BZFlag FPS

Help with Setup, Hardware, Performance or other Issues...Or just pimp your rig.
Post Reply
User avatar
khazhyk
Private First Class
Private First Class
Posts: 1400
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: Somewhere over there.
Contact:

BZFlag FPS

Post by khazhyk » Fri Feb 02, 2007 1:27 am

The FPS rate for bzflag on me is always 30> on windows, and changing the graphics setting to low or medium only changes thefps by 1-7. (i use expirimental.)

On Hix, Pillbox, and most other none 600+ object 1.x maps i get ~23
on everything else i get ~2-18 (usually 8-12)

I use ATI Radeon 9200 SE

8 FPS is sorta playable, but I'd like better playablility. Is it just my card that sucks or is there something else I can do? (I used to average 50 FPS, but this started about 2 months ago.)
Image

User avatar
JeffM
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 5193
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 4:11 am
Location: https://github.com/OmniTanks
Contact:

Post by JeffM » Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:55 am

you probalby need the correct openGL drivers for your card.
what OS are you on?
ImageJeffM

User avatar
khazhyk
Private First Class
Private First Class
Posts: 1400
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: Somewhere over there.
Contact:

Post by khazhyk » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:46 pm

oh yeah, forgot :oops:
Windows 2000 SP4
Image

User avatar
Saber
Private First Class
Private First Class
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:27 pm
Location: ¨¨¨¨¨

Post by Saber » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:46 pm

Can someone explain to me the graphic card hierarchy. Is 9200 better than X1300. It might be a stupid question for you but I just want to know it.

User avatar
khazhyk
Private First Class
Private First Class
Posts: 1400
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: Somewhere over there.
Contact:

Post by khazhyk » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:47 pm

X1300 is way better than 9200.
Image

User avatar
Saber
Private First Class
Private First Class
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:27 pm
Location: ¨¨¨¨¨

Post by Saber » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:51 pm

So if i understand X... is better than any none X card?

User avatar
khazhyk
Private First Class
Private First Class
Posts: 1400
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: Somewhere over there.
Contact:

Post by khazhyk » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:53 pm

I'm not sure exactly, but Jeff said a 9200 is about a X300.
Image

meeba
Master Sergeant
Master Sergeant
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 10:49 pm
Location: N. Sanity Beach
Contact:

Post by meeba » Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:38 am

On the plus side, me1, you don't have a mobility Radeon 9000 that overheats after 15 minutes of bzflag. :(

User avatar
DTRemenak
General
General
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 4:54 am
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Post by DTRemenak » Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:47 am

Video card model numbers are systematic. Both manufacturers use the same system, but the numbers are not comparable between them.

Higher series numbers do not mean the card is faster (i.e. the GeForce 7300 is much slower than the GeForce 6800). A higher series number in the same price bracket will usually be faster (i.e. the GeForce 7800 is faster than the 6800).

The first part is the series. Radeon X800 is X series, 9800 is 9k series, X1300 is X1k series, 8500 is 8k series, etc. In general, the higher the series number, the newer/more modern the card; typically each DirectX revision will be accompanied by several series of cards. Note also that series are heavily influenced by marketing, so there are usually some cards which don't actually belong to the series they're labeled as. The classic example is the GeForce4 MX, which is more like an overclocked GeForce2. ATI's X300 and X600 are actually uplabeled 9-series parts (they're R300 cores, approximately equivalent to the 9550 and 9600, respectively).
Radeons go through 7k, 8k, 9k, X, X1k.
GeForces go through 2, 3, 4, FX, 6k, 7k, 8k.

The second part is the price bracket. X300, 9200 are low-end, X1600, 9700, are midrange, X1900, 9800 is high-end. The higher this part is, the more expensive (and typically, faster and more capable) the card is.
Typically [000-500) is low-end or "budget", [500-700] is midrange, and (700-950] is high-end.

The third part is the performance designator. That's the XT in X1800XT, or the GT in 7800GT.
ATI usually goes by (in order of performance, slowest first) (HM, SE, or LE), (GT or RX), (no suffix), (GTO, XL, and new "Pro"), (XT and old "Pro"), (XTX)
nVidia usually goes by (same order) (MX, LE, or SE), GS, GT, GTS, GTX.

So, the X1300 is two generations newer than the 9200, but in the same price bracket. It has more features and is somewhat faster.

Post Reply