Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Reviews are inadequate

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Reviews
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 6, 2002 5:46:26 AM

As much as I enjoy reading the Graphic card reviews I find that the benchmarks used are not adequate, as an example the latest review of the GF3 TI 200 128meg card, Try loading up MS FLight Sim 2002 in some of the higher detailed areas where 350-450 megs of textures are used at once to display a continuously moving scene with hundreds of 3D objects. Now lets compare the pros and cons of the 64 vs 128 meg cards.

FS2k2 is a fairly popular game no? most folks are trying to run it at the highest res that there monitor will support and at 32bit color. For instance, I run it at 1600x1200x32 with negative LOD values on my O/C GF3-TI200.

Under these conditions, even the best Athlons and P4 systems have a hard time giving consistant FPS of 20+.

AT one time in the not to distant pass MSFS was used as THE game to use for bench marking systems, As these 128meg cards along with the new GF4s start becoming more available It may once again be usefull to use MSFS2k2 along with the other games as many of us would be interested in these types of comparisons.

Player1

More about : reviews inadequate

February 6, 2002 9:35:21 PM

Bump...

What? No comment?
February 6, 2002 9:54:36 PM

Nope, I gave up responding to people who came merely to bitch about the reviews on this site.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
Related resources
February 6, 2002 9:57:28 PM

lol


Only if you let me see the Umpa Lumpa- Homer Simpson.
February 6, 2002 11:14:49 PM

I would love such bench, seeing as MSFS2k2 really puts the max stress possible on these cards and would love to see how GF4 Ti4600 does!

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
February 6, 2002 11:17:37 PM

erm.. isn't that game using Directx? and therefore unable to make use of anisotropic! Bit of a pointless test if you can't put the card under load!
February 7, 2002 2:42:01 AM

Hello?

by default it uses Trifiltering but 8/16/32/64 Anistropy can be forced.

I think based on the context of the original post, memory and texture refresh/shading/multi textureing performance is what we are looking at here.
February 7, 2002 2:52:43 AM

Hey come on now fatburger, I was once a whiner, ofcource I had a better reason, But its ok we'll convert him. He does have a point. The only problem is that he was going for the more popular games like quake ect. Sorry to say, no matter how much you may love that game and how it might be a good game to benchmark with, its not by any means popular. Benchmarking is a very slow and long porcess. Have you ever sat and waited for 3dmark2001 to finish? Its quite slow and borring after the 50th time. And trust me, they have done it that many times too. Another game is just that much more work they have to do. Ofcource, I always thought I'd love to work the the THG. You'd get to play arround with all the new technologies and overclock them and have a bunch of fun, but I'm sure after a while these busy guys get board of that kinda stuff. BUT IF THE THG IS READING THIS, I WILL WORK FOR 5 AMERICAN DOLLARS AN HOUR!!! PLEASE HIRE ME, I WILL DO ALL THE TESTING (as long as I get the keep the samples, hehe)
February 7, 2002 3:04:32 AM

FatBurger said:
"Nope, I gave up responding to people who came merely to bitch about the reviews on this site."

Sounds like your wimping out, It’s a completely legitimate post FatBurger, and it seems the only one that’s whining is you.
So here, have some cheese.
February 7, 2002 3:08:21 AM

"Sorry to say, no matter how much you may love that game and how it might be a good game to benchmark with, its not by any means popular"

Uh, yer not talking FS2k2 are you?
February 7, 2002 3:34:00 AM

yep, in comparison, its not even close to other games. It is a respectable game and a lot of people play it, but no where near as many people play it comparitively.
February 7, 2002 5:07:49 AM

Please, spare me, You must be Joking, LOL!!! MSFS has been one of the Top selling pc games of all time for the last ten years straight, It is supported by hundreds and hundreds of developers world wide, there are as many websites, and there are at least 2 magazines published that are based on the sim, even in my little city of Rochester NY, I have a waiting list of close to a thousand for just my photorealistic scenery of this area alone, which you can check out here if you wish:
http://www.frontiernet.net/~pleatzaw/roch2k.htm.
February 7, 2002 1:46:44 PM

You've just introduced the apple for the orange. MSFS2k itself is NOT one of the best sellers of the past 10 yrs so testing IT adds little value. It's a great enterprise with some devoted fans but I have to concur with everyone else... it's really not that large % of the game community. Meanwhile Quake is both popular on its own and is used as the engine for numerous other popular games. Flight sims sales have... gone into a tailspin, if you will.

-------------------------------------
Nature abhors a moron. -- HL Mencken
February 7, 2002 3:18:16 PM

OK sure, I could be wrong, but I dont think so.
The last time that I had access to sales data two years ago MSFS was only second to Myst in sales for the past five years and was first place in sales for over ten years, sales figures as of late 99 where above the 4 million mark and that was two versions ago.

I am aware that many games have jumped in front as you state sales of flight sims "have been in a tail spin"
But I still see MSFS being refered to as top ten of all time at gathering/conventions etc... Anyhow my point was what game can you think of that is as popular as MSFS and will stress the CPU/Video card more? the current version Brings any current system to its knees.

So far this is a very weak forum, nobody very serious.

Its funny, the review of 128 meg card using benchmarks that only load about 40-60 megs worth of mips. yeah thats a great test of the benifits of a 128meg card. Give me a break.

Out.
Waiting for 3-4 giger w/8x AGP and a good GF4.
February 7, 2002 3:35:00 PM

TBFWW,
I re-read your post and have to opologize as what you said is exactly true.

But still, if you want to test the benifits of a 128meg vs 64 meg card why on earth use benchmarks that will only load 40-60 megs worth of mipmaps as the final test, why not use a game that will stuff the card full as well as bring it to a halt? (thats mainly a CPU problem)
February 7, 2002 5:33:12 PM

Your point is well taken. It would have been nice for them to think through *where* the 128mb cards may add value, not just pointing out that they do not in most cases.

-------------------------------------
Nature abhors a moron. -- HL Mencken
February 7, 2002 6:13:10 PM

As a hardcore quaker (amongst other things) I gotta step in and defend the guy a bit....

MS Flight sim will bring a high-end graphics card to it's knees 100x faster than quake ever could.
February 8, 2002 11:25:19 PM

I agree with player1. Reviews are useless. Somebody get on the phone with nVidia and get them to send me one of each from their latest range of graphics cards. So, err... I can ...um... test them for myself.... for a few months, until the next range is out. Then I'll test those!

<font color=red><i>I refugee from Guatanamo Bay,
dance around the border like I'm Cassius Clay
</i></font color=red>
February 9, 2002 12:18:58 AM

Hmm, actually MS Flight Simulator is more CPU sensitive than it is graphics card sensitive. You'll benefit more from a fast CPU.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
February 9, 2002 12:23:45 AM

I dont play MSFS. I think it sucks. Compare its sales to that of the Quake games, Half-Life, Serious Sam, etc, and I think you'll see that many games are much more popular.

Jack Burton is a great man...
February 9, 2002 2:17:55 AM

Nope, actually FS2K had that trademark of CPU hungry but FS2k2 is much more dependent on video card than ever before. Man I know what Player1 means, my Ti200 has been literally eaten by FS2K2's power-hungry requirements. It drops any card you got to 10 FPS if it wants and I do think it would make the killer stress bench. However you need to know what to test in it! As in full weather conditions? Full cloud and precipitations, with 100% ATC and population of traffic and full max settings INCLUDING 8 HW Lights?
If so, then send in the cards! I do want to see how much GF4 Ti4600 is brought down in heavy conditions as stressful as this...

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
!