Can anyone explain this...

[Overkill]

Ok,here goes...I got D3 tree days ago and after installing it game detected my system and gave me recomended settings 640x480 medium details...Naturaly I did disagree with game and tried 800x600 medium settings.Do I have to say that game looked like crap?FPS was horrible something like 15-20.In the moment of despair I raised resolution to 1024x768 high detail and enabled AA 2X.And guess what?Game runs smoothly now frame rete is from 25 to 60,no lags...in one word fantastic.You can see in my sig. what kind of rig I have,I run game on cat 4.7 and now on 4.9.I'm not complaining but I'm confused.Oh,I forgot to mention that I have enabled Anisotropic Filtering 4X.

[MUYA]

Edited: Monring...eyes not functioning...neva mind the brain

[schuey74]

Can I say you take a look at Hardocp hardware guide for Doom III? Your vid card is just not up to snuff for Doom III dude.
Reread his post. :)

[MUYA]

Reread his post. :)

Smarty-poops!!! :p

[evilchris]

I find it difficult to believe a 9600XT runs good at 1024x768 HQ with AA.

http://www2.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA5MDc4NzE0M1RPNjJBTU9FV1hfOV80X 2wuZ2lm


That's a 5900 Ultra at 1024x768 with no AA, running around the FPS he stated. A 5900 Ultra will obviously be much faster than a 9600XT.

Even a 9800 Pro at MEDIUM quality runs about there:

http://www2.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA5MDc4NzE0M1RPNjJBTU9FV1hfOV84X 2wuZ2lm

So how could a 9600XT? =)

[schuey74]

Ok,here goes...I got D3 tree days ago and after installing it game detected my system and gave me recomended settings 640x480 medium details...Naturaly I did disagree with game and tried 800x600 medium settings.Do I have to say that game looked like crap?FPS was horrible something like 15-20.In the moment of despair I raised resolution to 1024x768 high detail and enabled AA 2X.And guess what?Game runs smoothly now frame rete is from 25 to 60,no lags...in one word fantastic.You can see in my sig. what kind of rig I have,I run game on cat 4.7 and now on 4.9.I'm not complaining but I'm confused.Oh,I forgot to mention that I have enabled Anisotropic Filtering 4X.
Perhaps 9600s, or Radeons in general, have some problems in dealing with compressed textures in Doom 3 and setting it to high solves this. But who knows for sure, just enjoy!

[schuey74]

I find it difficult to believe a 9600XT runs good at 1024x768 HQ with AA.

http://www2.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA5MDc4NzE0M1RPNjJBTU9FV1hfOV80X 2wuZ2lm


That's a 5900 Ultra at 1024x768 with no AA, running around the FPS he stated. A 5900 Ultra will obviously be much faster than a 9600XT.

Even a 9800 Pro at MEDIUM quality runs about there:

http://www2.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA5MDc4NzE0M1RPNjJBTU9FV1hfOV84X 2wuZ2lm

So how could a 9600XT? =)
What would this guy have to gain by making something like this up? If you look at the rest of his rig you'll notice that he's got a pretty good cpu and gig of ram. This alone eliminates any cpu bottleneck (consider his vc) and his memory keeps the game from stuttering along. Everyone's been pointing out how a high frame rate isn't necessary for this game and here's the proof. As long as he isn't dropping into single digits the game probably feels fine, like he said.

[Overkill]

I find it difficult to believe a 9600XT runs good at 1024x768 HQ with AA.

http://www2.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA5MDc4NzE0M1RPNjJBTU9FV1hfOV80X 2wuZ2lm


That's a 5900 Ultra at 1024x768 with no AA, running around the FPS he stated. A 5900 Ultra will obviously be much faster than a 9600XT.

Even a 9800 Pro at MEDIUM quality runs about there:

http://www2.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA5MDc4NzE0M1RPNjJBTU9FV1hfOV84X 2wuZ2lm

So how could a 9600XT? =)


C'mon I'm not making this up.I have no reason.I was surprised too so that's why I made this post.

[evilchris]

What would this guy have to gain by making something like this up? If you look at the rest of his rig you'll notice that he's got a pretty good cpu and gig of ram. This alone eliminates any cpu bottleneck (consider his vc) and his memory keeps the game from stuttering along. Everyone's been pointing out how a high frame rate isn't necessary for this game and here's the proof. As long as he isn't dropping into single digits the game probably feels fine, like he said.

I don't think he's making it up, sorry for bad wording. I think something else is up. Sometimes people are at 16x12, for example, then change to Ultra Quality, rebench, and get insane FPS. Then they realize switching quality resets your res, etc

[hazindu]

you prolly just had something running in the background the first time.

[schuey74]

I don't think he's making it up, sorry for bad wording. I think something else is up. Sometimes people are at 16x12, for example, then change to Ultra Quality, rebench, and get insane FPS. Then they realize switching quality resets your res, etc
Cool. (60s)

[acrh2]

I'm sorry but I'm gonna have to call bull**** on this one.
Now, I have a real question to be answered here.
Why *DID* he make this up? Some kind of lying fetish?

UPDATE:
http://www2.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA5MDc4NzE0M1RPNjJBTU9FV1hfN18xM F9sLmdpZg==

[fleshonbone]

What I've personally noticed with D3, and what I think people miss, is how low their FPS dips in certain areas or during action sequences in the game.

I play 1280x1024 2AA 8AF and in general the FPS counter stays maxed at 60FPS, however, if I enter a big room with a lot of lights, or if it's during an action sequence, my FPS easily drops down to 30-35FPS.

If I bump the AA up to 4x, the same thing happens where I generally see my FPS counter between 50-60FPS, but, when it dips down, it dips down further than with 2xAA, ie 20-30FPS - which is pretty close to unplayable if you are fragging and moving about quickly.

I think it would be far more informative if we knew what people's minimum avg. fps was -

One thing I have noticed in D3:if you load a saved game, quit it right away, and simply re-load the save game again (without exiting D3); the level seems to play much smoother with less hiccups - this can easily be demonstrated with the timedemo - the second time you run the timedemo (if you haven't exited D3) there are almost no hiccups at all and FPS is almost always better on the second run.

[schuey74]

One thing I have noticed in D3:if you load a saved game, quit it right away, and simply re-load the save game again (without exiting D3); the level seems to play much smoother with less hiccups - this can easily be demonstrated with the timedemo - the second time you run the timedemo (if you haven't exited D3) there are almost no hiccups at all and FPS is almost always better on the second run.
Yea, I started doing this yesterday. Whenever I first start the game I'll go and run around for 30 seconds and then hit escape and reload the level. The game then plays much smoother, rarely a hiccup. :clap:

[mustrum]

Without checking up on his frames and how it should perform i want to add that the hardOC hardware guide is not correct. The ATI cards run D3 better than they wanted us to believe.
Don't get me wrong: They are owned by nvidia of course but they work well with D3 still.
I myself get much better frames than i should according to that chart.
Didn't they say Ultra quality will need a 512 mb card?
Why am i playing in Ultra Quality and 2x FSAA then?

[Overkill]

Huh,well I don't know but I'm realy happy,maybe it has something to do with my ram cas settings:2-2-2-5 :) .And that is another story.First I had 2x256 mb Samsung ddr 333 and than upgrade it to 2x512 kingston-infinion ddr400.Hell that ram sucked.I know that 865/875 momo's are very ram picky,but that ram did worked only on default settings,wich is 3-3-3-8.I chanched it for kingston-mosel and...well you saw cas settings now.To be no confusion this is not xyper-x ram,just plain value.CPU is great to,no need for o/c,512 L2 cashe and FSB800.Momo is great too.Sound card hardware acceleration set to full...well what can I say it's very stable rig.Maybe that is the anwser for my question.


And acrh2 if you do not belive,you are welcome here in Belgrade.Come and see. :)

[evilchris]

Without checking up on his frames and how it should perform i want to add that the hardOC hardware guide is not correct. The ATI cards run D3 better than they wanted us to believe.
Don't get me wrong: They are owned by nvidia of course but they work well with D3 still.
I myself get much better frames than i should according to that chart.
Didn't they say Ultra quality will need a 512 mb card?
Why am i playing in Ultra Quality and 2x FSAA then?

They benched UQ at 4fsaa. Also, [H] laid out the facts. They didn't "want you to believe" anything in particular. Their benchmarks are spot on. For example:

http://www2.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA5MDc4NzE0M1RPNjJBTU9FV1hfOV8yX 2wuZ2lm

I have a GT, and a 3.2, 200MHz more than that system and I get about 2 more fps in the default bench. Right on target. Keep in mind they ran the DEFAULT bench with no tweaks. Default game only changing settings with the menus.

[mustrum]

I see. I run only at 2x AA. Yes 4x AA makes the FPS go down a bit more wich i don't like. The cache=256mb change gave me a huge boost though. I don't know why this is not enabled by default.

[theultimo]

It seem avging mostly 30-60 on my desktop here, at 1024x768 MQ