1GHZ CPU in sight, how about more than 36fps in GPL patch?

I was just thinking why GPL was limited to 36fps in the first place, but now with new powerful processors ready to be available on the market why not run GPL at 60fps? That would be nice. What do you guys think?

I don't think it would be that noticeable since the eye can't really see it. I believe I read there is a limit to how many frames the human eye can actually see and I think it just might be around 36 fps. What it would help to give us is that 36 fps even when your surrounded by 19 other cars with full eye candy on. Jima

I dont know about yall ..But I can sure tell the difference between 30 some frames per second and 60. I think 60 frames is more realistic regardless if you can percieve it or not too. > I don't think it would be that noticeable since the eye can't really see it. > I believe I read there is a limit to how many frames the human eye can > actually see and I think it just might be around 36 fps. What it would help

Quoted text (13 lines)

> to give us is that 36 fps even when your surrounded by 19 other cars with > full eye candy on. > Jima > >I was just thinking why GPL was limited to 36fps in the first place, > >but now with new powerful processors ready to be available on the > >market why not run GPL at 60fps? That would be nice. > >What do you guys think?

> I don't think it would be that noticeable since the eye can't really see it. > I believe I read there is a limit to how many frames the human eye can > actually see and I think it just might be around 36 fps. What it would help > to give us is that 36 fps even when your surrounded by 19 other cars with > full eye candy on. The theory is that 30 fps or so is enought to get a real sence of motion. Remember movies is only 24 fps. The difference is that on a computer every frame is a sharp one, while on a movieframe a object in motion will be blurred. That is because the shutter is open all the time, while a computer made frame is instant showing the same picture for 1/36 (or whatever) seconds. I think you need framerates about a hundred or even more for the eye not to see this. With the new Voodoo5 coming out in a few months there will be a motion blur feature, but I think software has to support it. Take a little test: Set the monitor at a refresh rate of 60 and look at it for 15 seconds. Then turn the monitor on 85 Hz and enjoy the flicker-free image. -- Olav K. Malmin remove spam when replying

There was a demo somewhere that divided the screen into 4 and had 15, 30, 60 and 120Hz versions of the same animation. You could DEFINITELY tell the difference, the 120Hz one looked by far the smoothest. Another point, if GPL is updating the view 36 times a second, and the monitor is refreshing 85 times a second then the monitor is going to be redrawing the same frame 2 or 3 times.

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Jima > >I was just thinking why GPL was limited to 36fps in the first place, > >but now with new powerful processors ready to be available on the > >market why not run GPL at 60fps? That would be nice. > >What do you guys think?

% I was just thinking why GPL was limited to 36fps in the first place, % but now with new powerful processors ready to be available on the % market why not run GPL at 60fps? That would be nice. % What do you guys think? Here is why: Subject: Re: GPL 36 fps limit, why? Date: 06 Jun 1999 00:00:00 GMT Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators GPL's base unit of time is a tick which corresponds to 1/36th of a second, and everything in the game runs at some multiple or fraction of this unit (i.e. the player's physics are updated 8 times a tick or at 288Hz). Hence the 36fps limit ensures that everything is properly in sync and the 'world' can be safely redrawn each tick. Eric -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

% I don't think it would be that noticeable since the eye can't really see it. % I believe I read there is a limit to how many frames the human eye can % actually see and I think it just might be around 36 fps. What it would help % to give us is that 36 fps even when your surrounded by 19 other cars with % full eye candy on. % Jima Deja Vu all over again...... Subject: Re: GPL about to come off the shelf... Date: 20 May 1999 00:00:00 GMT Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators % Documented examples please. And i'm not talking about Joe Smoe, spending money % on a new TNT & V2 Sli wanting to find some difference and/or justification in % his spend. % I've still not seen a shred of prrof that 30fps via 60fps is an advanatge or % what. nad i'm talking a constant 30fps, not subject to dropout and peaks at % lower than 30fps. (which obviously higher average frame rates help u with). In the effort to conserve bandwidth (and tempers), instead of continuing to rehash old turf-war battles go to the following URL's and read what others have to say on this topic. http://www.firingsquad.com/features/faceoff/6-fps/default.asp http://www.sony-europe.com/tve/trinitron/100hz.html http://www.ping.be/powervr/fps_discus.htm http://www.robinsonresearch.com/MOVIES/part_IB.htm from http://www.student.hk-r.se/~pt93mm/thesis/domain_paper.html The qualifier 'Real-time' narrows the domain further. By this term we do not mean to imply that the system will have to deal with hard deadlines that are critical to the functionality of the application. Instead, the term is used to point out that we are talking about animation. This simply means that the frames must be produced at a speed that tricks the human eye to perceive flicker-free, or at least almost flicker-free motion. In practice, 'flicker-free' means 20 - 30 frames per second, "almost flicker-free" might be around 10 frames per second. Occasional frame rate drops to less than 10 frames per second might or might not be acceptable, depending on the application. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I just gotta comment on this one, and read all the responses so far to it too, so figured I'd post one message, hehe. From all my gaming experience, the more the better. But to a degree. Most magazines, gaming sites, game companies, etc, all pretty much mention the medical fact of the human eye having a threshold of about 60fps. Beyond that, it would take incredible perception and eyesight to be able to distinguish something running, say 65fps and something else running 75fps. I'm no expert, so can only rely on my own senses. And here's an example. I'll give opposing view even. When I first got really heavy into online gaming, it was with Quake2. My poor old Compaq P90 could barely run the game. Got like 2-5fps on average. Online it was worse. Playing a game online takes more horsepower, cause you are running the software to be able to be on the net, then dealing with incoming/outgoing data that's being processed, etc, all that in addition to simply running the game. I had to play the game in software rendered mode. But then I got a brand new Voodoo 1 card, hehe. FPS *soared* to over 9fps on average. Bounced around 8-12 depending on how much action was being displayed. I was in heaven. And know what?? It helped out my gameplay. I could kick the butts of players that I never could before. Everything moved so much faster, more in realtime, rather than lagtime. Then I got a 200mhz "Overdrive" cpu, remember them? It would only run at 180mhz, due to the fact I was limited to a 60mhz bus speed. Again, framerates skyrocketed, my online playing improved noticeable. I was starting to be able to run with the pack now, hehe. Instead of a hapless victim and easy target. Anyways, the more the FPS went up, the easier it was to play the game. The smoother it was. Both offline and online. Anyways, getting into some tech stuff. Most television programs run at 30-32fps, while motion picture box office movies run at around 35fps. While faster fps may seem to improve quality, also gotta figure in the fact that they probably shoot those feature films in alot higher resolutions, as compared to your typical nightly sitcoms on tv. Here's one big argument alot of gamers make in favor of skyhigh FPS. It's to do with lag and horsepower. In my opinion, most likely a horsepower issue. Let's say I'm getting 40fps in whatever game, and this is offline benchmark. Well, online, with the background internet related tasks running to keep me online, my FPS will drop. So let's say it gets cut down to 20fps. Well, that will be noticeably slower. Obviously. One guy I met, whose nickname escapes me, lol, he had just picked himself up a custom P3 450mhz with SLI Voodoo 2's, cranking out 110fps offline in Quake2. Some of us questions is apparent "overkill" for going all-out to be a "fps god", hehe. Well, he said it was because of the issue with the FPS drops when playing online, and even the apparent loss of FPS from lag, etc. Which, actually makes some sense, hehe. I know there is a command line switch in Quake2, called "cl_maxfps XX", where XX is the number of FPS you want to set it to. The game had that defaulted to "90". Well, I'd say 75% of Q2 players then, and more than half now, hehe, probably won't ever see FPS rates like that. So they claim it can cause lag, cause the game server is trying to put out the data fast enough to keep up with your 90FPS setting. That setting it lower, would cause both your computer, and the server, to work less hard. And it makes sense, if someone is only getting 30fps, why should he leave it at the default of 90 and possibly risk wasting all this bandwidth, if what they say is true. Also gotta consider one other thing. And this I've seen in some of the racing sims. With a "busy" screen, your fps will drop. With N3, i can sometimes see it stutter when there's a full field of cars in view, with several in rear view, and racing 2/3 wide, all those car textures have to be rendered. Running on a track alone, you'll get your max fps, but with alot of AI/Human cars all around you, well, your fps will drop a bit as it has to render those guys too, and account for their movement around the screen, or field of view. I seen that alot in Q2, when you get like 6 people in a small room, everyone firing like mad to kill the bad guys, explosions, rockets, debris, bodyparts, all that stuff flying around the room, well, your fps drops like a rock sometimes, hehe. And some people intentionally do the opposite and say "My minimum in the Crusher benchmark demo is 30", well hey, if the lowest he goes on a very busy screen, that's great. Probably would be 60 or better if he was in that same room by himself, with nothing going on, hehe. Ok, flip side of this, horsepower. Is it really more to do with the video card?? Or could it be connection speeds, and CPU speeds that factor in more?? 36 FPS in GPL would be nice enough, providing you can keep it constant, that's with other cars on the screen, basically a busy screen or setting, if it can resist dropping below 32, taht would be no big deal. But if you're limited to 36 and as a result, when things get busy, your fps drops to like 15, that sucks then, lol. Anyways, just some info and ideas, feel free to comment or whatever, brainpower is a wonderful thing when we all use it together to come up with ideas/solutions, etc. Destin BendsMaster <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > I was just thinking why GPL was limited to 36fps in the first place, > but now with new powerful processors ready to be available on the > market why not run GPL at 60fps? That would be nice. > What do you guys think?

I think there would be some major rewriting in that - IIRC GPL bases it's time off of the framerate. -- Kirk Lane [email hidden] [email hidden] ICQ: 28171652 BRT #187 "Yeah you won't find me I'm going MIA Tonight I'm leaving Going MIA Getting lost in you again Is better than being known" -Foo Fighters, "MIA" BendsMaster <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > I was just thinking why GPL was limited to 36fps in the first place, > but now with new powerful processors ready to be available on the > market why not run GPL at 60fps? That would be nice. > What do you guys think?

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> hehe. > > Ok, flip side of this, horsepower. Is it really more to do with the video > card?? Or could it be connection speeds, and CPU speeds that factor in > more?? 36 FPS in GPL would be nice enough, providing you can keep it > constant, that's with other cars on the screen, basically a busy screen or > setting, if it can resist dropping below 32, taht would be no big deal. But > if you're limited to 36 and as a result, when things get busy, your fps > drops to like 15, that sucks then, lol. > > Anyways, just some info and ideas, feel free to comment or whatever, > brainpower is a wonderful thing when we all use it together to come up with > ideas/solutions, etc. > > Destin

I seem to be following you today Destin. Different games put different demands on the cpu and vid-systems. Quake II limits the ammount of 3d info the cpu has to handle by creating small areas within the bigger overall map. In those types of games, the vid-card has a greater role in determining(sp!) the framerate. In other sims like GPL, the CPU gets the main workout. You can see this by adjusting the eye-candy. Frame-rates in GPL on a good system differ little from 800x600 or 1024x760 and up. In the Quake games, every step up the resoulution ladder really impacts the fps. Online "racing" does increase the workload and thus decreases the fps. But the key, at least with Papy products, is to get as many people locked in with a rock solid max frame-rate. If you have one guy putzing around online at 22fps it can effect all the other drivers as the server attempts to balance out his input/output with the others. So in that respect, we are fortunate that 36fps is the max. More and more systems are capable of producing that number now. If Papy doubled it to 72 and cut the inputs by half to keep the tick timing in step with the present code(oversimplfication I know) you would have an online nightmare as few 'current' systems could produce such high fps and the warping result would really deminish the racing even if you were one of the lucky ones generating 72fps. dave henrie

it. Here we go again...

% > I don't think it would be that noticeable since the eye can't really see % it. % Here we go again... Long time no see, Randy..... must be the slow... err excuse me, must be the extremely fast frame rate that my poor human eyes couldn't see as you flashed by.... <G> -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On Mon, 13 Mar 2000 10:31:22 -0500, "Randy Cassidy" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Jim Dombrowski <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:pIty4.9029$[email hidden]... >> I don't think it would be that noticeable since the eye can't really see >it. > >Here we go again... Yeah, let's not get into the "I don't need anything about 15Hz" thing. But to explain a bit, GPL uses a 288Hz timer (mind the 288/36 integer division) internally. Perhaps it even does for(i=0;i<8;i++) ProcessAllCars(); But anyway, lifting the max rate to 72Hz would be the next choice (4*72=288). But then you have your card displaying only 60, so a constant not-getting the frame rate you want. Better to have 36Hz constantly than 60Hz out of 72Hz displayed. A constant framerate is better than a varying faster framerate. Any Disney artist can tell you that. Besides, they'd have to clock down the 8 iterations per drawn frame to 4, which means collision detection will be twice as bad, and probably a lot of other tiny nasty things as well. I may be a bit off here, but probably not too far. It surely isn't the first time this is asked for, so there are probably good reasons for it. Ruud van Gaal MarketGraph / MachTech: http://www.marketgraph.nl Art: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery