Simple, sounds like verticle sync is on, turn it off, and we all know it can get that low at the start of a race, but IMO it shouldn't, your system's a little quicker than mine, and with a full field max gfx, 4xAA and 16XAF I average 40-60 at start. Maybe you have your gfx settings even higher than mine, which would require custom hi-res skins, I dunno. Are you running an extremely high resolution? I'm running typical these days, 1680x1050.

I just bought a new monitor, and my choices were limited to exactly that, I took the 20", it looked better than the 22" at that resolution, and it was an Acer, and I really like their monitors.

I've seen far worse than this, youtube alone can keep ya laughing all day. Nothing is worse than the "worlds worst drivers" when they showed this english guy driving very slowly off the off ramp, and then he tried to turn around, and wound up driving backwards down the shoulder of the slow lane because after fifteen minutes, he couldn't find a way to turn his car around 180 degrees.

Also recently on youtube, a couple of guys are drinking and hanging out, figure they may as well have a fire, actually the fire was planned. They had about 5 gallons worth of gasoline, and some wood and crap, in one 55 gal. drum, seems a bit overkill no? Well the first few tries it wouldn't lite, gasoline is like that, when there's a huge pool of it, so a match wouldnt do it, so the guy got himself a small piece of wood, or maybe paper, not sure, got it well lit, leaned ALLLL the way down into the barrel to touch the fire to the wood/gas/god knows what else, and big surprise, it blew up like a pound of C4 right in his face!

There are very stupid people in this world, and a line drawn on a map has nothing to do with it! And Niall09, I don't like your title, could be sarcasm so I'll keep it at that.

Last edited by DHRammstein, Fri 28 Mar 2008, 08:25.

Toms hardware shows the athlon much quicker in PCMark 05... I'm not really sure, but I've always thought the Athlon's were quicker than any of the 2000 series Intel chips, price for price they seem quicker until you get into intels 6000 series, but then it's a matter of money, they're so close. Mostly I'm depending on TomsHardware CPU chart from '07. But once you pass the 6850 it's all intel no doubt.

Well.... Hmm. Ok, I have CPUZ, use it often, I'll look in there, then try googling some more, I really hope it's shared, with most apps not being multithreaded it would seem like such a waste, at least, for now.

I'm curious about something, and with this I'm clueless. I'm currently running Vista, reason I mention is well, it may make a difference since it's so dual core friendly.

Ok, simple, I'm wondering if games like LFS, or anything else that's only going to use one core, are able to use all available cache memory? For instance, my proc has 2x 1MB, but since the game uses one core, will it only use one core's cache, or is Vista, or the game, LFS for example, able to use all available cache, all 2 MB? Out of nowhere just now I became very curious as the thought came to me, really out of nowhere.

Thanks for input, I always pay it forward with my knowledge in other areas

Ah, right. Had no idea he had speed in the lane.

Last edited by DHRammstein, Tue 25 Mar 2008, 09:30.

Hmm, well I mess around with bots a lot, and run 20 lap race sometimes to test setups, tires especially, anyways, I always force a pit stop, I do this to have as much practicing pitting as possible.. Anyways, several times I tried pittin on the last lap, right before the end of the race, and I was disqualified, but it gave me a reason, said I pitted too late, so this may be entirely unrelated. Edit: I remember once it disqualified me for pitting on the second to last lap as well, and I hadn't entered for no reason, I had minor damage, even though it was a required pit I still had a reason, so I can't figure why, maybe related? Anyone?

Last edited by DHRammstein, Tue 25 Mar 2008, 08:58. Reason : Fire is hot

What impresses me most with LFS is the fact it's not finished.

Quote from mcgas001 :

Just keep waiting. In the future games like this will be very common.

I actually meant how humurous it would be if the environments were DX10 and the cars and interiors DX8... would be funny, and certainly wouldn't make any sense!

Quote from horrgakx :

Which version please? I'm trying to decide on which one to use.

If you mean the Video driver it's the 169.25 driver, nHancer is newest version also. This driver has a bug that doesn't allow the nvidia control panel to set options for LFS, but as far as I know, its' only LFS, I have nHancer istalled "only" for LFS, works exactly the same as the Nv one does, and man it's great getting the graphics absolutely maxed out in this game!

Nvidia control panel yes, but Nhancer works for me, and seems to work for many others, newest Nvidia driver here.

Heh, it is funny though. DX10 type graphics with motion blur environment, DX8 graphics interior.... Imagine how people would react if a game really looked like this!

So problem fixed?

You can beat the price if you build, and you can pick and choose all the right brands!

I use tigerdirect a lot but certain items you can't return to them if they don't work, I couldn't return a video card to them that I bought broken, had to RMA it. Odds are your stuff won't be broken tho

Yeah if you set the options in the Nvidia control panel for global, it will work, I have the same problem. I used Nhancer and it works perfectly. Nhancer is what everyone uses I think, no idea what to tell ya, maybe someone else can help ya. Wait, does anyone think that card can even handle AA?

Last edited by DHRammstein, Fri 21 Mar 2008, 03:04.

Do you have a decent video card, some come with software, with a little icon down in your system tray, if so you can simply click it, go to resolution and instantly change your resolution to anything you like. If you don't have anything like that then I dunno what else to recommend.

Flatout 2 owns all!!

This game was a huge let down for me, the physics were too far off, though I understand it's not really a simmer. And the views, none seemed quite right. Ah, and the first few cups, the tracks, in the desert type areas, were absolutely terrible.

Last edited by DHRammstein, Fri 21 Mar 2008, 02:30. Reason : grizamar

Dick Cheney's house.

I live here, and yes, I throw lan parties, but I only have 5500 rooms with 66,000 PC's setup, so it may be a squeez.

I have a question I didn't mention in my other thread, about the blur on LCD's, and was hoping someone can explain the technical details I seek. I've been wondering for some time now, why I haven't seen a computer LCD that looks as brilliant as a good HD tv, and I only ever paid attention to resolutions, nothing else. And sorry for back to back threads, I wasn't paying much attention, could have bumped the other..

So a few days ago I was shopping for a new widescreen LCD and I noticed one HP had a contrast ratio of 1000:1, and was 19" widescreen, it looked pretty nice, but there was an acer right next to it, 20" and 800:1 contrast ratio. I honestly couldn't tell the difference, no matter what I did, except that the HP had a lot of motion blur, even tho it was 5ms, so I bought the Acer. I'm very happy with it, but I still don't understand much about contrast ratio. I mean, my monitor looks crisp, very little motion blur compared to the other brands, and I love Acer (Only brand LCD I've ever bought, 4 total) so I'm happy with it, but, taking one look at my friends Vizio HD tv, it just blew my mind, how vivid and brilliant it is, and nearly the same resolution. Is it the contrast ratio that separates PC LCD's from HD TV's? And do they make LCD monitors for PC that look as good as a nice HD tv? I mean, it's incredible how much better the HD tv looked, compared to my new LCD, or any computer monitor I've ever seen...
I know a decent amount about how an LCD works, but I just don't get why the tv's look so amazing. The only thing I can think of is contrast ratio, and if so, can anyone explain the technology behind it? Thanks.

Again my bad for two threads.

Last edited by DHRammstein, Fri 14 Mar 2008, 03:46.

Quote from Stang70Fastback :

Lol, I guess the name is a bit misleading. I don't really know much at all in detail about them.

I have to say, I wouldn't mind the air intakes so much if they didn't actually LOOK so fake from up close. I hate that honeycomb insert that is so obviously solid and not mesh. You should replace them with something that actually lets the air through (or looks like it does) then I wouldn't mind. I mean - my Subaru has a non-functional air scoop on the hood, but they weren't stupid enough to put a black plastic insert right at the front to make it LOOK fake.

I hate it too, it looks so corny, but I can't decide whether I should remove it all, because it's a limited edition and would ruin the car, and believe it or not... lol, most mustang fans like it.

Anyways next year I'm converting the body style to the '03-'04 Cobra to match the drivetrain, then I'll have no choice.
If you thought those honeycomb inserts were bad, you should see the back panel, I removed it the day I bought it, but here's what it looked like;

Anyways back on topic, my friend is building a case out of an old Nintendo system, the original one! I'll post pics when it's done, should be pretty cool! I wish I had a pic of his last creation, looked as bad as the OP's image, as far as the overkill design.

Last edited by DHRammstein, Wed 12 Mar 2008, 22:32. Reason : Picture

Well, if I lower my resolution, I can go as high as 75hz, which has less ghosting, but, LCD's look their best in their native resolution, which is always the max resolution, and the monitor can't handle more than 60hz at max resolution. But I'm fairly sure it's the responce time that causes the blur. From what I've read, and I'm not sure I understood it all... It seems that, even if it's running at 60hz, which should be perfectly smooth, or very close to perfect, if the responce time is too high, not all pixels on the screen change quickly enough, enough to match the refresh rate, so while the monitor refreshes to show a new image, some of the pixels are lagging just slightly behind, leaving a blur type effect from the previous image. Ehh, wish I understoood more, or could explain better

It really confuses me, I mean, if the screen refreshes 60/ second, there should be no "ghost" image from the previous frame, so is the blur a result of the crystal leaving it's previous state and producing the new frame....? Jeez I'm not sure I understand it right at all, but this is what's going through my head

Honestly though, it's not even noticeable in LFS, driving straight most of the time doesn't show it, but if the image on the screen has to move left/right/up/down quickly, then I see the ghosting, it's like a translucent image from the previous frame. I'll see if I can take a screen shot.

Honestly though I'm very happy with the monitor, I was stuck at such a low res before, and the CRT took up way too much space, and, well naturally, the LCD is much easier on the eyes, and sharper in it's nice high res.

Edit: This is the best example I can find, it's basically just a blur, but not on certain objest, the entire image has a blur to it..


Basically, if you've ever taken a picture while not holding your camera still, you get motion blur, which is exactly my issue, would love to know if gaming LCD's exist that reduce this, or if there's a setting in some monitors to improve this.

Last edited by DHRammstein, Wed 12 Mar 2008, 06:28. Reason : Picture