UT2004 frames...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fabrizio Bottaro
  • Start date Start date
F

Fabrizio Bottaro

reading someones post on frames on UT2004 triggered me to write this
question...

well on onslaught im getting 35-50 frames some instances down to 10-15 if
much is going on. i know theres alot of bots and stuff but i never thought
that my sstem would have such a problem running it, im running it at full
settings (holy Shit!) 1024 res not 1280. Is there some tweaking involved or
something or rather that i must do to rectify?

my mate has slightly better system quality PC3200 ram and stuff and hes
having same issue/problem if it actually is a problem??

solutions, advice or letting me know that everything is going to be ok...
will be appriciated. system specs below.

--
Almeyda

AMD2500XP @ 3200XP 11X200 2.21Ghz (waiting for Corsair 512 XMS3700 for extra
fsb and Ram speed :) )
ThermalTake Volcano 11 Xaser Edition
ASUS-A7N8X-E Deluxe
Kingmax 2X256MB Tiny BGA PC2700 DualChannel @166mhz 5/6
HIS Excalibur 9800XT 256mb @463/399 (Omegas 2.5.51 & ATI tool 0.20 No
Artifacts)
1x80GB SATA Seagate 8mg cache
2x40GB ATA Seagate
SB AudigyES
ANTEC SuperLanboy 350 Case (350W SmartBlue PS)
ThermalTake Hardcano 10 (Modded - All bits attached to 5.25" case face
plate - way better looking)
 
Fabrizio Bottaro said:
reading someones post on frames on UT2004 triggered me to write this
question...

well on onslaught im getting 35-50 frames some instances down to 10-15 if
much is going on. i know theres alot of bots and stuff but i never thought
that my sstem would have such a problem running it, im running it at full
settings (holy Shit!)
Click to expand...
/\
|
|
There's your problem right there. Remember when you selected those settings,
cranked them up, and you got the warning messages "Warning! This will
degrade performance."?

Weren't you even curious WHY you were getting those messages?

The point of those higher settings is not only for eyecandy, but for high
end top of the line systems.

Google "unreal tournament 2004 tweak" and follow the advise.
 
/\
|
|
There's your problem right there. Remember when you selected those settings,
cranked them up, and you got the warning messages "Warning! This will
degrade performance."?

Weren't you even curious WHY you were getting those messages?

The point of those higher settings is not only for eyecandy, but for high
end top of the line systems.

Google "unreal tournament 2004 tweak" and follow the advise.
Click to expand...
Did you see hist system specs, they are pretty top of the line. Running
at XP 3200 speed with a 9800 XT should allow for highest settings.
One of his problems, only 512 Mb of RAM, need 1 Gig.
AND apparently he's running an AthlonXP nForce2 with his FSB and DRAM
asynchronous, which degrades performance. 1:1 is the only way to run
it. Your system will perform better with everything at 166 then with
the 5/6 setting. I thought those motherboards had some kind of "sync"
feature on them.


--
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

- Inigo Montoya
Steve [Inglo]
HES PORN
 
Inglo thanks for the post, i agree i undestood that my system specs should
run the game fine, i wasent aware of
the other issue about the FSB, im currently as u see in my specs runnning my
fsb @200 with 5/6 devider for ram therefore running at 166(333), cause the
ram was givin me some issues clocked with sound distortion but nothin else.
i was originally running my FSB @378 1:1 with ram and the ram clocked nicely
and i had no glitches and instability issues, untill i installed farcry and
the sound went bad, game ran fine though, so i though id leave the ram to
rest with lower speed

anyways im crappin on, does it really affect speed as it stands 5/6? all my
benchmark performances are sweet, getting what i expect...

anyways if you feel like replying please do so im interested for knowledge
sake, but hopefully this should all be solved with some sweet corsair 512
xms3700 and then another stick not long after :)

--
Almeyda

AMD2500XP @ 3200XP 11X200 2.21Ghz (waiting for Corsair 512 XMS3700 for extra
Ram & FSB speeds)
ThermalTake Volcano 11 Xaser Edition
ASUS-A7N8X-E Deluxe
Kingmax 2X256MB Tiny BGA PC2700 DualChannel @166mhz 5/6
HIS Excalibur 9800XT 256mb @463/399 (Omegas 2.5.51 & ATI tool 0.20 No
Artifacts)
1x80GB SATA Seagate 8mg cache
2x40GB ATA Seagate
SB AudigyES
ANTEC SuperLanboy 350 Case (350W SmartBlue PS)
ThermalTake Hardcano 10 (Modded - All bits attached to 5.25" case face
plate - way better looking)


Inglo said:
/\
|
|
There's your problem right there. Remember when you selected those settings,
cranked them up, and you got the warning messages "Warning! This will
degrade performance."?

Weren't you even curious WHY you were getting those messages?

The point of those higher settings is not only for eyecandy, but for high
end top of the line systems.

Google "unreal tournament 2004 tweak" and follow the advise.
Click to expand...
Did you see hist system specs, they are pretty top of the line. Running
at XP 3200 speed with a 9800 XT should allow for highest settings.
One of his problems, only 512 Mb of RAM, need 1 Gig.
AND apparently he's running an AthlonXP nForce2 with his FSB and DRAM
asynchronous, which degrades performance. 1:1 is the only way to run
it. Your system will perform better with everything at 166 then with
the 5/6 setting. I thought those motherboards had some kind of "sync"
feature on them.


--
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

- Inigo Montoya
Steve [Inglo]
HES PORN
Click to expand...
 
Inglo thanks for the post, i agree i undestood that my system specs should
run the game fine, i wasent aware of
the other issue about the FSB, im currently as u see in my specs runnning my
fsb @200 with 5/6 devider for ram therefore running at 166(333), cause the
ram was givin me some issues clocked with sound distortion but nothin else.
i was originally running my FSB @378 1:1 with ram and the ram clocked nicely
and i had no glitches and instability issues, untill i installed farcry and
the sound went bad, game ran fine though, so i though id leave the ram to
rest with lower speed

anyways im crappin on, does it really affect speed as it stands 5/6? all my
benchmark performances are sweet, getting what i expect...

anyways if you feel like replying please do so im interested for knowledge
sake, but hopefully this should all be solved with some sweet corsair 512
xms3700 and then another stick not long after :)
Click to expand...

When you run asynchronous you introduce latency between the CPU and the
RAM, I didn't mean to say this is your main problem, extra memory is the
real key. Sync or async is probably worth >5% difference in
performance. The main thing is it makes it the overclock less
worthwhile, running your CPU @ 10x200 and memory @ 166 may end up
actually giving you less overall performance than CPU@11x166 and memory
@166. Like I said, I thought I'd read somewhere something about that
ASUS board that has something to do with syncing, maybe ASUS has taken
care of the latency problem. You'd be best to ask about that in
I reiterate, running asynchronous is not causing your slowdowns in
UT2004. It's just not the ideal set-up.

I've got an MSI nForce2 board w/ XP2500+ run at 12x185=2220 MHz. I have
1 Gb dual channel Corsair PC2700 XMS memory. and a 9800 Pro.

You might want to download UMark: http://www.unrealmark.com/, run the
default UMark UT2004 test (in case you don't see it there's a long
skinny button on the right side of UMark that opens another panel, click
on preset test and Use the bottom one.) Try at different resolutions
and compare the results with your settings to those of high quality and
high performance.

Looking at my results from the Onslaught map portion of the above
benchmark, the minimum fps on ONS-Dawn (HighQ 1280x1024) when I had only
512 Mb dropped all the way down to 2 fps, with 1 Gb of memory the
minimum is 17 fps. The average and high fps aren't close to being that
different.


--
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

- Inigo Montoya
Steve [Inglo]
HES PORN
 
thanks for the post inglo! ill look into it...

--
Almeyda

AMD2500XP @ 3200XP 11X200 2.21Ghz (waiting for Corsair 512 XMS3700 for xtra
Ram speed & Possible xtra FSB )
ThermalTake Volcano 11 Xaser Edition
ASUS-A7N8X-E Deluxe
Kingmax 2X256MB Tiny BGA PC2700 DualChannel @166mhz 5/6
HIS Excalibur 9800XT 256mb @463/399 (Omegas 2.5.51 & ATI tool 0.20 No
Artifacts)
1x80GB SATA Seagate 8mg cache
2x40GB ATA Seagate
SB AudigyES
ANTEC SuperLanboy 350 Case (350W SmartBlue PS)
ThermalTake Hardcano 10 (Modded - All bits attached to 5.25" case face
plate - way better looking)


Inglo said:
Inglo thanks for the post, i agree i undestood that my system specs should
run the game fine, i wasent aware of
the other issue about the FSB, im currently as u see in my specs runnning my
fsb @200 with 5/6 devider for ram therefore running at 166(333), cause the
ram was givin me some issues clocked with sound distortion but nothin else.
i was originally running my FSB @378 1:1 with ram and the ram clocked nicely
and i had no glitches and instability issues, untill i installed farcry and
the sound went bad, game ran fine though, so i though id leave the ram to
rest with lower speed

anyways im crappin on, does it really affect speed as it stands 5/6? all my
benchmark performances are sweet, getting what i expect...

anyways if you feel like replying please do so im interested for knowledge
sake, but hopefully this should all be solved with some sweet corsair 512
xms3700 and then another stick not long after :)
Click to expand...

When you run asynchronous you introduce latency between the CPU and the
RAM, I didn't mean to say this is your main problem, extra memory is the
real key. Sync or async is probably worth >5% difference in
performance. The main thing is it makes it the overclock less
worthwhile, running your CPU @ 10x200 and memory @ 166 may end up
actually giving you less overall performance than CPU@11x166 and memory
@166. Like I said, I thought I'd read somewhere something about that
ASUS board that has something to do with syncing, maybe ASUS has taken
care of the latency problem. You'd be best to ask about that in
I reiterate, running asynchronous is not causing your slowdowns in
UT2004. It's just not the ideal set-up.

I've got an MSI nForce2 board w/ XP2500+ run at 12x185=2220 MHz. I have
1 Gb dual channel Corsair PC2700 XMS memory. and a 9800 Pro.

You might want to download UMark: http://www.unrealmark.com/, run the
default UMark UT2004 test (in case you don't see it there's a long
skinny button on the right side of UMark that opens another panel, click
on preset test and Use the bottom one.) Try at different resolutions
and compare the results with your settings to those of high quality and
high performance.

Looking at my results from the Onslaught map portion of the above
benchmark, the minimum fps on ONS-Dawn (HighQ 1280x1024) when I had only
512 Mb dropped all the way down to 2 fps, with 1 Gb of memory the
minimum is 17 fps. The average and high fps aren't close to being that
different.


--
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

- Inigo Montoya
Steve [Inglo]
HES PORN
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top