5900XT and Doom3 -- post timedemo results

[Eric]

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

Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.

I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little slow.

Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by 9% to
425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.

Game: 1024 x 768; high quality; nothing turned off in advanced setttings
except for AA and Vsynch.

timedemo1: 25.9 (ouch)!

Now if I turn off Ansitropic Filtering (via Nvidia drivers) I get to 30.2.

If I drop to 800 x 600, I can leave AF on, and get in the low 30s. I get
over 40 in 800 x 600 with AF off (everything else as above).

So what do you other 5900XT people see (and don't forget to post machine
specs and game settings).

 

[Eric]

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

Oh and for those of you who don't know how to run a timedemo:

1. open console (cntr/alt/tilde key) -- instead of control alt delte -- hold
down control -- alt -- and tilde (~) key.
2. type timedemo demo1 (let it run -- takes about a minute -- then your fps
will show up)


"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
newsfednQFsiM2Pe43cRVn-pA@speakeasy.net...
> Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.
>
> I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little slow.
>
> Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by 9%
to
> 425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.
>
> Game: 1024 x 768; high quality; nothing turned off in advanced setttings
> except for AA and Vsynch.
>
> timedemo1: 25.9 (ouch)!
>
> Now if I turn off Ansitropic Filtering (via Nvidia drivers) I get to
30.2.
>
> If I drop to 800 x 600, I can leave AF on, and get in the low 30s. I get
> over 40 in 800 x 600 with AF off (everything else as above).
>
> So what do you other 5900XT people see (and don't forget to post machine
> specs and game settings).
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
newsfednQFsiM2Pe43cRVn-pA@speakeasy.net...
> Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.
>
> I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little slow.
>
> Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by 9%
to
> 425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.
>
> Game: 1024 x 768; high quality; nothing turned off in advanced setttings
> except for AA and Vsynch.
>
> timedemo1: 25.9 (ouch)!
>
> Now if I turn off Ansitropic Filtering (via Nvidia drivers) I get to
30.2.
>
> If I drop to 800 x 600, I can leave AF on, and get in the low 30s. I get
> over 40 in 800 x 600 with AF off (everything else as above).
>
> So what do you other 5900XT people see (and don't forget to post machine
> specs and game settings).
>

Machine: XP1700 @ XP2400 512MB DDR RAM, Geforce FX5900 @ 475/900 61.77
drivers

Game 1024 * 768 high quality 30.8 fps AF set to application controlled in
drivers
Game: 800 * 600 high quality 36.7 fps AF set to application controlled in
drivers

I get a lot of stuttering during the game however I wonder what the
recommended ram requirements are.

 

[Eric]

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

Damn -- how does an XP2400 compare to a P4 2.6 ghz (i wrote 2.4, I actually
have a 2.6).

Also, is yours a 5900XT or a regular 5900? I'm guessing at 475/900 its a
5900 with stock speed of 450/800?

Do you get better performance from overclocking core or memory on any video
card? I see you have the core only slightly higher, but the memory you have
well over 10% higher.


"Nick Le Lievre" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:2nc7qhFv8gteU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> Machine: XP1700 @ XP2400 512MB DDR RAM, Geforce FX5900 @ 475/900 61.77
> drivers
>
> Game 1024 * 768 high quality 30.8 fps AF set to application controlled in
> drivers
> Game: 800 * 600 high quality 36.7 fps AF set to application controlled in
> drivers
>
> I get a lot of stuttering during the game however I wonder what the
> recommended ram requirements are.
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:NvCdnUYJkaBlco3cRVn-jA@speakeasy.net...
> Damn -- how does an XP2400 compare to a P4 2.6 ghz (i wrote 2.4, I
actually
> have a 2.6).
>
> Also, is yours a 5900XT or a regular 5900? I'm guessing at 475/900 its a
> 5900 with stock speed of 450/800?
>
> Do you get better performance from overclocking core or memory on any
video
> card? I see you have the core only slightly higher, but the memory you
have
> well over 10% higher.
>

Yeah I have the FX5900 non ultra overclocked to 475/900 not the XT - I
definetely need some more ram I feel.

So where you get 25.9 I get 30.8 if I turn AF off you get 30.2 and I get
33.8

The difference is probably too do with FX5900XT vs FX5900 XP2400 is supposed
to compare to a P4 2.4ghz

 

[Eric]

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

"Nick Le Lievre" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:2ncbt6Fui212U1@uni-berlin.de...
>> I found that medium quality resulted in a lot less stuttering in the
> timedemo and also in game and I got 42fps at 1024 * 768 with no AA and AF
at
> 8x

But I really want High Quality -- as the sounds are better too. And I have
5.1 speakers.

I'm thinking I should play 800 x 600 at High quality.

Note that you need to run the timedemo twice. The 1st time it always will
stutter due to loading the textures. The 2nd time will be more accurate and
a little faster.

 

[Guest]

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

"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:4aqdnTfi3dG5Z43cRVn-uA@speakeasy.net...
>
> "Nick Le Lievre" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
> news:2ncbt6Fui212U1@uni-berlin.de...
> >> I found that medium quality resulted in a lot less stuttering in the
> > timedemo and also in game and I got 42fps at 1024 * 768 with no AA and
AF
> at
> > 8x
>
> But I really want High Quality -- as the sounds are better too. And I
have
> 5.1 speakers.
>
> I'm thinking I should play 800 x 600 at High quality.
>
> Note that you need to run the timedemo twice. The 1st time it always will
> stutter due to loading the textures. The 2nd time will be more accurate
and
> a little faster.
>

Yeah I just noticed that the 42 fps I recorded at medium quality 1024 * 768
was a cached run. I just run high quality 1024 * 768 again as a cached run
at got 38.6 so disregard my earlier scores and I just need some more ram for
this game;

Machine: XP1700 @ XP2400 512MB DDR FX5900 non ultra @ 475/900

1024 * 768 High Quality 38.6fps cached run
1024 * 768 Medium Quality 42 fps cached run

So you got 25fps in a cached run at 1024 * 768 High Quality ? that does seem
low

 

[Eric]

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

"Nick Le Lievre" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:2nccuuFvnnprU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> Machine: XP1700 @ XP2400 512MB DDR FX5900 non ultra @ 475/900
>
> 1024 * 768 High Quality 38.6fps cached run
> 1024 * 768 Medium Quality 42 fps cached run
>
> So you got 25fps in a cached run at 1024 * 768 High Quality ? that does
seem
> low

Could be the vid card -- big diff in timings from 425/763 to your settings.

 

[Guest]

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

"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> skrev i meddelandet
newsfednQFsiM2Pe43cRVn-pA@speakeasy.net...
> Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.
>
> I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little slow.
>
> Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by 9%
to
> 425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.
>
> Game: 1024 x 768; high quality; nothing turned off in advanced setttings
> except for AA and Vsynch.
>
> timedemo1: 25.9 (ouch)!
>
> Now if I turn off Ansitropic Filtering (via Nvidia drivers) I get to
30.2.
>
> If I drop to 800 x 600, I can leave AF on, and get in the low 30s. I get
> over 40 in 800 x 600 with AF off (everything else as above).
>
> So what do you other 5900XT people see (and don't forget to post machine
> specs and game settings).
>

You are not writing what level of AF you are using.
Also...
If you have Geforce 5900XT (or similar) then 'Medium quality' should be used
to get the best gaming experience..
High quality should be used on the latest nVidia 6800 and ATI cards only +
with CPUs as high as 3Ghz.
When it comes to 'Ultra quality', well, there is no computer in existance
yet which will give you extremly high frame rate on this settings.

 

[Eric]

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

AF is automatically set to 8x if you use High Quality settings in the game
(and leave drivers to application control for AF). So it is either 8x -- or
I turned them off entirely doing some testing as I mentioned in my post.

Also, 1024 x 768 (according to HardOCP) can be used (and I use it), but I
just get lower framerates. Note that I have a 2.6 (not a 2.4 ghz).

If I turn off AF entirely (but still High Quality), I do get over 30 fps in
the time demo. Not sure if 800 x 600 with 8x AF is better image quality
than 1024 x 768 with NO AF. What do you think?

Roughly same framerates with both of those settings.

I really want to use High Quality for the more sounds -- you get less sounds
with Medium Quality. And this game sounds sweet on 5.1 speakers (which I
have). I love the sound.


"MheAd" <cosibeg@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Kd6Qc.4217$vH5.457@amstwist00...
>
> >
> You are not writing what level of AF you are using.
> Also...
> If you have Geforce 5900XT (or similar) then 'Medium quality' should be
used
> to get the best gaming experience..
> High quality should be used on the latest nVidia 6800 and ATI cards only +
> with CPUs as high as 3Ghz.
> When it comes to 'Ultra quality', well, there is no computer in existance
> yet which will give you extremly high frame rate on this settings.
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
newsfednQFsiM2Pe43cRVn-pA@speakeasy.net...
> Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.
>
> I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little slow.
>
> Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by 9%
to
> 425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.
>
> Game: 1024 x 768; high quality; nothing turned off in advanced setttings
> except for AA and Vsynch.
>
> timedemo1: 25.9 (ouch)!
>
> Now if I turn off Ansitropic Filtering (via Nvidia drivers) I get to
30.2.
>
> If I drop to 800 x 600, I can leave AF on, and get in the low 30s. I get
> over 40 in 800 x 600 with AF off (everything else as above).
>
> So what do you other 5900XT people see (and don't forget to post machine
> specs and game settings).
>
>

all stock:
gainward 5900 "se" (400/700) 128mb
a64 3200+ 2.0ghz 2x512mb 2-3-2-7 200mhz

1024 x 768, nothing turned off in advanced setttings except for AA and
Vsynch, timedemo demo1

high 36fps
med 44fps

Btw, aren't sounds only supposed to be reduced in low quality?

"The Low Quality setting also reduces sound diversity to the level of one
sound per sound effect."
"Sound diversity is also increased in Medium Quality giving you more sounds
per sound effect"
No more references for high and ultra.

 

[Eric]

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

"BelaLvgosi" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$w6nx1i$7p8$1@newsfront4.netvisao.pt...
>
>> Btw, aren't sounds only supposed to be reduced in low quality?
>
> "The Low Quality setting also reduces sound diversity to the level of one
> sound per sound effect."
> "Sound diversity is also increased in Medium Quality giving you more
sounds
> per sound effect"
> No more references for high and ultra.

Yeah, it is not as clear, now that I read that again, although the first
paragraph in that section kind of implies that the sound diversity changes
on each setting:

"For each quality setting (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra) there are various
effects being manipulated. These effects include sound diversity and texture
quality. Sound diversity is simply controlling the number of sounds DOOM 3
will use per sound shader for a given sound. For example, let's say you are
shooting your gun and the bullets hit a wall. There could be ten different
possible sounds to pick from for that one sound effect that are already in
memory and ready to use. By reducing the number of sounds available in
memory, or rather narrowing the sound diversity, Doom 3 can save on the
amount memory being used."

How does your cpu compare to a P4 2.6 ghz (I don't know your CPU relates).

 

[Guest]

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

1280x1024x2xfsaa High quality - 59fps

2.6Ghz p4HT, 1.5GB Ram, 6800GT@Ultra

 

[Eric]

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

Bastard with the 6800 GT.


"Mark Jeffries" <fdsdf@fsdfsdf.com> wrote in message
news:hk9Qc.98003$D32.18509@fe44.usenetserver.com...
> 1280x1024x2xfsaa High quality - 59fps
>
> 2.6Ghz p4HT, 1.5GB Ram, 6800GT@Ultra
>
>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

> How does your cpu compare to a P4 2.6 ghz (I don't know your CPU relates).
>
>

The a64 3200+ 2.0ghz 1mb cache should slightly outperform an Intel 3.2C on
most benches stock, with clear advantage on games as ut2004, but disavantage
in encoding apps, wich for the record are heavily intel optimised.
For a rule of thumb (not quite exact, but should give you a notion), amd's
socket A xp's rating on 333 and 400fsb barton processors can be compared
directly to older intel p4's with 533 fsb, while a xp 3000+ is slower than a
p4 2.8 fsb800 on most stuff but over a 2.6.
For A64's either on socket 754 or 939 you can compare rates directly to p4's
fsb800.

Considering that the number of different sounds should almost only affect
ram used (they mentioned 80-100mb per map), I tend to belive low settings
(wich target 512mb ram or less) will have only 1/10 sounds as given in the
example, and medium should the have whole sound palete, as it won't affect
performance on a machine that can already play med or high. More info will
start circulating in the next days

 

[Guest]

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

"Mark Jeffries" <fdsdf@fsdfsdf.com> schreef in bericht
news:hk9Qc.98003$D32.18509@fe44.usenetserver.com...
> 1280x1024x2xfsaa High quality - 59fps
>
> 2.6Ghz p4HT, 1.5GB Ram, 6800GT@Ultra
>
>


Very nice, but an A64 3500 would give you about 50% increase, check
Anandtech's review. In a way those cynics saying 6800U on a 2.4-2.8 is a bit
waste are right.

 

[Guest]

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

"Jelle" <mazzel@veel.plezier> schreef in bericht
news:3G9Qc.4248$vH5.3131@amstwist00...
>
> "Mark Jeffries" <fdsdf@fsdfsdf.com> schreef in bericht
> news:hk9Qc.98003$D32.18509@fe44.usenetserver.com...
> > 1280x1024x2xfsaa High quality - 59fps
> >
> > 2.6Ghz p4HT, 1.5GB Ram, 6800GT@Ultra
> >
> >
>
>
> Very nice, but an A64 3500 would give you about 50% increase, check
> Anandtech's review. In a way those cynics saying 6800U on a 2.4-2.8 is a
bit
> waste are right.

Correction, it's more like 33%.

 

[Phil]

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

"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
newsfednQFsiM2Pe43cRVn-pA@speakeasy.net...
> Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.
>
> I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little slow.
>
> Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by 9%
to
> 425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.
>
> Game: 1024 x 768; high quality; nothing turned off in advanced setttings
> except for AA and Vsynch.
>
> timedemo1: 25.9 (ouch)!
>
> Now if I turn off Ansitropic Filtering (via Nvidia drivers) I get to
30.2.
>
> If I drop to 800 x 600, I can leave AF on, and get in the low 30s. I get
> over 40 in 800 x 600 with AF off (everything else as above).
>
> So what do you other 5900XT people see (and don't forget to post machine
> specs and game settings).
>
>

1280x1024, Medium - 16.1fps
1024x768, Medium - 24.9fps

(Both on the second run of the demo)

Athlon XP 3000+
512MB PC2700
A7N8X-X
Gainward GF4 Ti4800SE (280/570, Expertool "Enhanced")
Latest NVIDIA driver (61.76)

Not too bad, I was expecting alot less, even at 1280 it seems playable 90%
of the time, though at times it obviously does get the "laggy" feeling.

 

[Phil]

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

"Phil" <_invalid_@no_spam_.invalid_> wrote in message
newsMKdncpcQLYb14zcRVn-iA@eclipse.net.uk...
>
> "Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
> newsfednQFsiM2Pe43cRVn-pA@speakeasy.net...
> > Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.
> >
> > I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little
slow.
> >
> > Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by 9%
> to
> > 425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.
> >
> > Game: 1024 x 768; high quality; nothing turned off in advanced
setttings
> > except for AA and Vsynch.
> >
> > timedemo1: 25.9 (ouch)!
> >
> > Now if I turn off Ansitropic Filtering (via Nvidia drivers) I get to
> 30.2.
> >
> > If I drop to 800 x 600, I can leave AF on, and get in the low 30s. I
get
> > over 40 in 800 x 600 with AF off (everything else as above).
> >
> > So what do you other 5900XT people see (and don't forget to post machine
> > specs and game settings).
> >
> >
>
> 1280x1024, Medium - 16.1fps
> 1024x768, Medium - 24.9fps
>
> (Both on the second run of the demo)
>
> Athlon XP 3000+
> 512MB PC2700
> A7N8X-X
> Gainward GF4 Ti4800SE (280/570, Expertool "Enhanced")
> Latest NVIDIA driver (61.76)
>
> Not too bad, I was expecting alot less, even at 1280 it seems playable 90%
> of the time, though at times it obviously does get the "laggy" feeling.
>
>
>

26.2fps @ 1024x768 Medium, Graphics o/c'd to 300/580....now is it really
worth overclocking....

 

[Eric]

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

Can't hurt to overclock a little -- while the timedemo only shows 2 fps or
so increase, that's average. It may be alot more while playing the game.

"Phil" <_invalid_@no_spam_.invalid_> wrote in message
news:JLWdnYxDTqxQ1ozcRVn-hw@eclipse.net.uk...
>
> "Phil" <_invalid_@no_spam_.invalid_> wrote in message
> newsMKdncpcQLYb14zcRVn-iA@eclipse.net.uk...
> >
> > "Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > newsfednQFsiM2Pe43cRVn-pA@speakeasy.net...
> > > Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.
> > >
> > > I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little
> slow.
> > >
> > > Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by
9%
> > to
> > > 425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.
> > >
> > > Game: 1024 x 768; high quality; nothing turned off in advanced
> setttings
> > > except for AA and Vsynch.
> > >
> > > timedemo1: 25.9 (ouch)!
> > >
> > > Now if I turn off Ansitropic Filtering (via Nvidia drivers) I get to
> > 30.2.
> > >
> > > If I drop to 800 x 600, I can leave AF on, and get in the low 30s. I
> get
> > > over 40 in 800 x 600 with AF off (everything else as above).
> > >
> > > So what do you other 5900XT people see (and don't forget to post
machine
> > > specs and game settings).
> > >
> > >
> >
> > 1280x1024, Medium - 16.1fps
> > 1024x768, Medium - 24.9fps
> >
> > (Both on the second run of the demo)
> >
> > Athlon XP 3000+
> > 512MB PC2700
> > A7N8X-X
> > Gainward GF4 Ti4800SE (280/570, Expertool "Enhanced")
> > Latest NVIDIA driver (61.76)
> >
> > Not too bad, I was expecting alot less, even at 1280 it seems playable
90%
> > of the time, though at times it obviously does get the "laggy" feeling.
> >
> >
> >
>
> 26.2fps @ 1024x768 Medium, Graphics o/c'd to 300/580....now is it really
> worth overclocking....
>
>

 

[Guest]

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

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 11:00:51 -0400 "Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> meeped :

>Note that you need to run the timedemo twice. The 1st time it always will
>stutter due to loading the textures. The 2nd time will be more accurate and
>a little faster.

A little faster when you only look at the final scores... but massively
smoother. In fact, no chugging at all after the first run.
YOu'd think that the hellishly long loading times would have including texture
load ups....bunch of arse i reckon... considering how long theyve been writing
the sodding thing..


--


) ___ ______
(__/_____) /) (, / )
/ __ _ (/ _ /---( __ _/_ _
/ (_(_/ (_(__/ )_(_(_ ) / ____)(_(_/ (_(__/_)_
(______) (_/ (

 

[Guest]

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

> In a way those cynics saying 6800U on a 2.4-2.8 is a bit waste are right.
Lol, and in a way they've been hitting the crack pipe a bit too hard, so
adding the 6800 GT to my 2.6 giga p4 to get an average of 59 fps in doom3 is
a waste in what way exactly???

You know, you're right, I should have stuck with the 9700 pro and get 23fps
at a lower resolution!!

 

[Guest]

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

"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
newsfednQFsiM2Pe43cRVn-pA@speakeasy.net...
> Please post machine specs, game settings and timedemo demo1 results.
>
> I'm wondering whether I'm on target with my results. Seems a little slow.
>
> Machine: P4 2.4 ghz; 1 GB DDR RAM; Geforce FX 5900XT (overclocked by 9%
> to
> 425/763 -- stock is 390/700). Vid drivers -- MSI's 61.21 drivers.
>

AthlonXP 2600+ @ 2260mhz
2x256ddr 400 @ 430
Gainward FX 5900XT "GS" @ 450/900mhz 61.77 drivers
800x600 @ 85hz high(all on)
2148 frames @ 37 sec=58.0 fps

 

[Guest]

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

p4 2.8 (533fsb) , 1gig generic pc2700 and a powercolour 9700pro (all stock
speeds)
AA turned off in advanced options

1024x768 @ high detail = 33.3
800x600 @ high detail = 42.5

taken on the 2nd run through

 

[Guest]

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

"Eric" <Eric@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:GLCdnUYGfe-odY3cRVn-hw@speakeasy.net...
> Oh and for those of you who don't know how to run a timedemo:
>
> 1. open console (cntr/alt/tilde key) -- instead of control alt delte --
hold
> down control -- alt -- and tilde (~) key.
> 2. type timedemo demo1 (let it run -- takes about a minute -- then your
fps
> will show up)
>
>

do you need DOOM3 for this?
What other ways are gamers and overclockers benching their graphics cards?
FPS best standard. Do I need special software?