Why does the game run better for me on a low-end NVIDIA card?

[Ganon-Knight]

I get better framerates and overall a HUGELY better performance out of this game with a Geforce FX5200 than I do with my ATI Radeon HD4670. I get nasty framerate drops whenever I hit Escape in game to read the back chat log and, in general, whenever a lot of anything is on the screen, whereas the 5200 renders it all perfectly with all the exact same settings... so I'm just confused is all. If anyone with knowledge of this can offer some insight, go right ahead.

[kthx]

Low end game runs better on Low end graphics card.

[Ganon-Knight]

Yeah, that makes enough sense.

Apparently the game was made for DirectDraw and most newer cards merely emulate it or something.

[Maverick]

The game should run fine on any of the newer video cards. Just make sure you have the newest drivers which usually include the newest DirectX version.

If you still have problems, you can try to run dxdiag which will test DirectX with your graphics card and determine if there are any problems.

[Dutch_]

Got an amd 4830 and I only get like 128fps. Check the tech forum, they got easy tricks to boost ure fps.

[Pressure Drop]

I get better framerates and overall a HUGELY better performance out of this game with a Geforce FX5200 than I do with my ATI Radeon HD4670. I get nasty framerate drops whenever I hit Escape in game to read the back chat log and, in general, whenever a lot of anything is on the screen, whereas the 5200 renders it all perfectly with all the exact same settings... so I'm just confused is all. If anyone with knowledge of this can offer some insight, go right ahead.

i have that card and normal game it can drop down to jumpy fps but if i have the Software Emulation box ticked in the advanced options i get 2x the FPS and the game runs fine...

clicking on the avoid page flipping and disable clipping doesn't help.

No idea why this is but with it like that it's perfectly playable for me and the card works fine for other games so :huh: and left it at that

[Displaced]

same settings ive always had, i.e. no page flipping and whatever... on a hd4890 = constantly over 1000fps.

[Ephemeral]

same settings ive always had, i.e. no page flipping and whatever... on a hd4890 = constantly over 1000fps.

Too bad the maximum the human eye can detect is 28 fps.

damn, I forgot how much fun it is busting on Dis!

You might want to poke around with the dxdiag utility.

[Jason]

holy shit, can you even fathom how jaw-droppingly awesome it would be if we could see at one thousand frames per second?

[Displaced]

we would see everything in uber slow motion!

and while the human eye can only see about 30fps my spider sense can feel up to a quadjillion fps! :fear:

[Jason]

disp, you're not thinking big enough

if we could all suddenly see at 1000fps, the very concept of time itself would be utterly (and mind-bendingly) different

[Pressure Drop]

if you could see at 1000fps you would see shit in normal time

but with much better visual acuity with rapid moving subjects.

for still things like my cup of tea it's wouldn't make much difference since it's just sitting on my desk, but my monitor would look horrible since it's refresh rate is much less than 1000 hz

perception of time would be the same and your reactions speeds etc ... lag way behind that anyhow - bout 0.2 ms

[Jason]

way to go BUZZKILL

mister BILL NYE THE BUZZKILL GUY

i was having fun with my science fiction :]

[Ephemeral]

Time is relative.
For example, the earth's rotation is slowing and in the future it will take 25 hours for a day. Wonder if we will add the extra hour or stretch the meaning of an hour to keep it at 24.

[Pressure Drop]

Time is relative.
For example, the earth's rotation is slowing and in the future it will take 25 hours for a day. Wonder if we will add the extra hour or stretch the meaning of an hour to keep it at 24.

time is relative but that doesn't have anything to do with this. That is to do with different reference frames undergoing large differences in velocity/acceleration. This is about human perception, a blind man still has a perception of time even if he has no fps :P and ppls perception of time is weird to say the least and can be governed by emotions etc ... take ppl away from any time references and get tehm to to varying tasks for the same amount of time and record their time estimates and you'd get a wide margin of error and also some tasks being perceived longer (i'm reckoning that not looked any studies)

there is already conflict with the slowing of the earth and how to set the super accurate clocks with the addition of a leap second causing a divide in opinion

but a second has drifted away from it's solar origins and is no longer defined by that so unless it changes (i'd change it from a 60 base system) it would be 25 hours a day. As for our circadian rhythm i doubt that would even affect us much, let alone generations down the line that will have a long time to adapt.