Leadtek5900.128m And FARCRY

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Hi

Farcry doesnt play very well at all on my set-up was wondering if anyone
else had a similar set-up and was having poor fps too

UT2004...plays like its on fire like a million fps.....aceeeeeeeeee...

My Spec
AMD 3000XP+
1536meg 333mhz's DDR (crucial)
Leadtek A350 FX5900 128 meg.....52.16drivers
ASUS A7N deluxe w/o sound
XP sp1
DX 9.0b

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Simon Mallatratt <simon mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Farcry doesnt play very well at all on my set-up was wondering if
> anyone else had a similar set-up and was having poor fps too

The readme for Far Cry says it recommends the 53.03 or higher drivers. Those
52.16 drivers are quite nasty - I assume you don't play Desert Combat for
one thing :| Also, are you running the latest nForce2 drivers, or the ones
that shipped with motherboard?

On my rig Far Cry runs really nice, even on High, with the 56.72 drivers
(53.03 had problems with over bright textures on some objects):

AMD XP2400+
1GB DDR 400 (crucial) running in single channel
Leadtek A250 LE TD GF4Ti4200 128MB APG 4x
nVidia 56.72 drivers
ASUS A7N8X-X board with drivers updated around 3 months ago
C-Media 6ch sound card (dirt cheap, but it has 3 out jacks for 6ch sound as
well as mic + line in as well)
Windows 2000 Pro SP4
Directx 9b

Dan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

thanks for the quick reply

i read a lot about the latest drivers above 52.16 and ppl seem to have
problems with em so i never bothered

ive never up-dated the nforce2 drivers juts installed the ones that came wiv
the MB

does ur card pick up as 8x agp anywhere cos mine doesnt

its enabled in bios so is fast writes and that doesnt pick up either

Simon

downlaoding 56.72's and the latest nforce drivers will try and post

many thanks


"Daniel Crichton" <news@worldofspack.co.uk> wrote in message
news:40741ec2$0$21931$afc38c87@news.easynet.co.uk...
> Simon Mallatratt <simon mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Farcry doesnt play very well at all on my set-up was wondering if
> > anyone else had a similar set-up and was having poor fps too
>
> The readme for Far Cry says it recommends the 53.03 or higher drivers.
Those
> 52.16 drivers are quite nasty - I assume you don't play Desert Combat for
> one thing :| Also, are you running the latest nForce2 drivers, or the
ones
> that shipped with motherboard?
>
> On my rig Far Cry runs really nice, even on High, with the 56.72 drivers
> (53.03 had problems with over bright textures on some objects):
>
> AMD XP2400+
> 1GB DDR 400 (crucial) running in single channel
> Leadtek A250 LE TD GF4Ti4200 128MB APG 4x
> nVidia 56.72 drivers
> ASUS A7N8X-X board with drivers updated around 3 months ago
> C-Media 6ch sound card (dirt cheap, but it has 3 out jacks for 6ch sound
as
> well as mic + line in as well)
> Windows 2000 Pro SP4
> Directx 9b
>
> Dan
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Simon Mallatratt <simon mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> i read a lot about the latest drivers above 52.16 and ppl seem to have
> problems with em so i never bothered

52.16 are a mess. Check the release notes pdf onthe nvidia site, a lot of
recent games are broken with them. Desert Combat was bad - missing textures
all over the place (which was bad for me seeing that I'm a DC tester :\)

> ive never up-dated the nforce2 drivers juts installed the ones that
> came wiv the MB

Get the new ones. They do seem to improve the speed of the machine.

> does ur card pick up as 8x agp anywhere cos mine doesnt

No, my card is only AGP 4x, so will only ever run at AGP 4x.

> its enabled in bios so is fast writes and that doesnt pick up either

AFAIK fast writes are only supported on older hardware.

> downlaoding 56.72's and the latest nforce drivers will try and post

Look forward to seeing your results.

Dan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 16:01:20 +0100, "Simon Mallatratt" <simon
mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>Hi
>
>Farcry doesnt play very well at all on my set-up was wondering if anyone
>else had a similar set-up and was having poor fps too

After Auto-detect ?

Of after you have manually maxed everything ?

(I have a P4/3.06 + FX5900/128 oc'd to 875/890

Crytek has generated an excellent game, exceptionally efficient
game-engine, AND they also treat the customers like adults. Instead of
restricting the graphics options, they allow you to tweak everything
to taste (or capability of your hardware). Besides the wide range of
"presets" in the Game Option Menu, you can customize individual
underlying parameters in the Configuration Tool 'Customize' setup.

And Crytek have very kindly provided the wonderful AutoDetect
option for those not technically minded and just want to play the game
with graphics close to the capability of their hardware. It is a
little conservative but brilliantly thought out.

With all parameters at maximum, the graphics are sheer brilliance,
but will challenge a P4/3.6 + NV40/R420... the V1.1 patch already
supports NV40/PS3.0.

However, the game will run well on a GF3Ti500 by appropriately
setting the graphics options and still look far better than COD at
maximum setting. Crytek has scaled the preset graphics options quite
beautifully.

So go experiment.............

There is a bug in the V1.1 patch. If you experience severe
graphics artifacts, turn down the Shadow Quality to
"Medium" or below.

BTW, turn off any forcing of AA and Aniso in the video driver.
Let FC completely control the graphics setup.

Driving the resolution up and setting Aniso and AA
sufficiently far down for decent frame-rate seems to be the
best visual compromise. Other settings such as Water Quality
have little effect on frame-rate. Water Quality at Ultra High
is gorgeous.

Aim for an average outdoor FPS ~ 35-40 and you will do great
in terms of having super graphics without any negative effect on
game-play.

You may note that with the binocs zoomed, the frame-rate
falls drastically. Nothing to do with GPU; all CPU --- floating-point
scaling computations probably; the CPU temp sharply rises when
the binocs are turned on and zoomed.

A great workout for your system. And FC is a terrific benchmark
for next-gen hardware, since all graphics parameter-settings can be
individually exposed, changed and recorded in the Configuration
Tool. FPS gamers have desired for years a totally relevant
benchmark test -- simultaneously relating update-rate to perceived
graphics quality while allowing individual test-tweaking of
all elements of eye-candy. Far Cry is it. On the evidence of the
V1.1 patch Crytek seem quite willing to update the engine for
the latest DX9 implementations, such as PS3.0. No need
for an irrelevant synthetic benchmark.

John Lewis






>
>UT2004...plays like its on fire like a million fps.....aceeeeeeeeee...
>

Compared the scenario detail in UT2004 with that of Far Cry ?


>My Spec
>AMD 3000XP+
>1536meg 333mhz's DDR (crucial)
>Leadtek A350 FX5900 128 meg.....52.16drivers
>ASUS A7N deluxe w/o sound
>XP sp1
>DX 9.0b
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

In article <4074303e.3208536@news.verizon.net>, john.dsl@verizon.net
says...
> On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 16:01:20 +0100, "Simon Mallatratt" <simon
> mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi
> >
> >Farcry doesnt play very well at all on my set-up was wondering if anyone
> >else had a similar set-up and was having poor fps too
>
> After Auto-detect ?
>
> Of after you have manually maxed everything ?
>
> (I have a P4/3.06 + FX5900/128 oc'd to 875/890
>
WOW! That's an astounding overclock considering the stock speed of the
FX5900 is 400MHz (400 to 875). I'm guessing you meant 475/890 ;-)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

hi

ive updated my graphics drivers to 56.72s

also the latest nforce2 drivers

Farcry is a lot better thanks

however

my spec is HIGH (well i think so) and i expected more ...UT2004 flys.......i
dont see why theres the big differnece in fps....if one can do it then they
all shud

cheers

Simon

"Daniel Crichton" <news@worldofspack.co.uk> wrote in message
news:40742d39$0$5492$afc38c87@news.easynet.co.uk...
> Simon Mallatratt <simon mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > i read a lot about the latest drivers above 52.16 and ppl seem to have
> > problems with em so i never bothered
>
> 52.16 are a mess. Check the release notes pdf onthe nvidia site, a lot of
> recent games are broken with them. Desert Combat was bad - missing
textures
> all over the place (which was bad for me seeing that I'm a DC tester :\)
>
> > ive never up-dated the nforce2 drivers juts installed the ones that
> > came wiv the MB
>
> Get the new ones. They do seem to improve the speed of the machine.
>
> > does ur card pick up as 8x agp anywhere cos mine doesnt
>
> No, my card is only AGP 4x, so will only ever run at AGP 4x.
>
> > its enabled in bios so is fast writes and that doesnt pick up either
>
> AFAIK fast writes are only supported on older hardware.
>
> > downlaoding 56.72's and the latest nforce drivers will try and post
>
> Look forward to seeing your results.
>
> Dan
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

are u sure u av posted to right one mate

no one as suggested any O/cin of anything in this post


"wgd" <wgd@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ade1b1a40ec131a9896a1@news.pa.comcast.giganews.com...
> In article <4074303e.3208536@news.verizon.net>, john.dsl@verizon.net
> says...
> > On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 16:01:20 +0100, "Simon Mallatratt" <simon
> > mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Hi
> > >
> > >Farcry doesnt play very well at all on my set-up was wondering if
anyone
> > >else had a similar set-up and was having poor fps too
> >
> > After Auto-detect ?
> >
> > Of after you have manually maxed everything ?
> >
> > (I have a P4/3.06 + FX5900/128 oc'd to 875/890
> >
> WOW! That's an astounding overclock considering the stock speed of the
> FX5900 is 400MHz (400 to 875). I'm guessing you meant 475/890 ;-)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 20:38:14 +0100, "Simon Mallatratt" <simon
mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>are u sure u av posted to right one mate
>
>no one as suggested any O/cin of anything in this post
>

No matter. Just adjust your settings slightly lower if you don't
want to overclock. Overclock only gives a proportional increase
in performance. No silver bullet here....

( If you have a 5900, or 5900XT with GPU thermal monitoring you
can safely overclock the GPU, assuming that ther GPU has sufficient
timing margin., Alt-Tab from the game to check the temperature at
each stable overclock setting, having left the temperature window open
on desktop. Make sure that the max GPU temp does not exceed 75
degrees after 3-4 minutes of 3D game-play at your preferred screen
resolution. If you have a XT with no memory heat-sinks, do not try
overclocking memory without adding heatsinks. )

John Lewis

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 19:12:24 +0100, "Simon Mallatratt" <simon
mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>hi
>
>ive updated my graphics drivers to 56.72s
>
>also the latest nforce2 drivers
>
>Farcry is a lot better thanks
>
>however
>
>my spec is HIGH (well i think so) and i expected more ...UT2004 flys.......i
>dont see why theres the big differnece in fps....if one can do it then they
>all shud
>
>cheers
>
>Simon
>

Nope.

Use the console command ( after the ~, or top-left key, below Esc )
/r_displayinfo 1

to turn on the frame-rate monitor.

( /r_displayinfo 0 to turn off )

See the polygon count ? See the polygons/sec. Your GPU is really
sweating on the detail in this game.

UT2004 has very simple scenery -- <<deliberately so>>, to keep the
framerate high while expending an appropriate number of
polygons/textures etc on the players, vehicles and (simple)
structures. Far Cry does both. The beautiful scenery does not come
for free. However, the CryEngine also incorporates a version of
Polybump technology ( version patented by Crytek, I believe) to
significantly reduce the polygon count while still accurately
rendering complex objects.

So, if you want UT2004 type frame-rates, just pick lower graphics
settings. You will lose a bunch of game-irrelevant eye-candy,
like dangling sharks..... and swinging lights with moving shadows.
The real piper ( the customer) calls the tune here.

Or you can stand in line for a NV40/R420, both due to be announced
this month ( NV40, April 13, R420, April 26 ).

BTW, if you would like to upgrade your Athlon to an A64, the
64-bit version of Far Cry will be freely-downloadable when the
OS and hardware drivers are in place.....

Sign up for your free download at "www.amd.com/farcry"


John Lewis

 

[NaDa]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Simon Mallatratt" <simon mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Farcry doesnt play very well at all on my set-up was wondering if anyone
> else had a similar set-up and was having poor fps too
>
> UT2004...plays like its on fire like a million fps.....aceeeeeeeeee...

"Far Cry" is one of the few games aside from the incredibly laggy
"Deus Ex 2" where the frame-rates take a deep dive to the quicksand.
I noticed an annoying bug with my nForce Soundstorm audio. If you
have the same ASUS Deluxe revision 2.0 model nForce 2, you'll
encounter horrible stutters during the game, because the integrated
APU doesen't like the game. As goofy as it sounds I installed an old
"Soundblaster 1024 Live" and the game worked much better, without the
extreme Parkinson's attacks, but it still plods like a snail trying to
run a marathon.

 

[NaDa]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

wgd <wgd@nomail.com> wrote:
> john.dsl@verizon.net wrote:
> > "Simon Mallatratt" <simon
> > mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Hi
> > >
> > >Farcry doesnt play very well at all on my set-up was wondering if anyone
> > >else had a similar set-up and was having poor fps too
> >
> > After Auto-detect ?
> >
> > Of after you have manually maxed everything ?
> >
> > (I have a P4/3.06 + FX5900/128 oc'd to 875/890
> >
> WOW! That's an astounding overclock considering the stock speed of the
> FX5900 is 400MHz (400 to 875). I'm guessing you meant 475/890 ;-)

He's from Siberia. It's normal there.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Simon Mallatratt <simon mallatratt@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> are u sure u av posted to right one mate
>
> no one as suggested any O/cin of anything in this post

In the reply from John Lewis, right at the end, was this:

(I have a P4/3.06 + FX5900/128 oc'd to 875/890)

That is what wgd was commenting about.

Dan