🚀 go-pugleaf

On 12/2/2005 9:32 PM McGrandpa brightened our day with:

>"McGrandpa" <McGrandpaNOT@NOThotmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:8k9kf.22023$Au1.6931@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>  
>
>>"The Primate" <primate@primate.com> wrote in message 
>>news:wm6kf.121644$gh1.45352@fe09.news.easynews.com...
>>    
>>
>>>Just wondering what your experience is.  I was getting 46 under an AMD 
>>>Athlon  3000+ and just after installing an 4200+ X2 I was getting 40.
>>>
>>>I had read that my processor was roughly equal to a 3500+ single core so 
>>>I was expecting a slightly higher frame rate.  Good news is it shines in 
>>>multi-tasking, something I do alot when not gaming.  Expecially at 
>>>work....
>>>
>>>McGrandpa?   You had a previous thread on X2.
>>>
>>>RT
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>For some things the X2 4800+ flat out runs circles around my P4 3.0E. 
>>One thing I think I'm looking at is that both the 64 bit architecture and 
>>dual core potential are practically wasted under XP Pro 32 bit.   A number 
>>of A64 single core cpu's DO play Doom3 faster than this rig.  And Quake4, 
>>Far Cry, etc.   Where this thing stands up and completely leaves ALL the 
>>others behind is under a 64 bit OS.  Far Cry 64 is awesome.   But it's a 
>>damn lonely world right now, the 64 bit OS.   A few games, a few apps. 
>>Blinding speed, incredibly smooth.   But still have a few periph 
>>manufacturers that haven't blessed us with 64 bit drivers.  Epson HAS, so 
>>I can scan.  But Wacom hasn't so I can't draw, and HP hasn't for my 
>>printer so I can't use even a third of its capabilities.
>>The 4800+ has a core freq of 2.4gHz.  FSB is 2000mhz.  I think a A64 3800+ 
>>will keep up with it just fine in XP 32 bit.   X64 does utilize dual cpu 
>>more than XP32.
>>Still, though the fr's are only a little bit higher in Doom3 and HL2 they 
>>appear to run much smoother even when the fr's drop low.  The P4 with the 
>>same 6800GT in it, same PC3200 at DDR400 and dual channel does not look as 
>>smooth at all.   And I enjoyed Doom3, HL2 and Far Cry with the P4 and 
>>6800GT under XP 32bit.  I'm still trying things out and experimenting with 
>>different things, as time permits.  The one thing I'm not doing is 
>>overclocking anything at all.
>>
>>What are we using for benchmarking Doom3?    Lemme know and I'll bench it 
>>for ya.
>>McG.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Here we go:
>System:
>A64 X2 4800+, GA K8NSUltra939 (F8), 2 x 1gig PC3200, 6800GT, XP Pro SP2.
>Nvidia WHQL 77.77 driver set, Image quality = High Quality (best), AA and AF 
>set Application Controlled, refresh set 75 hz.
>Doom3 console:  timedemo demo1 usecache (3 runs each, last count given)
>1280x1024-ultra quality, 39.0 fps
>1024x768-ultra quality, 50.9 fps
>1280x1024-high quality, 61.4 fps
>1024x768-high quality,  68.7 fps
>
>I definitely see difference in texture quality between Ultra Quality and 
>High Quality.  In ultra quality 1280x1024 the textures look clearer, sharper 
>with smoother color blending.  It's worth the difference in fr's.  I'll play 
>it at 39 fps.   And I'll make sure prechache is on ingame, much smoother 
>even in lower fps situations.   :)
>
>Any tips, thoughts, ideas, anybody?  Inglo?
>
>McG. 
>
>
>  
>
I don't even have a single core 64bit processor.  I'd be curious to see 
how Quake4/Doom3 will run on Linux with one of those CPUs.  I'd like to 
see how those processors perform on a real 64 bit OS.  Of course the 
binaries for both games are still just 32 bit, heck I don't know if 
they'd even run on 64 bit Linux.  

-- 
"I did not have misleading relations with those facts"

					George W

Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
www.inglostadt.com