Quote from anik360 :

It All depends. Some Gpu's are better at calculating on certain aspects better. As far as I am concerned Synthetic tests don't really keep consistency but in better softwares such as 3d mark vantage and 06 things are a bit more accurate. Sandra is more of a second rate solution. In real world graphics tests the 4870x2 should beat 260gtx and dance around it. Hope that cleared your questions....

well yeah it cleared it to some degree.. still cant understand how they (those at sisoft) can get it SO wrong. i mean, anybody should be able to get a test between a gtx260 and a 4870x2 right :S

oh well.. like u said, might just be the way synthetic tests are..

Hi, i was just gonna ask someone out there in the big world if the software Sandra is pro-Nvidia?

if u look at the benchmarking pictures i attached then i win over a 4870x2 with my gtx260 :S

dont think thats possible...

Quote from Jakg :

...Impulse buy...

yeah same here, just ordered a RAZER LACHESIS BANSHEE BLUE..

Tried the new patch and the new shadow thingie.. didnt notice any difference in shadows nor fps.. dunno what that means tho

Quote from george_tsiros :

what's with you, shadow, bose? is it because he's a demoer?

whats with u? cs 1.6 is a crap game which runs on a p3 450MHz.. flight sim does also work on a low-spec rig.

crysis might get a little choppyness :P

Just got my new card, its a Geforce GTX260/216 896MB.
Did make my computer alot faster in games

Stuff in ITALIC is new.

Processor: intel core2duo e8500 @ 3.59ghz
Cooling: COOLERMASTER V8
Videocard: XFX GEFORCE GTX 260 896MB GDDR3 PCI-E DVI MULTI CORE
Cooling: STOCK
Memory: CORSAIR 4GB DDR2 XMS2 PC6400 (2X2GB)
HDD: 1x160GB 1x 320GB & 1x 1TB
Motherboard: ASUS P5QL PRO P43 775 ATX
PSU: COOLER MASTER REAL POWER MODULAR 520W
Speakers: crosswood 5.1 system
Soundcard: alc889a 7.1-channel
Monitor: Benq G2200W
OS: Windows 7 7100 32bit
Wheel: Logitech G25
Keyboard/mouse: logitech gaming g15 / microsoft laser mouse 6000

Quote from morpha :

It's to determine if the problem is limited to LFS or occurs with other games too

I meant the downloading of a game (that i for one have never heard of), when most people already would have more then LFS on their comp..

Quote from Shadowww :

Try downloading Nexuiz, it's free and very good fps game with pretty decent (better than CS: Source) graphics.

What does that help his crashing of LFS.exe?

Quote from Crommi :

Microsoft does not make drivers, it simply distributes them via Windows Update. They're just signed by Microsoft after passing WHQL test and do not usually include anything extra, just the device driver.

In this case, they're drivers that Nvidia has submitted for Microsoft and have passed WHQL tests which are required for product to be eligible for "Certified for Windows" certificate which you can most likely see clearly advertised on the front of your graphics card's retailbox.

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/winlogo/default.mspx

does anybody listen to me? no i dont think so.. EVEN IN XP i HAVE NEVER had to download new drivers just to use a res HIGHER than 1024x768 <-- thats what we were talking about at the start..

i dont give a crap about windows update, as i didnt use it before i posted that screen, so in that case win7 already HAS the appropriate drivers ON DISC.. so no need to download drivers for the card.. thats what i said..

EDIT: what drivers do Windows install during a reinstall? as i said that i already had drivers + 3d-acceleration after the reinstallation of my comp..

Quote from Shadowww :

No, you did not. Look at DLL names.

strange.. cause i dont have internet while installing... so thats odd.. in that case the drivers are already 3d-accelerator-ready from the cd/dvd then

Quote from Shadowww :

Uh, Seven automatically downloaded drivers for you.

strange.. i had ms' drivers as u saw if u looked at the attachment..

Quote from Shadowww :

If you don't give a damn about drivers for the gfx, I wonder how you get over 2 fps.

Vista and Seven can download gfx drivers automatically, but you need internet connection for it. Try installing and booting up your vista or seven without internet, and you will see how "fine" 3D-acceleration works. You will want to make it into free-fall acceleration

really? okey.. wait a sec.. will update this post in a sec

EDIT: i just checked DXDIAG (im on 7 for the record), and it says it uses MICROSOFT drivers, that is the ones that windows comes with. And they suck at everything. Will try LFS and see what fps i get..

EDIT2: Just played some LFS, and get over 200fps as it aint limited right now.. so i dont see the problem? and i also use 1680x1050...?

And as i said, i havent installed the Nvidia-drivers yet..

Last edited by Feffe85, Sat, 4 Jul 2009 11:48.

Quote from WSR :

You must be referring to Vista, as XP limits the resolution with the standard VGA drivers.

no it doesnt? i have NEVER had that problem as i said.. and no not Vista, i never use that shit..

Quote from ACCAkut :

snip

omg.. "all the children"-stories are as fun in german as in swedish :P

OT: http://starlounge.msn.se/index.cfm?objectid=57030

Quote from mcgas001 :

And I dunno if its possible, but making it control WMP/iTunes or whatever when its running in the background rather than making it do it itself.

i think he means a way to control WMP from in-game instead of having the LFS WMP using the playlist... i think :P

EDIT: OMFG! just noticed... DAMN THAT POST WAS OLD! :P

Quote from [DUcK] :

Ah okay. I just can't see the difference between letting the engine slow down in the gear you were just in, or dropping a few gears and revving its head off if fuel injection cuts the fuel flow
I mean you're off the throttle and on the brake in both cases. The only difference is a few thousand rpm. I just can't see how it saves fuel while the engines working harder

Edit: Don't reply; I know how it works now

oh so sry for the reply :P

so what have we learned in the thread? does it make u faster or not?

Quote from Shadowww :

You will boot fine without drivers, only that it will be 1024x768 with no 3D support until you get drivers. So you don't need to pre-install them.

sry bumping this old thread but; seriously? what computer have you used dude? if i re-install windows, dont give a damn about the drivers for the gfx and start a game or anything, i can ALWAYS select higher than 1024x768.. i always set my screen to 1680x1050 the first time i boot it up after reinstall..

Quote from DragonCommando :

As far as the "smile" shaped EQ, most people who don't know will set it like that anyway, and it does have a positive effect in some cases, such as on lower end sound systems. It won't beat a properly set EQ, but if you are not interested in spending the time it can add a little punch to an otherwise dull sound system.

I've used it a few times myself while working with lower end equipment, on garbage speakers that have no hope on earth of ever being equalized properly.

i finaly got my ass out of the wagon and got me a "microsystem" with built-in soundcard.. so now i have no need for the eq, as the micro-amp has it :P

about that smile-shaped eq: yes ur right, most of my friend tend to set it like that, and i always turn it into a sad smiley just to show them what i think about their setup oh well..

Quote from bmwe30m3 :

Any why did you have to make 3 posts in 11 minutes?

hoping for someone to care?

well im interested in the g27, IF, they make one. And if its better then the g25.. if not then im sticking with what i have..

Quote from LFSn00b :

Actually, I do think people hear it the same way, they just think differently about it. Basically it all comes to matter of taste where one people likes rock and the other one drum and bass.


BTW: my EQ here->

yes well in that case shouldnt all eq's be the same? or why would we need a eq in the first place if the only difference is in our choice of music style?

Quote from DragonCommando :

That would just drive me nuts.

which? the cutting or the low-bass? well yes, it aint the optimal, but i have no money for a better soundcard right now, so i have to make "the best" of it.. :/

Quote from hazaky :

Well yea, with my old PC i had the same program and i had to crank up my 100Hz too so it could even affect the bassline - but when i first looked at it then i was "WTF"

Yes, and that is because the chip on these boards sucks :P

Quote from hazaky :

So u hear "uuh" and i hear "aah" ???

No not really, but its BASICALY the same thing as two people dont SEE the same way.. the eyes and ears of two people arent exactly the same..
so people respond to freq's in different ways, and what someone says is "bass-less" someone else might think has too much bass..

Quote from DragonCommando :

I said basicaly, NOT exactly. I was trying to state that it shoulden't look like a bowl shape unless you are lazy or don't realy care that much.

Of course it will look different for everyone. But why do you have your 200hz completely cut? That removes all of your upper bass range.

In general, EVERY system will benefit from an EQ, regardless of what media you play. As I stated, the EQ is not to make one particular type of music sound good, it should be set to flaten any frequency deviances caused by different equipment and the listening environment. I've said that at least twice in this thread already.

Unless you have some type of RTA spectrum analyzer or simmilar equipment you are going to have to set your EQ by ear, and it's perfectly possible to do so, provided you know what you are doing and know what to listen for.

why? because my onboard soundchip sucks, and i rather have some low freq bass, instead of the cutting i get when having the 200Hz @ or below 0dB..

Last edited by Feffe85, Thu, 2 Jul 2009 06:33.

Quote from DragonCommando :

...this is what an equalizer tuned by ear should basicaly look like...

Excuse me? "this how it SHOULD look like"? EVERYBODY has different tastes in sound, two humans dont hear the sound the same way :/

so you really cant tell people "this is how it should look like"..

attached a pict of my EQ.

Quote from Bob Smith :

Reminds me of Xe-NONE. Only I nearly like them.

i kinda liked the song that the thread once revolved around... but it wasnt the start or the end on the song.. something there in between was pretty good tbh.. but yeah.. the song sucked for the most