I was too quick to press the reply button. I now see your motivations, so receive all my apologies.
Frederic Bouvier wrote: > Innis Cunningham wrote: > > > > > Hi Curt > > I downloaded the windows binaries last night for > > 9.4 and the problem of the drop down menu's > > locking the sim up still seem to exist.Even if you > > go to exit FG and then select cancel the sim locks up. > > Hey Innis, > > you just downloaded the release that is 3 months old ! > There is no *** 0.9.5555555 *** ( not 4 ) Win32 binary > yet. > > FYI, the menu lockup has been corrected in the binary below > and is ok for the upcoming release. > ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/FlightGear-0.9.4a.exe > > -Fred > > > The reason that I downloaded the binaries was that I > > have just built a new box,that I am going to put linux > > on,but wanted to find out how the new box compaired > > for speed to the old box. To my surprise the frame rates > > were worse than the old box. > > The following tests were done using windows 98SE > > The old box was a 850meg duron with 256 meg ram and > > a GF4-MX-440 64meg graphics card.On this box I could get 27fps > > sitting at the end of 28R at KSFO looking at the terminal. > > The new box a 2gig athalon with 512meg ram and a FX5200 > > 128meg graphics card could only give 22fps under the same > > conditions.Also my son who has a 2.8 gig rig running an ATI 9800pro > > card could only get 15fps.It seems the more powerfull the computer > > the slower FG seems to run. FG is not using the latest features new cards are offering and the 'old' features are pretty maxed out now. This is not an explanation for worst performance but just for lack of improvement. In the meantime, you probably switched to another setup/resolution that can eat computing power on your back. > > Now I dont know why that is but if we want to get new people into > > FG we should see what the problem is. > > As my son says if he had downloaded the game(sorry sim)and seen these > > kind of results he would have just scrubed it and moved on and I guess > > there are a lot of other people who would do the same thing. > > My son says that he gets frame rates of well over 100 on Quake and Doom > > which seem to be much more graphics intensive than FG. Original Quake is not pushing so much triangles and textures to the card because their action is indoor and the scene is bound to few rooms. Doom is even using sprites for the monsters instead of full 3d and lots of tricks are done to maintain a high framerate. That's said, FG is not very good at framerate because it is modeling a lot of things in background and it's graphic engine is a bit outdated. > > Also I noticed that in the 9.4 base the runfgfs bat file has been removed. > > Was there a reason for this. It has been supercede by fgrun that is much user frendly. > > I guess I did not notice this before because I was running the 9.4 > binaries > > with the CVS version of the base package and my own bat files. > > When I ran the 9.4 version I downloaded last night it seemed to flash up > > a dos window saying bad command or file name about were I would expect > > to see the Alpha window on my other version of 9.4.The sim would then > > continue to load.But once loaded the runway had black lines at the end of > > each texture. What is the Alpha window ? If you don't see fgrun, you probably have a path problem that is in conflict with you cvs version. The black lines are brought to you by newer hardware. I have the same and they probably come from anisotropic or another kind of filtering. > > I have seen this before when running AC3D and FG 9.4 at the same time on > > my old box.On that system the sim would, under those conditions, only run > at > > about 1fps or less.But in that case I could get the sim to run correctly > by > > shutting > > down AC3D(maybe a memory thing).But with the version I downloaded last > night > > I could not get the black lines to disappear at all. > > Is anyone else seeing this. > > >From the air the runway looks like a step ladder. > > Also on the new box the frame rates do not seem to change if I > > have full fog or no fog.On the old box the frame rates would half > > with no fog That last sentence make me feel that your performance problem is not related with the graphic card. If submitting less job to the card give the same result, that just mean that the bottleneck is not likely to be the graphic system, either software or harware. > > So with a new version coming out could these problems be looked at. Not likely on performance this time. You can still submit bug reports on the current version. -Fred _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
