🚀 go-pugleaf

LOL
You just don't get it do you?
If I get 42 fps at 1600x1200 and 50 at 640x480
then the benchmark is null and void because at 640x480 the ceiling is
capped!
The point of the other benchmarks is to show that these types of games have
no cap at all. UT on the other hand has very little differene in benchmarks
making this a completely useless comparrison. It's flawed.....
<DeadDred@nospam mail.com> wrote in message
news:3886cc7d.70423068@perm.read.netcom.net.uk...
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 07:18:57 -0500, "SilverBack" <downing7@gte.net>
> wrote:
>
> <erroneus links snipped>
>
> Why have you quoted 3dmark and Q3 scores in a discussion about UT?
> >
> >The answer here is fillrate.
> >In UT the difference is 19% from 640x480 to 1600x1200?
> >Sorry not possible. The benchmark procedure for UT is flawed. You are
going
> >to tell me that at 640x480 Your system "feels" like 50fps or less? I know
> >better. You can tell that the game on my system is way over that type of
> >frame
> >rate, more like 80...or more.
> >
> I haven't played games at 640x480 since I got rid of my V1 ages ago. I
> get little difference in performance between 800x600 and 1024x768, and
> it never flys, it always feels bogged down - basically performing like
> the demo performs.
>
> I am not saying that Phobia, or demo's in general are perfect, but
> from the results I have seen, they are in line with the way the game
> plays.
>
> DeadDred (ShaMaN)