Hello,
I bought a MSFF wheel a few months ago and only now I've begun to notice
that in some games, enabling the Force Feedback cause quite a performance
hit. I used FRAPS in Nascar HEAT and I noticed that I was taking a 25% hit
with FF on. Without FF, I can get anywhere from 52-61 FPS circling alone
around Bristol (using test mode in Garage). With FF, I get 40-50 FPS. When
AI cars are around it's an even bigger hit.
I guess my question is: Is this normal?? What kind of hit are other FF users
experiencing? Is it my wheel?
I did notice that racing games that used canned effects (hitting curb or
wall, pavement, grass, etc...) only loose FPS when the FF is activated. I
don't have Nascar 4 (one Nascar game is enough for me) so I can't compare.
Right now, I'm debating disabling the FF because I prefer smoother
framerates than FF effects. Although, I do like the way they are implemented
in NH and GP3 (shit game but nice FF). It helps give you a great sensation
of the car pulling and such.
Thanks,
Michael M
Celeron 566@875
256 MB RAM
GeForce 2 GTS 32MB
ASUS P2B rev. 1.02 (BIOS 1013 beta 7)
Win98 SE
On Sat, 03 Mar 2001 18:19:40 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]>
wrote:
It's a known problemn with that wheel.
Quoted text (7 lines)
>Hello, >I bought a MSFF wheel a few months ago and only now I've begun to notice >that in some games, enabling the Force Feedback cause quite a performance >hit. I used FRAPS in Nascar HEAT and I noticed that I was taking a 25% hit >with FF on. Without FF, I can get anywhere from 52-61 FPS circling alone >around Bristol (using test mode in Garage). With FF, I get 40-50 FPS. When >AI cars are around it's an even bigger hit. I thought that was fixed with updated drivers....sheesh...
I will say...some titles will see a FF impact no matter what the wheel is.
F1cs2k comes to mind. But others like GPL don't seem to bog down at all, or
if they do, the impact is
negligible.
I wonder why that is......
....
....
the third dave
"Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
hit
> >with FF on. Without FF, I can get anywhere from 52-61 FPS circling alone
> >around Bristol (using test mode in Garage). With FF, I get 40-50 FPS.When
> >AI cars are around it's an even bigger hit.
>
> It's a known problemn with that wheel.
Quoted text (7 lines)
> On Sat, 03 Mar 2001 18:19:40 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Hello, > >I bought a MSFF wheel a few months ago and only now I've begun to notice > >that in some games, enabling the Force Feedback cause quite a performance > >hit. I used FRAPS in Nascar HEAT and I noticed that I was taking a 25%On Sat, 03 Mar 2001 18:19:40 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]>
wrote:
>I bought a MSFF wheel a few months ago and only now I've begun to notice
>that in some games, enabling the Force Feedback cause quite a performance
>hit.
>
>I guess my question is: Is this normal?? What kind of hit are other FF users
>experiencing? Is it my wheel?
Everyone uses the iForce hardware chip in their wheels and the iForce
drivers EXCEPT Microsoft. Best analogy I can make is between a
hardware modem and a WinModem. Instead of the iForce dedicated
processor receiving simple, abbreviated commands to drive the motor
and provide the force feedback, the MS FF wheel requires the main CPU
to perform all of the necessary calculations and send far more complex
data streams to the wheel's drive circuitry.
I suspect that the MS design decisions were due to arrogance ("We can
do it just as well.") and the dislike of paying royalties to another
company for technology when they can't steal it. (perhaps they've
been caught enough times to know not to try anymore... Naahhh! <g>)
Bottom line. The MS FF wheel will put a far heavier burden (by about
100:1) on your CPU than any other FF wheel available today.
Regards,
Brett C. Cammack
brettDOTcammack@worldnetDOTattDOTnet
(remove the DOTs from my return address to reply privately)
>
> Bottom line. The MS FF wheel will put a far heavier burden (by about
> 100:1) on your CPU than any other FF wheel available today.
>sub bottom line : why buy this shit ?
"Txl" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Pjbo6.2243$[email hidden]...
>
> sub bottom line : why buy this shit ?
>
Well, a few reasons.
1 - Wheel has a small profile and it was the only one that fit on my desk. I
tried to buy the Act Labs, the Logitech and the Thrustmaster. All were too
big or wouldn't clamp down on my desk.
2 - Very handy quick release mechanism.
3 - Most reviews seemed favourable and the wheel had a nice feel.
4 - $45 CAN rebate.
Oh well, I guess I'm stuck with it. But considering the grief I went in
finding a wheel that would fit on my stupid corner desk, I'm happy with it.
I guess in a few games I'll just have to turn off the FF. The irony is I
thought CPU usage would decrease by having a USB controller as opposed to my
old gameport joystick. Heh heh.
Thanks,
Michael M
I take no performance hit with my MS/FF wheel. Never have. It works fine.
Gavel
On Sat, 03 Mar 2001 18:40:09 GMT, [email hidden]
(Brett C. Cammack) wrote:
You sure that's the reason? Microsoft FFB wheels and sticks have an
onboard processor too. I think it's only the USB versions that have
this problem for some reason.
Quoted text (15 lines)
>Everyone uses the iForce hardware chip in their wheels and the iForce >drivers EXCEPT Microsoft. Best analogy I can make is between a >hardware modem and a WinModem. Instead of the iForce dedicated >processor receiving simple, abbreviated commands to drive the motor >and provide the force feedback, the MS FF wheel requires the main CPU >to perform all of the necessary calculations and send far more complex >data streams to the wheel's drive circuitry. > >I suspect that the MS design decisions were due to arrogance ("We can >do it just as well.") and the dislike of paying royalties to another >company for technology when they can't steal it. (perhaps they've >been caught enough times to know not to try anymore... Naahhh! <g>) > >Bottom line. The MS FF wheel will put a far heavier burden (by about >100:1) on your CPU than any other FF wheel available today.On Sat, 03 Mar 2001 18:31:45 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]>
wrote:
> I thought that was fixed with updated drivers....sheesh...
Supposd to, obviously not though. I took back the MS FF2 joystick for
the same reason.
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001 13:47:52 -0800, "gavel" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> I take no performance hit with my MS/FF wheel. Never have. It works fine.
>Gavel
>
Do you have USB or gameport version?
Gameport. I've read a ton of posts over the past year mentioning framerate
hits but I've not encountered any. I own four wheel pedal combos but only
one force feedback model, the ms/ff. I never noticed a difference even on
marginal machines I've owned.
Best,
Gavel
Jagg <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2001 13:47:52 -0800, "gavel" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> > I take no performance hit with my MS/FF wheel. Never have. It worksfine.
> >Gavel
> >
>
> Do you have USB or gameport version?
On Sun, 4 Mar 2001 00:04:25 -0800, "gavel" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>Gameport. I've read a ton of posts over the past year mentioning framerate
>hits but I've not encountered any. I own four wheel pedal combos but only
>one force feedback model, the ms/ff. I never noticed a difference even on
>marginal machines I've owned.
That's because there is no frame rate hit with the gameport version.
This problem only applies to the newer USB versions.
Seems odd. Thought the whole point of USB was that it was a more
efficient means of I/O (especially compared to the ancient
architecture of the gameport), or is it just MS's implementation of
it?
I've got the gameport version as well and always wondered what people
were talking about with the performance hit. Good to hear there is a
difference between the two, since if I were buying now, I would have
picked up the USB version for convenience if nothing else.
-John
On Sun, 04 Mar 2001 17:28:56 GMT, Jagg <[email hidden]> wrote:
