Err.....Doh, here is me being an idiot but why does my little FPS meter in game still show the same average of 90 as it did with the OEM ATI card? Was I supposed to blow out my .cfg after istalling the Ultra? I can visually see much better clerity, definition and shadowing, but I hear tell of people getting in the hundreds..... or I was perhaps not paying attention..... again....lol.
Advertisement
Page 1 of 1
- You cannot start a new topic
-
This topic is locked
•6800 Ultra and I still show average of 90 FPS? DOH!
Rate Topic:
MultiQuote
#2
HoboHumpinSlut (old) 
- Joined: 07-February 04
- Posts: 2,308
Posted 12 February 2005 - 05:04 AM
do you actually have your fps limited via com_maxfps? if the answer is no, then do that (set it to a neat number where fps are still stable, eg 125). if the answer is yes, might it be set to 90?
#3
WaySlow (old)
- Joined: 17-October 04
- Posts: 29
Posted 12 February 2005 - 11:19 AM
[quote name='"HoboHumpinSlut"]do you actually have your fps limited via com_maxfps? if the answer is no' date=' then do that (set it to a neat number where fps are still stable, eg 125). if the answer is yes, might it be set to 90?[/quote']
Well I did not have a setting that I could find (testing in consol and in my .cfg). However, I manually tossed my old .cfg and set the com_maxfps in the clean one (as you suggested), but to 300.
Now depending on the section of the map is averages 160-300.
I don't see much visual difference between 100 and 300, what do recommend I cap it at (or not)?
Well I did not have a setting that I could find (testing in consol and in my .cfg). However, I manually tossed my old .cfg and set the com_maxfps in the clean one (as you suggested), but to 300.
Now depending on the section of the map is averages 160-300.
I don't see much visual difference between 100 and 300, what do recommend I cap it at (or not)?
#4
HoboHumpinSlut (old)
- Joined: 07-February 04
- Posts: 2,308
Posted 12 February 2005 - 01:20 PM
Quote
do you actually have your fps limited via com_maxfps? if the answer is no' date=' then do that (set it to a neat number where fps are still stable, eg 125). if the answer is yes, might it be set to 90?[/quote']
Well I did not have a setting that I could find (testing in consol and in my .cfg). However, I manually tossed my old .cfg and set the com_maxfps in the clean one (as you suggested), but to 300.
Now depending on the section of the map is averages 160-300.
I don't see much visual difference between 100 and 300, what do recommend I cap it at (or not)?
Well I did not have a setting that I could find (testing in consol and in my .cfg). However, I manually tossed my old .cfg and set the com_maxfps in the clean one (as you suggested), but to 300.
Now depending on the section of the map is averages 160-300.
I don't see much visual difference between 100 and 300, what do recommend I cap it at (or not)?
cap at 125...that is more than enough and your fps will be damn stable. (ie probably not going below it, except on maps like lameway2 maybe)
edit: well, actually cap it at your monitors refresh rate (r_displayrefresh)
Page 1 of 1
- You cannot start a new topic
-
This topic is locked
1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
Advertisement