If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Best way to increase frame rate to suit less powered platforms?
My platform is:
CPU: XP 1800+ CHIPSET: KT266A RAM: 512 MB My video card is: GF 4 Ti 4600 128 MB Ram Obviously, the video card outperforms the platform easily. My question is; when selecting video options in games, what are the things that depend on CPU, as opposed to video card that should be modified so as to produce the best frame rate? For instance, I know the resolution itself depends more on the card than the platform and that reducing it may not produce any improvements. I would expect the same for texture detail levels and anti-aliasing (although anti-aliasing will be card dependent and will generally have an effect). But do things like shadows and smoke matter? What other sorts of things should I look for so as to best match my video card and platform to produce best quality while retaining highest frame rates? In nominate |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The biggest CPU killer I can think of are physics in current games. The CPU
has to calculate how a ragdoll reactions to its environment and soforth. I don't think that your CPU is that big of a bottleneck on your card. "Innominate Twice" wrote in message om... My platform is: CPU: XP 1800+ CHIPSET: KT266A RAM: 512 MB My video card is: GF 4 Ti 4600 128 MB Ram Obviously, the video card outperforms the platform easily. My question is; when selecting video options in games, what are the things that depend on CPU, as opposed to video card that should be modified so as to produce the best frame rate? For instance, I know the resolution itself depends more on the card than the platform and that reducing it may not produce any improvements. I would expect the same for texture detail levels and anti-aliasing (although anti-aliasing will be card dependent and will generally have an effect). But do things like shadows and smoke matter? What other sorts of things should I look for so as to best match my video card and platform to produce best quality while retaining highest frame rates? In nominate |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On 13 Oct 2004 09:18:52 -0700, (Innominate
Twice) wrote: Obviously, the video card outperforms the platform easily. My question is; when selecting video options in games,... to produce the best frame rate? set resolution no more than 1024x768 with 16-bit textures max. ... -- Regards, SPAJKY ® & visit my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com "Tualatin OC-ed / BX-Slot1 / inaudible setup!" E-mail AntiSpam: remove ## |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Innominate Twice wrote:
My platform is: CPU: XP 1800+ CHIPSET: KT266A RAM: 512 MB My video card is: GF 4 Ti 4600 128 MB Ram Obviously, the video card outperforms the platform easily. My question is; when selecting video options in games, what are the things that depend on CPU, as opposed to video card that should be modified so as to produce the best frame rate? For instance, I know the resolution itself depends more on the card than the platform and that reducing it may not produce any improvements. I would expect the same for texture detail levels and anti-aliasing (although anti-aliasing will be card dependent and will generally have an effect). But do things like shadows and smoke matter? What other sorts of things should I look for so as to best match my video card and platform to produce best quality while retaining highest frame rates? In nominate In addition to what others have said, in older games, blending modes tend to kill the framerate a lot. Half-Life was pretty bad for this as everything used multitexturing to begin with, but then multiple blend passes were done for each explosion sprite, particle effects, transparency, etc. So what you find is that even modern hardware has a hard time with explosions and smoke in something simple like Counter-Strike. Much of this was the renderer itself and not the API or the graphics hardware, but this type of failing affected many games. If you have a decent high end FX card or a GF6, you really dont have to worry about anything like this much because most effects are driven by single textured pixel shaders combining everything into one programmable shader. If the card can handle the instruction length and do everything in one pass, then it makes a negligible impact on framerate. At least with modern games (but then you have the counter effect of many pixel shaders being used slowing down game as a whole). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Power supply can zap motherboard? | Eric Popelka | Homebuilt PC's | 8 | June 18th 05 08:54 PM |
Running a M7NCD Motherboard with 400 FSB | Krutibas Biswal | Overclocking AMD Processors | 17 | October 4th 04 11:36 AM |
can't set frame rate in CoD anymore | Wenslauw | Ati Videocards | 1 | February 24th 04 03:32 PM |
Happy Birthday America | SST | Overclocking | 333 | November 27th 03 08:54 PM |
will a cheap PSU (antec) kill P4S800 ? | nerdb0t | Asus Motherboards | 7 | October 23rd 03 11:37 PM |