mlists at netcom.no
Tue Oct 2 15:18:33 PDT 2001
At 17:06 02.10.2001 +0100, you wrote:
>On stardate Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:31:22 +0200
>Øyvind began the full scale invasion of earth with the following words:
> > >
> > > > Question - how *do* you get that kind of frame rate?
> > >
> > >Antoher question... Everyone is so keen to get Quake3 running at over
> > >200FPS. why? The monitor only displays (say)75-120 frames/sec.
> > Because your framerate drops drastically when you enter large open areas,
> > meet opponents etc. I've got 80 FPS in counter-strike. This falls down to
> > around 20 when I'm in combat.
> > (Dual pII400 w/GeForce2MX400).
> > The more stuff (i.e polygons), the lower performance. If you get your FPS
> > up to 200, you might have 50FPS in a hefty battle, which is half the
> > refresh-rate my monitor can handle in 800x600.
>I know that. My point was (as explained in another post) - Why do people
>not quote the /minimum/ framerate they get?
Because the /minimum/ FPS is not practical to quote without some
'standard'. My minimum FPS may well be 0.0001 with 300 Billion triangles on
screen at the same time.
I can easily get my GF2 to choke and only get a 5-6 FPS (I could probably
get it even lower if I try hard).
>Better still, why not average framerate and deviation?
This would be more useful IMO. But how?
>Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
>and put 'unsubscribe blfs-support' in the subject header of the message
Phone: +47 99389004
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-support' in the subject header of the message
More information about the blfs-support