Hi All:wave:,
What frames per second do you all get in Porsche Unleashed. Please also provide your system CPU and graphics card and which drivers do u use. Please also mention the resolution you play the game in. I use FRAPS to measure the frames per second. Your can download it from here http://www.fraps.com/FRAPS17A.EXE
and average frames for all tracks would be about 20... but I get affected quite bad on SChwaz..havent tested Alps...
Flitchy
05-12-2002, 04:30 PM
Hi! :)
I seem to be getting about 20-25 fps on average... drops to about 9 - 11 fps on zone or schw when there's lots of other cars on screen... I can get up to 55fps when it's just me and the winding road ahead and not much scenery, but mainly about 20 fps everywhere else... feels like it's less when I'm online, something like 1 - 2 fps at times, when everyone is overtaking me as usual... lol ^_^
45 in heavy traffic with 8 racers, while off or online. But 65 is the average.
Cheyenne
05-12-2002, 06:57 PM
Nice thread! -^
My System :PC:
P3 1ghz
1gb mem
Win98 SE
Radeon DDR 64
Cote d'Azur: FSAA OFF
800x600x32, Average FPS=81, high of 97, low of 64 = 0=)
1024x768x32, Average FPS=74, high of 87, low of 59
1600x1200x32, Average FPS=52, high of 60, low of 39
Cote d'Azur: FSAA ONx4
800x600x32, Average FPS=33, high of 39, low of 27
1600x1200x32, Average FPS=29, high of 35, low of 18
With Full Screen Anti-Aliasing set to 4-times sample, the menus were ugly and the text was slightly blurred. Also when opening drop down menues like the car selection menu, it was visibly slowed (guess it's trying to anti-alias all those screen fonts). But playing the game in either 800x600 or 1600x1200 was gorgeous. I have never seen the cars look better.
I also tried with FSAA at x2, but while still garbling the menus a bit (actually more than x4 did) i noticed no improvement in visual quality of the game.
Still though, I play in 800x600x32, with never a visual sign of framerate or jitter. The gauges are large so as to be easily read at a glance.
Wazza
05-12-2002, 07:46 PM
and every few seconds i get a complete lock, for probably almost a second, which is enough to make me head into a wall....
i got a 19" monitor, so 1024*768 still makes it easy to read gauges.... when I first started in PU, was on 12Mb Graphics and 1200 odd by 900 and something... higher res, and seemed better frame rate..then got new graphics card.. 32Mb.. did seem faster.. but its slow again...
[XR]Sri
05-12-2002, 08:15 PM
Hi All:wave:,
Thanx for your replies. Wazza what is ur video card? I started PU with a Celeron 300 @ 450 with a voodoo 3 3000 and i used to run PU smooth at 1024*768*16. So might be some driver probs.
I am currently running with 2x AA with the menu's working perfectly fine. But for smooth & perfect gaming one needs to get atleast 60fps. Which operating system do u all use?. I think PU is slow in my system because of WinXP.:(
:beer:
Wazza
05-13-2002, 12:21 PM
Matrox G450 32Mb... isnt that good?... there didnt seem to be too much difference between this and my old TNT 12Mb.. which I REALLY HATED.. coz it always locked up on Normandie, so I hardly ever raced it, and also on Auvergne bkws.. explains from the start why I'm bad there.. only been racing it past few months.. :rolleyes:
caipiranha
05-13-2002, 09:00 PM
That little proggie FRAPS is quite well suited to analize PUs intensity to utilize one's hardware. I guess I'll continue to let it run during my next races to be able to compare my next grafic card against my present one, if I upgrade it. I wouldn't really care how any other game performed on a new grafic-card anyway, as PU is my all-time favorite game. I like freestyle driving on public roads, can't stand racetracks. It's a damn shame, game developers don't make more games like PU or Midtown Madness.
Read on if you care, I'll be boring you with numbers from here on :read: (someone asked for it)
I ran a couple of single races only, driving different fast cars with opponents from same era, no traffic, standard weather.
I'd say, the average lies between 30-50 frames with my setup.
The frame-rate during the menus are well beyond the set refresh-rate of my monitor. Cote d' Azur was the fastest while Schwarzwald needed a lot more processing power for all the clear-cut and stuff. The rain on Autobahn seems to affect the frame-rate also, but I didn't test it with sunny weather. Above mentioned numbers are only counted during the actuall race, as load-sreens were zero, and menus faster.
As you can see, the frame-rate is very much depending on the track, the weather, and probably also the number of opponents as the replay shows. So no general single number can be produced.
System specs and grafic-settings:
Leadtek GeForce2 GTS (200/333MHz)
MSI K7T266Pro with AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1400@1533 (133*11,5), 512 MB DDR, CAS2
Win2000, SP2, nVidia official 23.11 Driver
1152*768 wide-screen, 32bit, no AA, 85Hz
all grafic options in Porsche PU maxed
[XR]Evo
05-13-2002, 10:48 PM
I hear you about the FPS shutdown Wazza, It happens about one in two races, just hopefully on a straight, not on the bend, where the computer ignores my turning input during such 'freezes'!
Hrmm, this isn't very good, but that's because my computer isn't very good!
Dell Latitude Laptop!
14" Moniter
500MHz PIII
8 MB ATI rage (yes it makes me angry) onboard Video
192 MB RAM
Broken keyboard :")
I run the game at minimum everything, and race with a keyboard...
640x480x16x'what did I just hit?'
low audio/low detail
PU runs between:
15 FPS in shwz forest, and
30 FPS at the start of cote...
I envy thee with superior hardware, but enjoy the game just as much!
Wazza
05-13-2002, 11:01 PM
i would love to have a blast on one of these superior systems, with a great wheel, such as a MOMO..im sure i could go 1-3 sec faster... just buy having better hardware... :rolleyes:
ive been watching more of my replays.. all my cornering is so rough... dang joystick.. dang slow framerate...
i did a newer race.. hahaa.... raced Norm bkw in Spyder.. only 3:03.3x I think... around same time as my online time... and this was a bad race.. 2:57 must be possible online.. oh wait, i forgot... online framerates are terrible, causing you to crash heaps....
I can do 2:07 on Norm bkw Gt1 quite easy now offline, and then online, when I get pole in full pit, at my 56 sec marker I believe, after the first shortcut, im already 0.5 sec behind my online time.. the car is too slow thru corners, and also on jumps gets twice as much air.. offline coming around that tricky right hand corner before town, that little ridge, offline with 100/0 i dont get air.. athough i can feel its kinda close.. online same df, car gets tail happy,.. and spins.. at least 60% of the time... waste of a decent race
[XR]Evo
05-13-2002, 11:23 PM
Hrmm, I remember some people discovered that the air in offline mode is 'thicker', top speed is reduced from online mode...This would mean, that downforce has more effect offline, and less online...I wonder what differences exist between spring rates, tire pressures, and the myriad of other car setup factors, between online and offline...Certainly the game's physics varies between the two modes!
Edit: I left part of my brain in there...
Moe Faster
05-14-2002, 05:38 AM
I've been using Fraps for some time now and have discovered that the biggest effect on frame rates is your connection. Cable and DSL are always going to better upload rates ( thats where your positional data is sent to the server for redirection), and 56k modems are the bane of online gaming.
I have always been a dial up with the same ISP (only $107/year) since I started playin PU online. So I have always experienced LAG in some form or another. From a type of lag where frame rates get continually reduced down to a ridiculous minimum of 5 or 6 fps, to lag where time gets warped and 1 second of real time equalls about 6 to 10 seconds of racing (WHEW). Then there's everyones favorite type of lag where the screen locks up for a few seconds if your lucky. If your NOT lucky your screen will freeze solid and you have to cold boot.
anyway I am currently running
a Celeron 500 mH
384 mb PC100 RAM
my NEW video card is a GForce 4 MX with 64 mb
my old vcard was RIVA TNT 16 mb
USR 56k internal modem getting a 50.6 bps connection
Screen resolution of 800x600 or 1024x768 produce similar results.
I haven't tried all the higher resolutions yet cause the difference between these 2 setting is about 25% or 10 to 15 fps.
At 800x600 resolution the 16 mb card would produce a max of 33 - 36 fps to an absolute minimum of 2 or 3 ( you can only watch a slow motion crash at that rate). The average frame rate was always less than 30 fps but usually more than 23. I could still control the car at 16 fps but just barely, any less than that and I was bug splatter.
My new vcard provides a much faster average frame rate (about 60 fps at 800x600) and will produce momentary maximums 88 to 92 but lag is the same, down to a minimum 12 or so (don't think I've seen single digit yet, but I don't run Fraps all the time).
I'm still learning the particulars of this GForce vcard (it has a TV out and PU looks cool on a 25" TV screen). I also have the ability to adjust the clock speed. :look:
Although, I think I could stand a little more knowledge on the subject of adjusting video card parameters it looks like my connection is MY biggest problem, so I'm starting to compare prices and services for cable, ADSL and DSL.
Gee wiz, did I write all this??? :HB:
8)~
DC_Geezr
05-14-2002, 05:45 AM
:) I'm getting about 40 fps on average,which isn't bad i guess although a few more frames would be nice.I like the look with full AA enabled though,so I doubt if there's much room for improvement.:( Running PU @ 1024x768.
P4 1.6
Asus P4T-E
256 RD Ram
MSI GF3 200Ti
nVidia 23.11 drivers
ADI Microscan 19"
Evo,Waz,you guys would be incredible on a decent system! Evo..a laptop??:eek: How do you do it M8??^_^
DC_Whoziz/Ric/Me^_^
Cheyenne
05-14-2002, 05:54 AM
Hi, Moe!
Hmm, I hear what you say about connection affecting framerate. I have heard that from others also. I do have to say though, I have never experienced it at any time. Whether using broadband or dialup (even WinModem, ugh!) It doesn't seem to affect gameplay in any way at all. Normally, at my home, I have a ping of mid 30s to mid 40s, but I travel a lot and stay with friends and therefore get to try out various forms of broadband and sometimes rely on my dial up accounts to get access, and ping can range from 165-260 or so. But, again, I have never had it affect gameplay at all. Maybe you have something else at work causing your slowdowns?=[
DC_Geezr
05-14-2002, 06:03 AM
Hi Moe! You and I must have been posting at the same time!^_^ I can't imagine ever playing online with a dial up modem;I guess DSL spoils a little bit.;) But what affects online framerate more? Yor connection speed,or your ping rate??
Ric;)
Spiderman
05-14-2002, 07:43 AM
I agree with Chey that the connection is not the problem for frame rates [normally]. I used to play on dial up and never had a problem with frame rates just flying cars and lag now and then. I suggest scandisk then defrag if you haven't done those in a while. A badly fragged drive can cause problems.
05-14-2002, 08:53 AM
Have you ever tried defragmenting a 30gb hard disk drive, with about 9gb left in free space.. It takes an eternity..
In online racing, I never had a problem with frame rates, but, occasionally troubles with other peoples cars flying, but, my own connection speed is quite fine though..
Spiderman
05-14-2002, 09:29 AM
Defrag can take a while. Do it overnight as I do or do it regularly and it's pretty fast. I have an 80 gig HD and it takes an hour. If your disk is overloaded with files or bloatware then tranfere to a CD is one solution to free up space.
Jone
05-14-2002, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by Cheyenne
P3 1ghz
1gb mem
Win98 SE
Radeon DDR 64
That's a second generation Radeon, is'nt it? A Radeon 8500?
If not, I got a serious problem.
Autobahn: Down to 16 at the start. Up to about 40 when I have left the crowd.
I have a Radeon AIW 32Mb DDR, P3 800Mhz, WinXP
Jone.
Cheyenne
05-14-2002, 03:56 PM
Hi, Jone!
Uh, no. My Radeon is an original DDR 64. I had considered at the time getting a 32, but my understanding was that they use a slower GPU clock and slower memory. Oh, Jone, I just saw you have an AIW. Those are much slower still (GPU+mem). I believe the only real advantage of the AIWs is they have "Tuner" capability built in. My DDR 64 still has full Rage Theater capability, but you simply need some sort of external tuner like a VCR/Cable Box/Sat decoder.
Also you describe "Autobahn" performance. What resolution and color depth are you running? I did all my testing for framerates "offline" with only my own vehicle on the screen. Tell me your exact (okay, approximate!) testing condictions, online/offline, number of cars, res+colors, and I'll do a comparison and post the results.
Also, as Ashwin91 suggested in another thread, I am running 1gb of memory on a Asus CUSL2-BP (wicked color!), and that only officially supports 512mb ram, but I do have updated Bios and it seems to address everything properly. I've never had a single problem with it before (well, other than the normal Windows problems - W98 SE).
Wazza
05-14-2002, 06:14 PM
im racing right now.. Sch bkw.. sooo shocking...
average of 7/8 frames a sec.. low of 4, high or 13.... its sooo undriveable.. i cant go 400 metres without crashing!
[XR]Sri
05-15-2002, 12:44 AM
Hi Chey:wave:,
I guess there is no use of having more than 384mb memory installed on win98se. The win98 kernel cannot handle more than 384mb. Sometimes it may lead to problems but mostly it works fine. However there is a solution as mentioned before that u can limit the amount of memory that windows can use. Please correct me if i am wrong.
:D
Jone
05-15-2002, 02:11 AM
Are you sure about the clock speeds? I think both runs at 167Mhz (GPU and Memory). It was a pretty expensive card when I bought it, and it really sucks if the less expensive Radeon 64 is actually faster. Can't say I have used the tuner much. The difference in clock speed can't be very big though and it looks like your best framerate is about twice as fast as mine!
I think some of the difference is to blame on WinXP. The general opinion is that you get more FPS in Win98 than you get on the same system with W2k or XP. But some say the opposite.
Has anyone here actually moved from Win9x to W2k or XP with little or no change in FPS?
I also know that the card only runs at 2X (AGP) due to a bug in the VIA 694 chipset, but this should not make a big difference.
I think I used 800X600 32bit, but there was little difference with lower colour depth or higher resolution. All graphics settings was set to maximum. I focused on finding the lowest FPS, and it occurred in the first S-curve before you actually enter the autobahn, some cars in front and some in the mirror. Drawing the 7 other cars is what causes the drop in FPS, and I'm not sure if it tells me I need more CPU or more GPU. Or maybe it tells me that NFS PU is coded bad :)
To compare top FPS I'll have to reinstall NFS PU. :) I had to do a "reinstall everything" 2 hours before my weekly GPL league race, and NFS PU has not actually been missed.
If the difference between mine and your system is as big as it looks, I might consider giving Win98 a try. But I think I would rather solve my problems (stuttering in GPL) with expensive hardware. :) I have stayed away from Microsoft’s 16bit "toy" OS'es :p since NT4 was out, and I would hate to get my hands dirty now. :D
I just read that the MS Force Feedback wheel is a FPS thief with GPL. This might also apply to NFS PU.
So maybe I should get a MOMO, and a Radeon 8500, and a faster CPU, and...... Oh no=[ I finally got the simracing "upgrade fever"
Jone.
DC Silicon
05-15-2002, 02:25 PM
Athlon 1 / 700
256MB SDR
Kyro II / 64MB
Win98SE
800X600X32
Offline, all details to max
Bahn: 27-80
Schwarz 30-70
Not yet tested online, never any sign of lock up, DSL, ping around 220-400ms