Recently, there was a posting about good setups and lap records. E.g., one
lap record is at 1.10.xxx in Mexico.
My lap record in Mexico is at 1.13.xxx (with the same setup), and I don't
believe, I can go three seconds faster. So I had the idea that lap times
could depend on used hardware, especially on processor occupancy (which
you get by pressing O while driving).
I have a 486 DX2/66 and a VL-graphics card, my max occupancy is 60%. Real
time, ie. what the stop watch tells me, is about eight seconds faster in
Monaco than actual lap time.
So my questions:
- Does real time approach to lap time, if processor occupancy is higher?
- Did somebody experience faster lap times when using a relative slow
machine, ie. an occupancy of more than 100%?
--
== Andreas ==
Thanks [1].
Bibliography:
[1] : "Explicit and Implicit Feedback in Computer-Mediated
Communication"
NeXTMail accepted.
>Recently, there was a posting about good setups and lap records. E.g., one
>lap record is at 1.10.xxx in Mexico.
>My lap record in Mexico is at 1.13.xxx (with the same setup), and I don't
>believe, I can go three seconds faster. So I had the idea that lap times
>could depend on used hardware, especially on processor occupancy (which
>you get by pressing O while driving).
There was a bug in F1GP PC version 1.02 (or something, at least on 1.04 it
has been fixed) that allowed "impossible" lap times during the race at Mexico.
For example one guys qualifying record is 1.14.406 and his race record is
1.11.223.
But anyway... I too wonder does laptimes depend on hardware.
--
<-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=->
< Tero Turtiainen ! Yes Sir! May I*** Your boots or do >
<-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=->
: I have a 486 DX2/66 and a VL-graphics card, my max occupancy is 60%. Real
: time, ie. what the stop watch tells me, is about eight seconds faster in
: Monaco than actual lap time.
: So my questions:
: - Does real time approach to lap time, if processor occupancy is higher?
When the processor occupancy approaches 100%, things are supposedly
going by at something close to realtime. So if you are travelling at a
constant speed of 60 mph, you should cover 1mile in 1 minute etc..
With your speed machine, things are actually going by faster than what
you might see in an actual vehicle travelling that speed. But I don't
think its always that accurate. I mean the occupancy changes with
amount and type of scenery and with the number of cars as well.
: - Did somebody experience faster lap times when using a relative slow
: machine, ie. an occupancy of more than 100%?
I have a 386DX-33 (used to be a fast PC<g>) and I participate in the F1SA
series on Compuserve and I can say that the lap times are really close
among people with all speeds of PC's. So I personally don't think
the processor speed affects the times *outright*.. By this, I mean
that there are several indirect factors which can indirectly create
better or worse times. If you have a fast PC, you can run the game
with a high fps setting (like 25) and this results in a smoother
display and better reaction times on the track (try driving with an
fps of 8 or 10 and you'll see what I mean). Opposite to this, if you
are running with 25 fps, full detail etc.. at 60% occupancy, you are
getting less time to react to a turn or chicane etc.. So you are at a
disadvantage because you have to react quicker. If your computer has a
turbo button, turn it off and see if you can get the occupancy up
close to 100% and see if its any easier. I can't tell, because I run
mine at 17fps at around 110% occupancy with full detail *no* track
texture..Overall though, I really don't think that a fast PC will get
you any better times or worse times.. It all really depends what you
get used to, and what your setup is like.
My best at Monaco without SA or any other helps is around 1:21 on D's.
I haven't raced Mexico since I started without steering help though sorry.
Later,
RQ
--
__ ;;;;;; ####
/ \;;;;;;;;; ####
/____/;;;;;;;;;;;;; ####
: :::::::::::::::::: : #####
## : :::::::::::::::: :
___###### : :::::::::::::::::: :___________
M Y O P I N I O N S A R E E X A C T L Y T H A T
|>
|> But anyway... I too wonder does laptimes depend on hardware.
I feel it does, but not necessarily in an obvious way (or not completely).
I have found that the higher the fps, the better control I have of the
car, and hence the better times I get. Better h/w gets you better fps,
hence better h/w should also get you better times (until you get to the
25 fps limit).
I also wonder about the input sampling that F1GP does. In other words, if
fps is set at 25, does the game sample the throttle/stick positions more
often than if fps is set at 8? Or is sampling rate independent of fps
but dependent on h/w? Or, is there some combination of these two. Ideally,
sampling rate should be independent of fps AND hardware - if you want a
uniform handling performance on any h/w.
--
ISSCO, University of Geneva | X400: S=afzal;OU=divsun;O=unige;
54 route des Acacias | PRMD=switch;ADMD=arcom;C=ch
CH-1227 GENEVA (Switzerland) | UUCP: mcvax!cui!divsun.unige.ch!afzal
Tel: +41/22/705 71 12 | FAX: +41/22/300 10 86
``I'm not artificially intelligent, I just work that way.''
I have a 386 SX16 and my occupancy is about 160%. I'll have to check if
realtime is any slower or faster.
CJD
