Go Back   Rage3D » Rage3D Discussion Area » Graphics Technology Forums » General Radeon Discussion
Rage3D Subscribe Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

General Radeon Discussion General discussion for news and rumours about discrete Radeon graphics products. Do not ask for tech support here, instead please use the Radeon Technical Support forum.

"
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Apr 15, 2004, 01:05 PM   #1
Advertisement (Guests Only)

Login or Register to remove this ad
lapino
Radeon HD 6870
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 243
lapino is still being judged by the masses


Default 1024x768 vs 1280x1024 : big performance hit?!

I just noticed when playing around with my Far Cry settings, that switching from 1280x1024 to 1024x768 made a HUGE difference in performance. Now I can run FarCry at about 50fps with all settings to highest on my pc (PIV 2.8 prescott@3.36ghz, 1gig ram,9800XT cat4.4,Audigy2) when I don't use AA or AF

When playing this at 1280x1024, famerates are down by 30%-50% depending on scene. Is this normal?
lapino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2004, 01:13 PM   #2
sCoTcH
Rage3D Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,953
sCoTcH is still being judged by the masses


Default

1024*768= 786432 pixels to work on every frame
1280*1024= 1 310 720 pixels to work on each frame.


The difference is huge.
sCoTcH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2004, 01:28 PM   #3
shockwave
canucklehead
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada SK
Posts: 14,883
shockwave is still being judged by the masses


Default

yuppers, there is quite a difference in speed, but when playing at 1280 X 1024, games look MUCH better.

I'd rather play at this resolution without AA/AF than play at 1024 X 768 with them on. It looks too much like a console game being played on a TV even with AA/AF jacked up to wazoo
__________________
Quote:
I always advocate knowledge and tolerance... unless... I personally find their traits worthy of contempt.
-Adanu
shockwave is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertisement (Guests Only)
Login or Register to remove this ad
Old Apr 15, 2004, 01:49 PM   #4
DiaperJe|\|i3
Proud Papa
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,910
DiaperJe|\|i3 is still being judged by the masses


Default

Quote:
Originally posted by shockwave203
yuppers, there is quite a difference in speed, but when playing at 1280 X 1024, games look MUCH better.

I'd rather play at this resolution without AA/AF than play at 1024 X 768 with them on. It looks too much like a console game being played on a TV even with AA/AF jacked up to wazoo
seconded, I did'nt realize how horrible games looked @ 1024X768 till I had to drop the res down for UT2K4.... damnit!
__________________
{currently playing : Marvel Lego Super Heroes /with my kiddies :) }
{currently reading : The Black House }
{currently missing : Vengence : SH64 : ChrisRay : ragejg : Efin }
DiaperJe|\|i3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2004, 06:09 PM   #5
MrTexTure
Radeon HD 6850
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Canada Sweden
Posts: 181
MrTexTure is still being judged by the masses


Default

Quote:
Originally posted by shockwave203
yuppers, there is quite a difference in speed, but when playing at 1280 X 1024, games look MUCH better.

I'd rather play at this resolution without AA/AF than play at 1024 X 768 with them on. It looks too much like a console game being played on a TV even with AA/AF jacked up to wazoo
Right you are and now when I got me a shiny 22 inch Viewsonic P225f it's horrible to play at 1024*768 .. I was so glad when I got my 9800 Pro and could up the rez to 1280*960 on mine 19 inch monitor but now I want 1600*1200 heh but no way in Far Cry anything over 1024*768 i a slidesgow :-( ..But then again the Nv40 aka 6800U is around the corner to save the day ;-)

And I have no prob to go back to the lovely Nvidia again, think Ps3.0 mmm heheh
MrTexTure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2004, 06:06 AM   #6
gts007
Rage3D Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NorCaL
Posts: 3,313
gts007 is still being judged by the masses


Talking

and you've probably got a better framerate/resolution ratio with a good ATI card
__________________

gts007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2004, 08:03 AM   #7
TheMonkeyBoyz
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 13,989
TheMonkeyBoyz is still being judged by the masses


Default

Quote:
Originally posted by MrTexTure
Right you are and now when I got me a shiny 22 inch Viewsonic P225f it's horrible to play at 1024*768 .. I was so glad when I got my 9800 Pro and could up the rez to 1280*960 on mine 19 inch monitor but now I want 1600*1200 heh but no way in Far Cry anything over 1024*768 i a slidesgow :-( ..But then again the Nv40 aka 6800U is around the corner to save the day ;-)

And I have no prob to go back to the lovely Nvidia again, think Ps3.0 mmm heheh
Nice monitor...

I have the P225 version (Shadow Mask) and what I did was for 1280x1024 and below,
I set the screen so that the image is centered in the middle of the monitor with a 16.5"
diagonal measurement and I have black space on all 4 edges of the screen outside of
that centered image. That way they display without pixelization comparatively, and
are close to what would be shown on a 17" monitor (just a tad bigger perhaps).

Then for 1600x1200 and above, I go edge-to-edge with the image, the full 20" Diagonal
as nature intended...

Does that make sense to you? I suppose I could take a photograph if it does not.

Anyway, that works great for me and I'm totally stoked. Maybe it will work for you too.

Enjoy the awesomeness that is your monitor!
TheMonkeyBoyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2004, 08:26 AM   #8
Socio
Rage3D Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,633
Socio is still being judged by the masses


Default

Quote:
Originally posted by MrTexTure
in Far Cry anything over 1024*768 i a slidesgow :-( ..But then again the Nv40 aka 6800U is around the corner to save the day ;-)
Not really I can play Farcry single player at 1920X1200 res with 9800XT and P4 3.06GHz and it is playable, it chugs here and there but it is playable and the widescreen image is unbelievable!

I can't wait to see how the X800 will run it at high res!
Socio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 16, 2004, 08:38 AM   #9
lapino
Radeon HD 6870
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 243
lapino is still being judged by the masses


Default

depends on how you define 'playable'. in a shooter like FarCry, I need at least 50fps, or it feels sluggish.
__________________

Gaming Rig: Intel Core i5-750| Asus P7P55 | Corsair XMS3 1600mhz 2x2gb| Club3D 5850 oc | Intel X25-M V2 34nm SSD 80GB | Antec Sonata III | Dell u2410
lapino is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why is 1024X768 with 4XAA and 8XAF faster than 1280X1024 with 2XAA in UT2K4? DiaperJe|\|i3 General Radeon Discussion 3 May 6, 2004 12:32 PM
LCD: 1024x768 + AA vs 1280x1024 eddie CATALYST Drivers 8 Jul 9, 2003 02:18 PM
1280x1024 or 1024x768 w/ 2xaa? 8500 lmberklee General Radeon Discussion 12 Jan 31, 2003 07:14 AM
1024x768+4xAA vs 1280x1024 DekerAdrenaline General Radeon Discussion 1 Jan 25, 2002 01:29 PM
1024x768 slower than 1280x1024? Why? Night Fisher General Radeon Discussion 12 Oct 28, 2001 06:18 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:19 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners. Copyright ©1998-2011 Rage3D.com
Links monetized by VigLink