Re: What the hell is going on here?

Chris Bloom wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > GPL recommended: 266mhz > F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > speed as one to run GPL?

Primarily a poor use of a poor graphics API (DirectX). Dave Ewing -- ***************************************************** David A. Ewing Xilinx Boulder [email hidden] *****************************************************

Chris Bloom <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > GPL recommended: 266mhz > F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > speed as one to run GPL?

IMHO htis is quite simple to explain. GPL used Glide. F1 2000 uses (unfortunately) Direct3D. Direct3D is way more innefficent than Glide. Especially on 3dfx cards :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > > Chris > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! >

Quoted text (8 lines)

> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > GPL recommended: 266mhz > F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > speed as one to run GPL?

and to continue that list: GPL optimal system: 400mhz F1 2000 optimal system: not invented yet

im sure f12000 has a lot of eye candy ;)

im sure f12000 has a lot of eye candy ;)

The realism of bad programming.

GPL Minimum system: 166mhz F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz GPL recommended: 266mhz F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the speed as one to run GPL? Chris * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

Ok... First off, I'm a huge GPL fan. The most realistic by far, blah, blah, blah. However, I kinda like F1 2000 too. I seem to remember when GPL came out that quite a few folks were whining about the system specs, complaining that it was undrivable during a race with only a few cars. Suddenly, (two years later) GPL will run on a minimal machine. Hmmm... Maybe its all... relative??? Warlock! Chris Bloom wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > GPL recommended: 266mhz > F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > speed as one to run GPL? > > Chris > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

My question is, what does F1 2000 offer for the extra Mhz required that GPL doesn't. I believe GP3 will run on a 266mhz even in software mode and the recommended machine is a 400mhz. This will include accurate weather rendering. Chris In article <[email hidden]>, "Mel Lanzer Co." <[email hidden]> wrote: >Ok... First off, I'm a huge GPL fan. The most realistic by far,blah, blah, >blah. However, I kinda like F1 2000 too. I seem to rememberwhen GPL came out >that quite a few folks were whining about the system specs,complaining that it >was undrivable during a race with only a few cars. Suddenly,(two years later) >GPL will run on a minimal machine. Hmmm... Maybe its all...relative???

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >Warlock! > >Chris Bloom wrote: > >> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz >> F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz >> GPL recommended: 266mhz >> F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! >> >> What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that

the >> recommended system to run it should need to be almost twicethe >> speed as one to run GPL? >> >> Chris >> >> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet'sDiscussion Network * >> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate inUsenet - Free! > > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

Chris Bloom <[email hidden]> wrote: >My question is, what does F1 2000 offer for the extra Mhz >required that GPL doesn't. I believe GP3 will run on a 266mhz >even in software mode and the recommended machine is a 400mhz. >This will include accurate weather rendering. I wouldn't pay too much attention to the minimum/recommended system specs.... Remco

The realism of bad programming. > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > speed as one to run GPL?

"Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > speed as one to run GPL? It's the chopper! ;-) Seriously, it's just bad optimisation by ISI. Simple as that. The game engine doesn't run as heavily as GPL Im absolutely sure, and the graphical engine that the game engine support is probably higher than GPL, but not enough to high to compare with the PC specs we need. Remember that ISI only did two titles in their history of racing simulators, while Papyrus has dozens... -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

gp3 is meant to have weather rendering? uh oh, i see myself crashing into the back of lots of cars in the rain very soon then :o) "Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

I guess it has a better physics engine than GPL. David G Fisher "Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > GPL recommended: 266mhz > F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > speed as one to run GPL? > > Chris > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network

* > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! >

450's didn't exist two years ago, so how could they be recommended on the box? David G Fisher " <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > GPL recommended: 266mhz > F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > speed as one to run GPL? > > Chris > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network

* > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! >

Chris Bloom wrote: > My question is, what does F1 2000 offer for the extra Mhz > required that GPL doesn't. I believe GP3 will run on a 266mhz > even in software mode and the recommended machine is a 400mhz. > This will include accurate weather rendering. Chris, you can't even run GP2 at Monaco with everything on and not get slowdown with a 266 MHz machine, so I seriously doubt that GP3 will be very playable on a machine of that spec. I'm a big fan of Geoff Crammond, and I eagerly await GP3, but I'm betting that you're going to need some serious horsepower to do the game justice. Hoping I'm wrong, Dave Ewing -- ***************************************************** David A. Ewing Xilinx Boulder [email hidden] *****************************************************

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:05:57 -0700, Chris Bloom <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>GPL Minimum system: 166mhz >F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz >GPL recommended: 266mhz >F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > >What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the >recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the >speed as one to run GPL? >

I have wondered for a long time.... For over a year ago I installed POWERSLIDE on my 200MHz Pentium with 32 MB ...and a Voodoo 1 with 4 MB...it looks better (gliding?) than all the other sim's I tried....and I have almost them all...on my Pentium 400 with 128MB and a Voodoo2 /12MB... Why don't "they" (gameproducers) use the same engine? The "sliding" is also very "rallylike", but I don't like the cars, tracks and drivers.....:-) "They" could just put in some realistic rally-cars, tracks and "real" driver names, and that would be it....! -- Med venlig hilsen / Best regards Thore Sorensen - [email hidden] DK-2700 Bronshoj - Denmark

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 23:54:36 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >450's didn't exist two years ago, so how could they be recommended on the >box? Since GPL didn't come out until late Septemtber 1998, it wasn't two years ago. And there were 450s *then*. :) "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Remco Moedt) writes:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>Chris Bloom <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>My question is, what does F1 2000 offer for the extra Mhz >>required that GPL doesn't. I believe GP3 will run on a 266mhz >>even in software mode and the recommended machine is a 400mhz. >>This will include accurate weather rendering. > >I wouldn't pay too much attention to the minimum/recommended system >specs.... > >Remco >

I'd say you need MORE processing power than the minumum specs. Minimum means with no(or few) graphics, fewer sounds, lower resolution. Not really enough for most people to enjoy the experience, and I think, misleading... Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

I'm running gpl on a p3 550, TNT2, SBlive, and I can't run it with all graphics options on during a race and have a usable frame rate. So maybe what the F1 2000 recommendations are is REALISTIC. [email hidden] (Chris Bloom) wrote in <[email hidden]>:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>GPL Minimum system: 166mhz >F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz >GPL recommended: 266mhz >F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > >What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the >recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the >speed as one to run GPL? > >Chris

-- Don Scurlock Vancouver,B.C.

That's because your using a TNT2. If you had a Voodoo3 it would be a different story. Don Scurlock wrote:

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > I'm running gpl on a p3 550, TNT2, SBlive, and I can't run it with all > graphics options on during a race and have a usable frame rate. So > maybe what the F1 2000 recommendations are is REALISTIC. > > [email hidden] (Chris Bloom) wrote in > <[email hidden]>: > > >GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > >F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > >GPL recommended: 266mhz > >F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > > > >What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > >recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > >speed as one to run GPL? > > > >Chris > > -- > Don Scurlock > Vancouver,B.C.

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 22:48:47 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I guess it has a better physics engine than GPL. Sarcasm intended? It's not the physics. If you crank down the graphics option a notch, and a notch, and another notch, the game actually runs quite fast but begins to look ugly. Nothing done to the physics yet, just graphics. Graphics is the bottleneck here. We need geometry engines, we need fast DMA paths to the graphics pipeline, we need scalability in adding multiple 3D cards to get better performance, much like CPU stacking, and we need faster paths and better 3D libraries (cough, OpenGL?!) to support the hardware more transparently. F12K has more things to do regarding detailed props around the track. And the cars are perhaps more detailed (or worse; stay detailed too long if they move farther away from the viewpoint).

Quoted text (13 lines)

>David G Fisher > > >"Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz >> F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz >> GPL recommended: 266mhz >> F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! >> >> What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the >> recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the >> speed as one to run GPL?

Ruud van Gaal MarketGraph / MachTech: http://www.marketgraph.nl Art: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery

[email hidden] (Tony StewartNo20) wrote: >im sure f12000 has a lot of eye candy >;) Except it *doesn't*, that's just the thing. What it has is a very poorly optimized graphics engine. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

"Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote: >IMHO htis is quite simple to explain. GPL used Glide. F1 2000 >uses (unfortunately) Direct3D. Direct3D is way more innefficent >than Glide. Especially on 3dfx cards :-) There's not THAT big a difference between Glide and a D3D application - not a WELL written D3D app anyway, something F1200 surely isn't. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

[email hidden] (Ruud van Gaal) wrote: >We need geometry engines, we need >fast DMA paths to the graphics pipeline, we need scalability in adding >multiple 3D cards to get better performance, much like CPU stacking, >and we need faster paths and better 3D libraries (cough, OpenGL?!) to >support the hardware more transparently. We need good programmers. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

Joe62 wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > "Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote: > > >IMHO htis is quite simple to explain. GPL used Glide. F1 2000 > >uses (unfortunately) Direct3D. Direct3D is way more innefficent > >than Glide. Especially on 3dfx cards :-) > > There's not THAT big a difference between Glide and a D3D application > - not a WELL written D3D app anyway, something F1200 surely isn't. >

No, I'd disagree on this assertion. Every Glide title I own, when I also run it's D3D counterpart, looks *much* improved in Glide as well as performing a lot faster. This title could definitely have benefited from a Glide port. OGL woulda made sense as well... -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

"Ruud van Gaal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 22:48:47 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >I guess it has a better physics engine than GPL. > > Sarcasm intended? > It's not the physics. If you crank down the graphics option a notch, > and a notch, and another notch, the game actually runs quite fast but > begins to look ugly. Nothing done to the physics yet, just graphics. > Graphics is the bottleneck here.

I was just repeating the line I used to hear a lot when discussing GPL. I could also apply everything you've just said above to GPL as well. When I and others had a slower machine and had trouble runing GPL, we were told it was the physics engine which was causing the low fps. Yet, if I switched to chase view, my framerate jumped up 10fps. Nothing done to the physics yet, just graphics. GPL's graphics were also very sparse compared to F1 2000. I think F1 2000's physics engine is as good as any I've experienced so I do expect it to require a lot of horsepower. Actually, I run it with all graphics at high or max, and it runs great. Still runs better than GPL. People just don't know how to keep their computer running at it's best. 466 TNT2 Ultra, 96 megs. David G Fisher

Quoted text (26 lines)

> We need geometry engines, we need > fast DMA paths to the graphics pipeline, we need scalability in adding > multiple 3D cards to get better performance, much like CPU stacking, > and we need faster paths and better 3D libraries (cough, OpenGL?!) to > support the hardware more transparently. > F12K has more things to do regarding detailed props around the track. > And the cars are perhaps more detailed (or worse; stay detailed too > long if they move farther away from the viewpoint). > > >David G Fisher > > > > > >"Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > >> F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > >> GPL recommended: 266mhz > >> F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > >> > >> What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > >> recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > >> speed as one to run GPL? > > Ruud van Gaal > MarketGraph / MachTech: http://www.marketgraph.nl > Art: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery

"Nobody" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wiGJ4.72$[email hidden]... > > Since GPL didn't come out until late Septemtber 1998, it wasn't two > >years ago. And there were 450s *then*. :) > > They were only sold to game developers! > Nonsense. I bought my rig at the same time I *preordered* GPL. It's a 400, but I could have payed a few hundred more for a 450, off the shelf.

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > I guess it has a better physics engine than GPL. Naw ;) You won't get me into that game David. Well not today ;-) It has good physics (oh see my words are getting less and less harsh each day (but the tracks still sucks eh!)), but the balance between the graphics vs. physics can't clearly not be higher than GPL. Per example, simply taking off some graphics that shouldn't take much processing power will give to the user in F1 2k a good framerate. So it is programming, but It's not very important to my eyes. I ran racing simulators without eye-candy for years... Hypothetically, let's say GPL runs at 288hz of physics + 200 of graphics, F1 2k probably runs at 300hz of graphics and 150hz of physics. It's NOT the double of processing power like you get the feeling of it vs. your computer speed when comparing GPL to F12k. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

So . . . you like the game then, eh? --DK "Joe62" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > There's not THAT big a difference between Glide and a D3D application > - not a WELL written D3D app anyway, something F1200 surely isn't. > > Joe McGinn > _____________________ > Radical Entertainment

I beg to differ. ISI may have only done 2 but Papy has been revamping the same nascar game for quite a while now so I wouldn't include those in your count, or at least count them as 1. Vintook "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NprJ4.81892$[email hidden]... Remember that ISI only > did two titles in their history of racing simulators, while Papyrus has > dozens...

I think that his point, Mel, is that F12000 does not have as high a "physics level" (if you know what I mean) as GPL. Therefore, if the vast majority of graphics calculations are now handled by 3-D cards, why does F12000 require a higher base level system to run on than GPL? Is that correct, Chris? -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Mel Lanzer Co. <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Ok... First off, I'm a huge GPL fan. The most realistic by far, blah, blah, > blah. However, I kinda like F1 2000 too. I seem to remember when GPL came out > that quite a few folks were whining about the system specs, complaining that it > was undrivable during a race with only a few cars. Suddenly, (two years later) > GPL will run on a minimal machine. Hmmm... Maybe its all... relative??? > > Warlock! > > Chris Bloom wrote: > > > GPL Minimum system: 166mhz > > F1 2000 Minimum system: 233mhz > > GPL recommended: 266mhz > > F1 2000 recommended: 450mhz!!! > > > > What extra realism that isn't in GPL does F1 2000 offer that the > > recommended system to run it should need to be almost twice the > > speed as one to run GPL? > > > > Chris > > > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * > > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! >

> Since GPL didn't come out until late Septemtber 1998, it wasn't two >years ago. And there were 450s *then*. :) They were only sold to game developers!

That is correct. In article <[email hidden]>, "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I think that his point, Mel, is that F12000 does not have ashigh a "physics >level" (if you know what I mean) as GPL. Therefore, if thevast majority of >graphics calculations are now handled by 3-D cards, why doesF12000 require

Quoted text (10 lines)

>a higher base level system to run on than GPL? > >Is that correct, Chris? > >-- >Regards, >Bruce Kennewell, >Canberra, Australia. >--------------------------- >

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

They were only sold to game developers!

Quoted text (10 lines)

>In article <[email hidden]>, "Bruce Kennewell" ><[email hidden]> wrote: >>I think that his point, Mel, is that F12000 does not have as >high a "physics >>level" (if you know what I mean) as GPL. >> Therefore, if the >vast majority of >>graphics calculations are now handled by 3-D cards, why does >F12000 require

The 3D cards just do hidden surface, shading, texturing and some lighting. Not that a major reduction of the burden put on the CPU isn't removed by that, however, transformation, clipping, morphing, LOD, collision detection, etc. must all be done by the CPU. The GeForce cards can handle lots of this stuff as well but such features are hardly supported yet by games.

Remember how bad the FPS was on CPR when it was released? A few months or so later a "TriGlide.dll" file was released for Voodoo cards. Which made a HUGE increase in FPS!!! Maybe EA could do the same? Comments? Bob B. "Chuck Kandler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (28 lines)

> Joe62 wrote: > > > > "Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote: > > > > >IMHO htis is quite simple to explain. GPL used Glide. F1 2000 > > >uses (unfortunately) Direct3D. Direct3D is way more innefficent > > >than Glide. Especially on 3dfx cards :-) > > > > There's not THAT big a difference between Glide and a D3D application > > - not a WELL written D3D app anyway, something F1200 surely isn't. > > > > No, I'd disagree on this assertion. Every Glide title I own, when I > also run it's D3D counterpart, looks *much* improved in Glide as well as > performing a lot faster. This title could definitely have benefited > from a Glide port. OGL woulda made sense as well... > > -- > Chuck Kandler #70 > K&S Racing > http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 > > Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: > http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! > > They'll call you names > And spit in your face, > But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

"Bob B." wrote: > > Remember how bad the FPS was on CPR when it was released? A few months or so > later a "TriGlide.dll" file was released for Voodoo cards. Which made a HUGE > increase in FPS!!! Maybe EA could do the same? Comments? Absolutely correct! What a better example to show the marked contrast between D3D & Glide efficiencies. You listening, EA?? -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

Chris. The guff on the GPL box had a 166 with 32Mb as a minimum. Go try it sometime if you can find an old machine at the local dump. MS "Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > My question is, what does F1 2000 offer for the extra Mhz > required that GPL doesn't. I believe GP3 will run on a 266mhz > even in software mode and the recommended machine is a 400mhz. > This will include accurate weather rendering. > > Chris