Printable View
This means 3 more months till doom3! God I hope that game has a timedemo benchmark like quake3 and ut2003 did!
"I want to be able to run the latest games at the highest detail options I can at 1280x1024, over 50 or so fps"
are you talking 8x fsaa and 16x AA I really hope so or its sad, just look at my sig.......
You're one twisted dude.Quote:
Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
This means 3 more months till doom3! God I hope that game has a timedemo benchmark like quake3 and ut2003 did!
"I want to be able to run the latest games at the highest detail options I can at 1280x1024, over 50 or so fps"
are you talking 8x fsaa and 16x AA I really hope so or its sad, just look at my sig.......
You scare me. Also, no I won't be running that high a level. I will run probably 8x AF and 4x AA at 1280x1024 max detail.Quote:
Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
This means 3 more months till doom3! God I hope that game has a timedemo benchmark like quake3 and ut2003 did!
"I want to be able to run the latest games at the highest detail options I can at 1280x1024, over 50 or so fps"
are you talking 8x fsaa and 16x AA I really hope so or its sad, just look at my sig.......
Personally, I have a 9500 Pro Sapphire Atlantis. I love the card but my girl needs one so she gets the 9500 Pro and I am getting a 9700 non-pro. I really don't need the clock speed of the 9700 Pro but I want the 128 MB DDR/256 bit memory instead of the 128bit! That is important.
Also, a 9700 Pro card is not going to give you what you paid for unless you are running a fast CPU. My AMD 1800+ XP is doing fine but it does get sluggish when there are a lot of bots in a DM or a game itself. Example - I can play Unreal 2 just fine BUT I always knew when an attack was coming...the CPU would chug ever so slightly for half a second. I would rather get the price break on a 9700 AND use the left over money to grab a nice 2800 or maybe 3000 XP this summer.
AMD is coming out with a whole new chipset this summer. Right now they are hoping people will get excited and blow their money on the 2800 and 3000 procs! Not me! I am waiting. Once the prices get reasonable I will buy one, maybe even 2 since I have so many computers in my test lab.
AMD admits they are trying to get people to buy the 2800 and 3000 procs because if not, they take a tremendous financial loss. Intel has been moving forward so quickly that AMD has new technology cpu's ready.
Damn I love competition! lol
im waiting to see how good the 9800 AIW is
Nice avatar there, kpxgq
I might get one for my other system, since it is now using Geforce3 Ti200 which is kindda old~~ and I dunno how to tweak it ={
use powerstrip to OC that. I ran ut2003 in 2048x1536 with 1 bot=20fps average. 16 bots lowered my fps to 12. thats on a stock ti500 on 1GHz. If I get a faster cpu, I should get like 30-40fps :D
I find that extremely hard to believe. You're telling me you averaged 20FPS in UT2003 @ 2048x1536 with a GeForce3 Ti500 and a T-Bird 1GHz (just making sure?). Just stop lying to people man, you're not helping anyone out with your misleading posts. I also find it hard to believe that you even have a monitor that supports that resolution, if you're hardware is that low-end :pQuote:
Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
use powerstrip to OC that. I ran ut2003 in 2048x1536 with 1 bot=20fps average. 16 bots lowered my fps to 12. thats on a stock ti500 on 1GHz. If I get a faster cpu, I should get like 30-40fps :D
Where is that damn rolleyes when you need it!? :D
--edit--
https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/...2003/04/14.jpg
This is on my rig running UT2003 @ just 1600x1200, I think we'd both agree that I have the faster rig. So I find it really hard to believe that you are getting 20FPS average @ 2048x1536. It also discredits that BS in your sig about how you get 74FPS @ 1600x1200 in UT2003. Just cut the BS man, it's annoying.
A) what is your point or are you just trying to boast?Quote:
Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
use powerstrip to OC that. I ran ut2003 in 2048x1536 with 1 bot=20fps average. 16 bots lowered my fps to 12. thats on a stock ti500 on 1GHz. If I get a faster cpu, I should get like 30-40fps :D
B) I think it's all a bit of bull, GF3 Ti500 + 1Ghz does not match up to what you claim.
C) This is not the first post that you have "crapped on" and people are starting to notice.
I've been here for a while now and usually stay pretty passive but enough is enough.
You sure your not related to "TherealBillGates"? :D
Keep it honest please.
What's the Unreal engines equivilent to Q3's picmip? I think Thunderbird1ghz knows that very well.
Quote:
Originally posted by JustWhitman
I find that extremely hard to believe. You're telling me you averaged 20FPS in UT2003 @ 2048x1536 with a GeForce3 Ti500 and a T-Bird 1GHz (just making sure?). Just stop lying to people man, you're not helping anyone out with your misleading posts. I also find it hard to believe that you even have a monitor that supports that resolution, if you're hardware is that low-end :p
Where is that damn rolleyes when you need it!? :D
--edit--
http://home.insightbb.com/~forseti/UT2003DM.jpg
This is on my rig running UT2003 @ just 1600x1200, I think we'd both agree that I have the faster rig. So I find it really hard to believe that you are getting 20FPS average @ 2048x1536. It also discredits that BS in your sig about how you get 74FPS @ 1600x1200 in UT2003. Just cut the BS man, it's annoying.
Ok three things:
1. you are not using the same benchmark as I am
2. is the demo verson comparable to the full retain?
3. somethings amiss with your rig......
Here is a screenie of my ti500 scores at stock speed. The ti4200 yielded 74/35 respectivitely, which is weird, considering ut2003 is cpu intensive. Quite a difference in flyby, maybe the LMA II really helps in new games, it didnt help much in quake3, but does in 3dmark and ut2003.
https://www.sharkyforums.com/
Here is what I get on the retail version. It drops lower than this in the game itself. I guess because this is an "average."Quote:
Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
[IMG]http://www.imagemagician.org/images/acemann/ut2003_scores.jpg
[/IMG]
https://www.sharkyforums.com/
I have no idea if there is a difference in the retail vs. demo, but something definitely isn't right. I ran the test in the HIGHEST detail possbile.Quote:
Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
Ok three things:
1. you are not using the same benchmark as I am
2. is the demo verson comparable to the full retain?
3. somethings amiss with your rig......
That being:
Color - 32Bit
Texture Detail - Highest
World Detail - Highest
Character Detail - Highest
Physics Detail - High
Character Shadows - On
Dynamic Lighting - On
Detail Textures - On
Projectors - On
Trilinear Filtering - On
Decals - On
Coronas - On
Foilage - On
Decal Stay - High
Nothing is amiss on my rig, as evertyhing else turns out right and about where it should on benchmarks. I think you're just using different settings to obtain a higher score. Becuase you shouldn't be getting higher FPS thats for sure, especially in botmatch. I'm gonna see what score I get with the lowest settings possible.
--edit--
Apparently changing the settings in game before running the benchmark has no effect on the results. So who knows, but I've rerun the test seveeral times and changed some settings for my system, and I get the exact same score. So it's not on my end.
Quote:
Originally posted by ewitte
Here is what I get on the retail version. It drops lower than this in the game itself. I guess because this is an "average."
http://home.houston.rr.com/ejwitte//images/ut2003.JPG
Maybe the benchmark uses fixed settings that remain constant reguardless of what settings you choose in the game itself? If you are getting 50fps in botmatch on a 2GHz p4, then why isnt 31fps believable on my 1GHz?
Probably cuz he's got a video card that is twice as fast. Seriously dude, I don't know why I keep reading your posts. I have you on my ignore list, but I have to read your crap to make sure you aren't mis-informing anyone. Please, as someone said stop it. It is alright to have an opinion, but the lying is getting old. You better either
A) Make a new name and try to clean your act up,
or
B) Stop giving out false information
I am almost positive it is against the AUP to post knowingly false information and one day a mod might just get tired of your claims. Seriously man just stop, a lot of people read here and do not post, and if they see your sig they will be like man maybe I should be getting that, or they might wanna upgrade to a part which they think is fast. Seriously man a lot of people here really strive to help people out, and with someone posting crap like this in every thread it doesn't help. People might think I am being harsh, but I could care less. I remember the days when I read this forum for hours on end picking up information, while never posting. If I would have seen stuff like this without people speaking out, I might have believed it. I think there should be a sticky at the top of the thread saying do not believe T-Bird 1GHz. I have nothing against you, but like I said I know for a fact that many people just read the forums, and lying about specs, and/or results just isn't right. Please stop.
only that I am dead serious. I have nothing to gain by lieing. as I said, I need someone to host the large screenshots........
Email it to me at [email protected]Quote:
Originally posted by Thunderbird1GHz
only that I am dead serious. I have nothing to gain by lieing. as I said, I need someone to host the large screenshots........
I will host it if you are serious :)
How many girlfriends do you have???? How about spreading the love with that deal:)Quote:
Originally posted by tYteaZzAzN
I'm gettin one...for $200 :D
One of my girl friend's dad's works at ATI and she's hookin me up ;)
HELLLL YEAH :D