Image Quality vs. Performance

[Jimstep]

This was the very essense of the debate back when 3dfx was king of the graphics cards. 3dfx had a very fast, 16-bit color graphics card and no one else could touch it. nVidia came along with 32bit color. The nVidia image was better for applications and games that used it, but the performance was not up to where 3dfx was running.

Oh, how things change over time. I still have my VooDoo cards and run them on my slower pc's.

For my nVidia cards, I run them will all options set to the max. I want to drive the graphics as fast as it will go with the best image settings. Image quality is first.

[JuNacy]

I'm a graphics-whore....another vote for image quality...

[doubleclick]

Ok, all power to quality...

...but only as long as the FPS are kept above 30, more or less.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the human eye sees any sequence of fix images as continuous, as long as the FPS are kept over 24, more or less. So 30 Hz is a good margin.

I remind this to all those perfomance freaks, who just can't get enough FPS. Any perfomance increase above 30 FPS CAN'T BE SEEN!!!

Me personally am glad to reduce my resolution to 640*480 @ 16 bit when playing RTCW Multiplayer, I just hate it when my FPS drop down to 10!!! :p (Need a new system sometime soon :rolleyes: )

[Jimstep]

I received a 3DMark2001SE score of 1562 with a G4Ti4200 overclocked to 300/550.

Settings for maximum eye candy:

screen resolution : 1600x1200 at 32bit color
AntiAliasing : 4 samples
Triple buffering
DXT1 Compression (what ever that is?)
D3D Pure Hardware T&L

[doubleclick]

:eek:

geeze....

[Aarmenaa]

I just push the quality as high as I can. When it starts getting choppy, or can't respond fast enough to my inputs, I leave it where it is. The best compromise! :t :t :t :t :t

-Aarmenmaa

[AllGamer]

... infinite dimensions - infinite possibilities ...

:D hehehehe.....

well add another vote to the GRAPHIX QUALITY team.

like mr. DoubleClick, dude here, i always go full power to MAX every GRAPHIC QUALITY to the TOP, as long as it doesn't go below 30 or so FPS

reason why i still keep my 3DFX Vodoo2, for my older systems.

and i rate the ATI A-I-W RADEON 8500 DV, over any nVidia G3 TI 500.

nVidia has always focused only on FPS, and their VIDEO quality has always been CHEAP!!!, is not bad, or poor, but is just a ok type of good enough Quality when running in fast.

and if you set it to use Quality video, the games are just hella bad and slow.
Choppy!, even at higher FPS !!!

BUT with ATI AIW RADEON 8500, at MAXIMUM QUALITY with their own new techno whatever engine, everything is AMAZINGLY real and FAST.

yet NOTHING, compares to the 3D IMAGE QUALITY level of any 3DFX cards.

Yes i rater my 3DFX VODOO2, over my ATI AIW 8500 RADEON DV, and SPECIALLY over any nVidia 3G TI 500

I JUST CAN'T BELIEVE WHY nVidia having ownership of all rights to the 3DFX stuff, HAVE NOT RELEASE A NEW CHIPSET that takes advantage of all the good stuff from 3DFX with their own stuff.

HOW F$*&# STUPID OF THEM.

Here is my system spec

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 x Abit KR7A-133
1 x AMD Athlon XP 2000+
4 x 512Mb DDR = 2048 Mb, or 2 Gig
4 x Maxtor 160 Gig HDD (udma 133)
1 x Plextor 40/20/40 (udma 33)
1 x Creative 8x PC-DVD (udma)
1 x Sound Blaster Audigy (pci)
1 x Generic Rockwell v.90 PCI modem (pci)
1 x 3com EtherFast 10/100 (pci)
1 x ATI All-in-Wonder 8500 DV 64Mb (agp)
1 x ATI Remote Wonder (usb)
1 x Logitech Cordless Freedom Optical (PS/2)
1 x Logitech Z-560 (audio out)
1 x Optiquest Q90 (vga)
1 x Logitech QuickCam 510 (usb)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
... Live Long and Prosper! ... \\||||//

:t