I haven't played UT in several weeks (been playing ole' Starcraft again), but before I quit I was in the top 100 CTF players worldwide according to ngWorldStats. I just bring that out to show that I'm not just some nobody who doesn't know what I'm talking about. I understand your want for beauty. I want it too. The point is, you don't have to trade speed for beauty. This thread was originally brought up about overclocking your processor. That would get you the exact same beauty w/ faster performance and no tradeoffs except your processor would last 6 or 7 years vs. 12 or 14, and what good is a 6 or 7 year-old processor anyways? What Intel processor was in use 7 years ago? I think it was either the 286 or 386SX. Those would do you nearly nothing today. Don't listen to people who complain about stability problems with overclocking. If you have stability problems, don't overclock as much. True, some processor/mobo combos won't overclock at all without stability problems, but, in my experience that is rare. As far as FSAA in FPS games go, the difference is not that astounding. Have you seen a Geforce 2 running on a monitor right next to a monitor driven with a V5 with FSAA enabled? I have, my local CompUSA store has a display set up with both cards on 19 inch viewsonic monitors running UT. You can tell something is different about the V5, but you don't look at it and say "WOW, that looks so much better". If you disable FSAA you DO notice how much more smooth the game looks. All of this is IMHO, though. You have what you like, I have what I like. I think you will find yourself in the minority, though if you were to survey gamers as to whether they prefer the looks of FSAA or the speed without it. Regards, dwyatt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 9:35 PM Subject: [newbie] OT video cards & gaming OT > If it ever gets so that I need more fps to wipe the floor with the people I'm > playing with I'll go for the pure speed thing. As it is I can drop into any > server on the net in quake3, UT, Half-Life and CS and be in the top 3 every > time and whats happeneing on my monitor is beautiful. All the time. > > You should see cobble with 4xFSAA enabled. The depth of texture is > incredible. > > I just got done playing UT with my brother, a friend of ours and a few > stragglers from the net. 6 maps, average of 350 frags per hour between them. > On morbius I got 490 frags per hour. We were playing fatboy instagib > mutators. My computer was the server too. FPS is not as big an issue as > people want it to be in my opinion ;-) I shoot for the balance between > beauty, playability and fun. > > > Abe > > > >===== Original Message From "dwyatt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ===== > >I agree with nearly everything good ole' Tom says in that article. In > >general though, I find Tom to be arrogant and stubborn. He usually will not > >back down from an issue even if he is proven wrong. > > > >You will also notice that Tom states that faster processor speeds REALLY > >help Unreal Tournament. (come on, overclock that processor, I just KNOW you > >want too :) ) > > > >From my quick scan of the article (to refresh my memory, I read it when it > >came out), he does nothing to refute the point I made, that is, you can not > >have too many fps. > > > >You were saying you were happy with ~60 fps. If you are just a casual > >gamer, I can understand that. You don't sound like a casual gamer (from the > >statement you made about all the hours you spend playing and hosting lan > >parties). Here's the math: > > > >360 degree turn in 100 ms or .1 seconds > >60 fps > > > >In .1 seconds at 60 fps, 6 frames are processed to the frame buffer and to > >the screen. > > > >This gives you a total of 6 frames to represent 360 degrees of a turn. > >Thus, your view is only updated every 60 degrees as you turn around (360/6). > >Not good. > > > >Another point Tom didn't mention: > > > >He said that you will see very little difference in several low resolution > >benchmarks with the same game and card, because the system is unable to feed > >the 3d card vertices fast enough. Well, you will also see the same thing as > >you increase the resolution, for a different reason. In fact, it is the > >exact opposite reason. You start bumping against the card's fill rate > >ceiling. The card becomes unable to keep up with all the data being sent to > >it by the system. > > > >FSAA on a first-person shooter? Why? Racing or flight sim's I get, but a > >FPS? Well, like you said, you have your own tastes. > > > >Like they say, too each his own. > > > > > > > >dwyatt > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Abe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 5:04 PM > >Subject: RE: [[newbie] Athlon thunderbird & ka7-100] > > > > > >> I just bought a voodoo5 about three weeks ago. It is a great card. I'll > >> layout my thinking for you so you can see what I took into account. > >> > >> 1. My past experience: My old computer has two voodoo2's running in SLI > >> mode. They perform on par with video cards like ATI rage fury, rage pro, > >> matrox g400 and tnt2 with one exception. The visual quality is superior. > >> Also, those cards work equally well in linux and windows which is > >important to > >> me because I play a lot of games that are not and probably never will be > >> available for linux. 3Dfx drivers are excellent for both platforms and > >while > >> they are not updated as often as Nvidia's drivers they are updated when > >they > >> need to be. > >> > >> 2. My monitor refreshes at 75hz. So, frame rates beyond that are kind of > >> silly. A movie (film in a theater) displays about 32 fps. Movies look > >real > >> enough to me...you? neurons can only fire once every 130th of a second. > >so, > >> I guess about 120-130 fps is about the most that is even theoretically > >> percievable by a human. > >> > >> 3. My game playing habits. Given a choice between playing at 1024x768 in > >> 16bit color with details set to low and playing at 800x600 in 32 bit with > >> details set to medium I'll take 800x600 every time. In other words, image > >> quality is more important to me then frame rates above about 50fps. Also, > >the > >> majority of the games I own will use glide and look better, are faster > >when > >> using it. I will choose Glide everytime over OpenGL or D3D assuming that > >> there is not a clear and unmistakeable advantage to one of the other API's > >in > >> a particular game. > >> > >> 4. Extra's on the video card. I had an ATI rage fury with TV out, > >S-Video > >> out and a host of other features. I never used them once. They were a > >total > >> waste of money for me. Since I had already come to the conclusion that I > >was > >> choosing between geforce and voodoo5, I looked at their extras. > >> > >> GeForce2, very very very fast. hardware T&L that only about three games > >> available right now use. Of those three I own and play quake3. More > >games > >> coming in the next year or so. Very good drivers updated very often and > >very > >> good linux support. Software full screen anti-aliasing. > >> > >> voodoo5, very fast. Glide for all of my old games that I still play > >> regularly. Half-Life, Star Siege, quake2, and so on. Glide for new games > >> too. Deus Ex, Unreal tournament, Quake3 and many more. Full screen > >> anti-aliasing in hardware with no extra code required. It can be used > >with > >> every game out of the box. > >> > >> I choose the voodoo5 because it supports all of my old games, it plays > >them > >> with VERY high fps with no FSAA and it plays them at very playable fps > >with > >> FSAA being used. > >> > >> Typical Half-life fps with 4xFSAA enabled at 1024x768 in Glide are 50-70. > >> Absolutely playable and so freaking beautiful that I can't really describe > >it > >> with words. UT I play with 2xFSAA in Glide and sit about the same 50-70 > >fps > >> at 800x600 with every detail level cranked to the highest. > >> > >> In linux the current voodoo5 drivers drivers only use 1 of the chips on > >the > >> board. I play quake3 at 800x600 with 16 bit color depth and medium detail > >> levels. Time demo1 produces 57.2 fps. Imagine when the drivers that use > >both > >> chips are available! If I want straight speed, I turn off wall marks, > >> ejecting brass, turn on simple items, play at 640x480 with vertex lighting > >and > >> get 80-90 fps in game. > >> > >> In short, I read all the reviews, I read the hardware specs and I talk > >with > >> people who have the hardware to see what it really runs like before I make > >a > >> decision. Generally I have a pretty goos idea of what I'm getting before > >I > >> buy so I am usually very satisfied with my purchases. In the case of the > >> voodoo5 and duron based computer I built, it has exceeded my expectations. > >> I'm happy. > >> > >> > >> Abe > >> > >> also, read this article for some illumination on the fps thing. > >> > >> http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/00q3/000704/index.html > >> > >> > >> >===== Original Message From "dwyatt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ===== > >> >Sorry if I missed something, because I've not been following this thread. > >> >But, anyway, you sound like you use your comp a lot like I do (very > >hard). > >> >I do have my PIII 500e o/c'd to 750 MHz. I have no stability problems. > >> >(stock Intel heatsink w/ no extra case or processor cooling and been > >running > >> >for 6 months 24/7) > >> > > >> >When it comes to 3d accelerator cards, what would you consider a more > >> >accurate indicator of a card's worth than it's fps rating? Sure, > >features > >> >are important, but as far as 3d accelerator cards go, most all of them > >have > >> >near the same features. So how is rating a card based on it's fps rating > >> >hogwash? > >> > > >> >Sometimes, a feature is so good that it outweighs the performance > >advantage > >> >of another 3d card. For example, www.firingsquad.com rated the Voodoo 5 > >> >higher than the Geforce2 because of the voodoo's higher visual quality, > >even > >> >though it is slower than the GF2. In general though, fps ratings are all > >> >that matters when comparing 3d cards, because features are so similar. > >> > > >> >BTW, my 250MHz overclock gets me anywhere from 15-30 fps more in UT. I > >> >don't know if you are one of those ppl saying what's the point of more > >than > >> >30 fps anyway? So just think about this: > >> > > >> >do a 360 degree turn in 100ms, divide 360 by your frame rate, your result > >is > >> >how often your view is updated during your turn > >> > > >> >end of rant :P > >> > > >> > > >> >dwyatt > >> >----- Original Message ----- > >> >From: "Abe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 9:46 PM > >> >Subject: RE: [[newbie] Athlon thunderbird & ka7-100] > >> > > >> > > >> >> yes but why? My machine never crashes and its on 24/7 with extremely > >> >heavy > >> >> use. > >> >> > >> >> I have half-life/quake3/unreal tournament marathons over here where I > >play > >> >on > >> >> my computer while it hosts for 5-12 people. I do that twice or three > >> >times a > >> >> week for 3-12 hours at a time. The machine just grins and keeps on > >going. > >> >> > >> >> How much faster is it going to be at 800mhz or even 900mhz then it is > >now? > >> >> And how unstable will it be? Bottom line is, I don't need to over > >clock > >> >it to > >> >> feel like I got my moneys worth. If it ain't broke it works just fins > >and > >> >> should be left alone. > >> >> > >> >> Don't forget that the jackasses on the online hardware review sites > >like > >> >> firingsquad and such not only tell you to overclock your chips but that > >> >the > >> >> only thing that matters when you buy a video card is how high it scores > >in > >> >> 3Dmark and how many fps it will put out in quake3. In other words. > >> >Hogwash. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Abe > >> >> > >> >> >===== Original Message From [EMAIL PROTECTED] ===== > >> >> >On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, you wrote: > >> >> >> no. maybe in a year and a half or so when this computer becomes my > >> >> experiment > >> >> >> bed. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >u can always unclock your duron. i would overclock it if i was > >> >> >u. with the motherboard u have i believe it is great for overclocking. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >===== Original Message From [EMAIL PROTECTED] ===== > >> >> >> >On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, you wrote: > >> >> >> >> the duron 600s are going for about 75 USD right now. The Asus > >A7v > >> >runs > >> >> >> about > >> >> >> >> 160. fairly affordable as far as brand new hardware goes. I > >spent > >> >> about > >> >> >> >> three months researching and saving to get this machine built. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Abe > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >===== Original Message From "Austin L. Denyer" > >> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> >> ===== > >> >> >> >> >> it actually takes about a minute. I've got a duron 600 > >machine > >> >with > >> >> >> >> >256M of > >> >> >> >> >> ram. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> ><envy> > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> It takes my machine 23 hours and 19 minutes to process a data > >> >block > >> >> >> >> >for seti > >> >> >> >> >> but I only run seti in windows at the moment. Presumably it > >will > >> >be > >> >> >> >> >quite a > >> >> >> >> >> bit faster in linux. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >You betcha! > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >Regards, > >> >> >> >> >Ozz. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Jesus saves, > >> >> >> >> Allah forgives, > >> >> >> >> Chthulu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >are u going to overclock your duron. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Jesus saves, > >> >> >> Allah forgives, > >> >> >> Chthulu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich. > >> >> > >> >> Jesus saves, > >> >> Allah forgives, > >> >> Chthulu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich. > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> Jesus saves, > >> Allah forgives, > >> Chthulu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich. > >> > >> > > Jesus saves, > Allah forgives, > Chthulu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich. > >
