Quote from (FIN)Eza :

[email protected] + oc'ed 9800GX2 gave average ~62fps in benchmark and when cpu was running 3.6ghz, fps jumps between 30-60 in game.
With E8600 minimum fps was around 20 and that's only difference comparing to quad. Just average fps was 5-10 lower.

I play with:
1920x1080
texture detail: medium
render quality: highest
view distance: 40
detail distance: 100
vehicle density: 100
shadow density: 16

Still, I'm stuck at the fact that vista64 is that much slower. If I'm correct, which I am I guess Haven't really noticed this level of slowdown in other games tho.

Quote from (FIN)Eza :

I let vari know on irc

Thanks!
Avg fps in that bench for i7 is about the same as C2D, clock-for-clock. Min fps seem even a bit worse. I couldn't take down the 2nd guy even though I OCed it to the point where it was stable to run the benchmark, but something like prime would probably bring it down easily, not to mention that temps would be very hot... I blame Vista too

Maybe its time to get testing Windows 7, Microsoft are handing out keys like toffee at the moment.

Quote from Gener_AL (UK) :

Maybe its time to get testing Windows 7, Microsoft are handing out keys like toffee at the moment.

On it.

32xAA?! R U SERIOUS?!?:?!??!?!

/me goes to nearest shop to buy 8800GTS, as mine current allows only 8x.

Shadowww read a little closer, you will find that the card is an emulated 8800GTS (GX2 is basically 2x8800) I dont think regular GF8800 seris are capable afaik its limit is 16.

Quote from Shadowww :

32xAA?! R U SERIOUS?!?:?!??!?!

/me goes to nearest shop to buy 8800GTS, as mine current allows only 8x.

Quote from Gener_AL (UK) :

Shadowww read a little closer, you will find that the card is an emulated 8800GTS (GX2 is basically 2x8800) I dont think regular GF8800 seris are capable afaik its limit is 16.

Yep, 32x is only because of SLI. Single card can do 16x, two card's SLI does 32x and quad SLI can do up to 64x AA


EDIT: autopilot, what mhz you can get outta i7? And what cooling, mobo, ram?

Quote from (FIN)Eza :

quad SLI can do up to 64x AA

* Shadowww will kill for quad SLI setup.

Quote from (FIN)Eza :

EDIT: autopilot, what mhz you can get outta i7? And what cooling, mobo, ram?

I've been running it at 3.60 GHz for normal use, but I may dial it down a bit, as I don't need that much for anything. Although 3.6 is fairly conservative regarding the voltages/temps, 3.8 wouldn't be a problem if I wanted it. I can run benchmarks at 4.0, but it needs ~1.37V+ and the temps are high for air cooling.
The components are in "Post your LFS Rig" thread.

One more thing i forgot that can really improve performance is 16bit texture/rendering. (and for some reason i prefer it)

Quote from Gener_AL (UK) :

One more thing i forgot that can really improve performance is 16bit texture/rendering. (and for some reason i prefer it)

Yup if you have pc from 1972

Or if you have Phenom... Just kidding.

This reminds me: I just checked again, and that bench site still doesn't have i7s in the list, it's been like 4 months now :P. There's no webmaster email there, does someone know his lfs username so I could drop him a message?

Quote from AutoPilot :

This reminds me: I just checked again, and that bench site still doesn't have i7s in the list, it's been like 4 months now :P. There's no webmaster email there, does someone know his lfs username so I could drop him a message?

vari is one of the admins. I actually dropped msg him on irc when you asked that first time, but guess he didn't see it or something

Good information.

Q:
Looking at these diff. RAM amounts testing I´m interested in what influence more ram would have on different 64-bit systems on LFS?

Taken out of this article:

..that power users will greatly get extra performance with the use of more than four gigabytes of memory. Just you remember that it requires a Windows 64-bit version to take advantage of the memory.

Sorry guys, can you help me? I'm looking for a new pc to run lfs on a 1920xYYYYpix has I got a new LCD screen but i'm not confortable with hardware issues, is one of those capable to run LFS with nice FPS on that screen resolution? What is the best choice?

AQUAPC CORE GAMER 300 i7 920 GTX 260 3GB TC
- Corsair VX550
- Asus P6T SE
- Intel CORE i7 920 2.66Ghz
- Cooler Freezer 7 pro
- Graphic NVIDIA GTX 260 896MB GDDR3
- 3GB DDR3-1333 Tri Channel
- HD 500GB sata2 16MB cache

AQUAPC QUAD-CORE OC GAMER Q8200 NVIDIA GTS250 4GB
- Corsair CX400
- Asus P5Q PRO
- Intel Quad core Q8200 2.33Ghz @ 2.8Ghz
- Cooler Artic Freezer 7 pro
- Graphic EVGA GTS 250 512MB
- 4GB ddr2 a 1000Mhz
- HD 500GB sata2 16MB cache

AQUAPC DUAL-CORE OC GAMER PC GUIA TESTE NATAL
- Corsair 550VX
- Asus P5Q-E
- Intel Core2 e8500 @ 3.6Ghz
- Cooler Artic Freezer 7 pro
- Graphic Evga GTX 260 216 core 896MB
- 4GB ddr2-1000
- HD 2x 320GB Raid0 (640GB)

Way too good for LFS. Put your prizes on the three machines, then I´d pick on.

Quote from Shadowww :

* Shadowww will kill for quad SLI setup.

Wouldn't even be noticeable, hell.. i don't even see the difference between 8x and 16x. Or maybe that's just me..

I'd take the last of your three compilations, I think LFS can't really benefit from multicore CPUs now, so the one with the highest per core speed.

Why would you need the hard drives in Raid0? Leave both drives seperated, and in case of failure the other one is uneffected.

I also want to play GTR2, not only lfs, but my biggest concern is the screen resolution I want to use...isn't it a bit on the "high demanding" side?

Also, the screen supports HD, can i benefit from it when using a pc or HD is only valid with tv signals and DVD/PS3?

(those setups were pre-made by the store, I think they can make some changes since I don't intend to use raid0 )

Quote from WhiteTiger08 :

I also want to play GTR2, not only lfs, but my biggest concern is the screen resolution I want to use...isn't it a bit on the "high demanding" side?

Also, the screen supports HD, can i benefit from it when using a pc or HD is only valid with tv signals and DVD/PS3?

(those setups were pre-made by the store, I think they can make some changes since I don't intend to use raid0 )

i self would have gone with the first choice. its atleast a little futureproof, and if u change ur mind about what games to play, u will be able to do it, without spending a fortune

sry to bump an older thread. but how much do one of you guy suppose a rig with all that stuff costs? *ima complete DURRRR about computers*

$600

Quote from Exile R :

sry to bump an older thread. but how much do one of you guy suppose a rig with all that stuff costs? *ima complete DURRRR about computers*

Asus rampage - $270 usd
Q9650 - $320 usd
4gb corsair ddr2 - $87 usd
4870 - $135 usd
TRUE - ~55 USD (+sandpaper for lapping )
Windows XP Pro - $140 usd
case + power supply - ~120 usd

~1127 USD.

Of course you can get a cheaper processor, motherboard, and ram (decent 4gb can go for $35 on newegg)

time to start saving up

thanks bro!