1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Best way to increase frame rate to suit less powered platforms?

Discussion in 'Nvidia' started by Innominate Twice, Oct 13, 2004.

  1. My platform is:

    CPU: XP 1800+
    CHIPSET: KT266A
    RAM: 512 MB

    My video card is:
    GF 4 Ti 4600 128 MB Ram

    Obviously, the video card outperforms the platform easily. My question
    is; when selecting video options in games, what are the things that
    depend on CPU, as opposed to video card that should be modified so as
    to produce the best frame rate?

    For instance, I know the resolution itself depends more on the card
    than the platform and that reducing it may not produce any
    improvements. I would expect the same for texture detail levels and
    anti-aliasing (although anti-aliasing will be card dependent and will
    generally have an effect). But do things like shadows and smoke
    matter? What other sorts of things should I look for so as to best
    match my video card and platform to produce best quality while
    retaining highest frame rates?

    In nominate
     
    Innominate Twice, Oct 13, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Innominate Twice

    Philburg2 Guest

    The biggest CPU killer I can think of are physics in current games. The CPU
    has to calculate how a ragdoll reactions to its environment and soforth.
    I don't think that your CPU is that big of a bottleneck on your card.
     
    Philburg2, Oct 13, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Innominate Twice

    Spajky Guest

    set resolution no more than 1024x768 with 16-bit textures max. ...
     
    Spajky, Oct 13, 2004
    #3
  4. Innominate Twice

    deimos Guest

    In addition to what others have said, in older games, blending modes
    tend to kill the framerate a lot. Half-Life was pretty bad for this as
    everything used multitexturing to begin with, but then multiple blend
    passes were done for each explosion sprite, particle effects,
    transparency, etc. So what you find is that even modern hardware has a
    hard time with explosions and smoke in something simple like Counter-Strike.

    Much of this was the renderer itself and not the API or the graphics
    hardware, but this type of failing affected many games. If you have a
    decent high end FX card or a GF6, you really dont have to worry about
    anything like this much because most effects are driven by single
    textured pixel shaders combining everything into one programmable
    shader. If the card can handle the instruction length and do everything
    in one pass, then it makes a negligible impact on framerate. At least
    with modern games (but then you have the counter effect of many pixel
    shaders being used slowing down game as a whole).
     
    deimos, Oct 13, 2004
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.