Minimum Frame Rates

lhgpoobaa

Illustrious
Dec 31, 2007
14,462
1
40,780
0
I would like to see more benchmarks where the minimum framerate is given!
e.g. during a demo run.
I think minimum framerates are more useful than maximums and possibly even averages, especially with 3d shoot-em-ups.
Think about it...
playing UnrealTournamet for example... when do you need the highest framerate? when the action is at its thickest with 16 bots onscreen, blood and gore flying, not to mention rockets, bullets, smoke and all the other action artifacts.
THAT is the time the framerate is at its lowest, and where a benchmark score gives the best indication of weather the mobo/3d card combo rocks or not.

Are their any other merits? and how does one go about getting useful minimums?

and PLEASE! intelligent replies only. When you flame you just show others how limited your cranial capacity is.


ThePoo!
 
G

Guest

Guest
that dependes of what video card you use !!!
if you got a kyro 2 then you will allways get (99 %) more minimum fps in worst case scenarios (more complexity present in newer games tribes 2 ,sam, etc..)

so the cpu may be the factor... but also the video card !!!


kyro 2 is more consistent !!!
 

noko

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2001
2,407
0
19,780
0
Serious Sam has a built in benchmarks that give the minimum framerate, avg and highs. Finding a low without worrying about calaculating may be easy. If the game has a FPS indicator, then just by watching the FPS indicator someone could find the minimum frame rate which a system has for a game. Obviously hard drive accesses etc. could give a random momentary pause to game play if someone has less ram then optimum and shouldn't be used as a benchmark. Your point is valid and anything that can reduce the minimum frame rate would be more beneficial then tryin to maximize the highest frame rate to just increase the average frame rate. What good is a 100FPS scene when suddently when the action goes up it drops down to 15FPS but yet the average is around 50FPS?
 

lamer_gamer

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2001
312
0
18,780
0
OMG! 40 fps, that would be sweet. Here's my sad, sad system specs:
Windows ME
Celery 633
P.O.S. mobo
192MB RAM
Creative SB 128 PCI
Voodoo 3 3000 PCI

When playing "Undying" my avg fps is like 20 with absolutely no action. But as soon as any action starts happening, my frame rates drop into the toilet @ around 5-7fps :frown: ! I'm thinking of getting a 32MB Prophet 2 MX PCI. Anyone know how much better the Prophet would be than my Voodoo 3?


<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by lamer_gamer on 04/28/01 05:46 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 

rcf84

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
3,694
0
22,780
0
Radeon PCI is faster and has less problems then the PCI geforce2mx boards "IRQ stuff and Geforce2mx need bandwith 4x AGP = 1gb transfer, 32bit PCI = 133mb " Radeon will run just fine and you can get it $100 US.

Northwood P4 + i845(brookdale)+ 200mhz DDR-SDRAM + ATi Radeon 2 = Dream Team :cool:
 

AEboy128

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2001
807
0
18,980
0
I have a athlon 500, with a voodoo3 1000 AGP and i
get between 35 and 40fps. I think the PCI or the Celery
633 is whats slowing the fps down. I would get AGP if
possible. If not upgrade your mobo. I kno someone with almost the same config u have and he gets about 20-30 fps. I think the celery cpu is whats taken down frame rates.

Intel sux, AMD is better
 

lamer_gamer

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2001
312
0
18,780
0
Yeah, it's lookin' like I'm going to have to upgrade my mobo if I want to do any better graphics wise (or other upgrades for that matter). I guess you can't be a cheap a$$ forever, huh?

BTW: Love these forums, very informative especially for the relatively uneducated like me. Thanx all!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS