Author Topic: Will There Be a Radeon Optimization? (Read 4332 times)

Bullethead · « **on:** December 13, 2003, 03:25:55 PM »

P4 1.7GHz, 512MB, ATI Radeon 9600 Pro, WinME, DX9.0

If you look back in the various frame rate threads since the AH2 beta process started, you'll find my numbers for 1991. When that 1st came out, I had a GeForce3 and 256MB Ram. Then I updated my system to the above and LOST about 10 fps across the board. But it was still very playable as I could get 40-50 fps with decent detail settings.

Now here we are in 1996 and I have only about 1/2 the frame rate I had in 1991. This makes AH2 unplayable no matter what I do. If I have the sliders all the way to the right, I can still get about 50fps, but tactically vital game objects such as field objects, town buildings, and ships, are completely invisible beyond about 2500 yards. OTOH, if I turn the sliders up so I can see these objects at useful distances, my frame rate becomes unplayably low even when it's just me and the drones offline.

Early in the beta process, I recall an optimization for Nvidia cards. I guess that did the trick because GeForce users have great frame rates. But us Radeon users have seen frame rates go steadily down since the beginning. What's up with that? And is there any hope that there'll be a "Radeon optimization" someday?

zmeg · « **Reply #1 on:** December 13, 2003, 03:56:33 PM »

Face the facts, ATI sux as bad as Intel.

mrblack · « **Reply #2 on:** December 13, 2003, 05:24:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by zmeg
Face the facts, ATI sux as bad as Intel.

LOL thats why they have the top rated board right now huh.
9800xt.

zmeg · « **Reply #3 on:** December 13, 2003, 06:01:19 PM »

If the performance lived up to the rating i'd get one myself.

214thCavalier · « **Reply #4 on:** December 13, 2003, 06:13:16 PM »

It does in other games which is why some are asking the question here.

Hajo · « **Reply #5 on:** December 13, 2003, 10:33:40 PM »

The Radeon 9800 Pro out performs the GeForce4Ti4600

I replaced...including Aces High and any Benchmarks

I've tested with.

B17Skull12 · « **Reply #6 on:** December 13, 2003, 10:55:58 PM »

well my dads cpu has almost 1 gig of memory and has a intel pos 64mb video card and it gets about 0 fps.

Estes · « **Reply #7 on:** December 13, 2003, 11:46:39 PM »

Ya'll have some ****ty luck. I'm runnin a 1.8 CPU, with a Radeon 9600, and a gig of ram.. I get 54 FPS in AH2.

JustJim · « **Reply #8 on:** December 14, 2003, 01:21:53 AM »

I think you guys need Nick Burns, The Company's Computer Guy.

@ 1600x1200 res 3/4 to left slider I get this

If I go 1024x768 3/4 to left slider I get this

I don't understand why people are getting such bad performance.

BTW my GeForce Ti 4400 is OC'd to 4600 specs thats it

mrblack · « **Reply #9 on:** December 14, 2003, 03:34:45 AM »

I'm running 1600x1200 res with 4x FAA and all settings in AH2 turned up.
And I get 60-75FPS I am limited becuase I have V-synch enabled and my monitor is only good for 77mhz at 1600x1200

I am happy with the results.

bloom25 · « **Reply #10 on:** December 15, 2003, 11:19:33 AM »

The Radeon cards don't currently seem to be perfoming up to par in AH2, but I'm fairly certain there's a fixable software (driver/AH) reason for it.

I know I've definately lost some performance from 1.994 to 1.995 with my Radeon 9800 (Cat 3.7s).

I remember HT mentioning something about lower than expected performance on Radeon cards, so I'm sure he's aware of the problem.

I'm hoping the 3.10 drivers scheduled to be released later this week might help also. (I've heard the 3.9s don't stutter as much in AH, but I know from experience the 3.9s have problems in some games. There's a hotfix for the 3.9 drivers, basically an early version of the 3.10s to fix these issues.)

Kaz · « **Reply #11 on:** December 15, 2003, 06:05:32 PM »

Thanks Bloom, I've got my fingers crossed that the 3.10 drivers will improve performance in AH2 among others games and that, like you mentioned, HT is aware of the problem with the Radeon cards and is working on it.

JustJim · « **Reply #12 on:** December 16, 2003, 10:43:39 AM »

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by zmeg
Face the facts, ATI sux as bad as Intel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

starting to think that myself.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Origionally posted by mrblack
LOL thats why they have the top rated board right now huh.
9800xt.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While that may be true this month, ATI and NVidia swap the top spot like madonna swaps lovers.

The Big Question Is, WHO has been the most reliable over time and seems to continue to be so.

I haven't been convinced to trade in my GeForce4 Ti 4400 for either company yet to be honest.

Not totally sure but to me at least it seems both the new ATI and NVidia based cards aren't all that great as opposed to earlier upgrades.

Course what do i know I can't even land a 4 kill sortie

JustJim1
<< Dragon Hawks >>

zmeg · « **Reply #13 on:** December 16, 2003, 11:41:55 AM »

Here's where things really stand(yuor milage may vary)

acetnt-2nd · « **Reply #14 on:** December 16, 2003, 12:47:41 PM »

Hey Zmeg,

Where the 9800 XT?

bit unfair to leave it out in these benchs.

Acetnt