Ti4600 to a 9700Pro, my story...

OK, Here is my story. I have just installed a 9700Pro card in place of my Ti4600. I decided to purchase it at Circuit City just in case I needed to return it. My system specs are: Asus P4PE w/ 2.66 P4 running at 3.0 Ghz. 512MB of Samsung PC2700 DDR333 memory running at 385mhz. The PCI and AGP are fixed at the default speed. No overclocking on either video card. Nascar 2002 - All options turned on except steering wheel graphic - Cockpit view - Single Race at Indy - 42 other cars - 40 drawn ahead, 10 behind 2 different fps numbers, the first is start of practice session sitting on pit road, the other is last car in a full field at start of race as engines are started. OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA ATI - 98fps / 47fps NVidia - 113fps / 53fps OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) ATI - 86fps / 45fps NVidia - 91fps / 45fps OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA ATI - 92fps / 37fps NVidia - 90fps / 36fps OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) ATI - 90fps / 34fps NVidia - 48fps / 32fps Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA ATI - 98fps / 45fps NVidia - 90fps / 38fps Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) ATI - 95fps / 42fps NVidia - 72fps / 35fps Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA ATI - 100fps / 39fps NVidia - 90fps / 36fps Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) ATI - 88fps / 37fps NVidia - 35fps / 22fps All testing on the Ti4600 was completed using the 40.71 drivers, and the ATI was using the latest 3.0 Catalyst drivers. All above numbers came from uninstalling the Ti4600, and installing the ATI in the same OS (WinXP Pro w/ SP1). I then reformatted and reloaded WinXP Pro, installed all service packs and updated drivers, installed DX9.0, then installed the ATI card drivers (3.0 Catalyst). I tested once again at the same track, same options turned on, see below: Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA on the ATI card. 102fps / 44fps So I figure I gained about 10-15% performance by reformatting and re-installing Windows on a fresh install, so there probably was some left over driver instances causing the slowdowns. At 2X FSAA 1600x1200x32, I doubled my framerates in D3D with ATI over the OpenGL with NVidia when alone on the track. I gained about 25-30% frame rate at the slowest points for both cards. As the resolutions come down, or as the FSAA is turned off, the difference isn't that great. Of course, your mileage may vary... Time to do some more testing so I can decide if the upgrade is worth it. Installing GTR2002 again now... Glen Pittman

"Adam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Jok%9.32465$[email hidden]... > <plonk> Self portrait?

Hmm. Are you running anti-alising and v-sync? Because I don't have near the system you do and I get better frame rates with basically the same graphics options. On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:37:02 -0500, "Glen Pittman" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (73 lines)

>OK, Here is my story. I have just installed a 9700Pro card in place of my >Ti4600. I decided to purchase it at Circuit City just in case I needed to >return it. My system specs are: Asus P4PE w/ 2.66 P4 running at 3.0 Ghz. >512MB of Samsung PC2700 DDR333 memory running at 385mhz. The PCI and AGP >are fixed at the default speed. No overclocking on either video card. > >Nascar 2002 - All options turned on except steering wheel graphic - Cockpit >view - Single Race at Indy - 42 other cars - 40 drawn ahead, 10 behind >2 different fps numbers, the first is start of practice session sitting on >pit road, the other is last car in a full field at start of race as engines >are started. > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA >ATI - 98fps / 47fps >NVidia - 113fps / 53fps > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) >ATI - 86fps / 45fps >NVidia - 91fps / 45fps > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA >ATI - 92fps / 37fps >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) >ATI - 90fps / 34fps >NVidia - 48fps / 32fps > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA >ATI - 98fps / 45fps >NVidia - 90fps / 38fps > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) >ATI - 95fps / 42fps >NVidia - 72fps / 35fps > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA >ATI - 100fps / 39fps >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) >ATI - 88fps / 37fps >NVidia - 35fps / 22fps > >All testing on the Ti4600 was completed using the 40.71 drivers, and the ATI >was using the latest 3.0 Catalyst drivers. >All above numbers came from uninstalling the Ti4600, and installing the ATI >in the same OS (WinXP Pro w/ SP1). > >I then reformatted and reloaded WinXP Pro, installed all service packs and >updated drivers, installed DX9.0, then installed the ATI card drivers (3.0 >Catalyst). > >I tested once again at the same track, same options turned on, see below: > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA on the ATI card. >102fps / 44fps > >So I figure I gained about 10-15% performance by reformatting and >re-installing Windows on a fresh install, so there probably was some left >over driver instances causing the slowdowns. > >At 2X FSAA 1600x1200x32, I doubled my framerates in D3D with ATI over the >OpenGL with NVidia when alone on the track. I gained about 25-30% frame >rate at the slowest points for both cards. As the resolutions come down, or >as the FSAA is turned off, the difference isn't that great. Of course, your >mileage may vary... > >Time to do some more testing so I can decide if the upgrade is worth it. >Installing GTR2002 again now... > >Glen Pittman >

Not sure which card you are saying you have, but I have VSync turned off on both cards. The results tell you which selection of FSAA I was using. I am open to hearing what framerates everyone else gets, in fact that is why I included details about which track and the graphics options, and also when exactly the FPS count was recorded so that we know how it compares to other peoples cards under the same circumstances. I have found Indy to be one of the worse for frame rates during the start of the race from the rear, thats why I chose it. Glen "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.com> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Hmm. Are you running anti-alising and v-sync? Because I don't have > near the system you do and I get better frame rates with basically the > same graphics options. > > > > On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:37:02 -0500, "Glen Pittman" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >OK, Here is my story. I have just installed a 9700Pro card in place of

my > >Ti4600. I decided to purchase it at Circuit City just in case I neededto > >return it. My system specs are: Asus P4PE w/ 2.66 P4 running at 3.0Ghz. > >512MB of Samsung PC2700 DDR333 memory running at 385mhz. The PCI and AGP > >are fixed at the default speed. No overclocking on either video card. > > > >Nascar 2002 - All options turned on except steering wheel graphic -Cockpit > >view - Single Race at Indy - 42 other cars - 40 drawn ahead, 10 behind > >2 different fps numbers, the first is start of practice session sittingon > >pit road, the other is last car in a full field at start of race asengines

Quoted text (35 lines)

> >are started. > > > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA > >ATI - 98fps / 47fps > >NVidia - 113fps / 53fps > > > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > >ATI - 86fps / 45fps > >NVidia - 91fps / 45fps > > > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA > >ATI - 92fps / 37fps > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > > > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > >ATI - 90fps / 34fps > >NVidia - 48fps / 32fps > > > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA > >ATI - 98fps / 45fps > >NVidia - 90fps / 38fps > > > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > >ATI - 95fps / 42fps > >NVidia - 72fps / 35fps > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA > >ATI - 100fps / 39fps > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > >ATI - 88fps / 37fps > >NVidia - 35fps / 22fps > > > >All testing on the Ti4600 was completed using the 40.71 drivers, and the

ATI > >was using the latest 3.0 Catalyst drivers. > >All above numbers came from uninstalling the Ti4600, and installing theATI > >in the same OS (WinXP Pro w/ SP1). > > > >I then reformatted and reloaded WinXP Pro, installed all service packsand > >updated drivers, installed DX9.0, then installed the ATI card drivers(3.0

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >Catalyst). > > > >I tested once again at the same track, same options turned on, see below: > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA on the ATI card. > >102fps / 44fps > > > >So I figure I gained about 10-15% performance by reformatting and > >re-installing Windows on a fresh install, so there probably was some left > >over driver instances causing the slowdowns. > > > >At 2X FSAA 1600x1200x32, I doubled my framerates in D3D with ATI over the > >OpenGL with NVidia when alone on the track. I gained about 25-30% frame > >rate at the slowest points for both cards. As the resolutions come down,

or > >as the FSAA is turned off, the difference isn't that great. Of course,your

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >mileage may vary... > > > >Time to do some more testing so I can decide if the upgrade is worth it. > >Installing GTR2002 again now... > > > >Glen Pittman > > >

I have also just went back into the game, and tested at Atlanta both as a test session and a Single Race w/ 42 cars. At Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 4X FSAA and no AF Pit Road during test session - 94 FPS (w/o FSAA 108 FPS) Max of 124 FPS and Minimum of 82 FPS. Pit Road during Practice of race - 87 FPS Start of race at rear of field - 44 FPS I will add that my FPS jumps up pretty quickly after the race gets rolling, but these numbers are taken just as the cars start their engines. I am also doing the short pace lap at the start, not sure how the FPS would be sitting in the pits. FWIW I also run my sound as "3D Sound" w/ 20 sounds played. I turned off 3D and set sounds to 8 and picked up 3 FPS. Glen "Glen Pittman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Not sure which card you are saying you have, but I have VSync turned offon > both cards. The results tell you which selection of FSAA I was using. > > I am open to hearing what framerates everyone else gets, in fact that iswhy > I included details about which track and the graphics options, and alsowhen > exactly the FPS count was recorded so that we know how it compares toother > peoples cards under the same circumstances. I have found Indy to be oneof > the worse for frame rates during the start of the race from the rear,thats

Quoted text (26 lines)

> why I chose it. > > Glen > > > > > > "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.com> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Hmm. Are you running anti-alising and v-sync? Because I don't have > > near the system you do and I get better frame rates with basically the > > same graphics options. > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:37:02 -0500, "Glen Pittman" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >OK, Here is my story. I have just installed a 9700Pro card in place of > my > > >Ti4600. I decided to purchase it at Circuit City just in case I needed > to > > >return it. My system specs are: Asus P4PE w/ 2.66 P4 running at 3.0 > Ghz. > > >512MB of Samsung PC2700 DDR333 memory running at 385mhz. The PCI and

AGP

Quoted text (44 lines)

> > >are fixed at the default speed. No overclocking on either video card. > > > > > >Nascar 2002 - All options turned on except steering wheel graphic - > Cockpit > > >view - Single Race at Indy - 42 other cars - 40 drawn ahead, 10 behind > > >2 different fps numbers, the first is start of practice session sitting > on > > >pit road, the other is last car in a full field at start of race as > engines > > >are started. > > > > > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA > > >ATI - 98fps / 47fps > > >NVidia - 113fps / 53fps > > > > > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > >ATI - 86fps / 45fps > > >NVidia - 91fps / 45fps > > > > > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA > > >ATI - 92fps / 37fps > > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > > > > > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > >ATI - 90fps / 34fps > > >NVidia - 48fps / 32fps > > > > > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA > > >ATI - 98fps / 45fps > > >NVidia - 90fps / 38fps > > > > > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > >ATI - 95fps / 42fps > > >NVidia - 72fps / 35fps > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA > > >ATI - 100fps / 39fps > > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > >ATI - 88fps / 37fps > > >NVidia - 35fps / 22fps > > > > > >All testing on the Ti4600 was completed using the 40.71 drivers, and

the

Quoted text (13 lines)

> ATI > > >was using the latest 3.0 Catalyst drivers. > > >All above numbers came from uninstalling the Ti4600, and installing the > ATI > > >in the same OS (WinXP Pro w/ SP1). > > > > > >I then reformatted and reloaded WinXP Pro, installed all service packs > and > > >updated drivers, installed DX9.0, then installed the ATI card drivers > (3.0 > > >Catalyst). > > > > > >I tested once again at the same track, same options turned on, see

below: > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA on the ATI card. > > >102fps / 44fps > > > > > >So I figure I gained about 10-15% performance by reformatting and > > >re-installing Windows on a fresh install, so there probably was someleft > > >over driver instances causing the slowdowns. > > > > > >At 2X FSAA 1600x1200x32, I doubled my framerates in D3D with ATI overthe > > >OpenGL with NVidia when alone on the track. I gained about 25-30%frame > > >rate at the slowest points for both cards. As the resolutions comedown, > or > > >as the FSAA is turned off, the difference isn't that great. Of course, > your > > >mileage may vary... > > > > > >Time to do some more testing so I can decide if the upgrade is worthit.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > >Installing GTR2002 again now... > > > > > >Glen Pittman > > > > > > >

Ya, I am sure we are not comparing apples to apples... probably missed something in your test parameters. I have not done extensive testing, but basically this is what I get: Dayton, start of race right after engines are started while at the back of the field I get 60-70 fps. During the race I avg anywhere from 45 to 70 fps. N2002 all options on, no anti-allising no v-sync 1280x960x16 OpenGL System: AMD athlon 1800 GeForce 2 ultra 512 ram XP pro no overclocking. On Mon, 3 Feb 2003 00:05:16 -0500, "Glen Pittman" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (153 lines)

>I have also just went back into the game, and tested at Atlanta both as a >test session and a Single Race w/ 42 cars. > >At Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 4X FSAA and no AF >Pit Road during test session - 94 FPS (w/o FSAA 108 FPS) Max of 124 FPS >and Minimum of 82 FPS. >Pit Road during Practice of race - 87 FPS >Start of race at rear of field - 44 FPS > >I will add that my FPS jumps up pretty quickly after the race gets rolling, >but these numbers are taken just as the cars start their engines. I am also >doing the short pace lap at the start, not sure how the FPS would be sitting >in the pits. > >FWIW I also run my sound as "3D Sound" w/ 20 sounds played. I turned off 3D >and set sounds to 8 and picked up 3 FPS. > >Glen > > > >"Glen Pittman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Not sure which card you are saying you have, but I have VSync turned off >on >> both cards. The results tell you which selection of FSAA I was using. >> >> I am open to hearing what framerates everyone else gets, in fact that is >why >> I included details about which track and the graphics options, and also >when >> exactly the FPS count was recorded so that we know how it compares to >other >> peoples cards under the same circumstances. I have found Indy to be one >of >> the worse for frame rates during the start of the race from the rear, >thats >> why I chose it. >> >> Glen >> >> >> >> >> >> "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.com> wrote in message >> news:[email hidden]... >> > Hmm. Are you running anti-alising and v-sync? Because I don't have >> > near the system you do and I get better frame rates with basically the >> > same graphics options. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:37:02 -0500, "Glen Pittman" >> > <[email hidden]> wrote: >> > >> > >OK, Here is my story. I have just installed a 9700Pro card in place of >> my >> > >Ti4600. I decided to purchase it at Circuit City just in case I needed >> to >> > >return it. My system specs are: Asus P4PE w/ 2.66 P4 running at 3.0 >> Ghz. >> > >512MB of Samsung PC2700 DDR333 memory running at 385mhz. The PCI and >AGP >> > >are fixed at the default speed. No overclocking on either video card. >> > > >> > >Nascar 2002 - All options turned on except steering wheel graphic - >> Cockpit >> > >view - Single Race at Indy - 42 other cars - 40 drawn ahead, 10 behind >> > >2 different fps numbers, the first is start of practice session sitting >> on >> > >pit road, the other is last car in a full field at start of race as >> engines >> > >are started. >> > > >> > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA >> > >ATI - 98fps / 47fps >> > >NVidia - 113fps / 53fps >> > > >> > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) >> > >ATI - 86fps / 45fps >> > >NVidia - 91fps / 45fps >> > > >> > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA >> > >ATI - 92fps / 37fps >> > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps >> > > >> > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) >> > >ATI - 90fps / 34fps >> > >NVidia - 48fps / 32fps >> > > >> > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA >> > >ATI - 98fps / 45fps >> > >NVidia - 90fps / 38fps >> > > >> > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) >> > >ATI - 95fps / 42fps >> > >NVidia - 72fps / 35fps >> > > >> > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA >> > >ATI - 100fps / 39fps >> > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps >> > > >> > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) >> > >ATI - 88fps / 37fps >> > >NVidia - 35fps / 22fps >> > > >> > >All testing on the Ti4600 was completed using the 40.71 drivers, and >the >> ATI >> > >was using the latest 3.0 Catalyst drivers. >> > >All above numbers came from uninstalling the Ti4600, and installing the >> ATI >> > >in the same OS (WinXP Pro w/ SP1). >> > > >> > >I then reformatted and reloaded WinXP Pro, installed all service packs >> and >> > >updated drivers, installed DX9.0, then installed the ATI card drivers >> (3.0 >> > >Catalyst). >> > > >> > >I tested once again at the same track, same options turned on, see >below: >> > > >> > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA on the ATI card. >> > >102fps / 44fps >> > > >> > >So I figure I gained about 10-15% performance by reformatting and >> > >re-installing Windows on a fresh install, so there probably was some >left >> > >over driver instances causing the slowdowns. >> > > >> > >At 2X FSAA 1600x1200x32, I doubled my framerates in D3D with ATI over >the >> > >OpenGL with NVidia when alone on the track. I gained about 25-30% >frame >> > >rate at the slowest points for both cards. As the resolutions come >down, >> or >> > >as the FSAA is turned off, the difference isn't that great. Of course, >> your >> > >mileage may vary... >> > > >> > >Time to do some more testing so I can decide if the upgrade is worth >it. >> > >Installing GTR2002 again now... >> > > >> > >Glen Pittman >> > > >> > >> >> >

Those GF2 Ultras were/are kick ass cards. My bubby has a P4 2.4g and a GF2 Ultra and he smokes my XP1800 with a GF3. One BIG thing to keep in mind is the GF2 will only do 1 (maybe 2) level of AF. I'm not sure what the ATI card is capable of but I know its at least 6 levels. That's a huge difference. So if Glenn is not editing any of the Papy red###.ini files he is running max levels. Which at those frame rates why the hell not. :) MadDAWG

And what did you get with the Gforce card???? Not much of a comparison contest when you don't include the other card..... Vintook "Glen Pittman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> I have also just went back into the game, and tested at Atlanta both as a > test session and a Single Race w/ 42 cars. > > At Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 4X FSAA and no AF > Pit Road during test session - 94 FPS (w/o FSAA 108 FPS) Max of 124 FPS > and Minimum of 82 FPS. > Pit Road during Practice of race - 87 FPS > Start of race at rear of field - 44 FPS > > I will add that my FPS jumps up pretty quickly after the race gets

rolling, > but these numbers are taken just as the cars start their engines. I amalso > doing the short pace lap at the start, not sure how the FPS would besitting > in the pits. > > FWIW I also run my sound as "3D Sound" w/ 20 sounds played. I turned off3D

Quoted text (43 lines)

> and set sounds to 8 and picked up 3 FPS. > > Glen > > > > "Glen Pittman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Not sure which card you are saying you have, but I have VSync turned off > on > > both cards. The results tell you which selection of FSAA I was using. > > > > I am open to hearing what framerates everyone else gets, in fact that is > why > > I included details about which track and the graphics options, and also > when > > exactly the FPS count was recorded so that we know how it compares to > other > > peoples cards under the same circumstances. I have found Indy to be one > of > > the worse for frame rates during the start of the race from the rear, > thats > > why I chose it. > > > > Glen > > > > > > > > > > > > "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.com> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Hmm. Are you running anti-alising and v-sync? Because I don't have > > > near the system you do and I get better frame rates with basically the > > > same graphics options. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:37:02 -0500, "Glen Pittman" > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > >OK, Here is my story. I have just installed a 9700Pro card in place

of > > my > > > >Ti4600. I decided to purchase it at Circuit City just in case Ineeded > > to > > > >return it. My system specs are: Asus P4PE w/ 2.66 P4 running at 3.0 > > Ghz. > > > >512MB of Samsung PC2700 DDR333 memory running at 385mhz. The PCI and > AGP > > > >are fixed at the default speed. No overclocking on either videocard. > > > > > > > >Nascar 2002 - All options turned on except steering wheel graphic - > > Cockpit > > > >view - Single Race at Indy - 42 other cars - 40 drawn ahead, 10behind > > > >2 different fps numbers, the first is start of practice sessionsitting

Quoted text (42 lines)

> > on > > > >pit road, the other is last car in a full field at start of race as > > engines > > > >are started. > > > > > > > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA > > > >ATI - 98fps / 47fps > > > >NVidia - 113fps / 53fps > > > > > > > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > > >ATI - 86fps / 45fps > > > >NVidia - 91fps / 45fps > > > > > > > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA > > > >ATI - 92fps / 37fps > > > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > > > > > > > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > > >ATI - 90fps / 34fps > > > >NVidia - 48fps / 32fps > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA > > > >ATI - 98fps / 45fps > > > >NVidia - 90fps / 38fps > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > > >ATI - 95fps / 42fps > > > >NVidia - 72fps / 35fps > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA > > > >ATI - 100fps / 39fps > > > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > > >ATI - 88fps / 37fps > > > >NVidia - 35fps / 22fps > > > > > > > >All testing on the Ti4600 was completed using the 40.71 drivers, and > the > > ATI > > > >was using the latest 3.0 Catalyst drivers. > > > >All above numbers came from uninstalling the Ti4600, and installing

the > > ATI > > > >in the same OS (WinXP Pro w/ SP1). > > > > > > > >I then reformatted and reloaded WinXP Pro, installed all servicepacks

Quoted text (24 lines)

> > and > > > >updated drivers, installed DX9.0, then installed the ATI card drivers > > (3.0 > > > >Catalyst). > > > > > > > >I tested once again at the same track, same options turned on, see > below: > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA on the ATI card. > > > >102fps / 44fps > > > > > > > >So I figure I gained about 10-15% performance by reformatting and > > > >re-installing Windows on a fresh install, so there probably was some > left > > > >over driver instances causing the slowdowns. > > > > > > > >At 2X FSAA 1600x1200x32, I doubled my framerates in D3D with ATI over > the > > > >OpenGL with NVidia when alone on the track. I gained about 25-30% > frame > > > >rate at the slowest points for both cards. As the resolutions come > down, > > or > > > >as the FSAA is turned off, the difference isn't that great. Of

course,

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > your > > > >mileage may vary... > > > > > > > >Time to do some more testing so I can decide if the upgrade is worth > it. > > > >Installing GTR2002 again now... > > > > > > > >Glen Pittman > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Sorry, but I think I will pass on re-installing the Geforce to do 4X FSAA comparisons...:-) I have attempted to run 1600x1200x32 w/ $X FSAAon the Geforce before, and it was marginal on frame rates. If I remember correctly, they were about 25FPS at the start of a race, and about 32-36 under normal racing conditions. But with the graphics stutter that I had when coming by the pit road entrance (worse with the F2 screen active), I wasn't comfortable, so I never ran it that way other than the test a while back. Glen "Vintook" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:_Sx%9.23591$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> And what did you get with the Gforce card???? Not much of a comparison > contest when you don't include the other card..... > > Vintook > > "Glen Pittman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I have also just went back into the game, and tested at Atlanta both as

a > > test session and a Single Race w/ 42 cars. > > > > At Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 4X FSAA and no AF > > Pit Road during test session - 94 FPS (w/o FSAA 108 FPS) Max of 124FPS

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > and Minimum of 82 FPS. > > Pit Road during Practice of race - 87 FPS > > Start of race at rear of field - 44 FPS > > > > I will add that my FPS jumps up pretty quickly after the race gets > rolling, > > but these numbers are taken just as the cars start their engines. I am > also > > doing the short pace lap at the start, not sure how the FPS would be > sitting > > in the pits. > > > > FWIW I also run my sound as "3D Sound" w/ 20 sounds played. I turned

off

Quoted text (10 lines)

> 3D > > and set sounds to 8 and picked up 3 FPS. > > > > Glen > > > > > > > > "Glen Pittman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Not sure which card you are saying you have, but I have VSync turned

off > > on > > > both cards. The results tell you which selection of FSAA I was using. > > > > > > I am open to hearing what framerates everyone else gets, in fact thatis > > why > > > I included details about which track and the graphics options, andalso > > when > > > exactly the FPS count was recorded so that we know how it compares to > > other > > > peoples cards under the same circumstances. I have found Indy to beone

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > of > > > the worse for frame rates during the start of the race from the rear, > > thats > > > why I chose it. > > > > > > Glen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.com> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > Hmm. Are you running anti-alising and v-sync? Because I don't have > > > > near the system you do and I get better frame rates with basically

the

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > > > same graphics options. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 20:37:02 -0500, "Glen Pittman" > > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >OK, Here is my story. I have just installed a 9700Pro card in

place > of > > > my > > > > >Ti4600. I decided to purchase it at Circuit City just in case I > needed > > > to > > > > >return it. My system specs are: Asus P4PE w/ 2.66 P4 running at3.0 > > > Ghz. > > > > >512MB of Samsung PC2700 DDR333 memory running at 385mhz. The PCIand

Quoted text (48 lines)

> > AGP > > > > >are fixed at the default speed. No overclocking on either video > card. > > > > > > > > > >Nascar 2002 - All options turned on except steering wheel graphic - > > > Cockpit > > > > >view - Single Race at Indy - 42 other cars - 40 drawn ahead, 10 > behind > > > > >2 different fps numbers, the first is start of practice session > sitting > > > on > > > > >pit road, the other is last car in a full field at start of race as > > > engines > > > > >are started. > > > > > > > > > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA > > > > >ATI - 98fps / 47fps > > > > >NVidia - 113fps / 53fps > > > > > > > > > >OpenGL 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > > > >ATI - 86fps / 45fps > > > > >NVidia - 91fps / 45fps > > > > > > > > > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA > > > > >ATI - 92fps / 37fps > > > > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > > > > > > > > > >OpenGL 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > > > >ATI - 90fps / 34fps > > > > >NVidia - 48fps / 32fps > > > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ no FSAA > > > > >ATI - 98fps / 45fps > > > > >NVidia - 90fps / 38fps > > > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1280x960x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > > > >ATI - 95fps / 42fps > > > > >NVidia - 72fps / 35fps > > > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ no FSAA > > > > >ATI - 100fps / 39fps > > > > >NVidia - 90fps / 36fps > > > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA (Quincux on NVidia) > > > > >ATI - 88fps / 37fps > > > > >NVidia - 35fps / 22fps > > > > > > > > > >All testing on the Ti4600 was completed using the 40.71 drivers,

and

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > the > > > ATI > > > > >was using the latest 3.0 Catalyst drivers. > > > > >All above numbers came from uninstalling the Ti4600, and installing > the > > > ATI > > > > >in the same OS (WinXP Pro w/ SP1). > > > > > > > > > >I then reformatted and reloaded WinXP Pro, installed all service > packs > > > and > > > > >updated drivers, installed DX9.0, then installed the ATI card

drivers

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > (3.0 > > > > >Catalyst). > > > > > > > > > >I tested once again at the same track, same options turned on, see > > below: > > > > > > > > > >Direct3D 1600x1200x32 w/ 2X FSAA on the ATI card. > > > > >102fps / 44fps > > > > > > > > > >So I figure I gained about 10-15% performance by reformatting and > > > > >re-installing Windows on a fresh install, so there probably was

some > > left > > > > >over driver instances causing the slowdowns. > > > > > > > > > >At 2X FSAA 1600x1200x32, I doubled my framerates in D3D with ATIover

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > the > > > > >OpenGL with NVidia when alone on the track. I gained about 25-30% > > frame > > > > >rate at the slowest points for both cards. As the resolutions come > > down, > > > or > > > > >as the FSAA is turned off, the difference isn't that great. Of > course, > > > your > > > > >mileage may vary... > > > > > > > > > >Time to do some more testing so I can decide if the upgrade is

worth

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > it. > > > > >Installing GTR2002 again now... > > > > > > > > > >Glen Pittman > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

One thing to keep in mind is that the CPU makes a HUGE difference. I went out and bought my GF2 trying to increase my frame rates, installed it in my P3 933 and I did not get ANY frame rate improvement with N2002 at the same detail levels. I was able to up the resolution but was still getting crappy frame rates and could not increase things like draw ahead distance, cars in front and behind, etc. I then upgraded the mb and cpu and saw a HUGE increase in frame rates. Bottom line is that the best graphics card in the world wont fix a cpu bottleneck. CPU matters. Brian Oster On Mon, 3 Feb 2003 06:49:21 -0500, "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>Those GF2 Ultras were/are kick ass cards. My bubby has a P4 2.4g and a GF2 >Ultra and he smokes my XP1800 with a GF3. > >One BIG thing to keep in mind is the GF2 will only do 1 (maybe 2) level of >AF. I'm not sure what the ATI card is capable of but I know its at least 6 >levels. That's a huge difference. So if Glenn is not editing any of the Papy >red###.ini files he is running max levels. Which at those frame rates why >the hell not. :) > >MadDAWG >