Video card for gp2

I would like to know the best video card to run gp2 on a p5-133 --

> I would like to know the best video card to run gp2 on a p5-133 > -- Hercules Dynamite 128/Video 4mb MDRAM working at 99mhz.

Hercules Dynamite 128, its currently the fastest 2d Dos card, here the url http://www.hercules.com/presale/specs/d128.htm Gregory Alferov ~~_____~~ http://www.sure.net/~tifosi/ [__]=[_(-)_]=[__]

>>I would like to know the best video card to run gp2 on a p5-133 >Hercules Dynamite 128, its currently the fastest 2d Dos card, >here the url http://www.hercules.com/presale/specs/d128.htm If you're *only* a GP2 fan, good advice. If you enjoy ICR2 or NASCAR2, look into the Rendition Verite-based cards such as the Intergraph Reactor or Sierra Screamin' 3D (the Creative Labs 3D Blaster PCI is also a Verite card, but it doesn't include the Rendition version of ICR2 in its bundle). You'll get enhanced appearance and faster frame rates in games written for the Verite and performance close to the Dynamite 128 for GP2. Check out: http://www.intergraph.com/ics/reactor Pick one or more: Model Rockets (competition-NERCB) / PCs (even Atari!) / Papyrus ICR-ICR2-NCR / Who needs a life when you have multiple non-lives?

This is absolutely not true, Intergraph will run GP2, much much slower, because it is only optimized for 3d, and in 2d it is very slow. But if you are only running Nascar2, Indycar2, Quake( i think) integraph is ok. Yet Verite chip set video cards, are slower in 3d then Voodoo, chip set video card. I dont know, why papyrus decided ( maybe Sierra ordered them to) to make a games for Verite cards, but if they made it for Voodoo, we would probably get 35fps, constantly (on p90). __ Gregory Alferov ~~_____~~ http://www.sure.net/~tifosi/ [__]=[_(-)_]=[__]

Quoted text (28 lines)

> >>Hercules Dynamite 128, its currently the fastest 2d Dos card, > >>here the url http://www.hercules.com/presale/specs/d128.htm > > If you're *only* a GP2 fan, good advice. > > If you enjoy ICR2 or NASCAR2, look into the Rendition Verite-based > >cards such as the Intergraph Reactor or Sierra Screamin' 3D (the > >Creative Labs 3D Blaster PCI is also a Verite card, but it doesn't > >include the Rendition version of ICR2 in its bundle). You'll get > >enhanced appearance and faster frame rates in games written for the > >Verite and performance close to the Dynamite 128 for GP2. > This is absolutely not true, Intergraph will run GP2, much much > slower, because it is only optimized for 3d, and in 2d it is > very slow. > But if you are only running Nascar2, Indycar2, Quake( i think) > integraph is ok. Yet Verite chip set video cards, are slower in 3d > then Voodoo, chip set video card. > I dont know, why papyrus decided ( maybe Sierra ordered them to) to > make a games for Verite cards, but if they made it for Voodoo, we > would probably get 35fps, constantly (on p90). > __ > Gregory Alferov ~~_____~~

This is not true either. The Reactor does have a problem with being slow in old VGA, but in SVGA/VESA 2.0, the Reactor is nearly as fast as an ET6000 board, and this is only revision 1.0 of its drivers. Bob Chalfin

This is untrue. The Reactor has a very slow VGA core, which is what GP2 uses to estimate framerates. It's VESA speeds are right on par with the fastest DOS performers, the ET-6000 based cards. -- Emory University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences The IWCCCARS Project: Q & A Representative Nascar Setups Page: http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~ebusch/

Hogwash. The rendition cards have excellent VESA performance, just a tad slower than the ET6000 chipset cards. They are very slow in VGA, but since GP2 supports VESA modes, it should run very well on a Rendition card. David *** You're only young once, but you can stay immature forever ***

Quoted text (10 lines)

>> If you enjoy ICR2 or NASCAR2, look into the Rendition Verite-based >>cards such as the Intergraph Reactor or Sierra Screamin' 3D (the >>Creative Labs 3D Blaster PCI is also a Verite card, but it doesn't >>include the Rendition version of ICR2 in its bundle). You'll get >>enhanced appearance and faster frame rates in games written for the >>Verite and performance close to the Dynamite 128 for GP2. >This is absolutely not true, Intergraph will run GP2, much much >slower, because it is only optimized for 3d, and in 2d it is >very slow.

Do you have direct evidence of the slow Verite speed of GP2? Here's what I have heard... The VGA mode of the Verite is *very* slow, but GP2 is played using the VESA SVGA modes, which are fast, comparable to the ET6000 (a tad slower). GP2 uses this slow VGA mode to compute its video log score (usually a paltry 25 or so on most machines) and to compute suggested frame rates, but the card actually performs better than that score would indicate. I *don't* have direct evidence of much of the above (at least the comparison to other cards), since the Reactor is the only card that's ever been in *my* new P133. GP2 does run faster than it did on my DX2/66, if that helps. :) There are Rendition-accelerated versions of ICR2, NASCAR2, and Quake. To the best of my knowledge, none of these are available Voodoo-accelerated. If you want racing sims, 2 of the 3 big racing sims are Verite-specific. The third (GP2) hasn't announced which 3D acceleration it will support (if any). For sim-racers, the choice is pretty simple (IMHO). Papyrus has been working on the Verite port of ICR2 for much of this year, so they're been behind that technology since (or even prior to) its inception. The Verite-accelerated ICR2 can hit 60+ fps on my P133 (when you take the 30fps real-time governor off). Pick one or more: Model Rockets (competition-NERCB) / PCs (even Atari!) / Papyrus ICR-ICR2-NCR / Who needs a life when you have multiple non-lives?

Hi Guys, I have a P100 using an Intergraph card, and GP2 is significantly faster than when I was running with my Diamond Stealth 64 2Mb DRAM (video). I can run with medium detail at most tracks, with only trackside objects, fences, and cars w/ track and curbs in the mirrors with an OCC between 95-150%, and when detail is set to low OCC is between 65-95%. Perhaps it's the motherboard that's the bottle neck on other systems? BTW, I get 110fps+ (no detail<g>) with frame-limiter removed. ~:P Best Regards, Marc J. Nelson Sim Racing News

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>> This is absolutely not true, Intergraph will run GP2, much much >>> slower, because it is only optimized for 3d, and in 2d it is >>> very slow. >Hogwash. The rendition cards have excellent VESA performance, just a >tad slower than the ET6000 chipset cards. They are very slow in VGA, >but since GP2 supports VESA modes, it should run very well on a >Rendition card.

I'm not speaking for all Reactor owners, but I for one get horrible fps with this card and GP2, with all textures off in SVGA I have an estimated 12 fps...this is with a P133 w/32 megs of ram. If anyone else has figured out how to get this thing to work with GP2, please let me know.

Quoted text (14 lines)

>>>> This is absolutely not true, Intergraph will run GP2, much much >>>> slower, because it is only optimized for 3d, and in 2d it is >>>> very slow. >>Hogwash. The rendition cards have excellent VESA performance, just a >>tad slower than the ET6000 chipset cards. They are very slow in VGA, >>but since GP2 supports VESA modes, it should run very well on a >>Rendition card. >I'm not speaking for all Reactor owners, but I for one get horrible >fps with this card and GP2, with all textures off in SVGA I have an >estimated 12 fps...this is with a P133 w/32 megs of ram. If anyone >else has figured out how to get this thing to work with GP2, please >let me know.

Forget your estimated FPS, GP2 is screwed by the slow video log mark. Set your framerate as to what you think will be ok, then guide adjustments by checking the processor occupancy "O" key. try 17.0fps with Kerb,track,fences,objects, trackside medium, and nothing in the mirrors as a starting point.

>I'm not speaking for all Reactor owners, but I for one get horrible >fps with this card and GP2, with all textures off in SVGA I have an >estimated 12 fps...this is with a P133 w/32 megs of ram. If anyone >else has figured out how to get this thing to work with GP2, please >let me know. Me too. With the same settings for graphics in GP2 that I used with the old Diamond Stealth 64, I dropped from an estimated 19 FPS to 10. Although it SEEMS faster than that. Could the estimated frame rate be wrong with the Reactor? -=Don=-

Yes GP2 incorrectly uses the Reactor's slow VGA core to estimate framerates. It's SVGA speed is well above what the program thinks it should be. -- Emory University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences The IWCCCARS Project: Q & A Representative Nascar Setups Page: http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~ebusch/

Does anyone know if there are any plans to port GP2's to the Rendition chipset? This is one of my favorite simulators and it's a shame I can't use the Reactor with it. Ryan -- "Live to own a Ferrari."

Hi Marc! What you doing here? :) Nice to have you around. Cheers! John _________________________________ __ _____| |_____ __ ________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |________ \ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | / > :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | < / :|__|::|____/ * Sim Racing News * \____|::|__| \ /______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm \._____\ [link lost in import: /~harmon/simnews]

Thanks Eric. I thought I was crazy. After all the games I've played where framerate is important, I though I had a pretty good grasp of what is jerky and when it tranisions to smooth. Like in GP2, just when the framerate gets high enough, the ground seems to turn into a real sheet of asphalt, smoothly passing underneath the car. Any lower and the feeling goes away. Just quick images of the ground flashing by. BTW, Thank you also for recommending me NOT to get the Sierra, and to go for the Reactor. I couldn't be happier! -=Don=-

I said: BTW, Thank you also for recommending me NOT to get the Sierra, and to Make that NOT to get the 3D Blaster. That was the only one available in the stores, and I did not want to wait. Little did I know that I Intergraph used FeEx exclusively. Cool. Sorry about the error re: Sierra. -=Don=-

>What you doing here? :) Hangin' TEN...<g> Nice to be here...Have you been on the homepage yet? It's at: http://members.aol.com/simracing/index.htm Joined just to get the connection, and then come to find that the phone lines are swamped with knuckle-heads playin' Air Warrior. :( See ya' soon...BTW, I got the info on E3 next June. Steve Smith is flying down from NY to join us, and I was also thinking of getting a few others in on it. If you can make it, will Rika be comin' along?...If so, I guess I'll have to bring my other half... :( Oh, well...there goes the idea of turnin' Atlanta on its ear!! ;) Best Regards, Marc Marc J. Nelson Sim Racing News http://members.aol.com/simracing/index.htm http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm

>> What you doing here? :) sac> Hangin' TEN...<g> >> Nice to have you around. sac> Nice to be here...Have you been on the homepage yet? It's at: sac> http://members.aol.com/simracing/index.htm sac> Joined just to get the connection, and then come to find that the pho= ne sac> lines are swamped with knuckle-heads playin' Air Warrior. :( sac> See ya' soon...BTW, I got the info on E3 next June. Steve Smith is sac> flying down from NY to join us, and I was also thinking of getting a sac> few others in on it. If you can make it, will Rika be comin' sac> along?...If so, I guess I'll have to bring my other half... :( sac> Oh, well...there goes the idea of turnin' Atlanta on its ear!! ;) sac> Best Regards, sac> Marc sac> Marc J. Nelson sac> Sim Racing News Man, that was *immensely* interesting for all of us. Thanks for sharing... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Henrik Hjortnaes AMIGA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~