RTCW hi-res and hi-tex is actually faster amazing !

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Hi,

I just played RTCW MP DEMO again on my PIII 450 mhz with 256 mb ram and a
FX5200 with 128 mb dram.

This time I set the resolution to 1024x786x32 bit, tri-linear interpolation
and model and textures high.

Half Indoors Half outdoor frame rate is 30 to 50. Indoors it can even be 60
to 70 with vsync on. Outside on the beach it s still 20 which is still good.

It's just amazing how much faster the frame rates are with hi-res and
hi-textures !

Since at 640x480 with bi-linear filtering and low textures the frame rate is
much lower about 20 to 30 half indoor/outdoor and 40 orso indoors.

So I think this is because when setting textures to high less interpolation
is required which is faster !

The fx5200 also has enough memory and textures are compressed... so it only
has to load them once... so at the start sometimes it shocks a little which
it not good for such a high action paced game... but later it's pretty
smooth...

Now everything just looks a bit better =D though I wonder if playing it for
hours is healthy ;) since such much details would lead to brain overflow
lol... but still it's good.

The soldiers also look a bit better up close... I would still be happy with
640x480.. if it wasn't for the faster frame rates at higher resolution...

I should still try 640x480 with high textures... and then see what fps is...
that could be interesting.

Though in itself rtcw is quite a dark game etc... the level is at midnight
too... halo is ofcourse more colourfull.

Also it's interesting to see how graphical quality is independant of the cpu
speed.

Maybe I could run halo at 1024x786 and still have the same fps... since only
the filling of the screen has to be done faster and that's done by the
gpu... not the cpu...

The asus website said: enjoy high quality graphics indepedant of cpu...
that's really true ! lol :)

Also I turn of light map in rtcw... since that just makes everything dark
and more beautifull.. but mostly darker... it aint doom you know ! :)

I dont want darkness in rtcw =D

Bye,
Skybuck.
 

augustus

Distinguished
Feb 27, 2003
740
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

> It's just amazing how much faster the frame rates are with hi-res and
> hi-textures !
>
if it wasn't for the faster frame rates at higher resolution...
>
> I should still try 640x480 with high textures... and then see what fps
is...
> that could be interesting.
>
> Though in itself rtcw is quite a dark game etc... the level is at midnight
> too... halo is ofcourse more colourfull.
>
> Also it's interesting to see how graphical quality is independant of the
cpu
> speed.
>
> Maybe I could run halo at 1024x786 and still have the same fps... since
only
> the filling of the screen has to be done faster and that's done by the
> gpu... not the cpu...

Yes, it's always been my experience that games tend to run MUCH faster at
higher resolutions than at 640x480. Like when I run UT2004 on my PIII 450
with my FX5200 at 1280x1024 with maxed details. I suggest you run Halo on
your PIII 450 at 1600x1200 on your rig for a truly breathtaking speed
experience. I still haven't figured out if you're a brighter than average
troll or a complete cretin.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Augustus" <tiberius@weeik.com> wrote in message
news:yz5pc.3021$9P6.1146@clgrps12...
> > It's just amazing how much faster the frame rates are with hi-res and
> > hi-textures !
> >
> if it wasn't for the faster frame rates at higher resolution...
> >
> > I should still try 640x480 with high textures... and then see what fps
> is...
> > that could be interesting.
> >
> > Though in itself rtcw is quite a dark game etc... the level is at
midnight
> > too... halo is ofcourse more colourfull.
> >
> > Also it's interesting to see how graphical quality is independant of the
> cpu
> > speed.
> >
> > Maybe I could run halo at 1024x786 and still have the same fps... since
> only
> > the filling of the screen has to be done faster and that's done by the
> > gpu... not the cpu...
>
> Yes, it's always been my experience that games tend to run MUCH faster at
> higher resolutions than at 640x480. Like when I run UT2004 on my PIII 450
> with my FX5200 at 1280x1024 with maxed details. I suggest you run Halo on
> your PIII 450 at 1600x1200 on your rig for a truly breathtaking speed
> experience. I still haven't figured out if you're a brighter than average
> troll or a complete cretin.

Well it just shows how stupid you really are...