mvigod

OK, just tested my frame rate with that tech support small window "billboard" 240fps on my Geforce 3 Ti500 card. Sounds good. Anybody seeing these numbers with the "billboard" test?

System: Microsoft Windows ME (4.90, Build 3000)
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) Processor, MMX, 3DNow, ~1400MHz
Memory: 256MB RAM
DX Version: DirectX 8.0 (4.08.00.0400)
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce3 Ti 500
MFR: NVIDIA
Version: 4.13.01.2311 (English)
Date: 11/29/2001 13:28:00, 108288 bytes


Also, does anybody know how to change your name under multiplay?

Maxime

In the graphics optimisations page, in RF G2, there's a couple options you can enble/disable...

If I disable the "lock to monitor refresh rate" option, i get much higher FPS. If this option is enbled, your FPS have to be a mulitple of your monitor refresh rate. For exmaple, in my case, the monitor refresh at 85Hz. So the FPS would have to be 21,42 85 or 170 Hz.... So in a field when I'm getting 42 fps with the opiton enabled, I get 70 fps with the option disbled

Maxime

Ther'e's also a way to disble this option in the Nvidia driver itself...


i,m getting 85 fps in the billbord test in 1024x768x32

....and about 500 fps in windowed mode (400x300x32)


I'm sure I would get more than 85 fps in fullscreen 1024x768x32 mode if I could find that monitor refresh rate thing in the driver program itself

Elwood

My Feedback: (2)

I did not see an option for FPS on the billboard. I also did not see the lock to monitor refresh rate where it was stated. I did disable shadows for airport objects and got an extra 5 fps. And then I disabled the shadows for trees (big loss there...) and got about 12 extra fps.

Maxime

The option "lock to monitor frequency" is not availlable with every videocards... I didn't have it with my Voodoo3, but I have it with my Nvidia card ( GF2 MX400, and now a GF3TI200)...

Elwood

My Feedback: (2)

I have a GF 3 Ti 200. Where is mine??? Oh well.

Ragz

I am getting abt 29-30 fps on the ground and abt 59-60 fps in the air with my system with all default settings.
P4-1.7ghz (i850 chip set)
128 MB RDRAM
Diamond Viper v770 Ultra Tnt2 32mb
Barracuda 40GB

I want to get a new graphic card though..maybe a GeForce 4 when it comes out this month..

Anurag

LeeU

My Feedback: (5)

Just ordered my new Dell Inspiron 8100, yes it's a &%$#@ laptop. It has a 1.2 GHz chip, 512 mb sys ram, 30 G hard drive 15" ultra high res monitor and a 64 mb ATI Radom 7500 video card, hope to get frame rates close to what your desktops are getting.Lee

Ragz

How much better can it get with frame rates beyond 50-60 fps? Is there a noticeable difference in the aircrafts physics etc with higher fps? Can our eye determine/appreciate the improved fps. I am very happy with the 50-60 fps that I am getting...

Anurag

mvigod

Ragz,

I would imagine at some point the diminishing returns principle enters in the equation...probably around 30fps would be my guess.

Ragz

So are you saying that anything beyond 30fps is not recognizable by the human eye. I know commericial cinema is 30fps...so I guess 30fps shld be ok on g2 also. If all this is true, why would people fork out extra cash for super fast video cards?

anurag

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

IIRC, commercial cinema is actually 24 frames per second, not 30. (This used to cause quite a few problems when computer screens were seen in movies, in terms of flicker on the computer monitor. Reseting the monitor refresh rate to a multiple of 24 was the simplest solution.)

Regarding the human eye noticing refresh... I used to earn a living writing the graphics software for large-scale military & commercial simulators; studies there showed that its not just the rate at which your graphics are re-rendered that's important, its the screen refresh rate too.

As an example, let's assume that you can generate a new frame 30 times a second; if your monitor refreshes at 30 hz, then the display will look pretty smooth. With the same 30 frames per second being generated, if your monitor refreshes at 60 hz, then the scene is actually noticeably more "jumpy". So, if you could have your frames being generated at N x your monitor's refresh rate, for positive integral values of N, that was optimal.

Of course, the above was a few years ago ... who knows what new ideas or 'facts' have come to light since then. ;-)

Regards,
Gordon