If you happen to have a Creative GeForce2 GTS and run Falcon 4.0 on it, I have the following experience regarding different drivers experience to share with you.

Creative origianl drivers ver .0384:
Resolution = 1024 x 768
Graphics Setting = Default
Realism setting = Ace
FPS = 34-38 (sitting on the runway)
FPS = 41-42 (lifting up into the air)
FPS = 47-48 (AGL = 23,000 ft)

nVidia's Detonator 2 drivers ver .0522
Resolution = same
Graphics Setting = same
Realism setting = same
FPS = 18-24 (sitting on the runway)
FPS = 25-27 (lifting up into the air)
FPS = 28-29 (AGL = 23,000 ft)

But this great deviations only happens to Falcon 4.0 only. For others like JFA-18, EECH the FPS is pretty much the same.

I'm deciding whether to buy a geforce2 or v5 5500. Could you let me know your cpu and amount of ram so I can compare likely fps as against my athlon 700, 256 pc133 ram?

Also, are the fps you refer to in TE or campaign?

Thanks in advance

Cheers

Hi. Firstly - do you know if you have FSAA enabled... that could be the FPS hit.

Secondly, There is no question that the 3.xx drivers are faster and more stable than the 5.xx drivers. Remember the FIRST actual released driver (not leaked beta) in the 5.xx version was 5.22 very recently :)
The 3.xx version have less features turned on in them and they are therefore faster. If you run 3DMark2000 with both drivers you will see the image differences and lighting effect changes.
Better image, more features, less FPS - it's still a good trade off in the case of the 5.22's

Sorry for replying late. Have been doing a lots of testing on my mcahine lately.

Yes, the spec is as follows:

PIII 600E (without o/c'g)
Creative GeForce2 GTS
256 Siemen PC-100 SDRAM (2x128)
EP-BX6 mobo (superb mobo I've had so far)
IBM 370190 7,200 rpm (1MB Cache)

Tell you my latest findings:
Using Creative original drivers & MSVCRT.DLL
PIII 600E (o/c'd --> 800E)

I managed to obtain 46-48 fps in takeoff position.

Yes, all the testing were done in TE mission.

You are right. I found out the default FSAA setting of nVidia's Detonator 2 drivers is set to 2 notch from the leftmost. Which means FSAA has been enabled by default. But even so, we are talking about a 16fps difference which is quite big and I don't think FSAA is totally accounted for that.

But you maybe right that the image quality differs in both drivers. But then as far as F4 is concerned, it doesn't bother me. Because afterall, F4 is an 'old' title now compared to others like EECH, Ka-52 TA and even JFA-18. Besides, T&L and FSAA are hardware built-in to the card that F4, at the time it was developed, didn't realize their features. That means, whichever drivers I use will have no significant impact or any obvious difference will be observed.

Rather, what worries me is when I play titles like Quake III Arena, Expendible and other Adventure titles which may fully utilize these features provided by the API.

Besides, I just proved that a significant jump in CPU speed does have significant impact on the FPS of games that's for sure. I think I am saving the big bugs for a genuine 1GHz CPU next summer.

Thanks a lot. Can't wait to see what v5 5500 owners report so I can decide...credit card's all charged up and ready to go!

Cheers

Glad to see a HongKong-er here, i come from HK also

I play Falcon4 and Flight Simulator 2000

Please contact me at bearbiscuit@hotmail.com

>>But even so, we are talking about a 16fps difference which is quite big and I don't think FSAA is totally accounted for that<<

You would be surprised if you knew what the settings actually mean in FSAA in the nVidia drivers. That second notch is equivalent to 4X FSAA (the highest setting that the V5-5500 will have) so a hit of 16 FPS is not that much of a surprise. The highest setting on the far right is 16X FSAA.

Your point about not seeing the difference in Falcon4 is true (excluding of course FSAA) but unless you are running one partition (and OS) for Falcon4 and nothing else (I do :) then you will suffer in your Quake3 and other more recent games as you will not get as good an image as you could because you are not using the newer drivers.

>>I think I am saving the big bugs for a genuine 1GHz CPU next summer<<

Well I am getting pretty close to that magical 1000mhz now by overclocking my P3-750e BE6-II combo. My most recent 3DMark2000 score was 5350 on a Geforce DDR.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blazter:
You would be surprised if you knew what the settings actually mean in FSAA in the nVidia drivers.........

---

Blazter,

I have learnt from other threads up here on this forum a while ago about this fact. But even so it is doing 4X FSAA, @1024x768, there are still noticeable jaggies at some camera angles. When I run it @ 1600x1200, I manage to get nearly no jaggies but of course, with loss of a nice cockpit that skypat has created for us.

When you say partition, are you refering to utilities like Magic Partition or Partition Manager and all those ?

You have done great! BE6 Ver 2 is a good board. I was using it prior to my EP-6XBA2 and now this EP-BX6. Did you upgrade your BIOS to cope with your PIII 750E CuMine CPU ?

Last, I have 3DMark2000 downloaded from the website. Believe it is only a trial version. Is it why I can never test any one of my own selected game ?

Appreciate you reply.

Best regards
Peter

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bill Hewett:
.......at the 4th notch and F4, JF/A-18, Flanker2, and MiG Alley are breathtaking, with very good framerates........a P3 800 and 256 MB RAM doesn't hurt..... This is one very powerful card!!

---

Bill,

You are luckier than me if that is so with your Hercules version of the GeForce2 GTS. The Creative one I've got doesn't seem to perform FSAA that well. At least, in JFA-18, all the text were blurred even I notch'd it at 2.

Yes, a PIII 800 doesn't hurt much. But this 800MHz is obtained out of an overclocking of a PIII 600E which worries me. Over-heating the CPU doesn't bother me. But I am not sure if I overclock @ 133MHz FBS, the AGP card (i.e. GeForce2 GTS) will be damaged despite AGP divider in the BIOS has adjusted it or me and keeps it down to 2/3, i.e. 66MHz.

I was attracted by its documented specifications. But as far as the card's performance seen by my eyes and all the statistics obtained in realtime, yes, it's deadly powerful.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blazter:

.......overclocking my P3-750e BE6-II combo.....

---

I really want to know if you have upgraded your BE6-II's BIOS. Since I still keep a piece in my library and want to compare how good it's overclocking against EP-BX6. I recall there is an AGP divider configurable in the BIOS but no PIC divider. Can you update me ? Appreciate you a great deal if you would do so.

Thanks.

Best regards
Peter

>>When you say partition, are you refering to utilities like Magic Partition or Partition Manager and all those <<

Yes, I use Partition Magic and run Falcon4 in it's own partition on data disk (outside tracks). I also have a a W98 OS on it's own partition (first disk) that runs ONLY Falcon4 (and of course GC, ICQ, RW). This way I can test many drivers for Falcon4 and not affect all the other apps on my system.

>>You have done great! BE6 Ver 2 is a good board<<
The BE6-II rev. 2.1 is a GREAT board :)

>>Did you upgrade your BIOS to cope with your PIII 750E CuMine CPU <<
Yes, I have the current BIOS

>>Last, I have 3DMark2000 downloaded from the website. Believe it is only a trial version. Is it why I can never test any one of my own selected game <<

3DMark2000 does not test "your" games. It is a self contained D3D / Directx7 tester. Just run the DEFAULT test and it runs 1024x768x16, then go to the wesite (Online Browser option) to get all the details of your test. If you need help.... let me know :)

>>I recall there is an AGP divider configurable in the BIOS but no PIC divider<<

I am using the SOFTMENU III version of BIOS and there IS a PCI divider as well as the AGP divider.

I hope that I answered all your questions... if not... give me another message :)

Beyond3d had this to say about the 3rd fsaa level:

"A 4-sample FSAA method, again [using two-sample over-sampling in both the horizontal and vertical direction, but with a High Detail Mip Level Selection. This will most likely be the optimal mode, offering good image quality and acceptable speed in most games. We expect this to be closer to 3dfx's 4X OGSS, but with less quality in the near-horizontal and near-vertical edges."

In addition to Blazter's comments I'll add simhq's comments of the two cards fsaa abilities. Basically they say no GF2 fsaa slider position matches 3dfx's 4x in quailty. Also, the nvidia settings are somewhat, uhh, wishfull thinking. As in impossible to perform on a 32 meg card above 1/2 way on the slider. 16x at 1024 16bit takes more memory for frame buffer than the card has total. Now you might run 320x240 32bit at highest fsaa setting
The slider is there, but if the card can't do what you ask, it will silently "fall back" to a lower setting, or no fsaa at all, without telling you, a direct quote from the guy who wrote the drivers. When I enabled 32 bit in EECH at 1024, it turned fsaa off altogether.

Reminder for you;

Topic: If you are using Creative GeForce2 GTS on Falcon 4.0

How's that Voodoo5 working for you? LOL

I read on Delphi that Joedy says they will be out by mid-summer? Is that right?

>>Basically they say no GF2 fsaa slider position matches 3dfx's 4x in quailty<<

Extrememly "subjective" at best. Who can show me data supporting that it "looks" better.

Hmmm, here's some more of your propaganda....

>>As in impossible to perform on a 32 meg card above 1/2 way on the slider. 16x at 1024 16bit takes more memory for frame buffer than the card has total. Now you might run 320x240 32bit at highest fsaa setting <<

Duh - exact same argument for 3Dfx.... the V5-5000 ONLY does FSAA (AT ANY LEVEL!) up to 800x600 res. The V5-5500 does it at 1024x768 - so - what's your point? Other than trying to be a 3Dfx stooge and spreading mis-information....

Both cards are limited to the memory onboard.

A couple of months ago you were posting all the time about how "the nVidia FSAA was software <bad> and 3Dfx was hardware <good>".

Here is a quote from the article you posted the link for.

>>I provide a step-by-step account of how NVIDIA appears to use hardware-based OGSS anti-aliasing. Although some people call this a software implementation, this is incorrect. This specific technique uses existing "hardware" features to create an anti-aliased result<<

Uh? What's next?

Let's see the damn V5 / V6 cards in consumer machines...... running consumer software AND THEN we can talk about how bloody good they are. In the meantime let us "poor" Geforce owner/users enjoy the excellent products we have <NOW>!

Simhq has both cards so at least they are qualified to have an opinion.

Now, as for the subject of the thread. The 5.22 drivers are slower than the older reference ones but offer some fsaa. The Prophet2 I have does fsaa to some extent, but I find it's quality/speed lacking on a PIII at 774. Falcon at 25-27 in instant action 2d cockpit, 1024, one notch of fsaa. Campaign can drop below 10 near FLOT.

Thanks. It helps a great deal.

I have a BE6 Rev. 2.0 rather than a 2.1. I believe that's why my SOFTMENU is not version III and thus no PCI divider. Anyway, I will upgrade it later so can compare the overclocking ability of both EP-BX6 and BE6 Rev. 2.

I installed everything on the same hard disk. Maybe I should consider Partition Magic.

Anyhow, let's wait for the results of V5.

from a anandtech review:

Do you actually read the articles that you refer to? Or do you read them.... but with 3Dfx "filters" on?

YOU POST;
>>Now you might run 320x240 32bit at highest fsaa setting<<

THE ARTICLE SAYS;
>>These graphs show that at 512x384 all FSAA modes can be used in all color depths <<

YOU POST;
>>The slider is there, but if the card can't do what you ask, it will silently "fall back" to a lower setting, or no fsaa at all<<

THE ARTICLE SAYS;
>>It is very important to realize that when you select mode 8, you do not automatically get 16-sample FSAA. Selecting mode 8 means that you are "requesting" the highest possible FSAA quality. The NVIDIA driver will take this request and it will try to get you the best quality possible given the game situation.<<

Hmmmmm. sounds a little worse the way you put it doeesn't it?

YOU POSTED;
>>a direct quote from the guy who wrote the drivers<<

You are on chatting terms with the "guy" (LOL) that writes the nVidia reference drivers? What's his name and number? I want to call him, I have a few questions too.

YOU POSTED;
>>I'm making sure people understand the facts about the nvidia fsaa slider<<

I think you are so blinded by your obvious "love" for 3Dfx that you wouldn't know a TRUTH if it hit you in the face.

I have kept fairly quiet for the last 6 months while you have interjected your negativity into every single Geforce thread that I have seen. We all know that you love 3Dfx and that you love your (not-in-hand) Voodoo5 5500 but why..... do you feel that you have to spend so much time and effort "dissing" the competition? Oh yeah - that is the 3Dfx way...... if you can't beat them - DIS THEM! LOL

P.S. It's spelled - DIPSHIT

The Voodoo5 5500 retails at $299, while most GeForce2 GTS cards carry a suggested retail price of around $350. Street prices hover in the neighborhood of $270 and $320, respectively.

If you spend the extra $50 and buy a Geforce2, you get scads of benefits, including faster raw frame rates; the power to run games at resolutions that, in our opinion, defeat the purpose of FSAA; more appealing features; a promising T&L engine; and a longer practical life for your 3D accelerator.

It's not easy to forgive Nvidia for the deplorable act of shipping product with a broken feature. Its saving grace is that the true benefits of the feature in question are subjective, and we honestly feel that FSAA is overrated.

That's not to say that the Voodoo5 5500 AGP is a bad product. It has its uses. If you, for some reason, must run your games at 800 by 600 (for example, if you're playing on a 15-inch monitor), FSAA will come into effect, and the Voodoo5 5500 does it better than any card ever has.

In this shoot-out, we chose not to mention the Glide API because it's all but dead. Nevertheless, we're sure there are a handful of gamers who are absolutely addicted to a title whose Glide acceleration outdoes any other 3D API, such as Starsiege: Tribes, or a Glide-only title, a myriad of which came out
in 1997 and 1998. A GeForce2 GTS won't satisfy such a gamer's needs.

The vast majority of gamers, however, would be better served with Nvidia's muscle-bound chipset. Look for it on the ELSA Gladiac, the Guillemot Hercules 3D Prophet II GTS, and on a number of other cards due out at or around the time this article goes live.
----------

Read the rest of the article.... it has some good things to say about the Voodoo5's FSAA (if you are going to use 800x600 res)
http://gamecenter.com/Hardware/Roundup/Voo5ge2/

I have no problem at all running Falcon4 at 1600x1200 and would love to see someone work up a cockpit for that res :)
The ONLY reason that I run 1024x768 (grudgingly....) is due to the fantastic cockpits available at that resolution <and only that resolution> :(

Do ya' feel like takin' on a project?
LOL

Have been over to a friend's who has his 5500. We both have overclocked 600e's and 21" monitors and the same games/sims. I looked at F4 and FA18.

In a sentence, the 5500 4x was better than anything I saw on my Prophet2 FSAA wise. The V5 owns FSAA. It cleaned up what the geforce never did at any fsaa level. The Geforce still owns color depth and texture detail quality.

In F4, instant action, 1024 4x FSAA, 2d cockpit, 64 fps.
Geforce2 minimum FSAA, 27 fps.

FA18. 1024 4x V5, slow. Geforce minimum fsaa, slower. 800x600 4x V5 looks very good and plays fast. Still cpu limited but as fast as a V3 or geforce without fsaa.

I did not see the improvement in image quality color wise that some reviewers talked about on the V5. My friend runs his monitor brightness higher than I do so not clear about this.

Another thing. The beta drivers I downloaded gave my V3 a Level of Detail bias adjustment. This is for mip maps, texture detail level. It made a big difference how my V3 looked. The same drivers loaded on his V5 don't show the LOD option, so I'm scratching my head about that. 3dfx has said they would include a LOD in a future driver.

I'm amazed at how good 800x600 looks on a V5. Damn good, and I'm a high res fanatic, preferring 1280 minimun without fsaa.

From what I've seen, with a geforce you're better off running as high a res as you can and adding a minimum fsaa, as lower res and more fsaa doesn't look so hot.

On the V5, you might prefer max fsaa and choose a res that suits you speed wise.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blazter:

Hammer

I have no problem at all running Falcon4 at 1600x1200 and would love to see someone work up a cockpit for that res
The ONLY reason that I run 1024x768 (grudgingly....) is due to the fantastic cockpits available at that resolution <and only that resolution>

Do ya' feel like takin' on a project?
LOL

---

It may not happen. The coding was never put into place to allow the creation of dedicated 1600x1200 cockpits. That is why you do not see 1600x1200 cockpits floating around out there. It might happen in the future but that is dependent on what our F4.0 coders can solve. With the latest benchmarks that I have seen I am disposed toward getting the GForce2 GTS. Unfortunately, I want AA and I want it at 1024 so that I can continue running my cockpit . Running at a resolution higher than 1024 isn't an option for me. I'm probably going to hold out for the rather expensive V5 6000 and see how it performs. Ideally I would like to fly F4.0 at 1024 resolution with FSAA 4X while maintaining a frame rate at least equal of faster than what it does now. If only that V5 6000 wasn't so darn expensive I could truly be happy with that decision . I will buy a faster processor at that time too .

------------------
Klaatu Barada Nikto

Hi a couple of points - or is that pints.... it's hard to tell this late at night :)

>>I am disposed toward getting the GForce2 GTS. Unfortunately, I want AA and I want it at 1024 so that I can continue running my cockpit .<<

I run Falcon4 now at 1024x768 with FSAA at level 3 on my Geforce. This is not something you will have any problem with on a GTS.

>>I will buy a faster processor at that time too<<

Most of your FPS are going to come from the processor no matter what card you use. I have a p3-750E overclocked and I am just starting to see the real potential of my Geforce card ESPECIALLY with Falcon4....
more horsepower = more FPS

MORLOCK257 took these shots on my #2 machine during a LAN meeting flight. Is getting a new vid card going to buy me anything?

Spec's are C300A @ 464/256MB 2 voodoo2 8MB in SLI mode @ 1024X768 on a 17" monitor. The X32TNT2U shows very similar graphical results with a drop of about 10 FPS.

BTW the JPG's loose some quality compaired to the actual screen or the original BMP's

BEAR

FPS are not a concern(at leastin F4)because they could really tank & still be over 20FPS which is where I like to see the floor. I recognize you will get some big hits at FLOT with APR running, but they are transitory hits & have to do with location on the battle field.

My question really is, will my graphics look $280-300 better then they look now? Can anyone post some similar shots as Morlock took with the new cards in 1024X786?

BTW got some mail about the cockpit & its XIS beta 6.

THX for the input

I have finished the various 'benchmark testing' and here are the results:

With Creative original drivers + DX 7.0:

CPU Speed = 600E

CPU Speed o/c'd --> 900EB

With Creative original drivers + DX 7.0a

CPU Speed = 600E

CPU Speed o/c'd --> 800EB

What you reckon the frame rates ?

RJ