I did something bad

Do you know if there is a screenshot key in the game? Printscreen is pretty booring, only one image at a time.

I could try some settings and do a series of images. The first time I changed from incockpit to outside I did notice some texture aliasing right at the start of the track, but ut dissappeared. I also noticed some texturebugs on the road with the bumpmap setting. Don't know. I would not say everything is perfect in that game, but it's "ok".
 
I kind of am confused as to why you'd "upgrade" to a Ti4200 from an R8500 to begin with. Recent benchmarks have pretty much shown the R8500 to be comparable in performance to the Ti4200 (pretty impressive for a card meant to compete with GF3 and which was claimed at first to only be as fast as a Ti200 by some-- I'd hate to be one of those with a Ti200 now ;)).

If you don't believe me look here: http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/videocards/article.php/3211_1449721__3

Granted the Ti4200 is a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitle bit faster...but hardly worth the cost of upgrading to. Unless you can definitely overclock it to Ti4600 speeds, I wouldn't even consider buying a Ti4200 having a R8500 atm. If you're buying new then it'd be worth going with the Ti4200, of course.
 
Nagorak:

It wasnt an upgrade as such. I really wanted a Radeon 9700 Pro but that is not out for about a month in the UK. And my piss poor Savage4 pissed me off (no pun intended) in just a few minutes. It was so crappy and shitty at 2D even that I had enough.

With the money plus £10 more I got for my Radeon 8500LE I thought I would give the GF4 Ti 4200 a go. And if you read my post I did intend on overclocking it. I plan on keeping the GF4 Ti 4200 until I need to upgrade to a DX9 card sometime next year. After a while I realised I cannot justify spending £300+ on a gfx card on my budget.

Oh and those benchmarks are all nice and dandy. However I noticed an increase in speed.

I have been forever trying to beat the 9000 mark whith my Radeon 8500LE and as soon as I put in my GF4 Ti 4200 I ran it just for the hell of it and got an instant 9000 marks.

Now with GP4 it is a little more complicated. The biggest boost in speed I have gotten in the game comes from going from an AthlonXP to a P4. I am talking over 50% improvement - closer to 80%. The GF4 Ti4200 is about another 10% - 20% faster on top of that in this particular game. However one thing - I personally believe the Radeon 8500LE is rendering more of an accurate picture, e.g. the bump mapping is not so horrid. Plus I love the colours I got from it. But again this is personal choice. And again the gain in speed from the GF4 Ti 4200 is notable to me!

I will also add that both cards have excellent 2D (compared to a shitty Savage4 anyway :p)

But anyway I am sure you were kidding.

I will note though I did expect more from the GF4 Ti 4200. To be plagued by (driver?) issues like this was a nice trip back to reality. And if anyone says the GF4 Ti 4200 has better IQ then I wll personally hit them over the head with a dead red herring ;)

That is just MY OPINION though. However I created this thread so I could get help with setting the blasted thing straight thats all :)

I am not about bashing one company or the other... I'll sell my soul to NVIDIA or ATI.. :LOL:
 
I'm not saying the Ti4200 isn't faster...it just kind of seemed like a trivial upgrade. I understand your situation more clearly now (probably should have read more closely the first time).
 
I upgraded from a Ti200@Ti500 to a Ti4200. It's much faster. But I have overclocked it to Ti4400 level.

Galilee said:
Do you know if there is a screenshot key in the game? Printscreen is pretty booring, only one image at a time.
Click to expand...

? anyone?
 
Some useless comments...

Heh, thought I recognized Monza because of that turn in GPL. :)

Bump-mapping may futz with the road, but it sure makes the nose cone decal a lot sharper.

misae, from what speed Athlon to what speed P4 did you move? What memory, too?
 
Ailuros said:
Hmmm I really need to get my hands on GP4. I combine in most of my racing sims 4xS with 2x Level aniso. Case example F1 2001:

http://users.otenet.gr/~ailuros/F1new.jpg
Click to expand...
may i just mention, that bilinear magfilter still sucks. look at the bridgestone logo on the left .. its just ugly and destroys illusion.
I've been waiting since TNT times, for somebody to implement bicubic texture mag-filter on consumer-level board.
Of course, it would be ideal if all apps would use high-res textures etc. but .. such pathological cases will always remain.
 
misae, from what speed Athlon to what speed P4 did you move? What memory, too?
Click to expand...

It was an AthlonXP 1600+ running at 148MHz FSB and memory.

In the test with all details on I could approach 20 fps.

With a Pentium 4 2.0AGHz with DDR 2100 (no overclock), same memory basically I got 37fps.

With the same Pentium 4 but memory at DDR 1600 (dont ask why) I still get 30fps rather than approaching 20 fps.

I am thinking that some SSE2 optimisations were implemented.
 
Misae,

Was that a DDR board or SDR ??, and a 1600 is approx 1.3 ghz vs. 2.2 ghz (not that mhz reflects overall speed any more) yet still almost 1000 mhz faster.
 
no_way said:
may i just mention, that bilinear magfilter still sucks. look at the bridgestone logo on the left .. its just ugly and destroys illusion.
I've been waiting since TNT times, for somebody to implement bicubic texture mag-filter on consumer-level board.
Of course, it would be ideal if all apps would use high-res textures etc. but .. such pathological cases will always remain.
Click to expand...

I'd just like to say that we'd have to step up to at least biquadric before moving to bicubic.
 
Doomtrooper said:
Misae,

Was that a DDR board or SDR ??, and a 1600 is approx 1.3 ghz vs. 2.2 ghz (not that mhz reflects overall speed any more) yet still almost 1000 mhz faster.
Click to expand...

Sorry I didn't explain that too well.

It is a Pentium 4 2.0A Ghz processor currently running at 20*100MHz FSB.

The memory is currently locked at DDR1600 speed (that is 2*100 bus speed for the memory) because I cannot change any of the CPU SOFT MENU settings on my stupid ass Abit BD7-II which will soon be returned for something that works as it is meant to.

So it is a 2GHz Northwood running on DDR Memory at 2*100MHz which totally sucks and has annoyed me no end for a few days.

To be honest I have no idea why the P4 is much, much faster on this particular game (GP4).

Running 3DMark 2001 the P4 is marginally slower than my old AthlonXP that ran overclocked at 1.5 - 1.6 GHz via the fsb.
 
Maybe the GF4 drivers are better optimized for the P4? Or maybe it's just the game likes bandwidth (ala Quake III). Then again you have Pc1600 DDR so that doesn't sound right. Hmmmm.
 
Chalnoth said:
I'd just like to say that we'd have to step up to at least biquadric before moving to bicubic.
Click to expand...
what's a biquadric filter?
With bicubic, i meant bicubic interpolation, such as Catmull-Rom, mitchell, or b-spline, instead of bilinear.
Of course windowed sinc(), such as Lanczos 3-lobed filter, would be even nicer, but i guess impractical to implement in hardware

edit: involuntary disdain removed :p pardon me
 
Nagorak, no the GF4 does improve speed but I noticed improved speed with the Radeon 8500LE as well of about 50-100% paired with the P4 rather than the AthlonXP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Z
Its not just me, games used to be better
5 6 7
Replies
128
Views
5K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
Cynicalking
Swap PS5 for a RTX 4070?
4 5 6
Replies
112
Views
12K
Davros
D
G
Nvidia G-Assist
Replies
2
Views
1K
Davros
D
A
RDNA3 Efficiency [Spinoff from RDNA4]
3 4 5
Replies
85
Views
9K
Bondrewd
Bondrewd
Z
I gave up on the Resident Evil series...
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
3K
Zombietoid
Z
Back
Top