I need 30fps in N1999, pleeeeease!!!!

I bought Nascar 2 1999 Edition a few days ago. The specs on the box said that I'd require a P166+, 32Mb RAM, 3dfx accelerator and Windows-compatible sound card. I have a P233 MMX, 64Mb SDRAM and a Herc Stingray Voodoo Rush card. I thought that I had it beat cold. But I was wrong! For the life of me I can't run at 640x480 with full detail, 39 cars, 20 ahead, 10 behind. It seems like I'm only getting about 15-20 fps. I'm using Bristol as my benchmark track and I really notice the stutter coming out of turn 4, just as the grandstands come into view (but the rate is bad elsewhere, too). The framerate only improves if I start turning the graphic options off, especially texturing. What am I doing wrong?!? I've even set my monitor's refresh to 60Mhz, set a permanent swap file of 200Mb, started Windows clean, with nothing in the Systray and I can't run full detail, full field. Am I just being unrealistic, or I missing something really obvious? As an aside, I have four 16Mb SMM's here. Should I add it to my PC? I've heard that it isn't exactly kosher to mix and match SIMM's and DIMM's. Opinions? Thanks everyone, Anthony Guevarra

Lose the 3dfx version, it will slow down nascar 99. I agree that the rendition card is the way to go to increase framerate on this game. You will see a big difference, although you still wont get all the details you want.

Quoted text (26 lines)

>I bought Nascar 2 1999 Edition a few days ago. The specs on the >box said that I'd require a P166+, 32Mb RAM, 3dfx accelerator >and Windows-compatible sound card. I have a P233 MMX, 64Mb >SDRAM and a Herc Stingray Voodoo Rush card. I thought that I >had it beat cold. But I was wrong! >For the life of me I can't run at 640x480 with full detail, 39 cars, >20 ahead, 10 behind. It seems like I'm only getting about 15-20 fps. >I'm using Bristol as my benchmark track and I really notice the stutter >coming out of turn 4, just as the grandstands come into view (but the >rate is bad elsewhere, too). The framerate only improves if I start turning >the graphic options off, especially texturing. >What am I doing wrong?!? I've even set my monitor's refresh to >60Mhz, set a permanent swap file of 200Mb, started Windows >clean, with nothing in the Systray and I can't run full detail, full field. >Am I >just being unrealistic, or I missing something really obvious? >As an aside, I have four 16Mb SMM's here. Should I add it to my >PC? I've heard that it isn't exactly kosher to mix and match SIMM's >and DIMM's. Opinions? >Thanks everyone, >Anthony Guevarra

To get the best you can out of N99 with your system, you'd probably want a V2200 chip rendition card, like the Hercules Thriller 3d 8mb. I had a 233 mmx previously, and got great results with the Thriller card. Don Burnette Dburn >I bought Nascar 2 1999 Edition a few days ago. The specs on the >box said that I'd require a P166+, 32Mb RAM, 3dfx accelerator >and Windows-compatible sound card. I have a P233 MMX, 64Mb >SDRAM and a Herc Stingray Voodoo Rush card. I thought that I >had it beat cold. But I was wrong! snip

I have a p16mmx with 64megs rms, vraptor rendition8meg and 3dfx 12 meg, video cars, i never got less than 28 fps, for a very brif moment a bristol and 30 fps at every other track and almost all of bristol. Must be the rush card...get a rendition v20 or banshee

Hate to ask, but how does one read fps in N1999?

Set an obvious detail (track texture perhaps, or grandstand) to "Auto," then set "turn details off fps" to , say, 28 and "turn details on fps" to 30. If when you run the game, the texture goes away, you are not getting a solid 28fps. Set it to 27 and try again. When you can do a full lap with max cars in view without the texture going away, that is the max constant framerate you can achieve. It will vary from track to track. Charlie

>Lose the 3dfx version, it will slow down nascar 99. I agree that the Haha, that is a good one. What a jokester. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

>I have a p16mmx with 64megs rms, vraptor rendition8meg and 3dfx 12 meg, video >cars, i never got less than 28 fps, for a very brif moment a bristol and 30 fps >at every other track and almost all of bristol. Must be the rush card...get a >rendition v20 or banshee You could be right. I didn't notice at first that he had a Rush card. That card is ***and generally performs 15% lower than the original 4MB 3dfx card. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

>I have a p16mmx with 64megs rms, vraptor rendition8meg and 3dfx 12 meg, video After reading rrevved's reply to you I realized you had a Voodoo2 card. You may find that you will get better performance with a 4MB 3dfx card. I believe I was reading in the flightsim NG where the Voodoo2 could actually be slower due to the fact that you don't have enough CPU pushing it. Might be something to check into. How many cars are you displaying ahead and behind? -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

>I bought Nascar 2 1999 Edition a few days ago. The specs on the >box said that I'd require a P166+, 32Mb RAM, 3dfx accelerator >and Windows-compatible sound card. I have a P233 MMX, 64Mb You may find that your performance will suffer if your "Windows- compatible sound card" is not a PCI. Dump the Rush and get a Banshee (are they PCI?) if you can, or a good 2D card and a 4MB 3dfx card. You may be doing pretty good. I have a P2-450, 128MB of ram and a 12MB voodoo2 card and don't even run it like that. I have the details maxed, but I draw 12 ahead and 4 behind. Expecting too much performance out of your rig. If you really only have a p5-166, then yes you are obviously being unrealistic. IMHO :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

Obviously a man who is a 3dfx fan. I've personally seen nascar run under rendition and 3dfx and without either, and I know for a fact that rendition is better, and that 3dfx will run slower than if you just ran with a generic card. It might look better, but it WILL run slower. Nascar 2 was never designed to be used with anything but a rendition card for enhanced graphics. Sorry, but its true.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>>Lose the 3dfx version, it will slow down nascar 99. I agree that the >Haha, that is a good one. What a jokester. >-- >Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

-snip- Cut back on the "behind" cars. 2 is plenty IMHO. If you are going to draw 20 "ahead" you could also cut back on opponents to 20 -snip- Alan

>Obviously a man who is a 3dfx fan. I've personally seen nascar run under Obviously. Ya except the Glide patch for N2 was apparently designed for a 3dfx card. You do know about this right? The original Glide patch for N2 sucked, but the Glide implementation in Nr1999 is done right. And as for slower: I am getting a fluid framerate (I would estimate 30fps) so I have no need to degrade my graphics and use my 2D card. You might be right if you ran the game on a 486 though. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

rrevved wrote I think the problem is that the NR99 code is a little buggy for some hardware compared to the N2 beta patch. Per example, I can easily get 25+ fps with everything on (Anti-aliasing at 2 and force High-res_textures) in N2. But the same in NR99 will give me some horrible slowdown in Turn4. I know it's a bug (this happened on the NROS also), and they don't plan to fix this. Oh yeah and the windows enablers have some problems on many system with bad sound (who fades in/out when you lift the gas). -= Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard/Nas-Frank> -= NROS Nascar sanctioned Guide http://www.nros.com/ -= SimRacing Online http://www.simracing.com/ -= Official mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. -= May the Downforce be with you... "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."

I stand by my original comment. I have a p2 400 with 3dfx and although it looks pretty and I have all textures on, I can still notice some slight slowdown at certain points in the game. Not enough to warrant losing some textures, but slowdown nonetheless. Running in the generic mode does not cause any slowdown, and is far more stable. I have yet to run two races at two different tracks in 3dfx mode without the game locking up at some point. This also doesn't happen in generic mode. Besides, this guy has a pentium not a p2, and he has a voodoo rush, both are working against him, although 233 mhz ought to be plenty. So I seriously suggest that he lose the 3dfx card. I would never buy a voodoo rush card as the main graphics board. I would get a good 2d-3d board like the matrox g200, I hear it runs 2d as fast as anything. Then I would get a voodoo2 add on(or hold out for the voodoo3). I do appreciate your comments though, that is what this newsgroup should be used for, to help people. There is way to much flaming that goes on here, and not enough information for the uninformed.

Yeah, yeah. I know. I know. The Rush is definitely not kosher. The card's ancient, but I wanted a 2D/3D combo at the time (I only had a Cirrus Logic) and the Rush seemed like a good bet, without having to shell out the $$$ for two different cards. For now though, it's all I got. I just figured that a game that lists a 166+, 32Mb of RAM and a 3D accelerator as its "Recommended" setup would let my 233MMX, 64Mb of RAM and Rush run at full detail. Wrong. BTW, I plopped in a borrowed Diamond Stealth II (4Mb) and it ran even worse. Funny thing is, when I set auto framerate on and the game hit that threshold, it would hang...cold. Never had that with the Rush. I've finally resolved to run the game in software only. That way, I can get full detail at 640x480 *and* 30 fps. Isn't a 3D accelerator like the Rendition or 3Dfx supposed to *increase* framerates, as well as improve the quality of the polygons?!? Guess I'm wrong, again! Anthony

Quoted text (13 lines)

>>>So I seriously suggest that he lose the 3dfx >>>card. >>Huh? >The original poster should lose his 3dfx card. It is a RUSH >card. >-- >Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

UnREM the FRAMERATE line in your N1999.PRF file. Only works for the DOS .EXEs only. Anthony >Hate to ask, but how does one read fps in N1999? >>> i never got less than 28 fps, for a very brif moment a bristol and 30 fps >>>at every other track and almost all of bristol. Must be the rush card...get a >>>rendition v20 or banshee >>Apparently, you're not using the settings the original poster was using. >>A 166/VoodooII, in N1999, will not do what you describe, if you are >>set to view 20 cars ahead and 10 behind, as he was.

>If you really only have a p5-166, then yes you are obviously being >unrealistic. IMHO :-) Actually, it's a P233MMX, but I get the idea : ) Upgrade time, James. Anthony

>>So I seriously suggest that he lose the 3dfx >>card. >Huh? The original poster should lose his 3dfx card. It is a RUSH card. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

I can't speak for absolute certain about the RUSH. I have a BANSHEE. Before that I had a Diamond Stealth II S220. Before that an Intergraph Reactor. You should see faster framerates with the Diamond Stealth in 3D than regular sotware. As a matter of fact.... Even the Reactor whould be better than software mode. And none of them locked up with the game once all was properly configured. I think something is wrong somewhere else. The 233 should do fine. I even had a K6 233 and N2 was fine on it. maybe someone can weigh in... Alan

Quoted text (31 lines)

> BTW, I plopped in a borrowed Diamond Stealth II (4Mb) and it ran even worse. > Funny thing is, when I set auto framerate on and the game hit that > threshold, it > would hang...cold. Never had that with the Rush. > I've finally resolved to run the game in software only. That way, I can get > full detail > at 640x480 *and* 30 fps. Isn't a 3D accelerator like the Rendition or 3Dfx > supposed > to *increase* framerates, as well as improve the quality of the polygons?!? > Guess > I'm wrong, again! > Anthony > >>>So I seriously suggest that he lose the 3dfx > >>>card. > >>Huh? > >The original poster should lose his 3dfx card. It is a RUSH > >card. > >-- > >Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. > >cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

oops, sorry. I still say it will run faster in generic mode for him.

Quoted text (13 lines)

>>>So I seriously suggest that he lose the 3dfx >>>card. >>Huh? >The original poster should lose his 3dfx card. It is a RUSH >card. >-- >Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com