|
|
| » 128 posts by user blppt |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=18077 |  blppt (128) Oct 30, 2007 - 10:51 am
| The problem, i think, is that although the Crysis demo looks very good, it doesnt look THAT good to me that it should be considered acceptable chugging along at 10-15fps @ Very High on an overlclocked 8800GTS/640 @ 1280x1024.
Hopefully, this pre-release demo just was very unoptimized. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=18057 | blppt (128) Oct 29, 2007 - 05:11 am
| Not in Vista it isnt....nvidia has never been able to control vsync in d3d games under vista. It even says in the tips at the bottom something like "for direct3d games under vista use the vsync setting in the game".
And yes, I am now running the 169 betas...goodbye ut2004 64bit. :-( Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=18057 | blppt (128) Oct 27, 2007 - 02:21 am
| Well, remember, that is with all the graphics options on "very high" (except physics)...in all honesty, I didnt expect it to run much better than that (considering the 8800GTS/G80 isnt exactly new technology anymore, its been out for a year or so).
Might be time to bite the bullet and add that 2nd 8800GTS for SLI....sigh...kinda sad that it would cost as much as a decent xbox360 bundle to do that though. Hopefully by the time I get the spare cash to do that, EA will have added a vsync option to the game.
Oh, also, I used the 64bit executable, if anybody cares. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=18057 | blppt (128) Oct 26, 2007 - 07:22 pm
| Damn, I cant believe they forgot to put a vsync option on the graphics menu.
Apparently, EA has forgotten that applications must force vsync for Direct3d games in Vista, the Nvidia control panel cannot.
I cranked all the graphics settings to very high, except for physics quality (probably needs a PhysX card to be usable), and while it is playable, its probably only doing about 10-15fps (no AA, 1280x1024).
System specs as follows:
X2 6400+ (black)
evga 8800GTS 640MB (BIOS oc'd to 600 core/1800 mem) 163.11 drivers (not the new betas)
4GB PC6400
vista x64
sb xfi xtremegamer Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=18051 | blppt (128) Oct 26, 2007 - 10:43 am
| On a somewhat unrelated note, for some reason I have yet to figure out, every nvidia driver (beta or WHQL) after 163.11 (beta) for 64bit vista makes ut2004 (64bit version) run jittery.
Unfortunately, since the game is so old, and almost nobody i know of uses the 64bit ut2004 version (it doesnt have the annoying hitches that the 32bit version does) there's a good chance Nvidia will never fix this issue.
I still play ut2004 a lot, and it sucks that in order to run Crysis properly, I will need to upgrade to these newer drivers. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=16624 | blppt (128) Jul 23, 2007 - 07:24 pm
| You cant find a Q6600 for $266 currently, but still, around $300 for a quad core that a $500 dual FX-74 setup cant match in most benchmarks (not to mention the extra $300 for the only compatible dual socket 1207 mobo).
AMD better get that Phenom out on time (or sooner) or I (and a lot of other people) are going to be tempted to go Intel. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=16411 | blppt (128) Jul 09, 2007 - 04:45 pm
| Yeah, but the Opteron 185 is essentially the same CPU.
On another note, what the hell is AMD going to do when Intel drops the quad-core Q6600 to $226 on July 22nd? Even the ridiculously expensive (still) dual FX-74 setup cant match its performance. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=15751 | blppt (128) Jun 01, 2007 - 04:47 am
| "It was noted that when Microsoft was developing the Xbox it used Macs as early hardware references, since the Xbox used a member of the PowerPC family of chips that Macs used at the time. "We never ran an ad on (that)," Jobs said."
Hmm yeah, how did that wonderful PowerPC Mac design end up for you Steve?
Pretty funny that Bill was actually the one showing restraint by not pointing that out. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=15606 | blppt (128) May 22, 2007 - 10:27 am
| Take it from me....getting tv cards & capture programs to work reliably in Vista 64 is a nightmare. Even WITH the in-box whql driver for my Hauppauge PVR 150, sometimes capture will work, sometimes it wont.
And thats if you are lucky enough to own one of the few tv cards that have a 64bit driver. Bleh. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=15522 | blppt (128) May 19, 2007 - 01:45 pm » Edited on May 19, 2007 - 01:45 pm
| I dunno, I believe in the past Macs had lower sound recording latency and the PowerPC chips, at least for a while, used to be preferred for image/video editing over x86.
Since there obviously is almost no difference in hardware anymore between mac & pc, that advantage is nonexistant. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=15522 | blppt (128) May 17, 2007 - 05:25 am
| | My win2000 system at work has a current uptime of 205 days. This is despite having only 256MB of RAM and IE6 crashing frequently during that time due to various badly designed websites. I'd say thats pretty damn stable. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=15036 | blppt (128) Apr 11, 2007 - 03:01 pm
| I would actually be shocked if they WERE shipping top-tier gaming systems with only Vista installed. The 8800 series 100.65 Vista drivers are pathetic. Maybe someday nvidia will release new drivers.....
maybe.... Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=14846 | blppt (128) Mar 28, 2007 - 04:53 pm
| Never mind 8800GTS/X XP fans, at least your drivers are stable and close to fully functional...us Vista 64 users are stuck with one hell of a crappy WHQL (which apparently they give you if the driver is only partially functional) driver, plus a month-old beta that is unstable.
How the tables have turned...used to be ATI that lagged in drivers. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=14679 | blppt (128) Mar 14, 2007 - 02:53 pm
| Not quite....the CD32 was far superior to a basic A500...68EC020 processor @ about 15mhz (24/32bit vs A500s 16/32 68000 @ 7mhz), 2MB RAM (512KB for A500), double speed cd drive (880K floppy for A500), AGA chipset (vs. older OCS chipset for A500)
It was actually a "consoled" version of the A1200.
Amiga kicked everythings ass for like 5 years, but like that guy above said, they did not do enough to keep it ahead of the pack. One of the great shames of the computer industry. Flag this | Edit this post |
|
