On 10/21/04 at 9:41 AM Chris Metzler wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:30:22 +0800 >"Innis Cunningham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Ok here's the comparison.I have two boxes sitting side by side both have >> Windows 98SE.One is a 850 duron with a GF4MX440 64m with 256meg of >> main memory running FG 9.5.The other box is a Athalon 2000 with a >> FX5200 graphics card and 512 of main memory running FG 9.6. >> This test was carried out using the 737 (not wireframe)off 28R at KSFO >> at noon with >> fog set to default and screen resolution 800X600.On the old box(Duron >> 850) frame rate >> sitting ready for takeoff 24fps and 70fps flying out to see off of >> 28R.On the new box >> under same conditions 56fps and 115fps > >Doing this with my box (Athlon XP 200+, nVidia GF4 Ti4600) at 1600x1200, >all settings default, I see 52fps sitting on the ground, 86fps once out >over sea. The numbers are *very* view-dependent, however -- switch to >an outside view early in the climb, and change the angle to be towards >the city or back towards the airport, and my numbers drop to the 30s or >even 27 or so. > I can drop from nearly 30 (looking to the left at KMIC) to about 6 (looking straight on at KMIC) when changing view direction with a Radeon 7200 32Meg, Athlon 1200, at 800x600 resolution. Not sure if it's texture memory or object density related though. Cheers - Dave This message has been scanned but we cannot guarantee that it and any attachments are free from viruses or other damaging content: you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
