No Aids Racing

limpindog · Post by **limpindog** » 19 Jun 2004, 19:12

hi all i am a happy bunny , just bought radeon 9800 pro and my fps is now runnin between 120 and 140fps was shocked to find out how mutch better the ati card is over nvidia , my advice .GO BUY 1

Steve · Post by **Steve** » 20 Jun 2004, 01:07

yo limpy, i bought one too, but in F1C, my friggin fps went DOWN for some reason, what drivers are you using for your card? i'm using the cat 4.6, in all other games the fps jumped way up though

Bilbo · Post by **Bilbo** » 20 Jun 2004, 01:45

It might depend on which card you had before and what settings you are/were using (FSAA/Anisotropic Filtering/etc.)...

limpindog · Post by **limpindog** » 20 Jun 2004, 01:50

i got all me a.a and a.f on , try the latest drivers from ati site thats what i useing .
if a remember there was an issue with some of there drivers
but am sure the new ones fix it
wxp-w2k-catalyst-8-02-040515a-015958c. these the ones i useing at the mo.
also make sure u remove ya old nvidia drivers in ad remove progs

Steve · Post by **Steve** » 06 Jul 2004, 05:11

check this out, a comparison between nascar thunder 2004 and F1C, why would the fps be so different?

Bilbo · Post by **Bilbo** » 06 Jul 2004, 05:50

Number of polygons? Texture size? Bad programming (game and/or driver) ? PLR settings causing extra work in one game (halfrate=0, supersampling, whatever) ?

Any or all of the above? (trying to help)

limpindog · Post by **limpindog** » 11 Jul 2004, 15:50

steve nas thunder has better improved gfx and stuff that y it look and play better.
with f1c 80 fps is fine mate ,,only goes up when i turn v sync off but i happy with 80fps and aa and af on seems ok

Steve · Post by **Steve** » 11 Jul 2004, 16:00

I will say this, the overall look and color quality is WAY better with the ATI, and i do love the card, i just wish i could sqyeeze a few more fps out of it in F1C, i've managed to tweak a little and up it to nearly 100 fps, what is really strange to me is that at some tracks there is a huge difference in frame rates, 15 - 20 fps better at some

Steve · Post by **Steve** » 11 Jul 2004, 16:01

thats squeeze, not sqyueeze, lol

Bilbo · Post by **Bilbo** » 11 Jul 2004, 20:37

Some tracks possibly have higher-res textures or more polygons (especially the add-on or modified tracks I would guess)...

Steve · Post by **Steve** » 11 Jul 2004, 20:39

true m8, but i'm not really going to worry about it anymore, the card runs smooth as silk, no more hesitations like the Nvidia had, and looks so damn good !!