Weird resolution/performance ratio w/ 9600 Pro

Pandaman · Jul 25, 2004, 06:17 AM

I tried doing a forum search to see if there was an answer to this already, but I couldn't find anything (and couldn't really figure out how to word it either ^^;) about it.

I just have this weird issue with my Crucial Radeon 9600 Pro (which I've got clocked at 440/350)-- no matter what resolution/color depth I use, my framerates are nearly identical (as in, within 1 FPS of eachother) and, well.... that just shouldn't happen. I'll use UMark to run UT2004 on the same level with the same bots with the same settings, and on 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024, and 1600x1200, it's always the same. I mean, I guess that's great on higher resolutions, but if I run something at 800x600 to play on my TV, I want it to actually run better (and not look a whole lot worse because of the way TVs display images).

A couple things:

-- VSYNC is not on
-- My framerates aren't usually like, astronomically high. Most of the time I can get about 40 FPS in UT2004 (in every resolution >_<) for example so it couldn't be limited by the refresh rate anyway.
-- I'm running Omega's drivers based on the Catalyst 4.7s.... the 2.5.58s.
-- It hasn't always done this, but it's been so long since I actually actively noticed it that I have no idea what changed between then and now.

Overall, it's not really a problem, but I just don't understand why it's doing this. O_o And I want to understand just in case it actually is something that's hampering my performance.

Full specs:
Crucial Radeon 9600 Pro w/ 128 megs of DDR RAM
Athlon XP 2000+
640 megs of PC133 RAM (yeah, yeah, it's old and slow, I know)
Soundblaster Live! Value
KT133 motherboard
Windows 2000 Pro

Any ideas?

Vampyromaniac · Jul 25, 2004, 06:34 AM

you are running a botmatch benchmark? if so, your CPU/mobo/RAM is the limiting factor most likely.
the same thing happens on my comp with botmatch benches (I have xp1800+9700pro+DDR266)

Zelig · Jul 25, 2004, 12:27 PM

Yeah, it's probably some other part of your system that's the bottleneck if that's happening. Although with many new cards, there really isn't a difference in performance between 640x480 and 800x600.

Pandaman · Jul 25, 2004, 05:22 PM

I didn't mean to make it sound as though it only happens in UT2004 -- that's just the easiest way to test it. It happens in everything. GTA: Vice City, Silent Hill 3, Deus Ex: Invisible War, Return of the King, Max Payne 2, Unreal 2....

Heck, even if I put on massive amounts of antialiasing and anisotropic filtering, it still doesn't slow down until I'm at like 6X AA + 8X AF.

And just so you know, it's the same whether I do a botmatch or not, so I don't think it's the AI that's limiting it. -_-

Pman · Jul 26, 2004, 05:55 AM

i got a 9600 pro. do u play battlefield 1942? if u do what kind of frame rate do you get? i get up to 100 and the lowest is 65

Pandaman · Jul 26, 2004, 06:16 AM

No, I don't play it. ^^; Sowwy. I just did a whole bunch of flyby tests with all of the maps in UT2004 that have flyby paths, and the only one that was more than 1 FPS different between 640x480 and 1024x768 was DM-Inferno. Still wantin' to understand this. ^^

eggs420 · Jul 26, 2004, 07:46 PM

My system isn't far in sucky-land from yours - Time for an upgrade! I've got an xp2100/768mb ddr2700/l7s7a2 which has the same low FSB (and your memory is even lower!) which is really bottlenecking the newer applications. I have been trying to squeeze any fps I can without horrible graphics from bf:v and even though I've got a 9800pro, I just can't get a steady 35+..The same as you mentioned, changing resolutions doesn't even help (much at all). Sad truth, but kiss some more cash goodbye!

Pandaman · Jul 27, 2004, 01:26 AM

Well, it just doesn't seem like a bottleneck problem since I know all about them, but uh... whatever I guess. -_-

It's not like things run slow or anything either. And as a poor, starving college student, the only place my money is going is towards food, books, tuition, and my dorm room. =P

Jul 25, 2004, 06:17 AM	#1
Pandaman HardwareHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Seattle, Washington Posts: 28 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	Weird resolution/performance ratio w/ 9600 Pro I tried doing a forum search to see if there was an answer to this already, but I couldn't find anything (and couldn't really figure out how to word it either ^^;) about it. I just have this weird issue with my Crucial Radeon 9600 Pro (which I've got clocked at 440/350)-- no matter what resolution/color depth I use, my framerates are nearly identical (as in, within 1 FPS of eachother) and, well.... that just shouldn't happen. I'll use UMark to run UT2004 on the same level with the same bots with the same settings, and on 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024, and 1600x1200, it's always the same. I mean, I guess that's great on higher resolutions, but if I run something at 800x600 to play on my TV, I want it to actually run better (and not look a whole lot worse because of the way TVs display images). A couple things: -- VSYNC is not on -- My framerates aren't usually like, astronomically high. Most of the time I can get about 40 FPS in UT2004 (in every resolution >_<) for example so it couldn't be limited by the refresh rate anyway. -- I'm running Omega's drivers based on the Catalyst 4.7s.... the 2.5.58s. -- It hasn't always done this, but it's been so long since I actually actively noticed it that I have no idea what changed between then and now. Overall, it's not really a problem, but I just don't understand why it's doing this. O_o And I want to understand just in case it actually is something that's hampering my performance. Full specs: Crucial Radeon 9600 Pro w/ 128 megs of DDR RAM Athlon XP 2000+ 640 megs of PC133 RAM (yeah, yeah, it's old and slow, I know) Soundblaster Live! Value KT133 motherboard Windows 2000 Pro Any ideas?

Jul 25, 2004, 06:34 AM	#2
Vampyromaniac confutatis maledictis Join Date: May 2002 Location: somewhere dark Posts: 5,974 Rep Power: 77 System Specs	you are running a botmatch benchmark? if so, your CPU/mobo/RAM is the limiting factor most likely. the same thing happens on my comp with botmatch benches (I have xp1800+9700pro+DDR266) __________________ *Digitalis 3.3* Athlon 64 3000 // ASUS K8V SE Deluxe // 1024MB PC3200 (2-2-2-10 1T) ATI All-In-Wonder 9700 Pro // 20" Dell 2005FPW (DVI) M-Audio Revo 7.1 + Philips Acoustic Edge // Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 320/16 Western Digital WD3200KS + 120/8 Seagate 7200.7 NEC ND-3550A 16x DVD±RW + Lite-On 52x24x CD-RW Antec Sonata case // 480W Antec TruePower personal bests \|\| Aq'3: 46796 \| 3D'01: 20461 \| 3D'03: 6336 \| 3D'05: 2677 \| PC'04: 4605 \| PC'02: 7691,9092,1250

Jul 26, 2004, 05:55 AM	#5
Pman DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 115 Rep Power: 0	i got a 9600 pro. do u play battlefield 1942? if u do what kind of frame rate do you get? i get up to 100 and the lowest is 65 __________________ [color=black]\| AMD Athlon64 3200+ ''Newcastle'' \| GigaByte GA-K8NS PRO \| Corsair CMX512-3200LL PRO \| BFG TECH 6800GT-OC (370/1000)\| Maxtor Diamond Max Plus 9 120GB \| Thermaltake Pipe101 Heatsink and Thermaltake UFO UV Blue Fan \|[/color]

Jul 26, 2004, 07:46 PM	#7
eggs420 my bud > yours Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: chicago Posts: 399 Rep Power: 0	My system isn't far in sucky-land from yours - Time for an upgrade! I've got an xp2100/768mb ddr2700/l7s7a2 which has the same low FSB (and your memory is even lower!) which is really bottlenecking the newer applications. I have been trying to squeeze any fps I can without horrible graphics from bf:v and even though I've got a 9800pro, I just can't get a steady 35+..The same as you mentioned, changing resolutions doesn't even help (much at all). Sad truth, but kiss some more cash goodbye! __________________ AMD64 2800+ // Chaintech VNF3-250 // 2X512mb PDI ddr400 2-3-2-5 // 80gb 7200RPM WD w/8mb cache // Leadtek 6800GT // 144kbit IDSL Clan -=CCC=- Admin 69.31.96.68 BF2 PUBLIC RANKED SERVER 205.218.65.236 BF2 DEMO SERVER

Jul 25, 2004, 12:27 PM	#3
Zelig HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 3,187 Rep Power: 71 System Specs	Yeah, it's probably some other part of your system that's the bottleneck if that's happening. Although with many new cards, there really isn't a difference in performance between 640x480 and 800x600.

Jul 25, 2004, 05:22 PM	Thread Starter #4
Pandaman HardwareHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Seattle, Washington Posts: 28 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	I didn't mean to make it sound as though it only happens in UT2004 -- that's just the easiest way to test it. It happens in everything. GTA: Vice City, Silent Hill 3, Deus Ex: Invisible War, Return of the King, Max Payne 2, Unreal 2.... Heck, even if I put on massive amounts of antialiasing and anisotropic filtering, it still doesn't slow down until I'm at like 6X AA + 8X AF. And just so you know, it's the same whether I do a botmatch or not, so I don't think it's the AI that's limiting it. -_-

Jul 26, 2004, 06:16 AM	Thread Starter #6
Pandaman HardwareHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Seattle, Washington Posts: 28 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	No, I don't play it. ^^; Sowwy. I just did a whole bunch of flyby tests with all of the maps in UT2004 that have flyby paths, and the only one that was more than 1 FPS different between 640x480 and 1024x768 was DM-Inferno. Still wantin' to understand this. ^^

Jul 27, 2004, 01:26 AM	Thread Starter #8
Pandaman HardwareHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Seattle, Washington Posts: 28 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	Well, it just doesn't seem like a bottleneck problem since I know all about them, but uh... whatever I guess. -_- It's not like things run slow or anything either. And as a poor, starving college student, the only place my money is going is towards food, books, tuition, and my dorm room. =P