 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Action Games / Doom / July 2004Doom3 is real slow on my pc
I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. I would expect you to be getting 0 FPS since it's not out yet. > > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. > > I would expect you to be getting 0 FPS since it's not out yet. He must've imported a time machine from Brazil (extremely obscure Simpsons halloween reference :) this same dude posted on half life exactly the same post replacing half life 2 with doom 3  SignatureAlmeyda > > > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > > > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > He must've imported a time machine from Brazil (extremely obscure > Simpsons halloween reference :) since when was 29-30 fps slow? > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. > since when was 29-30 fps slow? Well, since 50 is a minimum. :P SignatureKill them a lot! >> since when was 29-30 fps slow? > >Well, since 50 is a minimum. :P The actual minimum FPS is 30. This number is not magical, but is high enough to allow for smooth enough animation. (Besides, that number is lower than the reaction time of most humans.) Project IGI is a great example of this: it only has 30 FPS, but it does not vary as most games do. In most cases, the FPS shown for games is only an average. It does not contain information on how much the FPS jumps around, how often it drops below the critical FPS mark, and so on. >>>since when was 29-30 fps slow? >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > enough to allow for smooth enough animation. (Besides, that number is > lower than the reaction time of most humans.) 'Reaction time' isn't a good gauge as 'perception' times are much, much faster. And by that I mean something that 'catches' attention (such as movement in the peripheral vision field). The human 'reaction' to it may be 'slow' by comparison, but then you never react if you don't notice it at all. > Project IGI is a great > example of this: it only has 30 FPS, but it does not vary as most games do. > > In most cases, the FPS shown for games is only an average. It does not > contain information on how much the FPS jumps around, how often it drops > below the critical FPS mark, and so on. > >>>since when was 29-30 fps slow? > >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > faster. And by that I mean something that 'catches' attention (such as > movement in the peripheral vision field). The original Doom Engine was locked at 30 FPS :) Most Doom ports had this limit still until now. >>>>>since when was 29-30 fps slow? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > The original Doom Engine was locked at 30 FPS :) > Most Doom ports had this limit still until now. Yes, but I wasn't talking about the merits of the game design, I was talking about the design of human beings. > >> since when was 29-30 fps slow? > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > contain information on how much the FPS jumps around, how often it drops > below the critical FPS mark, and so on. Well, I just remember reading somewhere that for arcade games the 50 fps should be the minimum. When I look back at playing Quake2, 30-35 fps was never enough for me. SignatureI don't play well with others. > > >> since when was 29-30 fps slow? > > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > should be the minimum. When I look back at playing Quake2, 30-35 fps was > never enough for me. I don't know about anyone else, but frame rates over 35 or so FPS seems to have a "glassy", unnatural look to it. 30 seems to be the "magic number" for me, when it comes to realism. (notice how live or video taped NTSC footage seems to have a higher FPS than the "real world?". am i the only one who notices this? >>>>>since when was 29-30 fps slow? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > seems to have a "glassy", unnatural look to it. 30 seems to be > the "magic number" for me, when it comes to realism. There is nothing about a higher 'FPS' that would 'detract' from realism. More likely is there is some other factor with generating the images that go INTO the 'higher FPS' that causes the effect you perceive. The human eye/brain combination does a lot of 'interpretation' and causes things one might think are irrelevant to sometimes have dramatic effects. As just one example, the eye/brain makes 'predictions' about movement, which is one reason why fixed frame rate video appears as smooth motion. But if the frame rate is not constant, like some versions of 3/2 pull down, a fast moving object will appear as TWO objects because the brain thinks, based on movement in the previous frames, that it should be 'here' when it's still 'there', so the 'there' observation gets perceived as another one. Not saying that's what you were seeing but if, for example, to get the 'higher' frame rates the game simply inserts a few additional frames of the same image, appropriately interspersed to make up for the needed extra frames, then the eye/brain will not see it as 'natural' because the movement rapidly stop/starts every time an extra frame is inserted. > (notice how live or video taped NTSC footage seems to have a higher FPS > than the "real world?". am i the only one who notices this? I have no idea what you mean by a "higher FPS than the 'real world'". I don't know about anyone else, but frame rates over 35 or so FPS > seems to have a "glassy", unnatural look to it. 30 seems to be > the "magic number" for me, when it comes to realism. Well, I think the problem is that an average rate of 35 fps will eventually fall to 8-10 fps when the action becomes two crowdy (have I said this right? :) ). So, average rate of 60 fps will ensure you at least 30 fps in any situation. > (notice how live or video taped NTSC footage seems to have a higher FPS > than the "real world?". am i the only one who notices this? I did notice that too. SignatureI don't play well with others. Smola <spam@supersmola.net> said: >> (notice how live or video taped NTSC footage seems to have a higher FPS >> than the "real world?". am i the only one who notices this? > > I did notice that too. What are you talking about? SignatureMac Cool balanco01@yahoo.com (Proprclr) said: > I don't know about anyone else, but frame rates over 35 or so FPS > seems to have a "glassy", unnatural look to it. 30 seems to be > the "magic number" for me, when it comes to realism. > > (notice how live or video taped NTSC footage seems to have a higher FPS > than the "real world?". am i the only one who notices this? http://mikhailtech.com/articles/editorials/fps/ SignatureMac Cool > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. I thought Doom3 ships on Aug. 3? I've got you beat. I bought Half Life2 at Electronics boutique today. > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. > I've got you beat. I bought Half Life2 > at Electronics boutique today. > > > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. Hows it run, I was thinking of picking that up but I got doom3 instead. > I've got you beat. I bought Half Life2 > at Electronics boutique today. Ugh, that is So five seconds ago. I just got Half-Life IV today. Dirt cheap too, since they're making room for Unreal Tournament 3080. > I've got you beat. I bought Half Life2 > at Electronics boutique today. Pikers. I just ordered Duke Nukem Forever, Prey, and Team Fortress 2 from an expatriate Nigerian finance minister, online. All he asked me for in return, was the use of my bank account numbers so I could hold some money for him for a while. Damn friendly folk, those Nigerians. -Marshall > > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. "Hugo Drax" <hugodrax@aol.com> said: > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and > drop to 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I > doing something wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect > 60fps at least. I'm getting 40+ FPS with a 2.53Ghz P4 and Ti4200 @ 1024x768 2xAA. You are definitely doing something wrong. Try turning the overclocking screw on the 9800 clockwise until you see visual artifacts, then back off 1/4 turn and benchmark again. SignatureMac Cool > "Hugo Drax" <hugodrax@aol.com> said: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the 9800 clockwise until you see visual artifacts, then back off 1/4 turn > and benchmark again. Cool thanks, I never knew what the purpose of that little plastic screwdriver they ship with was for. How hell did you buy the game if it's not oficially out until beginning og August. > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. > How hell did you buy the game if it's not oficially out until beginning og > August. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > something > > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. Doh! Hugo got one! It's not even out yet. > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing something > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. TOOL! > It's not even out yet. > > I bought doom3 at bestbuy today and the FPS hover around 29-30 and drop to > > 20fps on my 3.2GHZ/800mhz+9800PRO. What the heck gives am I doing > something > > wrong I figured at 1024x768 no AA I should expect 60fps at least. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.