GP2 timer ticking 6% too fast ??

Hi there, The other night, when I was 'driving' on the Hockenheim circuit, I noticed that the lap-times GP2 reports are about 6% slower than the times measured with a stopwatch: GP2 time 'real time' difference 1:46.299 1:40.16 +6.1% 2:36.900 2:28.17 +5.9% 2:06.204 2:00.00 +5.2% (I was a little late stopping the clock :-) ) => One (1) 'real second' is about 1.06 'GP2 seconds' I run GP2 on: - Asus PVI-486SP3 (Award BIOS rev. 2.05) - Intel 486DX2-66 (overclocked at 80MHz, PCI at 40MHz !) - 256kB 15ns SRAM L2 cache - 32MB 60ns FPM RAM - WD Caviar AC 2850, 850MB EIDE PIO 3 HDD (master on prim. IDE channel) - WD Caviar AC 2540, 540MB EIDE PIO 3 HDD (slave on prim. IDE channel) - Mitsumi FX-400 (4x) ATAPI CD-ROM - Genoa Phantom 64 Pro Video (PCI, 4MB VRAM, S3-Vision968) - Windows 95 - GP2 US English version 1.0b - GP2 ran in a full screen MS-DOS box, keyboard controlled, with the following graphics options: - Graphics Detail Mode: Manual - Diplay Textures: All Off - Plot in Mirrors: All Off - Texture in Mirrors: None - 3D Diplay Type: SVGA - TrackSide Objects: None - Frame Rate: 16.0 fps (Estimate = 14.2) (The processor occup. was 70-93% (straight line driving) ) I also tried the 'Use Estimate' setting of 14.2 fps but things did not change! Furthermore I tried setting my system clock back to 33MHz and booted DOS 6.20 but to no avail !! Anybody experiencing the same sort of difference between 'real time' and 'GP2 time' ?? This is making it very hard for me to get into the Hall of Fame ( RJS, if you read this, I drove 1:38.2xx 'real time' on Hockenheim) :-) Please, eMail your response cause I don't visit this group very often. Thanks, Edwin H. Heusinkveld The Netherlands

Quoted text (50 lines)

> Hi there, > The other night, when I was 'driving' on the Hockenheim circuit, I noticed that the > lap-times GP2 reports are about 6% slower than the times measured with a stopwatch: > GP2 time 'real time' difference > 1:46.299 1:40.16 +6.1% > 2:36.900 2:28.17 +5.9% > 2:06.204 2:00.00 +5.2% (I was a little late stopping the clock :-) ) > => One (1) 'real second' is about 1.06 'GP2 seconds' > I run GP2 on: > - Asus PVI-486SP3 (Award BIOS rev. 2.05) > - Intel 486DX2-66 (overclocked at 80MHz, PCI at 40MHz !) > - 256kB 15ns SRAM L2 cache > - 32MB 60ns FPM RAM > - WD Caviar AC 2850, 850MB EIDE PIO 3 HDD (master on prim. IDE channel) > - WD Caviar AC 2540, 540MB EIDE PIO 3 HDD (slave on prim. IDE channel) > - Mitsumi FX-400 (4x) ATAPI CD-ROM > - Genoa Phantom 64 Pro Video (PCI, 4MB VRAM, S3-Vision968) > - Windows 95 > - GP2 US English version 1.0b > - GP2 ran in a full screen MS-DOS box, keyboard controlled, with the following graphics > options: > - Graphics Detail Mode: Manual > - Diplay Textures: All Off > - Plot in Mirrors: All Off > - Texture in Mirrors: None > - 3D Diplay Type: SVGA > - TrackSide Objects: None > - Frame Rate: 16.0 fps (Estimate = 14.2) (The processor occup. was 70-93% > (straight line driving) ) > I also tried the 'Use Estimate' setting of 14.2 fps but things did not change! Furthermore > I tried setting my system clock back to 33MHz and booted DOS 6.20 but to no avail !! > Anybody experiencing the same sort of difference between 'real time' and 'GP2 time' ?? > This is making it very hard for me to get into the Hall of Fame ( RJS, if you read this, I > drove 1:38.2xx 'real time' on Hockenheim) :-) > Please, eMail your response cause I don't visit this group very often. > Thanks, > Edwin H. Heusinkveld > The Netherlands

Gp2 automatically "slows" down game time, so that your frame rate doesn't suffer, so if you want to have 25 fps, and your computer can't handle it, the game will slow down game time so you experience every second in the game. Something like that. Ray

hi i ran in adelaide and compared the gp2 time with the time on a 'real' stopwatch (p166, vga most of the details; 50-80% occupancy): gp2: 1m16s000 'real': 1m09s000 and a friend of mine did it on different pc's with different hardware setup (dx2/66 w overdrive, only the most important details; 70-100% occupancy): gp2: 1m16s000 'real': 1m11s000 now i wonder: are the laps equal, or is there a gap of 2s ? are laps of different pc's compareable ? any ideas, theories, facts ? addie

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > Hi there, > > The other night, when I was 'driving' on the Hockenheim circuit, I noticed that the > > lap-times GP2 reports are about 6% slower than the times measured with a stopwatch: > > GP2 time 'real time' difference > > 1:46.299 1:40.16 +6.1% > > 2:36.900 2:28.17 +5.9% > > 2:06.204 2:00.00 +5.2% (I was a little late stopping the clock :-) ) > > => One (1) 'real second' is about 1.06 'GP2 seconds'

x 'real time' on Hockenheim) :-) [cut]

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Please, eMail your response cause I don't visit this group very often. > > Thanks, > > Edwin H. Heusinkveld > > The Netherlands

stopwatch: You've got WAY too much free time on your hands!

you people won't tell me that Edwin H. Heusinkveld and me are the only ones that reported the discrepancy between the gp2 lap times and the 'real' ones ? you're absolutely right, Art, but your friend or girlfriend or whoever has not to be extraordinarely smart to handle a simple stop watch in the right moments, has she/he ? and she/he has not even to be very good at it, because i am talking about severeal SECONDS, not several 1/100s. if the difference would be constant, i wouldnt care. but on different pc's its different. get me right, gp2 is fun to me anyway, but if the laps driven on different pc's are not comparable, then a HOF makes no sense. addie ?) btw: i miss the statement of good ol' DG

IMHO the way this can be explained is as follows: As long as the processor occupancy is *always* at 100%, real time should be equal to GP2's time. Any short time over 100% will slow down the game and real time will get longer. This seems to be fact. If we now assume the opposite is also true, it would mean that occupancies below 100% actually SPEED UP the game. IMO this is a major flaw! Erich.

Quoted text (24 lines)

> hi > i ran in adelaide and compared the gp2 time with the time on a 'real' > stopwatch (p166, vga most of the details; 50-80% occupancy): > gp2: 1m16s000 'real': 1m09s000 > and a friend of mine did it on different pc's with different hardware > setup (dx2/66 w overdrive, only the most important details; 70-100% > occupancy): > gp2: 1m16s000 'real': 1m11s000 > now i wonder: are the laps equal, or is there a gap of 2s ? are laps of > different pc's compareable ? any ideas, theories, facts ? > addie > > > Hi there, > > > The other night, when I was 'driving' on the Hockenheim circuit, I

noticed that the > > > lap-times GP2 reports are about 6% slower than the times measured with a stopwatch: > > > GP2 time 'real time' difference > > > 1:46.299 1:40.16 +6.1% > > > 2:36.900 2:28.17 +5.9% > > > 2:06.204 2:00.00 +5.2% (I was a little late stopping the clock :-) ) > > > => One (1) 'real second' is about 1.06 'GP2 seconds' > x 'real time' on Hockenheim) :-) > [cut] > > > Please, eMail your response cause I don't visit this group very often. > > > Thanks, > > > Edwin H. Heusinkveld > > > The Netherlands

> IMHO the way this can be explained is as follows: > As long as the processor occupancy is *always* at 100%, real time > should be equal to GP2's time. Any short time over 100% will slow > down the game and real time will get longer. This seems to be fact. > If we now assume the opposite is also true, it would mean that > occupancies below 100% actually SPEED UP the game. i guess not. i made another test: running with all details off, so i had an occ. of about 30-50% and the gap was the same as with an occ. of 50-80%. the gap (in % i guess) seems to be constant on my pc as long as the occ. is below 100%. but when i run on the other pc, the gap is different to mine. maybe it is, because its a different cpu ? different mhz ? mine is an intel p166, the other one is a dx2/66 upgraded with a kingston 586 cpu with 133mhz. addie i m afraid thats what it is. well, but its fun anyway ?) you just can not compare laps driven on different pc.