Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A fps question .

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • replied
    I get about 30-40 FPS in most of maps with my 3-years-old GeForce4MX. 20FPS is enough for me...

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by WosP
    Eh with those settings I get 40 fps with a celeron tualatin ,ge force 2 mx , 128 ram , I would be suprised If I wouldnt get the average fps 80 with sempron 2800 + radeon 9600 , ram 512 ...
    I think that's cuz the game auto adjusts visual setttings if u have a slow machine to keep the framerate up, or I read that somewhere here. Don't get a sempron cpu for gaming... Price diff from that to an athlon64 isnt too much, bout $60, and would make the most difference in this game which is reallly cpu intensive.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I have been quite disappointed performance-wise when I upgraded my machine a couple of months ago.

    I have upgraded to an AMD XP-M(atm running@2.35GHz), GF 6800 and 1 Gig of highspeed ram and I am not able to play UT2004 @1024*768 @default details without the occasion unplayable framedrops. I my mind that is not right, especially when you have studied numerous gamebenchmarks and see how lower spec machines score 150+ fps in UT2K4. I was hoping to be able to play at at least 1280*960@default details. Bummer.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Basically the way I've understood it is that the human eye can only see so much on average anyway. But you do FEEL a difference while playing just in the speed, and flow of the controls. *shrugs* at least I do. A TV show runs at approx. 30fps which is fine seeing how it's TV. Games at an eye level would look fine at 30 fps, but then all of a sudden, 15 things happen in the game that your hardware has a little trouble handling, so it dips to 15 fps. It starts to get really choppy. Then something explodes, and it falls to 5 fps where it all becomes an unplayable slideshow. For this reason you would find 60 fps better because if the same scenario happened you would still be above 30 fps when a boatload of stuff is going on. Ideally however, you would want 90 fps so that not only would it always look smooth even when something dipped, but it would still feel smooth.
    After that it starts becoming more about bragging rights really.

    Gamer A: "Well I ran UT2k4 at an average of 125 fps with all of the eye candy on on my 1 year old comp"
    Gamer B: "So what? My 3 month old comp gets 250 fps!!!!"

    In either case it gets to a point where the difference to all but the most die hard PC modder, is barely noticeable, if noticeable at all.

    But it is nice to be able to brag like that, of course the truth is that most of us never have the kind of money it takes to do that all of the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by slime73
    Considering I play with a steady 12 FPS, and usually score in the top 3 in DM, you have been rendered OBSOLETE!



    EDIT: Oh yeah, and I have NO mouse lag (with reduce mouse lag turned OFF).

    considering that you're playing on some ****ty demo servers or catalyst, i think that maybe you should keep your mouth shut about stuff you don't really know anything about. sorry to ruin your dreams kid, you're not good and you're not knowledgeable about UT2k4.


    about the sempron system, you can build a **** fine rig for $600-$800 (monitor and OS excluded) that would never drop below 85fps with every setting at medium to high. so really, it's a lot easier to build according to a budget rather than to achieve a certain setting. but i wouldn't purchase a sempron processor. very limited upgrading options. and you can get a real athlon64 for just a few bucks more and a large performance gain.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Eh with those settings I get 40 fps with a celeron tualatin ,ge force 2 mx , 128 ram , I would be suprised If I wouldnt get the average fps 80 with sempron 2800 + radeon 9600 , ram 512 ...

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    You can check FPS by typing in stat fps in the console by pressing either ` (the one below esc) or tab. To be honest I dont think the sempron or 9600 will cut it. I'd go for a AMD 3400+ and a 6600GT, but be aware if you get a PCI-e or PCI or AGP graphics cards, because you cant run a AGP graphics card on PCI-e or PCI and vice versa.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by WosP
    Im saving money for xbox 360 , I like those settings believe me , so what would you recommend for those settings ? Maybe sempron 2800 + , 512 ram , 9600 ?

    EDIT : btw , what does reduce mouse lag do ? Does it actually get rid off the mouse lag with some cpu power ( less fps ) , or somethin else which also effects the fps ? I was trying to play without it today and it felt the same , I got vsync off , maybe thats it . I cant tell if my aim is better with it or without it . So Ill keep it on I guess .
    Honestly, I never build a computer based on settings... so I wouldn't know what to tell you. I give myself a budget, and build the best system I can with that. How much were you planning to spend on the Sempron system you mentioned right there? (Including mobo, etc?)

    Yeah, I think it just dedicates some more CPU time to getting rid of mouselag, which usually reduces fps (sometimes drastically.) If you don't notice mouselag with 'reduce mouselag' turned off, you probably don't need it turned on. Alot of people don't get any mouselag when vsync is off, and some lucky ones don't get it even when vsync is on.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Im saving money for xbox 360 , I like those settings believe me , so what would you recommend for those settings ? Maybe sempron 2800 + , 512 ram , 9600 ?

    EDIT : btw , what does reduce mouse lag do ? Does it actually get rid off the mouse lag with some cpu power ( less fps ) , or somethin else which also effects the fps ? I was trying to play without it today and it felt the same , I got vsync off , maybe thats it . I cant tell if my aim is better with it or without it . So Ill keep it on I guess .

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by NakedApe
    No it does not. There is no setting that will allow you to see more frames per second than your monitors refresh rate. Think about it...
    Not consistently, or in a positive manner, no. But, you can technically see more frames per second than your mointor's refresh rate... what do you think tearing is? That's two frames being partially displayed at once. With vsync, it's likely one of those frames would never have been rendered onscreen at all. Again, tearing is more visible to some than it is to others. (Except when it's really bad, then it's blatantly obvious to all.)

    Originally posted by WosP
    My hz at 1024 x 768 will be 116 , I dont worry about that too much , I want to know with what gpu + cpu can I get 80 fps average at 1024 x 768 , highest dynamic LOD , high physics , lowest textures , low world detail , every detail turned off ( dynamic lighting , coronas .. ) and COLOR AT 16 - BIT , right now with those settings Im getting about 45 avg fps with celeron 1,3 ghz tualatin , ge force 2 mx 32mb , and 128 ram . I think with and amd semrpon 2800 + 754 , ati 9600 , and 512 ram, I should do fine right ? I mean that hardware is so much better compared to mine .I want a new pc just for ut 2k4 , and downloads , not for other games .
    What's your budget? You can build a system better than that sempron one for relatively little nowdays.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    My hz at 1024 x 768 will be 116 , I dont worry about that too much , I want to know with what gpu + cpu can I get 80 fps average at 1024 x 768 , highest dynamic LOD , high physics , lowest textures , low world detail , every detail turned off ( dynamic lighting , coronas .. ) and COLOR AT 16 - BIT , right now with those settings Im getting about 45 avg fps with celeron 1,3 ghz tualatin , ge force 2 mx 32mb , and 128 ram . I think with and amd semrpon 2800 + 754 , ati 9600 , and 512 ram, I should do fine right ? I mean that hardware is so much better compared to mine .I want a new pc just for ut 2k4 , and downloads , not for other games .

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    first thing you need to remember is that your monitor can not display any FPS higher then your refresh rate, and the max rate at wich your eyes can see the diff has been so over debated and studied, i dont know what to belive ;/

    but i do know this, at 60mhz refresh rate i get a headace within 5 minuits...

    so just find what ever looks right, there is nothing better then what is good for you

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    how do you check fps rate?

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by vrxGz
    Honestly, this depends on settings. If you've got vsync on, you're NEVER going to be able to notice anything higher than your monitor's refresh rate.
    No it does not. There is no setting that will allow you to see more frames per second than your monitors refresh rate. Think about it...

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Honestly, this depends on settings. If you've got vsync on, you're NEVER going to be able to notice anything higher than your monitor's refresh rate. When it's off, a very few people can notice a difference between 60 and 85 fps. Most people can see the the video start to get choppy below 50 or 60 fps.
    Originally posted by slime73
    Considering I play with a steady 12 FPS, and usually score in the top 3 in DM, you have been rendered OBSOLETE!



    EDIT: Oh yeah, and I have NO mouse lag (with reduce mouse lag turned OFF).
    If you're getting in the top three with those fps, you're playing in the wrong servers. Then again, if you're getting those fps, it wouldn't be very fun to play in the 'right' servers.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X