UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
Get 3DNow! Message Board
User Comments
My system is slow
profile | register | preferences | faq | search
|
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
|
Get 3DNow! Message Board User Comments My system is slow
|
| Author | Topic: My system is slow |
| Postmand_Per Follower of Athlon |
 posted September 03, 1999 08:43  
Hi! I have just done some benchmarking on my machine and I think my scores are a bit low. I get: Quake2 Half-Life 3DMark99Max It doesn't matter if I run the tests in 640*480, 800*600 or 1024*768, the scores are the same. Even with my old K6-2 300 + Voodoo2 my results were higher (at least in Q2, can't really remember the 3DMark-scores). My system: I'm using Windows98 SE and the newest drivers from 3dfx. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| Pieter Follower of Athlon |
posted September 03, 1999 11:37
isnt the cachable area just 128 mb ? IP: Logged |
| Postmand_Per Follower of Athlon |
posted September 03, 1999 14:36
I'm not sure but I think it can cache 256MB RAM. But I can't see why it should slow my system down that much just because the motherboard can't cache the last 64 MB RAM. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| Akma Follower of Athlon |
posted September 03, 1999 19:07
Warning! I'm trying to play the wise man. 1. The cacheable area is 128MB with 512k L3, 256MB with 1024k L3. 2. Somewhere in the net it was said that Windows is using the memory from top to bottom (highest addresses first). 3. My machine (K6-III 400,96MB,Asus P5A-B,Riva TNT) scores 3272 3DMarks and 6354 CPU 3DMarks in 800x600x16 resolution. IP: Logged |
| Postmand_Per Follower of Athlon |
posted September 04, 1999 15:44
My motherboard does have 1024k L3 cache so it shouldn't be a problem cahcing the 192 mb ram then. Akma, have you tried running a timedemo in Q2 or Half-life? I saw a review of a system equal to mine somewhere (can't remember the url) and it scored significantly higher scores than mine in Q2 and Half-life. How can that be? Also my friends computer (pretty much equal to mine, just got Voodoo2 sli instead of Voodoo3 3k) is faster than mine 
------------------ IP: Logged |
| Troodon Follower of Athlon |
posted September 04, 1999 17:33
Do you have the last Via AGP drivers? Have you tried to reinstall W98? IP: Logged |
| Khai RULE Celeron Worshipper |
posted September 04, 1999 20:18
HI Postmand_Per I have similar setup as yours but with K6-2 350 @ 400 i got 27,3fps for crusher and 51.8fps for demo 1. i think you should get much higher scores considering you got K6-III 450. Have you installed latest VIA AGP IDE drivers and also your V3 drivers. dont forget also to install Q2 Patch From AMD site. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| Akma Follower of Athlon |
posted September 04, 1999 21:45
Here's my QuakeMark table, K6-III 400 + Riva TNT (AGP Detonator 2.08 drivers): Quake1 1.09 (GL 0.97) 800x600x16 Quake1 1.09 (GL 0.97) 800x600x32 Quake2 3.10 Software 800x600 Quake2 3.20 3DNow! Software 800x600 Quake2 3.10 OpenGL 800x600x16 Quake2 3.20 3DNow! OpenGL 800x600x16 Quake3 Test 1.08 800x600x16, bilinear, 3/4 texture quality Quake3 Test 1.08 800x600x32, bilinear, 3/4 texture quality IP: Logged |
| Postmand_Per Follower of Athlon |
posted September 06, 1999 09:31
I have just installed the latest AGP drivers from VIA but they didn't change anything. Also my Windows is only a week old or something like that... The Q2 patch from AMD isn't that only for Voodoo2? I'm pretty sure it's installed but I can only choose between 3dfx OpenGL or Default OpenGL, and choosing 3dfx OpengGl just make the screen go gray. Pressing Return a few times will make the game return to standard software-mode.... This really starts to bug me, especially when yours system are getting higer scores than mine BTW I found the url to the review I was talking about earlier, so if anyone cares about how fast a machine like mine is supposed to be they could take a look. ------------------ [This message has been edited by Postmand_Per (edited September 07, 1999).] IP: Logged |
| Akma Follower of Athlon |
posted September 06, 1999 17:54
>The Q2 patch from AMD isn't that only for Voodoo2? I also thought at first that it was only for Voodoo, but I was happy to find out that it also makes TNT based cards go faster. As you can see from the scores crusher runs 25-30% percent faster with the patch. All you have to do is to select the '3dnow default opengl' gfx driver instead of the usual 'default opengl'. IP: Logged |
| Postmand_Per Follower of Athlon |
posted September 07, 1999 16:18
Now I found the Q2 patch and it's working  I now get 30 fps in Crusher and 65 fps in Demo1 in all resolutions. I think that's strange.... I have also tried running the q3demo1 in Q3 v1.08, and here's my scores: Fastest (640*480) Fast (640*480) Normal (640*480) Normal (800*600) Normal (1024*768) Are these scores okay or what? ------------------ IP: Logged |
| Akma Follower of Athlon |
posted September 07, 1999 17:29
Okay? Hmmm, anything above 20 fps is okay to me. It's not the maximum frame rate, but the playability... If it's playable, it's okay. IP: Logged |
| PsyKo Follower of Athlon |
posted September 08, 1999 12:36
I agree with Akma; if it's playable, it's okay. On my K6-2/400/V3 3000, I get between 30-40 fps at 800x600 or 1024x768 when playing Unreal, and that's more than enough--as long as I'm killing something, I think it's fine. [This message has been edited by PsyKo (edited September 08, 1999).] IP: Logged |
| Postmand_Per Follower of Athlon |
posted September 08, 1999 07:05
It is playable, but why be satisfied with lower framerates if you know you can get higher? 
------------------ IP: Logged |
| All times are ET (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All submissions are copyrighted by their respective authors and are not for re-use in any form without their explicit written consent.
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.37
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998 - 1999.