GP2: A Question Of Frame Rate

As a recent buyer of GP2, I was surprised at how much the frame rate can be improved by swiitching off various graghic details. I have a Pentium 133, with 32mgs of Ram and an ATI Mach 64 card with2mgs. (I have Win95, but run GP2 in DOS) My frame rate with all graphics on (and in SVGA) was a brutal 8-9. With most graghics off and in VGA, I was able to improve to 25.9 -- a threefold improvement. My question(s) is: Is a 25 frame rate good/bad with the machine and setup described above? Could I improve some how? What is the current "top end" of frame rate available using a high end PC (Pentium Pro, for example)? Are there any other factors that affect frame rate? Thanks in advance for your comments. -raceboy JV WC97

Quoted text (20 lines)

> As a recent buyer of GP2, I was surprised at how much the frame rate > can be improved by swiitching off various graghic details. > I have a Pentium 133, with 32mgs of Ram and an ATI Mach 64 card > with2mgs. (I have Win95, but run GP2 in DOS) > My frame rate with all graphics on (and in SVGA) was a brutal 8-9. > With most graghics off and in VGA, I was able to improve to 25.9 -- a > threefold improvement. > My question(s) is: Is a 25 frame rate good/bad with the machine and > setup described above? Could I improve some how? What is the current > "top end" of frame rate available using a high end PC (Pentium Pro, > for example)? Are there any other factors that affect frame rate? > Thanks in advance for your comments. > -raceboy > JV WC97

The performance you got with that P133 is right on par with what I get on my P100 (21fps with no graphics options on in SVGA). From what I read, even P200 and PPro200s slow down with graphics cranked up in SVGA. If Microprose would just support 3D accelerators(esp. Rendition) we'd have a reason to smile wider when playing this game. Meanwhile, us GP2 players wait for two more generations of processors to come out so that we can play this game at full detail. M Lewis

Quoted text (20 lines)

> As a recent buyer of GP2, I was surprised at how much the frame rate > can be improved by swiitching off various graghic details. > I have a Pentium 133, with 32mgs of Ram and an ATI Mach 64 card > with2mgs. (I have Win95, but run GP2 in DOS) > My frame rate with all graphics on (and in SVGA) was a brutal 8-9. > With most graghics off and in VGA, I was able to improve to 25.9 -- a > threefold improvement. > My question(s) is: Is a 25 frame rate good/bad with the machine and > setup described above? Could I improve some how? What is the current > "top end" of frame rate available using a high end PC (Pentium Pro, > for example)? Are there any other factors that affect frame rate? > Thanks in advance for your comments. > -raceboy > JV WC97

On my Pentium Pro 180, the frame rate for GP2 sucks. I have to turn most details off in SVGA just to get the game passable. And if you have to run the game in VGA with most details off just to get a decent frame rate, why not just pick up World Circuit I in the budget rack for 5 bucks instead of spending all that money on the new (not improved) version?

Quoted text (10 lines)

> My question(s) is: Is a 25 frame rate good/bad with the machine and >setup described above? Could I improve some how? What is the current >"top end" of frame rate available using a high end PC (Pentium Pro, >for example)? Are there any other factors that affect frame rate? > Thanks in advance for your comments. >-raceboy >JV WC97

The frame rate doesn't seem to be as important, or for that matter very useful, in deciding how much graphics to use. For example, set all but the sky on and try running Monaco vs Canada. If you save a hotlap, replay it and time the replay you'll find that the real time will be A LOT LONGER for Monaco! The "roadside objects" seem to be the biggest factor affecting play speed.

>Meanwhile, us GP2 players wait for two more generations of processors >to come out so that we can play this game at full detail. Ohhh yeah, I need that sky texture so badly!!!!

> >Meanwhile, us GP2 players wait for two more generations of processors >to come out so that we can play this game at full detail. > Ohhh yeah, I need that sky texture so badly!!!! Scott, That is not a lust for clouds, but rather a slam on Microprose for writing sloppy graphics code and failing to support 3D acceleration for this game. Please refrain from posting mocking messages... M Lewis

You really need to get that PC of yours looked at. From all the posts you've written about this it sounds like you get considerably worse graphics in GP2 with your PC than I and many others get with a bog standard P133. Cheers, Richard

Quoted text (18 lines)

> = > As a recent buyer of GP2, I was surprised at how much the frame rate > can be improved by swiitching off various graghic details. > = > I have a Pentium 133, with 32mgs of Ram and an ATI Mach 64 card > with2mgs. (I have Win95, but run GP2 in DOS) > = > My frame rate with all graphics on (and in SVGA) was a brutal 8-9. > With most graghics off and in VGA, I was able to improve to 25.9 -- a > threefold improvement. > = > My question(s) is: Is a 25 frame rate good/bad with the machine and > setup described above? Could I improve some how? What is the current > "top end" of frame rate available using a high end PC (Pentium Pro, > for example)? Are there any other factors that affect frame rate? > = > Thanks in advance for your comments. > =

The best way to determain wether your computer can handle the load, is pressing the O-key while racing. GP2 will then show the processor occupan= cy which you should keep below 100% as much as possible. The amount of RAM doesn't matter above 16MB. Just to give you an idea of what your PC will be able to handle : The graphics-settings I'm using for other circuits than Monaco are : (P120, 16MBEDO, DiamondS64_2MBDRAM/S3SPDUP) While not linking : SVGA, Fences, Track, Hills, Trackside objects No plot and no texture in mirrors All trackside objects Estimated framerate 17.0 , I set it at 13.4 While direct-linking : SVGA, Fences, Hills, Trackside objects No plot and no texture in mirrors All trackside objects Framerate set to 12.8 While modem-linking : Same as with direct, but fps set to 12.1 or 11.8 At Monaco I set the options so, that just after the first corner (that'= s the hardest place) the P.O. is 160%. Ren=E9 van Lobberegt, The Netherlands. -- = * * * If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. * * http://www1.tip.nl/users/t752096/ * * The minute I touched the flame I knew it would never die *

> That is not a lust for clouds, but rather a slam on Microprose for > writing sloppy graphics code and failing to support 3D acceleration for > this game. Please refrain from posting mocking messages... Sorry, but I beg to differ. Microprose did not write the game, Geoff Crammond did. The same guy who wrote (I may be corrected here!) stunt car racer, Elite, and the super game GP1. I don't think Geoff was being sloppy by writing a game that is ahead of the hardware. Think about it, you write a game that is as good as it can be on, say a pentium 133, then 12 months later your game is laughed at because newer games have "pretty clouds" and so look better than your ageing game, but need a pentium pro etc.. Maybe if Geoff added texture to the cars and tire smoke in GP1, there may have not been a need to write GP2!! I'm sure GP2 will still be moving stock in computer shops in 12 months because it still looks good on pentium 800s :) Sorry if my original post was a bit sarcastic, but the complaint that "the sugar isn't sweet enough" really starts to wear thin. I'm a programmer, and wish my programs only had twice the number of bugs Geoffs code spits out. (Geoff, if you are out there, gp2 use16550 was DUMB!) P.S. How do you write code enhanced for video cards when at the release (and even now) there was no dominating video card. Its like releasing a video on beta. It's not financially viable. Regards Scott

Quoted text (26 lines)

> > That is not a lust for clouds, but rather a slam on Microprose for > > writing sloppy graphics code and failing to support 3D acceleration for > > this game. Please refrain from posting mocking messages... > Sorry, but I beg to differ. Microprose did not write the game, Geoff > Crammond did. The same guy who wrote (I may be corrected here!) stunt > car racer, Elite, and the super game GP1. I don't think Geoff was being > sloppy by writing a game that is ahead of the hardware. Think about it, > you write a game that is as good as it can be on, say a pentium 133, > then 12 months later your game is laughed at because newer games have > "pretty clouds" and so look better than your ageing game, but need a > pentium pro etc.. Maybe if Geoff added texture to the cars and tire > smoke in GP1, there may have not been a need to write GP2!! I'm sure GP2 > will still be moving stock in computer shops in 12 months because it > still looks good on pentium 800s :) Sorry if my original post was a bit > sarcastic, but the complaint that "the sugar isn't sweet enough" really > starts to wear thin. I'm a programmer, and wish my programs only had > twice the number of bugs Geoffs code spits out. (Geoff, if you are out > there, gp2 use16550 was DUMB!) > P.S. How do you write code enhanced for video cards when at the release > (and even now) there was no dominating video card. Its like releasing a > video on beta. It's not financially viable. > Regards > Scott

Scott: Forgive my incorrect statement, Microprose did only publish the game, Geoff Crammond did write it. I didn't mean to insinuate that the game had bugs, I have found very few. In that department, Crammond must be commended. I do know when GP2 came out in relation to the release of the presently supported 3D cards. Nonetheless, I believe that graphics are merely icing on the cake, just as you do, but I also believe that playing games at 30fps makes you a better racer than playing at 12fps(as I have to do on GP2). I no longer play the game because I cannot get a decent frame rate in VGA OR SVGA with NO DETAIL on. The game runs like a pig. I play nascar2 on my rendition card at a constant 30fps and I even get to turn on some of the icing. Gameplay comes first, and the graphics of GP2 render it unplayable on my P100. For the money I have put into computers, I find it frustrating that I cannot play the best racing sim out there. As for writing graphics that will still sell when P-800s are common, I look at that as double-dipping. I ran out the first day the game was available and bought it. It won't run good, but there is indeed an extra market in the future to sell this game. Graphics do count, but only to the point that they allow you to enjoy the product. Microprose should support the hot video accelerators (3dfx and rendition) via patches, because the graphics are getting in the way of playing the game for many customers like me. Peace and Happy Racing, Matt Lewis

Hooray! Someone with a brain! The BEST way to get a good framerate is it dump GP2 and play GP1! 25 FPS on just about any computer! It's lots cheaper too! BTW, those hoping for a patch can forget it! MPS doesn't give a shit unless theres money in it. I'll bet my dormant copy of GP2 it is the end of the line for this version.

Quoted text (10 lines)

>> My question(s) is: Is a 25 frame rate good/bad with the machine and >>setup described above? Could I improve some how? What is the current >>"top end" of frame rate available using a high end PC (Pentium Pro, >>for example)? Are there any other factors that affect frame rate? > The frame rate doesn't seem to be as important, or for that matter >very useful, in deciding how much graphics to use. For example, set >all but the sky on and try running Monaco vs Canada. If you save a >hotlap, replay it and time the replay you'll find that the real time >will be A LOT LONGER for Monaco! The "roadside objects" seem to be the >biggest factor affecting play speed.

I'd go further by saying that not only the framerate is unimportant, it is indeed _wrong_. The framerate readings in the 'Graphic Details' screen have no idea of the track you'll be racing at. Now compare the number of scenery objects at Monaco and say Barcelona. I am usually using 18.2 fps worth of scenery, yet the _actual_ framerate difference during the race at both tracks is obvious, with processor occupancies of 200+ and 100- % respectively. Sincerely, Karim ---------------------------------------- Warning: e-mail address protected by Anti-Bot Protection:) Please double any reply with an e-mail. My ISP loses them less often :(

>> That is not a lust for clouds, but rather a slam on Microprose for >> writing sloppy graphics code and failing to support 3D acceleration for >> this game. Please refrain from posting mocking messages... >Sorry, but I beg to differ. Microprose did not write the game, Geoff >Crammond did. The same guy who wrote (I may be corrected here!) stunt >car racer, Elite I'll correct you: Elite was by David Braben (sp?) :-) Jo =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= When everything else failed, we can still become im- mortal by making an enormous blunder.... John Kenneth Galbraith =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I no longer play the game because I cannot get a > decent frame rate in VGA OR SVGA with NO DETAIL on. The game runs like > a pig. I play nascar2 on my rendition card at a constant 30fps and I > even get to turn on some of the icing. Gameplay comes first, and the > graphics of GP2 render it unplayable on my P100. For the money I have > put into computers, I find it frustrating that I cannot play the best > racing sim out there.

How fast does your video card run under dos? I played gp2 at work in VGA on a pentium 75 quite happily (I was playing it at home on a 486 2/66) Seems like GP2 doesn't like the rendition card. No argument here, but going on past experience, Geoff/Microprose don't seem to like to put out too many patches or fixes. I guess you don't earn money on patches. Sad really, as the "get the sale and bolt" approach doesn't earn you a lot of loyalty. Regards Scott

OK, I will correct you, Elite was not written by Geoff Crammond, but by David Braben and Ian Bell. You are right about the other two though (An updated stunt car racer would be great! Is the rumour that this is what he is working on still alive or has it changed?) -- Mark Dyball

> OK, I will correct you, Elite was not written by Geoff Crammond, but by > David Braben and Ian Bell. Is the rumour that this is what > he is working on still alive or has it changed?) Yep, you are right. I remember reading somewhere in an interview that Geoff was working on a sequel, but haven't heard anything new either.

David Braben wrote Elite, just in case anyone's interested ;) -- Dave Bowers

Yeah but, how can you play F1GP when you know you are missing out on better crashes, cleverer and better AI cars, wheelspins and groovy damage such as wheels coming off? -- Dave Bowers

On Wed, 08 Jan 1997 12:25:40 +0000, Julian Anderson >My only major bug with Crammond is that he doesnt seem to complete the >job, Amiga GP1 wasnt finished either, (the link option was missing) To be fair to Geoff, when the Amiga version of F1GP/WC was released (back in about 1991) linked games were rare beasts indeed (if they even existed at all). So it wasn't an "unfinished" version, but a child of its times <g> Cheers, Richard