GPL 1.1 - a summary please?

What is the situation with 1.1? It is unplayable on my system due to the slowdown effect. Does anyone know when a fix is going to be released? At the moment, it's back to 1.0 for me! Iain PS I know this must have been answered before, so don't flame me!

I do not believe there is a definitive answer. Some people are trying to claim their PC's are setup better than the people with problems. Unbelievable... -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

>I do not believe there is a definitive answer. Some people are >trying to claim their PC's are setup better than the people with >problems. Unbelievable... You mean you find it hard to believe that some folks have a system more compatible than others? With all the patching, ini swapping,***pit replacements, sound, and graphic patches that are available for gpl, it is no wonder the effects are different for many users. Throw in the fact some systems are overclocked to within a micron of their silicon lives and you have plenty of room for "similiar" systems to behave differently. The quickest way for folks to pin down the patch problems would be to start cleaning house, (old drivers etc) and get their systems squeeky clean for gpl to run. Then team up with drivers that have the same core ini's and timing settings etc and THEN determine if the problems still exist.

The fact is, that I am running a V3 3000 on a PII 450. I have all the latest drivers, and I did a new clean install of GPL, and then patched 1.1. Version 1.0 has always been perfect for me with 36fps at 1024x768, but v1.1 is unplayable! It is like driving through treacle. There is a real problem here, so please don't put it down to overclocking, bad drivers(?), etc etc. THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH 1.1, and I am pretty annoyed about it as i have been waiting on the FF for months now! Iain

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >I do not believe there is a definitive answer. Some people are > >trying to claim their PC's are setup better than the people with > >problems. Unbelievable... > You mean you find it hard to believe that some folks have a system more > compatible than others? With all the patching, ini swapping,***pit > replacements, > sound, and graphic patches that are available for gpl, it is no wonder the > effects are > different for many users. Throw in the fact some systems are overclocked

to

Quoted text (7 lines)

> within > a micron of their silicon lives and you have plenty of room for "similiar" > systems to > behave differently. > The quickest way for folks to pin down the patch problems would be to > start cleaning > house, (old drivers etc) and get their systems squeeky clean for gpl to

run. > Then team up with drivers that have the same core ini's and timing settings > etc > and THEN determine if the problems still exist.

>I do not believe there is a definitive answer. Some people are >trying to claim their PC's are setup better than the people with >problems. Unbelievable... That is a pretty annoying type of illogic isn't it? I mean in today's world where almost every PC is unique in some way 95% of bugs are only apparent on some configurations, even when they are real, fixable bugs in the software. That's why they are so hard to find. (I'm fairly sure that all cars aren't SUPPOSED to warp out of the starting gate just before a race starts, to re-appear halfway down the track 15 secinds later, already running - or was there some sort of particle-physics experiment during the 1967 GP season that I'm unaware of?) Joe McGinn ========================================== Staff Writer for the Sports *** Network [link lost in import: /***.com/] ==========================================

My 'treacle' effect described earlier disappears if I disable FF. With no FF, there is no slowdown at all in 1.1. Where does that leave us? Iain

Quoted text (20 lines)

> >I do not believe there is a definitive answer. Some people are > >trying to claim their PC's are setup better than the people with > >problems. Unbelievable... > That is a pretty annoying type of illogic isn't it? I mean in today's > world where almost every PC is unique in some way 95% of bugs are only > apparent on some configurations, even when they are real, fixable bugs > in the software. That's why they are so hard to find. > (I'm fairly sure that all cars aren't SUPPOSED to warp out of the > starting gate just before a race starts, to re-appear halfway down the > track 15 secinds later, already running - or was there some sort of > particle-physics experiment during the 1967 GP season that I'm unaware > of?) > Joe McGinn > ========================================== > Staff Writer for the Sports *** Network > [link lost in import: /***.com/] > ==========================================

>My 'treacle' effect described earlier disappears if I disable FF. With no >FF, there is no slowdown at all in 1.1. >Where does that leave us? My warping is there with or without FF turned on. Joe McGinn ========================================== Staff Writer for the Sports *** Network [link lost in import: /***.com/] ==========================================

>>I do not believe there is a definitive answer. Some people are >>trying to claim their PC's are setup better than the people with >>problems. Unbelievable... >That is a pretty annoying type of illogic isn't it? I mean in today's Annoying only if you think that everyone with a problem has their PC setup wrong. After I patched to the latest version of SCGT, my Logitech FF controller (which was on ID#2 and working properly) was no longer available to the game. So is my PC setup not setup properly or is there some- thing wrong with the patch? Ian says that GPL 1.0 works fine while 1.1 does not. In fact many people say this. I suppose a blind person would say their PC's are at fault. Randy has said he was looking into the problem which should be good enough for everyone. DIRECTX WAS SUPPOSED TO TAKE CARE OF THAT!!! And the game MFR's are tasked with ensuring this it happens. So far it hasn't and DOS games have become more stable and easier to setup. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

It leaves us asking what controller you have??? -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

My controller is the Ultimate Per4mer FF which has been magnificent for the last year- until GPL 1.1 that is! Iain

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >My 'treacle' effect described earlier disappears if I disable FF. With no > >FF, there is no slowdown at all in 1.1. > >Where does that leave us? > It leaves us asking what controller you have??? > -- > Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. > cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

It may be sucking CPU cycles then. Randy had numbers for the MS, Logitech and TM FF wheels, but not for the one you have. SO it may be as bad as the TM wheel. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com >My controller is the Ultimate Per4mer FF which has been magnificent for the >last year- until GPL 1.1 that is! >Iain >> >My 'treacle' effect described earlier disappears if I disable FF. With no >> >FF, there is no slowdown at all in 1.1. >> >Where does that leave us? >> It leaves us asking what controller you have??? >> -- >> Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >> cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

What numbers did Randy give for the TM? Iain

Quoted text (14 lines)

> It may be sucking CPU cycles then. Randy had numbers for the > MS, Logitech and TM FF wheels, but not for the one you have. > SO it may be as bad as the TM wheel. > -- > Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. > cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > >My controller is the Ultimate Per4mer FF which has been magnificent for

the

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >last year- until GPL 1.1 that is! > >Iain > >> >My 'treacle' effect described earlier disappears if I disable FF. With > no > >> >FF, there is no slowdown at all in 1.1. > >> >Where does that leave us? > >> It leaves us asking what controller you have??? > >> -- > >> Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. > >> cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

3,500,000 CPU cycles for one FF effect. The MS wheel was 1,500,000 while the Logitech FF was 50,000! -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com >What numbers did Randy give for the TM? >Iain >> It may be sucking CPU cycles then. Randy had numbers for the >> MS, Logitech and TM FF wheels, but not for the one you have. >> SO it may be as bad as the TM wheel. >> -- >> Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >> cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com >> >My controller is the Ultimate Per4mer FF which has been magnificent for >the >> >last year- until GPL 1.1 that is! >> >Iain >> >> >My 'treacle' effect described earlier disappears if I disable FF. With >> no >> >> >FF, there is no slowdown at all in 1.1. >> >> >Where does that leave us? >> >> It leaves us asking what controller you have??? >> >> -- >> >> Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >> >> cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 07:16:47 -0500, Hey thats some cool info. Where'd you get that? -- * rrevved at mindspring dot com * unit.26 - s.p.u.t.u.m. * http://www.cabal.net * http://www.sputum.com

Quoted text (8 lines)

>On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 07:16:47 -0500, >>3,500,000 CPU cycles for one FF effect. The MS wheel >>was 1,500,000 while the Logitech FF was 50,000! >Hey thats some cool info. Where'd you get that?

Randy Cassidy posted these numbers here in the NG a while ago. I would suggest using dejanews :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

Here was the post by Randy: I've heard (though not through any official channels) that MS is working on a USB version of their FF wheel. And that would be an exceptionally Good Thing. It seems that clocking FF commands out through the MIDI lines is rather slow. These are the approximate timings I've measured on my Win95 PII-400 for issuing our force commands to three different wheels (your mileage may vary): 3,500,000 cycles - Thrustmaster Force GT (USB) 1,500,000 cycles - Microsoft Sidewinder FF wheel (MIDI/game port) 55,000 cycles - Logitech Wingman Formula Force (serial) Which translates to a 32% (!?!?!?!?!), 13.5% (!!), and 0.5% (ahhhh...) CPU hit. Randy :>3,500,000 CPU cycles for one FF effect. The MS wheel :>was 1,500,000 while the Logitech FF was 50,000! : Hey thats some cool info. Where'd you get that? : * rrevved at mindspring dot com

Sorry guys, but how does this help me? What values in the core.ini file do you recommend I use to avoid the 'treacle'? Iain

Quoted text (25 lines)

> Here was the post by Randy: > I've heard (though not through any official channels) that MS is > working on a USB version of their FF wheel. And that would be an > exceptionally Good Thing. It seems that clocking FF commands out > through the MIDI lines is rather slow. These are the approximate > timings I've measured on my Win95 PII-400 for issuing our force > commands to three different wheels (your mileage may vary): > 3,500,000 cycles - Thrustmaster Force GT (USB) > 1,500,000 cycles - Microsoft Sidewinder FF wheel (MIDI/game port) > 55,000 cycles - Logitech Wingman Formula Force (serial) > Which translates to a 32% (!?!?!?!?!), 13.5% (!!), and 0.5% (ahhhh...) > CPU hit. > Randy > :>3,500,000 CPU cycles for one FF effect. The MS wheel > :>was 1,500,000 while the Logitech FF was 50,000! > : Hey thats some cool info. Where'd you get that? > : * rrevved at mindspring dot com

On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 17:23:41 GMT, Thanks, Chuck!! Now, I'm truly glad I have an ACTLABS Force RS. It uses the same IForce drivers, etc. as Logitech... whew... Thanks again. -- * rrevved at mindspring dot com * unit.26 - s.p.u.t.u.m. * http://www.cabal.net * http://www.sputum.com

It doesn't help you worth a crap. But it does answer the question Ed had :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com >Iain >> Here was the post by Randy: >> I've heard (though not through any official channels) that MS is >> working on a USB version of their FF wheel. And that would be an >> exceptionally Good Thing. It seems that clocking FF commands out >> through the MIDI lines is rather slow. These are the approximate >> timings I've measured on my Win95 PII-400 for issuing our force >> commands to three different wheels (your mileage may vary): >> 3,500,000 cycles - Thrustmaster Force GT (USB) >> 1,500,000 cycles - Microsoft Sidewinder FF wheel (MIDI/game port) >> 55,000 cycles - Logitech Wingman Formula Force (serial) >> Which translates to a 32% (!?!?!?!?!), 13.5% (!!), and 0.5% (ahhhh...) >> CPU hit. >> Randy >> :>3,500,000 CPU cycles for one FF effect. The MS wheel >> :>was 1,500,000 while the Logitech FF was 50,000! >> : Hey thats some cool info. Where'd you get that? >> : * rrevved at mindspring dot com

>Thanks, Chuck!! Now, I'm truly glad I have an ACTLABS Force RS. >It uses the same IForce drivers, etc. as Logitech... whew... Really? The TM uses (I thought) IForce too but it's numbers were terrible. Hey, how much have you been using your TSW lately? :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 20:35:26 -0500,

Quoted text (8 lines)

>>Thanks, Chuck!! Now, I'm truly glad I have an ACTLABS Force RS. >>It uses the same IForce drivers, etc. as Logitech... whew... >Really? The TM uses (I thought) IForce too but it's numbers >were terrible. >Hey, how much have you been using your TSW lately? >:-)

Not much. I love my TSW so much, I have trouble switching back, even for GPL 1.1. If the Force RS had a shifter like the TSW, it would be great. I guess I will have to wait and see what the new ACTLABS shifter looks like when its released. -- * rrevved at mindspring dot com * unit.26 - s.p.u.t.u.m. * http://www.cabal.net * http://www.sputum.com

Well thanks a lot! I knew this NG was useful! Iain

No problem. Glad to be of assistance. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

This is in general a very useful NG, it's a pity it's spoilt by this kind of sarcasm and time-wasting, Greg. You are usually a pretty reasonable guy from what I've read - what went wrong? Iain

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >Well thanks a lot! I knew this NG was useful! > No problem. Glad to be of assistance. > -- > Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. > cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > >Iain > >> It doesn't help you worth a crap. But it does answer the question > >> Ed had :-)

What went wrong was you started complaining because someone answered another question in htis thread which you apparently did not appreciate. Ed Bain wanted to know where I got the numbers for CPU cycles with regards to FF wheels. Someone kindly posted the relevant post and you start whining because it didn't help you. IMHO you were selfishly ignoring the fact that the post helped Ed. But what the hell it didn't help *YOU*. So... I think it was total BS so I started up on you :-) Any questions? :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com >Iain >> >Well thanks a lot! I knew this NG was useful! >> No problem. Glad to be of assistance. >> -- >> Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >> cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com >> >Iain >> >> It doesn't help you worth a crap. But it does answer the question >> >> Ed had :-)

This is becoming rather silly, but I have to say that your interpretation of events is somewhat strange! I put in a post saying 'sorry guys, but how does this help me? What values in the core.ini file do you recommend I use to avoid the treacle?'. You think that is complaining?!? Jeez, all I was doing was asking for some help with the core.ini file following questions you asked about my controller, and all I'm getting is grief! Anyone (apart from Greg) know recommended values for the ini file? Thanks, Iain

Quoted text (44 lines)

> >This is in general a very useful NG, it's a pity it's spoilt by this kind > of > >sarcasm and time-wasting, Greg. You are usually a pretty reasonable guy > from > >what I've read - what went wrong? > What went wrong was you started complaining because someone > answered another question in htis thread which you apparently > did not appreciate. Ed Bain wanted to know where I got the numbers > for CPU cycles with regards to FF wheels. Someone kindly posted > the relevant post and you start whining because it didn't help you. > IMHO you were selfishly ignoring the fact that the post helped > Ed. But what the hell it didn't help *YOU*. > So... I think it was total BS so I started up on you :-) > Any questions? > :-) > -- > Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. > cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > >Iain > >> >Well thanks a lot! I knew this NG was useful! > >> No problem. Glad to be of assistance. > >> -- > >> Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. > >> cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > >> >Iain > >> >> It doesn't help you worth a crap. But it does answer the question > >> >> Ed had :-)

>Sorry guys, but how does this help me? What values in the core.ini file do >you recommend I use to avoid the 'treacle'? >Iain Something has really been bugging me about this whole situation.... What the hell is treacle? Don McCorkle Libertarian Motorsports

Think "molasses in January" DE

>> Something has really been bugging me about this whole situation.... >> What the hell is treacle? >Think "molasses in January" I understand what was being described, a running in quicksand effect, what I'm asking is the meaning of the actual word. One of my occaisonal flashes of clarity just struck. Looked in the dictionary, it said molasses only thicker. Guess your answer was quite literal after all, thanks. Don McCorkle Libertarian Motorsports