Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: humble on April 17, 2005, 06:34:32 PM
-
I've got a AMD 64 3200+ with a X800 pro and 1 gig of PC3200....
I'm finding the game is unplayable in "GV" mode under alot of circumstances....hope a patch is otw....
-
Honestly, humble, I don't know what you expect with borderline hardware like that.
And, I might add,
I have a P4 2.8GHz oc'd to 3.06, a Radeon 9800 Pro, and 1 Gb ram, and find my FRs drop to to 20s and 30s at busy fields. I've also noticed a reappearance of the dreaded mini screen freezes.
Haven't changed any settings since 2.02.
-
MY framerate at tower is about 55 going to max of 75 (monitor refresh) in the air....my F4 GV rate is ~23 but drops to 6 or 7 FPS at times....
-
Complaing about 20-30 FPS? You should try my Powerpoint Slide show version of Aces high!
Every once in a while at altitude, clear skies and by myself, I MIGHT hit 40 fps, but then the computer realizes that it screwed up in giving me a glimpse of reasonable frame rates, and quickly drops it back down in the high teens.
But, I'm in the process of getting a new system (finally!!), so one of these days I'll be able to have GOOD frame rates like you guys!
BTW Humble, your system is obviously trash. I don't make many offers like this, but since you don't live that far from me (I'm in Mesa), I'll offer to come over and pick it up for you and take it off of your hands so you don't have to mess with it anymore!:D:)
-
same here and it's not my equipment either. very frustrating.
-
I also have AMD 64-3200, with Geforce 256 bit 5700....mid 40's in normal, when same scenario pre-patch was much higher--found myself having to drop to F2 range often while in furballs, and a pesky freeziing thing happens fairly often--only for second or so. In general, I find it LOTS harder to shoot stuff---was 250 behind a lanc with a A8 with 30's.... had no idea where rounds went to. Fighters MUCH harder to hit...When AH2 started, I had weened myself of firin at 800, etc..now I seem to have to ween myself of firin above 300.
-
humble ... i have the same system cept a 3400+ . im finding some parts of gameplay annoyingly slow. Ive had to drop my textures to 256 , to find good all around fps . Id hate to see how its affecting people with older systems . FWIW
38
-
Originally posted by humble
I've got a AMD 64 3200+ with a X800 pro and 1 gig of PC3200....
I'm finding the game is unplayable in "GV" mode under alot of circumstances....hope a patch is otw....
hell im running a amd athlon xp 2400
with a crapie motherboard, must be doing
something right, or i just dont know any better?
wait till i buy my new system:D
-
Originally posted by 68DevilM
hell im running a amd athlon xp 2400
with a crapie motherboard, must be doing
something right, or i just dont know any better?
wait till i buy my new system:D
Well? What are you doing? Whats your FPS?
-
GV mode, wtf is that?!
-
humble - before this pacth: 50-60fps normal on a BUSY field, now I'm down to 5-15fps.
Darn trees. But at least I can weave in and out of them (four p-kills so far) :D
AMD 2500+ (1.8GHz), Ati Radeon 9700 Pro, 1 Gb ram.
-
AMD Fx53
6800 256mb Ultra(omega drivers v 1.6177 (Q)
2 gigs Corsair Ult Low Lat. ram
IN the tower.... 45
IN a furball 15-20 at times.
This is unaceptable in my book.
I saw nothing wrong with the trees of the last patch.
Not only have I died more times to phantom trees than nme planes but they're also killing my frame rate.
The very sad part is that I was thinking about over clocking this box after the patch.
After waking up I relized I was crazy to think I should have to.
-
Originally posted by Boozer2
GV mode, wtf is that?!
You have multiple view options F1 thru F4...F$ is the most detailed and is the "ground view mode....
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
AMD Fx53
6800 256mb Ultra(omega drivers v 1.6177 (Q)
2 gigs Corsair Ult Low Lat. ram
IN the tower.... 45
IN a furball 15-20 at times.
This is unaceptable in my book.
I saw nothing wrong with the trees of the last patch.
Not only have I died more times to phantom trees than nme planes but they're also killing my frame rate.
The very sad part is that I was thinking about over clocking this box after the patch.
After waking up I relized I was crazy to think I should have to.
Morph....
Do youhave a seperate sound card or use onboard sound. Ihave a DFI lanparty (754). It's an NV3 chipset. Basically its the XBox chip...Iread multiple places that tis actually faster then having a seperate soundcard....however skuzzy says it still takes CPU cycles awayfrom graphics....was thinking bout swapping one in. But your system runs rings around mine so I dont see the good if youhave problems as well.....
-
>>Do youhave a seperate sound card or use onboard sound. Ihave a DFI lanparty (754). It's an NV3 chipset. Basically its the XBox chip...Iread multiple places that tis actually faster then having a seperate soundcard....however skuzzy says it still takes CPU cycles awayfrom graphics....was thinking bout swapping one in. But your system runs rings around mine so I dont see the good if youhave problems as well..... <<
I dunno, I have FR around 20-30 over a busy field..
I got one of those $20 Sound Blaster cards & noticed a pretty good jump in FPS.. lowered a few of my settings & it's better than it was... one thing also, I'm preloading everything except video mem
P4 2.6g
Nv4000fx 128mb
512ram of some kind or another
and a $20 sound card...
systems not a screamer but it does pretty good for AH2, sux with Doom3 tho...:aok
WD
-
Humble, I know exactly which mobo you've got. I've got an asus sk8n with my sound card from soundblaster. The mobo is ok at best. I am not pleased with it.
This weekend I've dont just about all there is to do with my drivers.
I even made a list of the ones out there I know work best for each peice of hardware and trieded every posible combination.
No luck.
-
Using an old Athlon 2400XP with 512MB SD-RAM, onboards sound and ATI9500Pro, i am usually at 25-40 FPS.
Many GVs and Bandits will sometimes push me down to around 12-15.
I set ground distance to the absolute minimum, so i don't have much trees to care about, but i on the other hand i use force 4xAA for image quality.
I would expect systems like Morpheus' or humble's to run AH2 at full details without problems, wonder what goes wrong?
-
I EVEN pulled out one of my brand new sticks of memory thinking maybe one of them was bad/shorted out/who knows... to try and solve horrid frps.
One thing I do see is that I will have all this unused memory at the top of my screen and I'm still getting crapy rates.
Is my system too stupid to realize that it's got all that other memory to use? Or is the game too stupid? Everything is stupid right now. Im at wits end with this.
-
Morpheus, do you have the "Preload Textures" box checked?
I have and it reduced inflight reloading alot. Also you will see that your video memory is much better used.
-
seems to be a theme going on here.
AMD64 3400+
2Gig PC3200
ATI X800Pro
Nothing Overclocked !
Tower 60s - 100s (cant get Vsync to work on any setting may be cos I use DVI connection ? dunno )
In Air no trees 80 - 200
On deck near trees 15-25 :eek:
GV Mode F4 single figures ie 3-7 fps.
Admittedly I use 1024 textures but cant move sliders all the way to the left they are about 75-80% as the fps are too low .
I preload into system not Video as 1024 textures use all the 256mb video memory.
With this done I only use about 40mb of the Vid memory leaving 210mb unused. Got no problems with system memory bout 900mb left free so no pagefile usage.
Dont get me wrong I am certainly not complaining about my Frame Rates who would. What does trouble me is the huge drop in frames when encountering the new trees not such a problem for me but my old rig would have frozen up solid.
Adjuster
-
Adjuster...
Sounds about the same as mine....my GV framerate is a bit higher (most times) but I'm running 512 vs 1024 with everything preloaded. It seems that the soundcard issue is a minor one given other system specs here.
I'm going to run aquamark and se2003 benchmarks again tonight and see if anything changed there. Then run some GV's again and see what FPS I get. Then I'll start tweaking drivers and rebenchmark....then OC system 5%/10%....then swap in a sound card. Curious what I can do to up framerate.....
Morph I have no clue....have you run an aquamark bench on that system?? It should just scream....
-
I do very well with futuremarks benchs'. I will have to check on my scores, I remember being impressed. BUT, I fire up aces high and its like someone taking a chainsaw and cutting my system in half. I dont get it.
I had an X800 prior to buying this 6800ultra which I gave to my father when his gpu got roasted. That card, in this game, dominated. I will say no more... that'll open up a can of worms with the ati vs's geforce guys.
-
Makes me kind of hesitant to upgrade my video card. I have my detail settings about 1/3 of the way from performance towards details, and my textures set to 256, with 1024X768 resolution. updating to the 67 series Omega drivers got me an improvement in framerates, although I can't seem to get VSync turned on. I noticed nothing dramatic with regards to framerates in the last patch. I did notice the trees no look even more like camo net.
I've been considering upgrading to a newer 6600 series 256MB video card this month, along with a 21" monitor. I'm serious when I say I'm now hesitant to upgrade. The card will be over $150 shipped, money I can spend on something else if it won't make AH II even better.
I don't seem to have any of the terrible framerates people are getting, but I don't have the details cranked up, the game seems really playable to me. Lowest I've seen my framerate drop to is around 25-30 with a LOT of planes around. I was flying BETWEEN the trees last night with 50 FPS or better. I don't fool with GV's much, but Saturday I took a base with an LVT with around 20 planes present, and a lot of smoke, still had a framerate of 50+.
AMD 2500+ Barton Mobile
Soltek SL-75FRN2-RL
OCZ PC4000 Dual Channel Platinum (512)
WD 37 Gig Raptor 10K RPM RAID drive
VisionTek GeForce 3 Ti 200 64MB 4X AGP
Creative Audigy Live!
I am running the thing turned up to 220MHz and 11X, my
Motherboard/CPU/RAM benchmarks on par with a P4 3.4
Intel.
The only thing I can think of that might make my rig run so much better is RAID and the speed of my RAM. It sure ain't the video card. Then again, it may not be all that good, I don't have all the pretty details some see.
-
Virgil
My old card is a Ti-4200....a great great card. I wouldnt bother to update until you upgrade your CPU/MB. Historically I dont like to GV...but with the new tree's its actually a huge improvement. Use the F4 view (if you dont) and see what your frame rates are....
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
I do very well with futuremarks benchs'. I will have to check on my scores, I remember being impressed. BUT, I fire up aces high and its like someone taking a chainsaw and cutting my system in half. I dont get it.
I had an X800 prior to buying this 6800ultra which I gave to my father when his gpu got roasted. That card, in this game, dominated. I will say no more... that'll open up a can of worms with the ati vs's geforce guys.
Morph....
I ran my mark3 2003 bench....was horrible....half of what it should be. Didnt have time to trouble shoot it but will tonight. Run your benchs again before you tinker...if you see the same scores then you have an AH issue...I'm guessing I have a more broad based problem (although everything else runs great)....
-
XP 2600+ O'cd to 2.3Ghz
1GB Corsair RAM
Geforce 5900XT O'cd to 5900U speeds
SoundBlaster sound card
Bioware M7NCD motherboard.
AA at 2x, AF off, Vsync ON, 512 max textures.
Ingame sliders at 80% to the left, bottom "range" slider at 50%.
-------------------------------------------------------
After the last patch, I'm getting 80+ fps in the tower. Yes the trees do affect my fps, but not nearly as much as the animated water (this is a problem unique to the 5xxx series video cards). I cant explain why a system that should be running rings around mine isnt. Perhaps you should run your Direct X diagnostic and send it to Skuzzy for a look through. Mabye he can point out some things to help you.
-
Originally posted by Tumor
Well? What are you doing? Whats your FPS?
i get 40-60 fps, but i also streamlined windows xp to make it faster by turning everything off that you dont need that takes up resouces
-
I've done some reading up on my mobo Humble...
heh. Its a peice of crap to say the least. No one likes it. I should have checked around more before I took the advise of one person I know. I figuredthat because he had a similar setup and it worked well for him I'd get it... Wrong.
Maybe he's got some sort of secret drivers I dont know about.
I think I shall rip it from my case and smash it into a thousand itzy bitzy peices when I get another one.
All I know is that soon, if I crank anymore power into this box to run AH to where I like it to run, Im going to have to invest in a deisel generator dedicated to running my power supply.
-
I'm wondering, why is it people are running PC3200 RAM with really fast systems?
I intentionally went with PC4000 RAM to be able to run my RAM and my CPU REAL hard and in synchronous mode. although I don't have a lot of RAM, my 512MB usually scores as high as a lot of other guys 1Gig or more, but few of them are running PC4000RAM in Dual Channel synchronous mode. It seems to make my CPU work a lot faster as well. Odd how my rig benchmarks up there with P4 3.4 rigs with 1Gig or more of RAM.
Humble, I won't swap out the CPU/MB in this rig, I'd only upgrade the RAM to 1Gig (same RAM just more of it) and the video card. otherwise I'll build a new rig.
-
I dont think you have much top end with regard to a better GPU. I had a fan failure that fried my 2500+...went ahead and upgraded. Otherwise I'd of stayed with the Ti-4200. Dont think a card upgrade will gain much. the 2500+ and Ti-4200 match up pretty well.
I'm still using my old ram from previous system. Certainly will upgrade as needed. Up till this patch system has been flawless....I'll redo bench marks tonight. Unless I had AVG or something running my 6750 3DMark 2003 inicates a real problem somewhere totally seperate from AH...
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
I'm wondering, why is it people are running PC3200 RAM with really fast systems?
I intentionally went with PC4000 RAM to be able to run my RAM and my CPU REAL hard and in synchronous mode. although I don't have a lot of RAM, my 512MB usually scores as high as a lot of other guys 1Gig or more, but few of them are running PC4000RAM in Dual Channel synchronous mode. It seems to make my CPU work a lot faster as well. Odd how my rig benchmarks up there with P4 3.4 rigs with 1Gig or more of RAM.
Humble, I won't swap out the CPU/MB in this rig, I'd only upgrade the RAM to 1Gig (same RAM just more of it) and the video card. otherwise I'll build a new rig.
Probably most of em (like me) have a Motherboard that runs at 400mhz FSB. PC4000 is DDR2 type RAM, and alot of people dont like it. You are running Dual Channel. Alot of people (again, like myself) bought motherboards that dont support Dual Channel. In that case, I believe PC 4000 is actually slower than PC 3200 (I dont know this for a fact, since I've never used it, I have heard people say that though). Now that the DDR3 RAM is coming out, when the prices drop, I can bet you'll see people upgrading.
-
Epox 8NPAJ + NForce3 Socket-754 DDR Mainboard
AMD Athlon64 + 3400 Processor
ATI 256 MB Radeon X800 Video Card w/Zalman Cooling
1GB Corsair XMS PC3200 DDR Memory
Audigy 2 Sound Card
_____________________________ ____________
Oh, sucks to be me :( only showing 102 fps, from 112 fps; woe is me :rofl
-
Originally posted by bj229r
I also have AMD 64-3200, with Geforce 256 bit 5700....mid 40's in normal, when same scenario pre-patch was much higher--found myself having to drop to F2 range often while in furballs, and a pesky freeziing thing happens fairly often--only for second or so. In general, I find it LOTS harder to shoot stuff---was 250 behind a lanc with a A8 with 30's.... had no idea where rounds went to. Fighters MUCH harder to hit...When AH2 started, I had weened myself of firin at 800, etc..now I seem to have to ween myself of firin above 300.
FYI that 5700 you have has the same chip as the Ultra card, an NV36, and can easily be overclocked.
I got the 256M 5700le with the NV36 chip, it was under clocked to 250.. while the ultra comes with the same chip running at 475
Using coolbits I clocked the chip to 450 and memmory from 200 to 400...
Here's a great article on what I'm talking about:
here (http://hi-techreviews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=622)
Edit:
Typo: My card is running 450/475 with an FPS maxed at 85 (same as monitors refresh rate) to the high 50's elsewhere 1024 res / 512 textures, XP3200 / SB Aud Gamer sound / Gigabyte K7 Triton Mobo S-ata RAID.
But I boot off a seperate drive with. a clean Windows XP install for games only, my 'regular' drive has no games.
-
Originally posted by LTARokit
Epox 8NPAJ + NForce3 Socket-754 DDR Mainboard
AMD Athlon64 + 3400 Processor
ATI 256 MB Radeon X800 Video Card w/Zalman Cooling
1GB Corsair XMS PC3200 DDR Memory
Audigy 2 Sound Card
_____________________________ ____________
Oh, sucks to be me :( only showing 102 fps, from 112 fps; woe is me :rofl
Try turning on your Vsync, then come back and tell us what your fps are. Fake frame rates dont count.
-
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
Try turning on your Vsync, then come back and tell us what your fps are. Fake frame rates dont count.
____________________________
Fake?? What's to BS about?? either it shows the rate or not. Average is bout 100 fps. There are goods days and bad days, not unlike anyone else. Bad days 40 - 75, good days 100 +. Not sure what Vsync is, (never claimed to be puter expert) but if it has that much of a negative effect why would I want to?? :confused:
-
Athlon XP 2000+(Palomino)
ancient Asus A7V-133C
Asus GF4 Ti4200 OC'd
1 Gb of SDRAM
Allways getting over 30 fps except over a field if it has more than 5 buildings on fire.
The key to good frame rates is to shut down every unneeded process and service of Win XP.
I've shutdown the services I never need from the "services.msc" module.
I use FSAutostart (http://www.kensalter.com/fsautostart/) to close down the ones I need sometimes but not in AH(like print spooler).
-
Morpheus:
Fx53
1 GIG Corsair Twinxxl extreme super duper cas 2 memory
1 BFG 6800 GT PCI Express
MB is ASUS-SLI etc...
I get 60-80s in the tower
80-100 at 5-10k
100-120 at 15-20k
And yes thats with vsync on.
Theres some setting in your bios you need to ensure is maxed out for your video card. I forget.
But I got the same setup you do (actually yours should be faster with the ultra.
-
Balsy
Can you take a shot of your bios and either post it here or email it to me?
Id be interested to see what you have going on in there. And would be greatful for the help.
Thanks
-
Originally posted by 68DevilM
i get 40-60 fps, but i also streamlined windows xp to make it faster by turning everything off that you dont need that takes up resouces
Oh... wow. So I guess there really ARE people who don't do that hehe :D
And here I always thought it was a no-brainer.
-
Originally posted by LTARokit
____________________________
Fake?? What's to BS about?? either it shows the rate or not. Average is bout 100 fps. There are goods days and bad days, not unlike anyone else. Bad days 40 - 75, good days 100 +. Not sure what Vsync is, (never claimed to be puter expert) but if it has that much of a negative effect why would I want to?? :confused:
Because your monitor cannot show frame rates in excess of your monitors refresh rate. PERIOD. What you see on your screen, regardless of how many fps your card is reporting, is limited to your refresh rate. If it's set at 85, then you are seeing 85 fps. If its set at 60, you are seeing 60 fps. This is an established fact, its not my opinion. Turning Vsync ON in your video card setup "syncs" your frame rate output with your refresh rate. Capping it basically. Since you cant see anything beyond that to start with, anything above your refresh is "false framerates". They dont exist. Turn your vsync to ON, and see what your framerate drops to. Thats what you are actually seeing. It can also cause micro warps and freezes while your computer tries to catch up with the video card if they arent "synced".
I havent seen a monitor yet that costs under 400 dollars that has a refresh rate higher than 85 at popular screen resolutions. If you have vsync on and are getting those 100+ frame rates, I bow to your superior equipment and apologize.
-
starofafrica
FYI: Frame rates above the refresh rate of your monitor DO exist. You just don't see the extra frames. But whatever happens in those unseen frames still happens. Bullets hit, planes move, etc...
Getting an un-synched 120 FPS is going to give you smoother, better gameplay even with an 85 refresh, than synched at 85 FPS. The only reason to enable v-sync is if you see "tearing" or other graphic anomolies. Pretty much a non-issue these days.
g00b
-
new trees / ground texture have made AHII VERY VERY unplayable
i mean 10fps when landing really hurts
-
Originally posted by g00b
starofafrica
FYI: Frame rates above the refresh rate of your monitor DO exist. You just don't see the extra frames. But whatever happens in those unseen frames still happens. Bullets hit, planes move, etc...
Getting an un-synched 120 FPS is going to give you smoother, better gameplay even with an 85 refresh, than synched at 85 FPS. The only reason to enable v-sync is if you see "tearing" or other graphic anomolies. Pretty much a non-issue these days.
g00b
g00b, I have never seen a resource that says that. Mind providing me with a source? If I'm wrong I dont mind learning something new.
-
Just as a FYI, this is what the Skuzzmeister had to say on the subject
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/newreply.php?s=&action=newreply&postid=1006402
Originally posted by Skuzzy
There are a number of factors involved with accurate frame draws as it relates to FPS. A video card has many options available to determine what should be drawn on the display at any given moment.
When a game displays the FPS, it is displaying the rate at which it can render a frame. Just because a game renders it, does not mean that frame is actually being displayed on the video display.
Now it gets complicated. When vsync is enabled, you are assured that every frame rendered is displayed, as long as the video subsystem properly honors vsync. So what is a game doing when it cannot shove data to the video card during a frame draw?
Well, it depends on how many frame buffers a game allocates and if the frame buffers are full or not when the game wants to render a frame. It also depends on how the video subsystem (hardware/driver) decides it wants to handle it.
Sometimes a video card can stall the data delivery so a frame will not be missed, sometimes it might throw away a frame buffer to allow the game to continue. Really hard to know as it is dependent on the video subsystem.
Most of the time a video subsystem will make the best attempt to make sure the video frames are rendered so they do not miss any data, which keeps the video smooth and accurate.
Without vsync, a video subsystem has several options available. It can overwrite the video frame, which will typically cause 'tearing' in the video display due to mismatched frames being partially overlayed.
The video susbsystem may opt to finish a current frame buffer and overwrite previous buffers, which can cause some jerkiness in the motion of objects, but this method eliminates the 'tearing' effect.
A game could also send the same frame over and over again, if the update information is not available for the next frame. This last item can lead to some intersting visuals. For instance, in an online game, the object in your view needs a packet update from a server to be placed accurately in its environment. If you are running insane frame rates, your player/object could get updatred many times while game code simply extrapolates the remote object position. Suddenly a packet update arrives and the extrapolation may not have been accurate and the remote object jumps.
Your position, which the remote player has not gotten yet coupld also jump as while you are running insane frame rates and your object has been moving around, the remote player does not see it until he gets a packet update.
Now, both of you are out of sync, which can cause perception of lag, when in fact, it is a video synchronization problem and may not have a thing to do with lag. This can be more exaggerated with very high CPU speeds as well.
Keep in mind, I am not specifically talking about Aces High. Just the overall effect running without vsync can have on a multi-player game.
So the question then becomes, are your perceived improvements in your view worth the possible side effects? You cant prove frame rates you dont see are helping you. Its too easy to pass off as individual perception. It's a fact that it can cause problems. I'm certainly not getting anythign out of it if you do or dont turn it on. I'd just like to make sure the facts are straight.
-
OK my Aquamark is 62092 & my 3Dmark03 is 10030....
My frame rate at spawn (stock) in F4 mode is ~23 in a PZ4 using "3" location (unbottoned turret view)
-
Morpheus,
Do you have the same MB???
-
hate to be 'my system runs sweet all in ya face' but.....
im running:
AMD 64 2.2ghz cpu
ATI radeon 9800
1gig DDR ram
soundblaster 5.1
at:
1280X1024 res
1024 textures
preload sysmem
with graphics sliders:
level of detail: 1/3 left from full performance
displayed object size: in middle
ground vis range: 1.5k
Frames per second: (set to max of 75hz)
tower: 75
furball 20+ planes: 40-50
under 1k above trees: 30-40
under 1k furball 20+ planes: 25-35
GV mode: 15-30
i just dont understand how your mega systems cant do this.
but then, my net conect sucks big time, and joystick is a POS, so i take the rough with the smooth.
-
Originally posted by mechanic
hate to be 'my system runs sweet all in ya face' but.....
im running:
AMD 64 2.2ghz cpu
ATI radeon 9800
1gig DDR ram
soundblaster 5.1
at:
1280X1024 res
1024 textures
preload sysmem
with graphics sliders:
level of detail: 1/3 left from full performance
displayed object size: in middle
ground vis range: 1.5k
Frames per second: (set to max of 75hz)
tower: 75
furball 20+ planes: 40-50
under 1k above trees: 30-40
under 1k furball 20+ planes: 25-35
GV mode: 15-30
i just dont understand how your mega systems cant do this.
but then, my net conect sucks big time, and joystick is a POS, so i take the rough with the smooth.
meh. you are always instigating trouble. :D
-
First of all , people have different levels playabilty , i dont like to see any type of slow down in my system . Alot of people are saying their system runs fine, slow downs to 20 -30 fps is not fine in my book . Ive seen as low as 40fps with my system 1280X 1024, 512 textures 4 AA . Ive seen where people say that anything above 30 fps the human eye cant see, well i can tell a difference between 60fps and 75fps . Roll a plane at 75fps then roll at 60 fps , 75 is much smoother and seems faster to me .
Humble my system is getting 70,087 in aquamark and 11,245 in 3dmk03 our systems are basically the same except i have an audigy 2 soundcard so for using the onboard your system seems fine as far as benches go . i notice a better , less fluctuating frame rate by going with th audigy2 over the ac97 on the nforce 3 board .
I really like what HTC has done with the game . Its got to be hard to balance new features vs playablility, but at this point my system isnt high end , but if im having some issues , i really feel for some of the players who have an older rig ...... 38
AMD 64 3400+
x800 PRO (535 core 500 mem)
1 gig corsair 3200 CL2
Audigy 2
-
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
Because your monitor cannot show frame rates in excess of your monitors refresh rate.
. If you have vsync on and are getting those 100+ frame rates, I bow to your superior equipment and apologize.
_____________________________ _____________
Well obviously we are talking about two completely different screen rates. the rate I'm speaking of shows at the top of your screen every time you log on. My posting wasn't to offend or BS, it was to inform and offer info that may or may not help others. So am I going to brag on my rig.....hell yes....considering not more than six months ago I showed an average of 9 frames to zero frames (top of the screen).
Again, SCREEN reads high fr most of time. VSYNC IS NOT ON. And quite frankly have been advised to leave OFF, by someone who knows a whole lot more bout puters than me. Again bad days & good days.....and that's after the new updates.
Bad Days: Only on certain maps, like the one for last night. Logged in late, less than 200 players. FR low, screen skipping, stuttering, little bit of lag, little bit of warping. On the most cleared up after about 30 - 45 minutes of play.
I've found bad days revolve around 2 or 3 certain maps only, why........???? AGAIN as stated before I'm no puter expert, never claimed to be (unlike others).
So Star, evidently you wentn't able to answer my earlier question, maybe too busy being arrogant. So I'll open the question to the thread: Why turn Vsync on if it has such a negative effect on Frame Rate?? Mine is off and I show a good frame rate (top of the screen....Star....Top of the screen), and on most have more good days than bad.
LTARokit
-
Originally posted by LTARokit
__________________________________________
Well obviously we are talking about two completely different screen rates. the rate I'm speaking of shows at the top of your screen every time you log on. My posting wasn't to offend or BS, it was to inform and offer info that may or may not help others. So am I going to brag on my rig.....hell yes....considering not more than six months ago I showed an average of 9 frames to zero frames (top of the screen).
Again, SCREEN reads high fr most of time. VSYNC IS NOT ON. And quite frankly have been advised to leave OFF, by someone who knows a whole lot more bout puters than me. Again bad days & good days.....and that's after the new updates.
Bad Days: Only on certain maps, like the one for last night. Logged in late, less than 200 players. FR low, screen skipping, stuttering, little bit of lag, little bit of warping. On the most cleared up after about 30 - 45 minutes of play.
I've found bad days revolve around 2 or 3 certain maps only, why........???? AGAIN as stated before I'm no puter expert, never claimed to be (unlike others).
So Star, evidently you wentn't able to answer my earlier question, maybe too busy being arrogant. So I'll open the question to the thread: Why turn Vsync on if it has such a negative effect on Frame Rate?? Mine is off and I show a good frame rate (top of the screen....Star....Top of the screen), and on most have more good days than bad.
LTARokit
We arent talking about 2 different things. Wasnt trying to come across as arrogant, but it does tend to irritate me when there are plenty of resources available that tell you why its a bad thing to do. I'd trust Skuzzy's opinion about game related issues before I'd trust a hundred guys in the arena. Because I've been a "support tech", and done repairs and fixes on other people's stuff, and I've seen just how much the "expert" at home knows about his system. Enough to cause problems. Thats why there's always going to be a good market for guys to do low level support and repairs. You claimed not to be an expert and thats cool. You dont have to be. But you need to know there are more sources of information than your friends. And they can be wrong.
Now, I obviously wasnt clear on the issue and I apologize. I'll try to make it more clear for you. The frame rate number you see when you log into AH is the frame rates that your video card reports it is putting out. If it says 100, it is telling you that it is drawing 100 frames per second. However, if your monitor's refresh rate is set at 85, it only refreshes (or redraws) your screen 85 times per second. So you can never view more than 85 frames per second, no matter how many your card says its putting out. If you look at the post Skuzzy made (and I copied to here), you will see how he explains how many problems that can cause when your card is drawing 100+ frames per second but your monitor can only display 85.
I have seen guys in several forums that brag how many fps they can get in different games with vsync off, and so think this must be a good thing. So they advise all their friends to turn it off too, thinking its a tool that gives them a big boost in frame rates.
Let me give you an analogy. Lets say you had a switch on your tachometer in your car. In one position, "normal", it shows the actual RPMs of the engine. In the other position, "MAX", it does a little "diagnostic routine", and tells you the max RPMs your engine can turn. Useful thing to know right? But for everyday driving, dont you want to know the actual RPM's of the engine? I mean, the MAX setting is great for troubleshooting, it might be able to warn you if things are getting loose, or dirty, or needs maintenance if the max RPM number drops, but its really useless for hopping in your car and driving down the street. So why would you use it?
I realize thats not a perfect analogy, but it serves the purpose. And I do apologize if I came off as arrogant. It was never my intention.
-
I've been considering upgrading to a newer 6600 series 256MB video card this month, along with a 21" monitor. I'm serious when I say I'm now hesitant to upgrade. The card will be over $150 shipped, money I can spend on something else if it won't make AH II even better.
[/B]
I just put a 6600GT 128mb in my system.
Intel 2.0Ghz
Intel Mobo (4x AGP)
Soundblaster live
1gb ram.
My fps hovers around 40-50 and drops to about 30 in low furballs. What I have seen with the new card is that the FPS does not drop radically in the low furballs and I no longer get the pronounces studdering. Installing the latest nVidia drivers cured some disconnect problems.
I preload textures but not skins and I am not using hardly any video ram. So I don't know how much help a more video ram would be. I think my main bottleneck is that my mobo only supports 4x agp.
-
Intel 850E chipset
Intel P4 3.06Ghz HT enabled
1G RAMBUS PC1066
ATI 9700 Pro 128
Viewsonic 21in Monitor 1024x768 @ 120Mhz
With the release of 2.03 untill the latest patch when I made a change in the texture and detail sliders I went from a minimum FPS of 60 to Maximum of 120 in the game, down to min 8 in some cases max 109. I found my FPS went to the chits when I was close to the gound and had more than about 6 planes around.
I moved my top two sliders 3/4 of the way to the right into performance and my frame rates came back to 60min and 120 max. Is the AH 2.03 coad handeled freindlier by Intel systems????
-
Originally posted by LTARokit
__________________________________________
So Star, evidently you wentn't able to answer my earlier question, maybe too busy being arrogant. So I'll open the question to the thread: Why turn Vsync on if it has such a negative effect on Frame Rate?? Mine is off and I show a good frame rate (top of the screen....Star....Top of the screen), and on most have more good days than bad.
LTARokit
He already answered your ? you just didnt take the time to read it ......... 38
Originally posted by Skuzzy
There are a number of factors involved with accurate frame draws as it relates to FPS. A video card has many options available to determine what should be drawn on the display at any given moment.
When a game displays the FPS, it is displaying the rate at which it can render a frame. Just because a game renders it, does not mean that frame is actually being displayed on the video display.
Now it gets complicated. When vsync is enabled, you are assured that every frame rendered is displayed, as long as the video subsystem properly honors vsync. So what is a game doing when it cannot shove data to the video card during a frame draw?
Well, it depends on how many frame buffers a game allocates and if the frame buffers are full or not when the game wants to render a frame. It also depends on how the video subsystem (hardware/driver) decides it wants to handle it.
Sometimes a video card can stall the data delivery so a frame will not be missed, sometimes it might throw away a frame buffer to allow the game to continue. Really hard to know as it is dependent on the video subsystem.
Most of the time a video subsystem will make the best attempt to make sure the video frames are rendered so they do not miss any data, which keeps the video smooth and accurate.
Without vsync, a video subsystem has several options available. It can overwrite the video frame, which will typically cause 'tearing' in the video display due to mismatched frames being partially overlayed.
The video susbsystem may opt to finish a current frame buffer and overwrite previous buffers, which can cause some jerkiness in the motion of objects, but this method eliminates the 'tearing' effect.
A game could also send the same frame over and over again, if the update information is not available for the next frame. This last item can lead to some intersting visuals. For instance, in an online game, the object in your view needs a packet update from a server to be placed accurately in its environment. If you are running insane frame rates, your player/object could get updatred many times while game code simply extrapolates the remote object position. Suddenly a packet update arrives and the extrapolation may not have been accurate and the remote object jumps.
Your position, which the remote player has not gotten yet coupld also jump as while you are running insane frame rates and your object has been moving around, the remote player does not see it until he gets a packet update.
Now, both of you are out of sync, which can cause perception of lag, when in fact, it is a video synchronization problem and may not have a thing to do with lag. This can be more exaggerated with very high CPU speeds as well.
Keep in mind, I am not specifically talking about Aces High. Just the overall effect running without vsync can have on a multi-player game.
-
Originally posted by LTARokit
__________________________________________
Well obviously we are talking about two completely different screen rates. the rate I'm speaking of shows at the top of your screen every time you log on. My posting wasn't to offend or BS, it was to inform and offer info that may or may not help others. So am I going to brag on my rig.....hell yes....considering not more than six months ago I showed an average of 9 frames to zero frames (top of the screen).
Again, SCREEN reads high fr most of time. VSYNC IS NOT ON. And quite frankly have been advised to leave OFF, by someone who knows a whole lot more bout puters than me. Again bad days & good days.....and that's after the new updates.
Bad Days: Only on certain maps, like the one for last night. Logged in late, less than 200 players. FR low, screen skipping, stuttering, little bit of lag, little bit of warping. On the most cleared up after about 30 - 45 minutes of play.
I've found bad days revolve around 2 or 3 certain maps only, why........???? AGAIN as stated before I'm no puter expert, never claimed to be (unlike others).
So Star, evidently you wentn't able to answer my earlier question, maybe too busy being arrogant. So I'll open the question to the thread: Why turn Vsync on if it has such a negative effect on Frame Rate?? Mine is off and I show a good frame rate (top of the screen....Star....Top of the screen), and on most have more good days than bad.
LTARokit
Found this on expert exchange, a source I use a lot in my job (i r tec geek)
------
http://www.experts-exchange.com/Miscellaneous/Games/Q_21379660.html
Should the 'vsync' option be kept on or turned off?
Depends. Do you have a powerful machine? And most importantly, what is the Refresh rate of your monitor?
Vsync forces games to draw exactly as many frames as the monitor can per second, i.e. if you have your monitor running at 85 Hz then it will be forced to draw 85 frames per second - but this will be hard for your machine because it must be able to run the game at 85 fps.
If your machine is not powerful enough then vsync will cause slowdowns (not choppiness, slowdons), as the game will redraw frames to reach 85 fps, recalculating each frame even without game progress.
You can prevent some display errors that way and also force some games to run at more than 60 Hz, and 60 Hz can strain your eyes after a while of playing.
Because I have a rather fast machine and I do not like slowdons in games I usually turn vsync off.
-----
So, I guess the conclusion is that if your system can produce framse faster than your monitor can display them them turning vsync on may be the right thing to do to prevent the problems Scuzzy was talking about (and it may be those issues you mention above) BUT if you cannot produce frames in excess of your monitors refresh rate then vsync is/can be a drag.
Mine is probably on and I cannot produde frames faster than my monitor. I will try turning it off tonight and see what results I get.
-
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
I realize thats not a perfect analogy, but it serves the purpose. And I do apologize if I came off as arrogant. It was never my intention. [/B]
_____________________________ ____________
Yo Star, may not be the perfect analogy, but it's one on my level of understanding. Thanks....question answered :D
<>
LTARokit, XO
-
Originally posted by 38ruk
First of all , people have different levels playabilty , i dont like to see any type of slow down in my system . Alot of people are saying their system runs fine, slow downs to 20 -30 fps is not fine in my book . Ive seen as low as 40fps with my system 1280X 1024, 512 textures 4 AA . Ive seen where people say that anything above 30 fps the human eye cant see, well i can tell a difference between 60fps and 75fps . Roll a plane at 75fps then roll at 60 fps , 75 is much smoother and seems faster to me .
Humble my system is getting 70,087 in aquamark and 11,245 in 3dmk03 our systems are basically the same except i have an audigy 2 soundcard so for using the onboard your system seems fine as far as benches go . i notice a better , less fluctuating frame rate by going with th audigy2 over the ac97 on the nforce 3 board .
I really like what HTC has done with the game . Its got to be hard to balance new features vs playablility, but at this point my system isnt high end , but if im having some issues , i really feel for some of the players who have an older rig ...... 38
AMD 64 3400+
x800 PRO (535 core 500 mem)
1 gig corsair 3200 CL2
Audigy 2
I've got everything "stock" as of now....when I OC'd Igot higher bench marks but didnt notice more then a couple of FPS difference in game...wasnt worth the heat for a such a minimum gain IMO.
When Irechecked everything Inoticed Iwasnt loading everything into memory....that seems to have helped alot....looks like I'm up to ~32-33 FPS for GVing....
MY in air stuff is fine....even in furballs. I do agree the soundcard is an issue. I've got 2 or 3 lying around so I'll swap one out soon as I get right drivers for it....
-
So what if you're seeing rediculous framerates> 190 FPS clear blue climbout to 15 FPS on the deck...not near anything but trees, and you have vsync on? Thats my situation.
-
aztec,
That just means you have tree-sync on.
:lol
Balsy
-
aztec,
That just means you have tree-sync on.
:lol
Balsy
-
Is the AH 2.03 coad handeled freindlier by Intel systems????
I am also curious about this. It seems to me that only AMD systems are being reported (mine included) i went with AMD due to the reports of it being a better gaming platform. I went with the Nforce3 chipset because of my own isues in the past with VIA.
I only have time to play Aces High so it is the only game that I care performs to the highest level. If it plays better (and more stable) on intel then I regret my decision, and AMD has screwed me again.
-
Is the AH 2.03 coad handeled freindlier by Intel systems????
I am also curious about this. It seems to me that only AMD systems are being reported (mine included) i went with AMD due to the reports of it being a better gaming platform. I went with the Nforce3 chipset because of my own isues in the past with VIA.
I only have time to play Aces High so it is the only game that I care performs to the highest level. If it plays better (and more stable) on intel then I regret my decision, and AMD has screwed me again.
-
Is the AH 2.03 coad handeled freindlier by Intel systems????
I am also curious about this. It seems to me that only AMD systems are being reported (mine included) i went with AMD due to the reports of it being a better gaming platform. I went with the Nforce3 chipset because of my own isues in the past with VIA.
I only have time to play Aces High so it is the only game that I care performs to the highest level. If it plays better (and more stable) on intel then I regret my decision, and AMD has screwed me again.
-
Blame it on Skuzzy and his P4. Hater. :D