LFS - Framerate problems in multiplayer

Does anyone else have framerate problems online with LFS? Offline with 8 cars, my framerates are acceptable (30 - 50) but last night I tried to venture online and had framerates in the teens, and it was unplayable. I am on a dialup modem and had pings in the range of 200, if that matters. Stephen

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Stephen F.) wrote: > Does anyone else have framerate problems online with LFS? Hi Stephen, I've noticed no difference between online or offline... at least nothing significant enough for me to be keeping an eye on the frame rate counter. But my race machine is fast enough that I might not notice a dip, and I'm on ADSL, racing on servers which show up as having a ping of 40-60. Which all means I have no excuse whatsoever for racing poorly :-) The LFS forums don't seem to have any suggestions either. I wonder if it's worth doing what we used to do in GPL, forcing a connection at 33k instead of 56k? These things are always a pain to debug. Andrew McP

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:31 +0100 (BST), Andrew MacPherson wrote: > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Stephen > F.) wrote: > >> Does anyone else have framerate problems online with LFS? same here... sadly. In a ten car field, I ususally get 10-20 fps during the start, then it settles to 30-40 later on in the race. Any ideas? Cheers, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:31 +0100 (BST), [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: >Which all means I have no excuse whatsoever for racing poorly :-) Well, you're at least a contender for using the most ugly car color.... <g> Thx for waiting a few times, too bad I sucked. After I exchanged the joystick for a wheel it improved a bit (which means some cars were unhurt..) I like LFS online. It's not serious racing, more like Unreal Tournement. The fact that the races are short, 5 min at the most,means you don't have to wait long for the next race. Huge fun factor. Remco

"Stephen F." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Does anyone else have framerate problems online with LFS? Offline with 8 > cars, my framerates are acceptable (30 - 50) but last night I tried to > venture online and had framerates in the teens, and it was unplayable. Iam > on a dialup modem and had pings in the range of 200, if that matters. > A fast computer helps a lot in multiplayer mode. This is because you're not simply displaying the positions of the other cars. If there's 6 other cars on the track, your computer is calculating the physics for each of those cars + your own. Have you tried using the "multiplayer speedup" option in the Misc menu yet? Chris

"Chris Z." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TY9Va.147145$OZ2.28559@rwcrnsc54... > "Stephen F." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Does anyone else have framerate problems online with LFS? Offline with8 > > cars, my framerates are acceptable (30 - 50) but last night I tried to > > venture online and had framerates in the teens, and it was unplayable.I > am > > on a dialup modem and had pings in the range of 200, if that matters. > > > > A fast computer helps a lot in multiplayer mode. This is because you'renot > simply displaying the positions of the other cars. If there's 6 othercars > on the track, your computer is calculating the physics for each of those > cars + your own. Have you tried using the "multiplayer speedup" option in > the Misc menu yet? > I thought it was the opposite. Offline the computer has to calculate the physics for each opponent (especially since the cars in LFS can use user-specified setups, which can be really funny), but online it should just be putting the cars in the right place based on x,y,z,roll,pitch,yaw. Online should be faster, I would think. Stephen p.s. I'll try the speedup option...

"Stephen F." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Does anyone else have framerate problems online with LFS? Offline with 8 > cars, my framerates are acceptable (30 - 50) but last night I tried to > venture online and had framerates in the teens, and it was unplayable. Iam > on a dialup modem and had pings in the range of 200, if that matters. Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > Stephen > >

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Righty) wrote: > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local hardware issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or out as a cause. Andrew McP

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Uwe hoover Schuerkamp) wrote: > Any ideas? Have you noticed any hard disk activity while the frame rate's low? Buried in the menu somewhere are some settings for replay saving. Maybe at the start, with lots of vehicles close by, LFS is caching a lot of information for that replay. I had a bit of trouble with LFS pausing every few seconds (while the HD light flashed) but turning off replays seems to have cured it. It could easily be a coincidence though. Andrew McP PS Might be memory related, I have 512Mb in the PC and 128Mb on the vid card.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Remco Moedt) wrote: > Well, you're at least a contender for using the > most ugly car color.... <g> Some things in nature are coloured strangely to say "don't eat me, I'm poisonous!" Same principle applies here :-) > Thx for waiting a few times Wanted to keep well away from the pack at the front. There were a couple of seriously unskilled LX drivers causing regular problems for a while. > After I exchanged the joystick for a wheel it improved a bit Losing the GTI helped a bit as well :-) > It's not serious racing, more like Unreal Tournement. Ok, now you're going to have to go to your room and wash your mouth out! I know what you mean, but there are some seriously good drivers hiding out there among the kidz, and I find the handling of the cars very realistic indeed. Mind you, in all the crazy GPL races I've ever had I never ever heard someone say <cartman>"this track is so gay!"</cartman>. I did nearly quit the server at that point on Saturday :-) > The fact that the races are short, 5 min at the > most, means you don't have to wait long for the next race. Well, races can be as long as the host likes. But even in my most serious GPL days I've never been convinced that longer races have any place in online pickup racing. It's the nature of the beast that there will always be lag, distractions, and carelessness that ruin the flow... look at Rascar for example, and those guys are trying hard to race cleanly. And think of all the time we've wasted over the years waiting for a race with a decent field to start in VROC :-) > Huge fun factor. Absolutely. And I swear I get more realistic feedback through my Momo in LFS than I get in any other sim. At times it feels so real... but I may just have got lucky with the default settings. Andrew McP

"Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > (Righty) wrote: > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local hardware > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or out > as a cause. > > Andrew McP >

Disagree. The first thing to rule out is a bad connection to the host. Did the guy say that his low frames happen all the time online? Or was it just a one-time deal? Bad connections do exist. They come and they go. Some connections between host and client are bad no matter the speed. But I'd have to say right off that having a 56k modem is not the way to go when racing online (and please, no references to GPL and 56k modems). No matter the game, it's always better to have a cable/dsl connection, obviously. Alanb

In article <zIfVa.830$cF.282@rwcrnsc53>, [email hidden] (Alan Bernardo) wrote: > Disagree. The first thing to rule out is a bad > connection to the host. Well, yes. But it can be hard to identify definite issue with net stuff. You can *definitely* tell when you're machine's running LFS as quickly as physically possible. That's why I think it's a good first step. Andrew McP

"Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > (Righty) wrote: > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local hardware > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or out > as a cause. > > Andrew McP >

Framerate is certainly not a problem offline. I can run 1400x1050 (native resolution of my notebook) with decent framerates. If I back off to 800x600, turn off trees & flags, use a simple sky, I'm into the 70s. Stephen

"Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:zIfVa.830$cF.282@rwcrnsc53... > > Disagree. The first thing to rule out is a bad connection to the host.Did > the guy say that his low frames happen all the time online? Or was itjust

Quoted text (8 lines)

> a one-time deal? Bad connections do exist. They come and they go. Some > connections between host and client are bad no matter the speed. > > But I'd have to say right off that having a 56k modem is not the way to go > when racing online (and please, no references to GPL and 56k modems). No > matter the game, it's always better to have a cable/dsl connection, > obviously. >

That probably is my problem. Oh well... can't justify getting cable of ADSL at 50.- a month just for a little bit of playing. Stephen

"Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] (Uwe hoover Schuerkamp) wrote: > > > Any ideas? > > Have you noticed any hard disk activity while the frame rate's low? > Buried in the menu somewhere are some settings for replay saving. Maybe > at the start, with lots of vehicles close by, LFS is caching a lot of > information for that replay. > > I had a bit of trouble with LFS pausing every few seconds (while the HD > light flashed) but turning off replays seems to have cured it. It could > easily be a coincidence though. > > Andrew McP > > PS Might be memory related, I have 512Mb in the PC and 128Mb on the vid > card.

I turned off replays, lowered texture size to reflect the meagre memory on my GeForce2Go etc (256Mb system, 32Mb graphics). As I said, I'm perfectly happy with the framerate in offline races against AI. Stephen

In article <3f2621a8$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Stephen F.) wrote: > If I back off to 800x600, turn off trees & flags, > use a simple sky, I'm into the 70s. But if you race online with those settings does it help at all? In your other reply you talk about justifying the cost of adsl/cable. Here in the UK I pay �24/39euro for adsl (most ISPs are more like �30/48e) and I was very reluctant to commit myself to the extra cost... after all, modem access did everything I really wanted for almost half the price, and I didn't *need* adsl. It felt like an unnecessary luxury. I was wrong :-) Now I couldn't live without it. It makes me shudder even to *think* about going back to modem access, even though I haven't done much online gaming at all since I got it. I'll shut up now, I probably shouldn't be tempting you. I'm sure you have far better things to spend the money on :-) Andrew McP

"Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> In article <3f2621a8$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > (Stephen F.) wrote: > > > If I back off to 800x600, turn off trees & flags, > > use a simple sky, I'm into the 70s. > > But if you race online with those settings does it help at all?

No, so I think it is the connection... > > I'll shut up now, I probably shouldn't be tempting you. I'm sure you > have far better things to spend the money on :-) > You're right, but I guess if we only spent money on what we *need*, we'd live in straw houses and eat porridge. Now, a cable feed with a wireless base station would be something nice for my notebook, and I could justify it to my girlfriend by saying that I would no longer be tied to the phone cable... Stephen

In article <3f263c17$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Stephen F.) wrote: > I could justify it to my girlfriend by saying that I would no > longer be tied to the phone cable... This is probably *very* dangerous for your credit cards, but you could also tell her how easy it is to go shopping on the web once you have broadband. In fact if I was to say there was a downside to adsl it's the fact that I've made far too many impulse buys in the middle of the night, or straight after a bad day at work purely because it's so quick & painless to go surfing hardware-porn sites :-) Andrew McP

thanks Andrew & Stephen, I'll try turning off replays and see if that solves the fps problem during the starts. Cheers! uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:04:33 +0200, Stephen F. wrote: > > p.s. I'll try the speedup option... > > so what kind of frame rates should I expect from LFS S1 on the following rig? Athlon 1800XP+ GeForce 4 MX 440 (64MB, I believe) SBLive! Value ECS K7S5A / LAN 384MB SD-RAM (PC-133) Windows 98SE (just explorer and systray running) TSW2Mod (FF disabled in-game) Thanks in advance, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 09:27:26 +0200, Stephen F. wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > "Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:zIfVa.830$cF.282@rwcrnsc53... >> >> Disagree. The first thing to rule out is a bad connection to the host. > Did >> the guy say that his low frames happen all the time online? Or was it

I'm on DSL (1Mbit / 256kbit), and the slowdown at the start happens each and every time (ping times in the low 50-60) Cheers, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 21:20 +0100 (BST), [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: >In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] >(Remco Moedt) wrote: >> After I exchanged the joystick for a wheel it improved a bit > >Losing the GTI helped a bit as well :-) Hehe. Actually, with a joystick it's hard to correct a loose tail. That's why I choose a FWD. I left the race to hook up the wheel, but you were gone when I returned. Wussy.... <g> >> Huge fun factor. > >Absolutely. And I swear I get more realistic feedback through my Momo in >LFS than I get in any other sim. At times it feels so real... but I may >just have got lucky with the default settings. I turned FF off, it made me fishtail the car too much. Remco

In article <[email hidden]>, Uwe hoover Schuerkamp says...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:04:33 +0200, Stephen F. wrote: > > > > p.s. I'll try the speedup option... > > > > > > so what kind of frame rates should I expect from LFS S1 on the > following rig? > > Athlon 1800XP+ > GeForce 4 MX 440 (64MB, I believe) > 384MB SD-RAM (PC-133) > Windows 98SE (just explorer and systray running)

I got 40-60 on XP1700@2200, same GF4MX but 512mb DDR on WinXP SP1. Some problems during the start (20fps) but never under 40 later on. -- Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups. ICQ: 138579247

"Stephen F." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Does anyone else have framerate problems online with LFS? Offline with 8 > cars, my framerates are acceptable (30 - 50) but last night I tried to > venture online and had framerates in the teens, and it was unplayable. Iam > on a dialup modem and had pings in the range of 200, if that matters. I have a 640/272 dsl connection, 850MHz Athlon and an GF2MX. If there are 10 cars in the race (Blackwood GTI) at turn 1, I get 7.6fps (A slide show). If I enter a game with a max of 8 cars with 6 or 7 playing I can make it through turn 1 without noticing any problems. > > Stephen > >

I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was the limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics card. There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though adding more AI cars or a big field online slowed the car. I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB with dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a full field of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing, etc.). Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30 FPS, which is still smooth. "Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > (Righty) wrote: > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local hardware > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or out > as a cause. > > Andrew McP >

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Remco Moedt) wrote: > I left the race to hook up the wheel, > but you were gone when I returned. Wussy.... <g> Ah, it was late and I assumed you'd gone to bed. I wandered off to go annoy some paper with a paintbrush.... much better for the heart rate than dodging sideways LX6s. > I turned FF off, it made me fishtail the car too much. Interesting. I haven't tried LFS without FF but I still prefer GPL without FF... though that's probably because I spent so many hours driving with an un-forced wheel. Andrew McP

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:02:32 +0200, Uwe hoover Schuerkamp wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > thanks Andrew & Stephen, > > I'll try turning off replays and see if that solves the fps > problem during the starts. > > Cheers! > > uwe > >

I disabled replays, flags and trees, made sure the multiplayer speedup is enabled and tried again... still slow as molasses during multiplayer starts, esp. when many different makes are on the track. I don't think it's a problem with my setup (I get 60fps at F1C Hockenheim test day and 90 in N2003 practise), so I wonder if anybody has managed to improve fps in LFS during multiplayer starts? Thanks again for your suggestions, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

What a increase!! What Motherboard/chip/ram did you get and where?? My Gateway GHz laptop is about double the frame rate of my GHZ with T4 4200 home built computer. I guess it is time for an upgrade. Bob "epster" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:PQFVa.1282$[email hidden]... > I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was the > limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics card. > There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though adding moreAI > cars or a big field online slowed the car. > > I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB with > dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a fullfield

Quoted text (21 lines)

> of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing, etc.). > Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30 FPS, > which is still smooth. > > > "Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > > (Righty) wrote: > > > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local hardware > > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or out > > as a cause. > > > > Andrew McP > > > >

Correction!!! The laptop is 2Ghz, and the Desktop is 1Ghz. So even thou the desktop has a much better video card, the laptop is twice as fast which confirms that a fast CPU is the key to good frame rates. Bob

Quoted text (11 lines)

> What a increase!! What Motherboard/chip/ram did you get and where?? > My Gateway GHz laptop is about double the frame rate of my GHZ > with T4 4200 home built computer. I guess it is time for an upgrade. > > Bob > > > "epster" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:PQFVa.1282$[email hidden]... > > I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was the > > limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics

card. > > There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though addingmore

Quoted text (7 lines)

> AI > > cars or a big field online slowed the car. > > > > I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB with > > dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a full > field > > of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing,

etc.). > > Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30FPS, > > which is still smooth. > > > > > > "Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote inmessage

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > news:[email hidden]... > > > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > > > (Righty) wrote: > > > > > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > > > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > > > > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local

hardware > > > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in orout

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > as a cause. > > > > > > Andrew McP > > > > > > > > >

ok.. Specs of upgrade are as follows: Gigabyte 8KNXP M/board (P875 Chipset) supporting Dual Channel DDR RAM. 2 x Kingston HyperX PC3500 (DDR 434) double sided DIMMS Intel P4 3.0c 800Mhz FSB CPU Subzero4G peltier CPU cooler FWIW, I'm also running 3x Seagate Cheetah 15KRPM 18GB HDs running RAID0, connected to an Adaptec Dual Channel Ultra 160 SCSI RAID Controller with 128MB writeback cache. Believe it not I found the HDs and Adaptec controller in server that a company had thrown out into a skip. So.. LFS loads pretty quickly as well :-) Cheers, Tim "wasson" <wasson[remove]@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:lPMVa.5$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> What a increase!! What Motherboard/chip/ram did you get and where?? > My Gateway GHz laptop is about double the frame rate of my GHZ > with T4 4200 home built computer. I guess it is time for an upgrade. > > Bob > > > "epster" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:PQFVa.1282$[email hidden]... > > I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was the > > limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics

card. > > There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though addingmore

Quoted text (7 lines)

> AI > > cars or a big field online slowed the car. > > > > I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB with > > dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a full > field > > of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing,

etc.). > > Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30FPS, > > which is still smooth. > > > > > > "Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote inmessage

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > news:[email hidden]... > > > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > > > (Righty) wrote: > > > > > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > > > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > > > > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local

hardware > > > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in orout

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > as a cause. > > > > > > Andrew McP > > > > > > > > >

Wow, no wonder you are getting such high frame rates. I want to upgrade, but that appears way over my head. In round about numbers, what did that upgrade cost?? Thanks, Bob

Quoted text (10 lines)

> ok.. Specs of upgrade are as follows: > > Gigabyte 8KNXP M/board (P875 Chipset) supporting Dual Channel DDR RAM. > 2 x Kingston HyperX PC3500 (DDR 434) double sided DIMMS > Intel P4 3.0c 800Mhz FSB CPU > Subzero4G peltier CPU cooler > > FWIW, I'm also running 3x Seagate Cheetah 15KRPM 18GB HDs running RAID0, > connected to an Adaptec Dual Channel Ultra 160 SCSI RAID Controller with > 128MB writeback cache. Believe it not I found the HDs and Adaptec

controller

Quoted text (19 lines)

> in server that a company had thrown out into a skip. So.. LFS loads pretty > quickly as well :-) > > Cheers, > Tim > > > "wasson" <wasson[remove]@prodigy.net> wrote in message > news:lPMVa.5$[email hidden]... > > What a increase!! What Motherboard/chip/ram did you get and where?? > > My Gateway GHz laptop is about double the frame rate of my GHZ > > with T4 4200 home built computer. I guess it is time for an upgrade. > > > > Bob > > > > > > "epster" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:PQFVa.1282$[email hidden]... > > > I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was

the

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics > card. > > > There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though adding > more > > AI > > > cars or a big field online slowed the car. > > > > > > I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB

with

Quoted text (32 lines)

> > > dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a full > > field > > > of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing, > etc.). > > > Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about 30 > FPS, > > > which is still smooth. > > > > > > > > > "Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in > message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > > > > (Righty) wrote: > > > > > > > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > > > > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > > > > > > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local > hardware > > > > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in or > out > > > > as a cause. > > > > > > > > Andrew McP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

I paid about �830 (US$1340) for the m/board, CPU, cooler and RAM. However, it was a company purchase, so money wasn't an issue for me. You can probably save about 50% of that and only lose 10-15% performance by getting a 2.8GHZ CPU (and they overclock pretty well too), an 865 chipset M/board that gives the same performance but without the bells and whilstles, and buying 2 x PC3200 (DDR 400) 256MB DIMMs (total of 512MB) instead of getting 1GB of RAM. Included in my purchase was �85 for the Peltier CPU cooler - you can save all that by using the standard Intel Heatsink/fan, which looks very impressive. Anyway - I'd better stop this thread here as I am way off topic. Tim "wasson" <wasson[remove]@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:WNUVa.372$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> Wow, no wonder you are getting such high frame rates. > I want to upgrade, but that appears way over my head. > In round about numbers, what did that upgrade cost?? > > Thanks, > > Bob > > > > ok.. Specs of upgrade are as follows: > > > > Gigabyte 8KNXP M/board (P875 Chipset) supporting Dual Channel DDR RAM. > > 2 x Kingston HyperX PC3500 (DDR 434) double sided DIMMS > > Intel P4 3.0c 800Mhz FSB CPU > > Subzero4G peltier CPU cooler > > > > FWIW, I'm also running 3x Seagate Cheetah 15KRPM 18GB HDs running RAID0, > > connected to an Adaptec Dual Channel Ultra 160 SCSI RAID Controller with > > 128MB writeback cache. Believe it not I found the HDs and Adaptec > controller > > in server that a company had thrown out into a skip. So.. LFS loads

pretty

Quoted text (29 lines)

> > quickly as well :-) > > > > Cheers, > > Tim > > > > > > "wasson" <wasson[remove]@prodigy.net> wrote in message > > news:lPMVa.5$[email hidden]... > > > What a increase!! What Motherboard/chip/ram did you get and where?? > > > My Gateway GHz laptop is about double the frame rate of my GHZ > > > with T4 4200 home built computer. I guess it is time for an upgrade. > > > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > > "epster" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:PQFVa.1282$[email hidden]... > > > > I found that with a big field, the CPU and not the graphics card was > the > > > > limiting factor with an Athlon 1Ghz CPU and Nvidia TI 4600 graphics > > card. > > > > There was no difference between 800x600 and 1600x1200, though adding > > more > > > AI > > > > cars or a big field online slowed the car. > > > > > > > > I've now solved this by upgrading the m/board to a P4 3Ghz with 1GB > with > > > > dual channel DDR 400 RAM, and I'm getting constant 60+ FPS with a

full > > > field > > > > of 12 cars and maxed out graphics (1600x1200x32 bit, 2 x texturing, > > etc.). > > > > Off the Line for the first 10 seconds slows the framerate to about30

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > FPS, > > > > which is still smooth. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in > > message > > > >

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > > > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > > > > > (Righty) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Turn off the trees and flags, reduce your resolution; > > > > > > try 800x600 if you were using 1024x768. > > > > > > > > > > That's a good point. First thing to try to rule out is a local > > hardware > > > > > issue. With the settings on minimum you can at least rule this in

or

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > out > > > > > as a cause. > > > > > > > > > > Andrew McP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

"epster" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:ZsTVa.12902$[email hidden]: > ok.. Specs of upgrade are as follows: Here are my specs: Pentium4 3Ghz 800mhz FSB Asus P4P800 Deluxe (865 chipset) 256mb (x4) = 1G, Kingston HyperX PC3200 @ CAS 2-2-2-5 ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128mb, AGP8X, Fastwrites on Western Digital 160G 8mb buffer, 7200 RPM I'm not getting the kind of framerate you describe, at least not back of a full grid on the city levels. Otherwise it runs OK, but not blazing. Have you tried from the back of a full grid on the city levels? F1C smokes on this machine but LFS can bring it down to its knees.

Ped Xing <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]: > I'm not getting the kind of framerate you describe, at least not back of > a full grid on the city levels. Otherwise it runs OK, but not blazing. > > Have you tried from the back of a full grid on the city levels? > > F1C smokes on this machine but LFS can bring it down to its knees. Did a bit more testing. Full AI grid (car: FXO), South City Long, back of grid, 1152x864x32, 2X FSAA, 8X ANISO: 30's at the start, which climbs steadily as I pass cars. By the time I am in 1st place, the framerate gets into the 100's in spots, but dips as low as into the 60's depending on what part of the circuit I'm on. So OK, not as bad as I thought. But I wish I could stop it from getting into the low 30's. As you pointed out, screen resolution doesn't seem to make a big difference. I wonder if it would actually be better with a full online grid as opposed to a full AI grid, since the CPU wouldn't have to compute the AI.