Looking for advice on a new System

External Since: Apr 10, 2004 Posts: 672

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:56:49 GMT, "Derek"
<del.wattsnospambaby.TakeThisOut@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>well if you have increased the fsb frequency by 1 mhz at a time looking for
>the best perforamce that was still stable I'm afraid so (guilty your honour)

You say that as if it's unusual. Smile

External Since: Nov 28, 2005 Posts: 49

"goPostal" <agutgopostal.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Wl3Wh.13$ku5.6@newsfe02.lga...
>
> "Derek" <del.wattsnospambaby.DeleteThis@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:RsSVh.2690$mk4.1792@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Folk" <Folk.DeleteThis@folk.com> wrote in message
>> news:q16f23hmap4rr0u31ns68fa8l10ril7gcu@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 00:36:42 +0200, Bruno <dont.use.DeleteThis@this.address.ever>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> The first graph is representative of the setup for a typical UT99
>>>>> gamer.... 1024 x 768 with no AA or AF.
>>>>
>>>>I thought a typical UT gamer would use way higher resolutions however I
>>>>did dig up some data for those playing CS, Half Life and other Valve
>>>>stuff and I stand corrected (providing those figures are similar for
>>>>UT). It seems less than 10% is using a resolution above 1280x1024 and in
>>>>fact about 44% is using 1024x768 or lower!
>>>
>>> Thanks for the link. I was already familiar with those stats
>>> (they're quite fascinating) since I've used them for reference before.
>>> The average system is quite modest.
>>>
>>>>I'm very surprised of this. I know that some years ago a screen letting
>>>>you go 1600x1200 cost a pretty penny, in fact the two monitors I
>>>>mentioned above cost me $3000+, but it has since then become very
>>>>affordable - even if you insist on using a TFT monitor it's a bargain
>>>>compared to back in time. These days one can get a 2nd hand super high
>>>>end monitor like my old Sony for like $100 or so, simply because so many
>>>>people have abandoned CRT's despite them still being the best thing for
>>>>gaming (and photo work if you like the colours to be correct).
>>>
>>> There's a considerable percentage of hardcore PC gamers that would run
>>> their games in wire frame at 8 bit 640 x 480 if they thought they
>>> could get an extra 10 fps. Smile

>>>
>>>>> We can see that there are 16
>>>>> cards that have the same framerate (given a 3% margin of error).
>>>>> Obviously we are CPU bound at that resolution, since those 16 cards
>>>>> represent a varying amount of pixel pushing power yet they all yield
>>>>> the same results.
>>>>>
>>>>Exactly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> In order to "separate the pack" for a vid card shootout, you need to
>>>>> raise the visual stakes, and they do that by using artificially high
>>>>> AA/AF or resolution settings. There's certainly nothing wrong with
>>>>> that, but if you do all your gaming at "normal" resolutions and AA/AF
>>>>> levels, then any one of those 16 cards are just as good as the other
>>>>> in UT.
>>>>
>>>>Now here's the thing. The AA/AF settings aren't really artificially high
>>>>but more like what should be the norm, after all we deserve the games we
>>>>play to look the best possible.
>>>
>>> Turning on decent AA/AF levels on my system makes a modest difference
>>> in UT2004 ONS. I usually keep it off though. In a fast paced FPS,
>>> looking at the scenery is not high on my list. Smile

>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now look at the results from the same article when benching Doom 3....
>>>>> http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/10/04/vga_charts_iv/page9.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Now instead of 16 cards, we have only 3. Now which game engine would
>>>>> you call CPU limited?
>>>>>
>>>>No question Doom 3 is a very different beast. However just because it's
>>>>much harder on the gfx card does not mean UT is not demanding once you
>>>>up the resolution and gfx quality settings, the level is just different.
>>>>
>>>>I shall try and do some testing in the weekend. Perhaps I can make a
>>>>graph showing what's the limit in my system - just for the fun of it.
>>>
>>> I've wasted entire weekends doing just that sort of thing. Are we
>>> geeks or what?
>>
>> well if you have increased the fsb frequency by 1 mhz at a time looking
>> for the best perforamce that was still stable I'm afraid so (guilty your
>> honour)
>>
>> Nick-Dastardly
>>
>> "quit snikkering Nuttley"
>>
>
> I bet you guys look like that kid from the movie "Powder".
> http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~susan/sf/films/powder.jpg
>
> Go outside and get some sun Razz

ROFL wish I looked that good , it's much worse than you might at first
suppose there is a proper photo of me posted on the web (though the server
is down at the moment )http://www.lobsternet.org/afl/ yep I am also a
petrolhead.

Nick-Dastardly
no you don't get a medal