GP2 w/ Rendition Versus Matrox

Just got a Rendition card. Replaced a 4mg Matrox with it. ICR2 is great. GP2 performance has suffered though. Video speed in log went down from a very nice 636 (w/ Matrox) to a 24 (w/ Rendition) Estimated frame rate went from 23.1 (With all on but the sky) to a 11.1 Any Suggestions!?! I have a PPro w/64 mg. Hank

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Just got a Rendition card. Replaced a 4mg Matrox > with it. ICR2 is great. GP2 performance has suffered > though. Video speed in log went down from a very > nice 636 (w/ Matrox) to a 24 (w/ Rendition) > Estimated frame rate went from 23.1 (With all on but > the sky) to a 11.1 > Any Suggestions!?! > I have a PPro w/64 mg. > Hank

The same thing happened on my P166 overclocked to 180 when I went from a Diamond Stealth 64DRAM 2MB to the Rendition. Stealth: Speed: 324 Video: 320 Rendition: Speed: 350 Video: 24 I believe this is because the video speed rating is just for standard 320X200 VGA, which the Rendition is pretty slow at. Its 640X480 SVGA performance is pretty good. My estimated frame rate dropped from 21.1 to 9.1, using the same detail settings(no sky, no textures in mirrors, no texture on track, hills, verges), in SVGA. I think the estimated frame rate is based on the VGA video test, so it assumes your SVGA performance will change also. Using the same frame rate with both cards, 18.1, I cannot tell any difference in processor occupancy on the track. So, I would ignore the estimated frame rate, and set your graphic details/frame rate for a processor occupancy of no more than 100% in most driving situations. -- "Feel Lucky, Scubaboy?" - Discovery Channel, Shark Week, 1995