Please register or login. There are 3 registered and 1356 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 367.09 kbit/s November 22 - 07:53pm EST 
Hardware Analysis
      
Forums Product Prices
  Contents 
 
 

  Latest Topics 
 

More >>
 

    
 
 

  You Are Here: 
 
/ Forums / Nvidia driver cheats? Truth or fiction?
 

  Of Screenshots and Microscopes 
 
 Author 
 Date Written 
 Tools 
Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2
Carter Sudeith Apr 29, 2004, 09:58pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Of Screenshots and Microscopes
Unreal 3.0 can't play on the X800XT, its a fact. There's a reason they let more people see it on the 6800U than the x800XT.

Want to enjoy less advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Apr 29, 2004, 10:58pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Of Screenshots and Microscopes
BIG REASON FOR THE 9800 XT, is cause usually Find them in 256MB DDR, with the Pros its harder to find them with the 256MB DDR.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
Shadow_Ops_Airman1 Apr 29, 2004, 11:03pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Of Screenshots and Microscopes
I Dunno its funny that i see that peeps are having probs with the 56.** driver series from Nvidia, i HAVE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE TO SWITCH BACK TO 53.03, WITH THESE WORDS, IF IT AINT BROKE, DONT FIX IT.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ (133x14= 1867MHz) (209x11= 2299MHz)
DFI LP NF2 Ultra-B (Hellfire 3EG Rev2)
Antec SX800, Neo HE 500, 4 Antec 8CM Fans
Thermalright SI-97 1 Antec Tricool 12CM Fan
CL SB XFi Xtreme Music
2x Barracuda HDs (250/400)
2x Samsung Write
m olotov May 04, 2004, 09:53am EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Of Screenshots and Microscopes
Shouldn't we be aiming for cards that will give 75FPS, or other rate equal to maximum refresh rate of the monitor? We can all see the difference between a 60 and 75 Hz refresh rate - isn't the FPS question essentially the same?

On this basis the difference between 100FPS and 200FPS should be invisible (and the question is academic) as these are additional frames that by definition cannot be seen.

Brian Stewart May 04, 2004, 12:40pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Of Screenshots and Microscopes
I don't know if this has been said, but...
FILM AND GAMES ARE DIFFERENT.

The reason you do NOT notice the low framerate of a film (23.976 fps, or 29.97 fps, NTSC)
is because the film recorded the motion.
Each frame ina filmstrip has motion on it. Becuase the frame is exposed for a certain amount of time (a SMALL amount of time) it captures the first image, then a small moment later, then a little later.

Basically, you have a motion-blur effect going on on each frame automatically.

With a game, you do not expose chemicals to light to create the image.
You see only each frame.
There is no motion blurring on each frame. This is what makes it easier to notice the framerate drops in games. A action-packed game at 24 fps would look horrible, but an action packed movie at 23.976 looks great.

The reason is that when film is exposed, you get a motion-blur effect on each frame.
You don't get this in games. (Some games try to program such effects in, but it's not a physical blurring do to the motion)

MSI K8N Neo 2 Platinum
1 GB DDR 400
Athlon 64 4600+
6800 GT
m olotov May 04, 2004, 02:48pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Of Screenshots and Microscopes
I think that's right. Expanding the idea, the reason film and games look different at the same frame rates is that in a film the speed that the world actually changes at is normal physics speed. By contrast, in a game, the maximum speed that the game-world can change at is the speed that the computer can render the pictures of it.

So in a film, the brain's normal processes just fill in the gaps between the frames making its perception of motion appear smooth. In a game, the game-world actually slows down when the frame rate (the rate that the pictures of it can be shown) drops: the brain can try to fill in the gaps but it appears unreal as the actual events in the game have been slowed down by the hardware - which is the point of over-clocking it ...

Jason F Jul 27, 2004, 10:19am EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Of Screenshots and Microscopes
acually.. Nvidia's can O/C great.. the ones that can't is not because of the Nvidia VPU, but instead because of the board manufacturer... get Gainward.. they make thier cards to O/C in fact the goldensample cards come O/C stock. One thing I don't like about alot of the ATI cards.. is that the RAM does not have Heatsinks...

Athlon XP 2400+ O/Ced to 2.5 ghz
512 MB Corsair XMS pc3200
Gainward Geforce 3 Ti200 128mb O/Ced to Ti4400 speeds
U160 SCSI RAID 0 (4 Quantum 9.1 10k RPM drives)
CoolMax 400Watt PSU
Nitro Cooling
Max Normal Nov 07, 2005, 03:25pm EST Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: Of Screenshots and Microscopes
The difference in FPS to achieve 'persistence of vision' between movie film and TV or video games has nothing to do with motion blur. In fact you may remember that video cards capable of creating motion blur effects were being manufactured three or four years ago, and this did not automatically double the speed of all of our gaming experiences.

The human brain percieves smooth animation of images at around 25 FPS, and this is the approximate speed that most movie cameras need to work at as one whole frame is being displayed at a time (The portions between the frames are strobed out).

TVs and computer monitors however are interlaced. This means that only every other scanline of information is displayed per frame, so it takes two frames to compose a whole image.

The upshot of this is that to achieve persistence of vision, a minimum framerate of 50fps is required.
Of course the framerate will fluctuate greatly depending on the complexity of the information being displayed by a graphics card at any one time, so for this reason you'd probably want an average of 75fps depending on resolution and variation in complexity within the game to ensure that your fps never dropped below 50, and to guarantee a completely smooth gameplay experience.


Write a Reply >>

Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2

 

    
 
 

  Topic Tools 
 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates
 

  Related Articles 
 
 

  Newsletter 
 
A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.