View Single Post
Old 10-23-03, 05:55 PM   #55
Hellbinder's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: CDA
Posts: 1,510

Originally posted by walkndude
By the same logic that some of you are using to say doom3 will be useless for benchmarking you should also be saying any numbers in any review that exceed the refresh rate are useless as well...

At a refresh rate of 85, any framerates above that rate cannot physically be displayed -they are written to the frame buffer and discarded...

StealtHawk brings some common sense to the rescue, how many of you believe your rig is going to be able to hit a consistent 60fps in doom3 at say 1280*1024 with 4xaa and 16xaf applied ? I can answer that quite comfortabley with NONE....

To take it a step further, what good does it to do to see quake3 benchmarks with card a at 400 fps and card b at 380 fps ? Once again the answer is none unless you want to get into an argument over whose card can throw away more frames...

If anything we may finally have a benchmark where the numbers are relative...
Actually that is incorrect.

Generally games are not caped or Forcably synced this way in the rendering process. Which is why you get screen tearing with Vsync off in most games. It is basically splicing multiple frames together in the same rendering cycle...

A totally different matter than this where the game will only output 60 new frames in one second.
Overam Mirage 4700
3.2ghz P4 HT
SIS 748FX Chipset 800mhz FSB
1Gig DDR-400
60Gig 7200RPM HD
Radeon 9600M Turbo 128 (400/250)
Catalyst 4.2
Latest good read. [url][/url]
Hellbinder is offline   Reply With Quote