whereas local memory is 166mhz for v3, up to 266 for a Geforce3. Pretty surprised that there should be any change with any game, let alone gpl. You will always end up running the game at whatever settings which DON'T use the agp aperature, cos the performance hit is so big. From N4 readme.txt: "Because of the large amount of textures used in NASCAR� Racing 4, it is recommended that 32-bit color only be used on video cards with 64 MB or more texture memory." Manually setting texture size: "Increasing this value above the detected value may prevent the game from dropping mip levels as more textures are loaded, but note that setting too large of a value may result in SIGNIFICANT performance hits as textures begin to swap in and out of memory." So it's got me buggered as to why you would find any difference. But if it works, what the hell! Rafe Mc On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:32:09 GMT, "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (48 lines)

>Everyone seems to get different results with AGP Aperture size. > >I found that with it on 64MB, GPL crashed quite regularly. I also found >that with it on 32MB (which is the same size as the amount of VRAM on my >32MB GF2 gts), GPL and 3DMark2000 all performed better, so i've left it on >32 MB since. > >I'll have a go at explaining what I believe AGP Aperture size does- > >Basically you have local VRAM, this is the memory on your video card. Then >you have system memory, this is your normal main memory. AGP Aperture >enables your video card to have extremely fast access to a portion of your >system memory. This memory is then refered to as non-local video memory >(because your video card can access it, but it's not physically on your >video card). Non-local video memory is slower than local-video memory, but >faster than system memory (in terms of how quickly it can be accessed by >your video card). > >Say your video card has 32 MB, and a game needs 50 MB of video card memory >to run with high-res textures. Your video card can use the non-local video >memory (AGP memory) along with the local video memory to act like a card >that has more memory than it really does. The results would be a little >slower than using a genuine 64MB video card, but at least the high-res >textures would work. > >And obviously the aperture size controls how much system memory can be >controlled this way by your video card. > >Anyway, those are interesting results you got, I think I'll try a little >experimenting myself :) > >"Beckett Richard-qswi266" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Well, it changed mine! :-) >> >> I have a duron 750, hercules GF2 mx 32meg, 128 meg memory, and MSFF >> gameport. >> ><snip> >> >> Now I don't know what the aperture is, and how it should be set depending >on >> one's system, but getting it right's made such a difference, that I would >> say it's well worth having a quick fiddle with. >> >> R. > >

>Err...P3-650 / Creative Labs GF2 GTS 32 MB / 256 MB pc133 / Win98 first >edition / cool looking speakers / go-faster stripes / furry dice / racing >socks ;) > It'll run faster painted red :)

"Arto Wikla" wrote ... > Where can you set these alternative "AGP Apertures"? (Win98SE, GF2) > I guess it would be best that I do not know it, though... ;-) > > Arto > --In the bios setup before windows load - something like hit <del> while booting. Tony

It'll run even faster painted red with bright yellow, orange & white stripes :) "Rafe McAuliffe" wrote: | It'll run faster painted red :) | >Err...P3-650 / Creative Labs GF2 GTS 32 MB / 256 MB pc133 / Win98 first | >edition / cool looking speakers / go-faster stripes / furry dice / racing | >socks ;) --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001

"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> writes: > Err...P3-650 / Creative Labs GF2 GTS 32 MB / 256 MB pc133 / Win98 first > edition / cool looking speakers / go-faster stripes / furry dice / racing > socks ;) way cool. I walways imagined I was alone in having a dedicated pair of socks for armchair racing. -- Gunnar #31 SUCKS#015 Tupperware MC#002 DoD#0x1B DoDRT#003 DoD:CT#4,8 Kibo�: 2 DE RECTIS NON TOLERANDUM EST

First I wouldn't consider a 950 slow if a 997 is fast. As far as the other bus speeds go that could be a possiblitly and part of the "differance". The whole point of my post was that these things shouldn't have effected the physics but they did. MadDAWG

Last time I checked into it ATI Rage chips and Nvidia Geforce were the only ones actually using the AGP aperture. The rest of the video cards just use the AGP interface for the faster bus speed. Not 100% sure about the v5 but I know the v3 doesn't. If you want to know if your card uses it or not just use the DX properties to see if AGP is enabled or disabled if enabled then run the test to make sure it works. I would think that if your card doesn't use AGP you would want to turn this off or set to smallest setting, but I haven't actually tried that my self. MadDAWG

Also don't forget the change in operating system MadDAWG

As far as WinME vs. Win98SE goes I feel that ME is better. I know alot of people have had problems with ME and my guess on that would be that like any newer software you will need more hardware to run it. As I said before I have a 950 mhz AMD k7 Athlon, 256 ram and a Geforce 2 GTS 64 meg video card. I have seen alot of people recommending that you turn of PC health, but I have not done so and have had no performance problems. I think it also has to do with what type of system you are running. I built my own so I know all the system drivers that are used a what settings they are in stalled at. My parents have a Compaq and there is no way I would consider doing anything to that system because of the way its set up. I run a 56k dial up and I feel that my connection quality for gaming has gotten better in ME over Win98SE. One thing that may be a problem for some people is the lack of a DOS mode. So if you have any old software that requires a "restart in Dos mode" to run don't even think about ME. I know there is alot of bad press about ME but I'm pretty happy with it. Granted this is just my experience and yours may vary. MadDAWG

Ok, thanks for the info :) I was also surprised, I expected since GPL works fine with 16 MB cards and doesn't use a lot of textures, that it wouldn't need or use any AGP memory. It's probably just a peculiarity of the drivers. "Rafe McAuliffe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> Pretty good explanation Simon, but one point that I'll disagree on. > Non-local video memory is a LOT slower than local memory, not a > little. Accessing memory via the agp aperature happens at 66mhz (agp > bus speed) whereas local memory is 166mhz for v3, up to 266 for a > Geforce3. > > Pretty surprised that there should be any change with any game, let > alone gpl. You will always end up running the game at whatever > settings which DON'T use the agp aperature, cos the performance hit is > so big. > > From N4 readme.txt: > > "Because of the large amount of textures used in NASCAR� Racing 4, it > is recommended that 32-bit color only be used on video cards with 64 > MB or more texture memory." > > Manually setting texture size: > "Increasing this value above the detected value may prevent the game > from dropping mip levels as more textures are loaded, but note that > setting too large of a value may result in SIGNIFICANT performance > hits as textures begin to swap in and out of memory." > > So it's got me buggered as to why you would find any difference. But > if it works, what the hell! > > Rafe Mc

I agree, Windows ME, when setup right, is MUCH better. "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3b3347f4$[email hidden]... > As far as WinME vs. Win98SE goes I feel that ME is better. I know alot of > people have had problems with ME and my guess on that would be that likeany > newer software you will need more hardware to run it. As I said before I > have a 950 mhz AMD k7 Athlon, 256 ram and a Geforce 2 GTS 64 meg videocard. > I have seen alot of people recommending that you turn of PC health, but I > have not done so and have had no performance problems. I think it also has > to do with what type of system you are running. I built my own so I knowall > the system drivers that are used a what settings they are in stalled at.My > parents have a Compaq and there is no way I would consider doing anythingto > that system because of the way its set up. I run a 56k dial up and I feel > that my connection quality for gaming has gotten better in ME overWin98SE. > One thing that may be a problem for some people is the lack of a DOS mode. > So if you have any old software that requires a "restart in Dos mode" torun

Quoted text (8 lines)

> don't even think about ME. I know there is alot of bad press about ME but > I'm pretty happy with it. Granted this is just my experience and yours may > vary. > > > MadDAWG > >

I'm using WinME and have absolutely no problems with it, it even shuts down properly, something 98se hardly ever did. Speaking of which, I had a crazy problem with 98se, when I tried to shut it down it would hang at the windows is shutting down screen, until I turned off the power (at the socket outlet) to either my speakers or FF wheel, then it would continue and shut down. Didn't happen every time, sometimes it would complete straight away. Anyone ever had that problem and found a cure ? -- Ian P <email invalid due to spammers> "Lannie Schafroth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9gvju7$37b$[email hidden]... > I agree, Windows ME, when setup right, is MUCH better. > > "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:3b3347f4$[email hidden]... > > As far as WinME vs. Win98SE goes I feel that ME is better. I know alot of > > people have had problems with ME and my guess on that would be that like > any > > newer software you will need more hardware to run it. As I said before I > > have a 950 mhz AMD k7 Athlon, 256 ram and a Geforce 2 GTS 64 meg video > card. > > I have seen alot of people recommending that you turn of PC health, but I > > have not done so and have had no performance problems. I think it also has > > to do with what type of system you are running. I built my own so I know > all > > the system drivers that are used a what settings they are in stalled at. > My > > parents have a Compaq and there is no way I would consider doing anything > to > > that system because of the way its set up. I run a 56k dial up and I feel > > that my connection quality for gaming has gotten better in ME over > Win98SE. > > One thing that may be a problem for some people is the lack of a DOS mode. > > So if you have any old software that requires a "restart in Dos mode" to > run > > don't even think about ME. I know there is alot of bad press about ME but > > I'm pretty happy with it. Granted this is just my experience and yours may > > vary. > > > > > > MadDAWG > > > > > >

Since I'm an English gent it would have to be racing green with a yellow stripe :) "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:12FY6.31286$[email hidden]... > It'll run even faster painted red with bright yellow, orange & whitestripes > :) > > "Rafe McAuliffe" wrote: > | It'll run faster painted red :) >

OkeeeeeeDoeKeeeeeeeeeeeee:-) hahahaha "Simon Brown" wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

| Since I'm an English gent it would have to be racing green with a yellow | stripe :) | | "Thom j." wrote: | > It'll run even faster painted red with bright yellow, orange & white | stripes | > :) | > | > "Rafe McAuliffe" wrote: | > | It'll run faster painted red :)

--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001

OkeeeeeeDoeKeeeeeeeeeeeee:-) hahahaha

Quoted text (9 lines)

| Since I'm an English gent it would have to be racing green with a yellow | stripe :) | | > It'll run even faster painted red with bright yellow, orange & white | stripes | > :) | > | > | It'll run faster painted red :)

--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.262 / Virus Database: 132 - Release Date: 6/12/2001

Or that computers tend to make up their own rules for themselves :) On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 12:48:13 GMT, "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (37 lines)

>Ok, thanks for the info :) > >I was also surprised, I expected since GPL works fine with 16 MB cards and >doesn't use a lot of textures, that it wouldn't need or use any AGP memory. >It's probably just a peculiarity of the drivers. > >"Rafe McAuliffe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Pretty good explanation Simon, but one point that I'll disagree on. >> Non-local video memory is a LOT slower than local memory, not a >> little. Accessing memory via the agp aperature happens at 66mhz (agp >> bus speed) whereas local memory is 166mhz for v3, up to 266 for a >> Geforce3. >> >> Pretty surprised that there should be any change with any game, let >> alone gpl. You will always end up running the game at whatever >> settings which DON'T use the agp aperature, cos the performance hit is >> so big. >> >> From N4 readme.txt: >> >> "Because of the large amount of textures used in NASCAR� Racing 4, it >> is recommended that 32-bit color only be used on video cards with 64 >> MB or more texture memory." >> >> Manually setting texture size: >> "Increasing this value above the detected value may prevent the game >> from dropping mip levels as more textures are loaded, but note that >> setting too large of a value may result in SIGNIFICANT performance >> hits as textures begin to swap in and out of memory." >> >> So it's got me buggered as to why you would find any difference. But >> if it works, what the hell! >> >> Rafe Mc > >

Sometimes the overclocking can affect the physics tho. For some reason, GP3 would go crazy on my Celeron 400 @588. Car would flip up in the air, bounce around, mad stuff. Turn it back down to 400, it would run normally (but sloooowwww!) Strange, my new Athlon tbird runs GP3 fine, overclocked or not. Very odd, but can happen. Rafe Mc On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 20:18:58 +0100, Derek James <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 10:44:22 -0400, "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>Its amazing how much system specs can affect the feel of a sim/game. I have >>the DTR games from Ratbag. My system is an AMD k7 950 overclocked to 997mhz. > >I'm not so sure that you've got this right. Clearly there is a >difference in feel between a fast and a slow system because the frame >rate is better and the joystick/wheel can be polled more often or >something but overclocking the system does not directly affect the >physics in a game. It's just a guess but maybe at certain overclock >speeds (on your system) other factors came into play, such as bad USB >performance or a dodgy joystick port etc. What's good for a benchmark >might not be good for the overall feel of a game?

Puke, gag! Windows ME is pathetically unstable... "Lannie Schafroth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9gvju7$37b$[email hidden]... > I agree, Windows ME, when setup right, is MUCH better. > > "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:3b3347f4$[email hidden]... > > As far as WinME vs. Win98SE goes I feel that ME is better. I know alotof > > people have had problems with ME and my guess on that would be that like > any > > newer software you will need more hardware to run it. As I said before I > > have a 950 mhz AMD k7 Athlon, 256 ram and a Geforce 2 GTS 64 meg video > card. > > I have seen alot of people recommending that you turn of PC health, butI > > have not done so and have had no performance problems. I think it alsohas > > to do with what type of system you are running. I built my own so I know > all > > the system drivers that are used a what settings they are in stalled at. > My > > parents have a Compaq and there is no way I would consider doinganything > to > > that system because of the way its set up. I run a 56k dial up and Ifeel > > that my connection quality for gaming has gotten better in ME over > Win98SE. > > One thing that may be a problem for some people is the lack of a DOSmode. > > So if you have any old software that requires a "restart in Dos mode" to > run > > don't even think about ME. I know there is alot of bad press about MEbut > > I'm pretty happy with it. Granted this is just my experience and yoursmay

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > vary. > > > > > > MadDAWG > > > > > >