[ut2003io] 10 avg FPS. What the ... ? [SUMMARY of sorts]
kencantwell at comcast.net
Sun Mar 7 15:23:01 EST 2004
Thanks for all the input. Here are some things I've learned.
+ There's a ut2004 mailing list (to subscribe send blank email
to mailto:ut2004-subscribe at icculus.org) which I guess kind of
renders this one obsolete. Where was that announced, anyway?
+ I didn't exactly perform a statistical regression or anything,
but it appears that the key to getting 40-50 fps is having a
GeForce 4 or FX (or an analogous Radeon).
Wallowing in the details a bit, the reported fps numbers generally
fell in the 15-25 range (sluggish) or the 40-50 range (speedy).
Those in the speedy group had Athlon XP processors in the range
1800+ to 2400+ and these nvidia GPUs: GF4 Ti-4200, GF FX5600 Ultra,
GF FX5950 Ultra. Since there were several people in the sluggish
group with processors in that range, I'm giving all the credit to
Relevant variables such as resolution settings and the map in
question were frequently unreported. For me, playing anything
other than ONS-Torlan improves my numbers a lot, but turning the
rez down from 1024x768 to 800x600 matters little.
Also, FPS isn't the only relevant factor here. I've sometimes
had smoother play at 15 fps than at 25 fps.
+ Like some others, I've decided that an upgrade to a FX 5700 Ultra
is in order. The best prices I'm seeing are in the US$175 range.
Oh yeah, beware the word Ultra showing up where it doesn't belong.
For instance Gainward sells a product called "FX PowerPack! Ultra/860
TV/DVI 128MB" which is based on the plain (not Ultra) FX 5700 gpu.
This offense and others get propogated to vendors and on to price
search sites, so don't get giddy when you seach for "nvidia 5700
ultra" at http://nextag.com/ and you see US$139.
kannonfodder aka HunkaHunkaBurninLove
More information about the ut2003