Author Topic: must be doing something wrong (Read 359 times)

68DevilM · « **on:** July 03, 2004, 09:48:21 PM »

i got to be doing something wrong with my video card tweeks

cant get above 45fps and in furballs it horrible

ive tryed all kinds of combo's

more performance,
more detail??

i dont know ive got it all the way up to optimal perfomance now
any advice???

emachines T2482
windows xp
amd athlon xp 2400 1.99ghz
radeon 9200 128mb
756mbram

Orig · « **Reply #1 on:** July 04, 2004, 07:27:23 AM »

It's probably the radeon 9200. That's really a budget card no matter what you paid for it.

You might get better framerates with even an "old" GeForce4-4200/4600 and not pay too much, but then you wouldn't have any hardware dx9 features. These cards are now pretty cheap and they run everything but the super-new games fairly well.

For hardware DX9 at a reasonable price, I've read that the radeon 9700 cards have a good price/performance ratio. 9600XT and 9700 both.

But a 9200... That's just old technology repackaged with a "9" in the number.

Check out http://www.tomshardware.com and find their latest "VGA Charts" because they list pretty much every single card on the market with comparable benchmarks, all rank-ordered using the same benchmarks. Obviously benchmarks aren't perfect, but you can get a good idea how each card ranks against the overall market, and then check pricewatch or another price search engine to find how far up the VGA Chart performance ladder you can afford.

Ghosth · « **Reply #2 on:** July 04, 2004, 08:22:12 AM »

My radeon 9000 pro 128mb card is doing fine in ah2 on a 1.67ghz cpu.

Was running mid 30's in tower to 60/70's
in flight. However patch 5 gave me a good boost to mid 50's at the lowest.

You running the latest cat 4.5 drivers?
Tried ragetweak?

68DevilM · « **Reply #3 on:** July 04, 2004, 11:22:54 AM »

umm i updated my drivers if thats what you mean?

Embark · « **Reply #4 on:** July 04, 2004, 02:42:19 PM »

45FPS is excellent. Anything higher is of negligible difference. I run mine at 1600 x 1200 with max settings and get about that in Furballs too.

Orig · « **Reply #5 on:** July 04, 2004, 03:13:20 PM »

"45 fps" is fine sure, but with what levels of detail, what resolution, and with what kind of FSAA and ansio filtering?

I find the game looks a TON better to me at 2x FSAA for example, and luckily I seem to be a bit cpu limited because at 1024x768 I get almost the same framerate with no FSAA/ansio as I do with 2x FSAA and 2x ansio filtering. The trees, horizon, and hangars shimmer and "crawl" much less with FSAA turned on.

I used to run AH at 1280x1024 and no FSAA but found that the sweet spot on my rig (athlon XP 2000+ and GF4-4200) seems to be 1024x768 with 2x FSAA.

Get a better vid card, and you get better graphics in addition to the pure framerate. If you want framerate uber alles, you can get a whole lot more by turning all the sliders all the way down, decrease texture size, and move the horizon in way close (shift-f4?) but it'll look pretty smurfy.