IMOLA Framerates are slower?

Many thanks to Dave for this new track, but I have a question, my frame rates on the "non-original" GPL tracks are slower than on the original tracks. Is this a normal phenomenon? I currently have only tried the "demo" conversions of N3 tracks and Imola and noticed this right away. Just curious... C. Bybee

"cbybee" <[email hidden]> writes: > Many thanks to Dave for this new track, but I have a > question, my frame rates on the "non-original" GPL tracks > are slower than on the original tracks. Is this a normal > phenomenon? I currently have only tried the "demo" > conversions of N3 tracks and Imola and noticed this > right away. Just curious... A theory is that the amount of polygons in not optimized in the self-made tracks, since optimizing is very time-consuming. I rather like a lot of tracks, instead of very few optimized ones :) -- Olav K. Malmin remove spam when replying

I get a frame rate hit when near the firestone sign, and I THINK its due to all the flagmen, as I don't get this hit running in training mode Martyn_D "Olav K. Malmin" wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> "cbybee" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > Many thanks to Dave for this new track, but I have a > > question, my frame rates on the "non-original" GPL tracks > > are slower than on the original tracks. Is this a normal > > phenomenon? I currently have only tried the "demo" > > conversions of N3 tracks and Imola and noticed this > > right away. Just curious... > > A theory is that the amount of polygons in not optimized in the > self-made tracks, since optimizing is very time-consuming. > > I rather like a lot of tracks, instead of very few optimized ones :) > > -- > Olav K. Malmin > remove spam when replying

I prefer optimized tracks myself. Fewer, higher-quality tracks. Racing with a full or even half a field at the O-ring or Brands Hatch or Snetterton is impossible. Framerate's fine at all the original tracks though. The old CART tracks seem to be good performers as well. :) -- ----------------------------------- Morgan Vincent Wooten mailto:[email hidden] http://members.tripod.com/~morganv/ ----------------------------------- Olav K. Malmin <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "cbybee" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > Many thanks to Dave for this new track, but I have a > > question, my frame rates on the "non-original" GPL tracks > > are slower than on the original tracks. Is this a normal > > phenomenon? I currently have only tried the "demo" > > conversions of N3 tracks and Imola and noticed this > > right away. Just curious... > > A theory is that the amount of polygons in not optimized in the > self-made tracks, since optimizing is very time-consuming. > > I rather like a lot of tracks, instead of very few optimized ones :) > > -- > Olav K. Malmin > remove spam when replying >

"Morgan V. Wooten�" <[email hidden]> writes: > I prefer optimized tracks myself. Fewer, higher-quality tracks. Racing with a > full or even half a field at the O-ring or Brands Hatch or Snetterton is > impossible. Framerate's fine at all the original tracks though. The old CART > tracks seem to be good performers as well. :) Yeah, I tried a full field race at Imola, and it was impossible. But that's really not a issue for me, since I never race offline :)

Quoted text (29 lines)

> -- > ----------------------------------- > Morgan Vincent Wooten > mailto:[email hidden] > http://members.tripod.com/~morganv/ > ----------------------------------- > > Olav K. Malmin <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "cbybee" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > > Many thanks to Dave for this new track, but I have a > > > question, my frame rates on the "non-original" GPL tracks > > > are slower than on the original tracks. Is this a normal > > > phenomenon? I currently have only tried the "demo" > > > conversions of N3 tracks and Imola and noticed this > > > right away. Just curious... > > > > A theory is that the amount of polygons in not optimized in the > > self-made tracks, since optimizing is very time-consuming. > > > > I rather like a lot of tracks, instead of very few optimized ones :) > > > > -- > > Olav K. Malmin > > remove spam when replying > > > >

-- Olav K. Malmin remove spam when replying

On Tue, 11 Jul 2000 22:13:41 GMT, "Morgan V. Wooten�" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I prefer optimized tracks myself. Fewer, higher-quality tracks. Racing with a >full or even half a field at the O-ring or Brands Hatch or Snetterton is >impossible. Framerate's fine at all the original tracks though. The old CART >tracks seem to be good performers as well. :) Yup, and it is difficult optimizing the tracks. Perhaps the new tracks don't contain the 3 levels of detail that the originals do. And there's always the track visibility at each section, which is hard to do optimized. Ruud van Gaal MarketGraph / MachTech: http://www.marketgraph.nl Art: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery

This is a problem most apparent for the V2's (as I'm told). I have a V2 and can't get above 29 fps in the pits at Imola and 29-33 in the pits at Ostich-Ring. Brands hatch was a problem also but no were neer O-ring and Imola. With out grabbing a new Video card, I wonder if editing the graphics would help any? Such as taking the trees and making them all one color, sort of like a green shadow of a tree rather then a multi green color making a tree look like a tree? or even some of the other graphics... Just what did the GPLEA do to Snetterton to have a large, medium, small, graphics files? I couldn't run the large without a 10 fps run. The "small" file I get 36 all the time with *almost* all graphics turned on. cbybee wrote in message <8kfpus$kdu$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (11 lines)

>Many thanks to Dave for this new track, but I have a >question, my frame rates on the "non-original" GPL tracks >are slower than on the original tracks. Is this a normal >phenomenon? I currently have only tried the "demo" >conversions of N3 tracks and Imola and noticed this >right away. Just curious... > >C. Bybee > > >

Actually, Imola framerates aren't that bad. I tried a full field race yesterday and only occasionally and at the start did I see choppiness (~25 fps). Mainly it's the O-Ring and Snetterton that are impossible to race on with full fields. And my 'net connection is too slow for online racing so that's out. :( -- ----------------------------------- Morgan Vincent Wooten mailto:[email hidden] http://members.tripod.com/~morganv/ ----------------------------------- Olav K. Malmin <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "Morgan V. Wooten�" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > I prefer optimized tracks myself. Fewer, higher-quality tracks. Racing with a > > full or even half a field at the O-ring or Brands Hatch or Snetterton is > > impossible. Framerate's fine at all the original tracks though. The old CART > > tracks seem to be good performers as well. :) > > Yeah, I tried a full field race at Imola, and it was impossible. But > that's really not a issue for me, since I never race offline :) > > > -- > > ----------------------------------- > > Morgan Vincent Wooten > > mailto:[email hidden] > > http://members.tripod.com/~morganv/ > > ----------------------------------- > > > > Olav K. Malmin <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > "cbybee" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > > > > Many thanks to Dave for this new track, but I have a > > > > question, my frame rates on the "non-original" GPL tracks > > > > are slower than on the original tracks. Is this a normal > > > > phenomenon? I currently have only tried the "demo" > > > > conversions of N3 tracks and Imola and noticed this > > > > right away. Just curious... > > > > > > A theory is that the amount of polygons in not optimized in the > > > self-made tracks, since optimizing is very time-consuming. > > > > > > I rather like a lot of tracks, instead of very few optimized ones :) > > > > > > -- > > > Olav K. Malmin > > > remove spam when replying > > > > > > > > > -- > Olav K. Malmin > remove spam when replying

I am interested in what you guys refer to as "impossible". I run a full (19 AI) field at Imola, 800 x 600 rez, mirrors are set to show 'cars and track' and all other (forward view) graphics are at maximum. No problems at all.....mostly 36 fps, some slowdown at the start (naturally) and at the first LH corner, where the rate drops to about 27 fps. (Voodoo 3, P-II 450.) -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Olav K. Malmin <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "Morgan V. Wooten�" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > I prefer optimized tracks myself. Fewer, higher-quality tracks. Racing with a > > full or even half a field at the O-ring or Brands Hatch or Snetterton is > > impossible. Framerate's fine at all the original tracks though. The old CART > > tracks seem to be good performers as well. :) > > Yeah, I tried a full field race at Imola, and it was impossible. But > that's really not a issue for me, since I never race offline :) > > > -- > > ----------------------------------- > > Morgan Vincent Wooten > > mailto:[email hidden] > > http://members.tripod.com/~morganv/ > > ----------------------------------- > > > > Olav K. Malmin <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > "cbybee" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > > > > Many thanks to Dave for this new track, but I have a > > > > question, my frame rates on the "non-original" GPL tracks > > > > are slower than on the original tracks. Is this a normal > > > > phenomenon? I currently have only tried the "demo" > > > > conversions of N3 tracks and Imola and noticed this > > > > right away. Just curious... > > > > > > A theory is that the amount of polygons in not optimized in the > > > self-made tracks, since optimizing is very time-consuming. > > > > > > I rather like a lot of tracks, instead of very few optimized ones :) > > > > > > -- > > > Olav K. Malmin > > > remove spam when replying > > > > > > > > > -- > Olav K. Malmin > remove spam when replying