Hello,
i bought Galaxy GTS250 ddr3 512m and my fps is around 50/60~ with more cars in multiplayer the fps drops to 22~
my old video card was Galaxy 9500 ddr3 512m and the fps is the same with the new one.. why is that? is not overheating and that stuff

CPU-bottlenecked ?

What he said. LFS is highly CPU dependent, so it's no surprise that doing anything but upgrading the CPU yields no improvement.

my cpu is intel 6.0

There is no such CPU as an "Intel 6.0". Try again.

There are no 6.0GHz CPU's aswell.

But there is, on overclocked base.

Quote from hazaky :

But there is, on overclocked base.

If he would be leet enough to overclock his CPU to 6.0GHz, he wouldn't ask that stupid question here.

I'm guessing this guy's not a big overclocker considering his bewilderment with his upgrade.

I'm also guessing he's referring to a Pentium 4 6xx series (631, 641, 651, 661), based on the Cedar Mill core. He may also be referring to a Pentium or Core 2 E6xxx series.

Its 3.0 dual core that makes 6.0

Hah, if only!

Apparently you don't know how CPUs work all too well, so you should probably refrain from such assumptions

As of now LFS is not a multithreaded / multi-core-optimized application, so it will always only use one CPU core. In your case LFS was CPU limited before your GFX card upgrade and still is now, hence no fps improvement.

We need a facepalm smiley.

Actually, we have one :doh:

:doh:

Doh. I missed that one. Danke.

Quote from BOSCHO :

Its 3.0 dual core that makes 6.0

:doh:

Quote from BOSCHO :

Its 3.0 dual core that makes 6.0

You are up there with the "I use Mozilla Firefox Antivirus" guy I met the other day.

Quote from AndroidXP :

Hah, if only!

Apparently you don't know how CPUs work all too well, so you should probably refrain from such assumptions

As of now LFS is not a multithreaded / multi-core-optimized application, so it will always only use one CPU core. In your case LFS was CPU limited before your GFX card upgrade and still is now, hence no fps improvement.

It should also be noted that even if LFS were multicore-optimzied, the CPU itself still runs at 3.0 GHz (or whatever the clock speed is). The only difference would be the usage of both cores instead of just one.

Quote from BOSCHO :

Its 3.0 dual core that makes 6.0

It's this same flawed logic that lets memory manufacturers advertise silly clock rates. In theory there is twice the computing power available but you'll never get double the performance even with a highly parallel piece of software (which LFS isn't, btw).

If its Pentium 4 then I would be no suprised but if its Exxx series then it should not run so slowly. Dont you have your FPS locked in LFS?

You mean my 500 JiggaHertz memory only runs at 200 Hertz? It just has a Hendeca Data Rate?

Quote from DEVIL 007 :

If its Pentium 4 then I would be no suprised but if its Exxx series then it should not run so slowly. Dont you have your FPS locked in LFS?

I doubt it's anything more recent than a Pentium D 3.0.

my lfs had hi-res textures and the fps was little
installed a fresh copy of lfs and i have now 160 fps +/-
btw: i do not understand how the processors work

Quote from BOSCHO :

btw: i do not understand how the processors work

We know.

YiYeah, I have 6,2ghz mawfakers. and 2gb dual channel memory makes it 4gb!

I'm guessing he means 6.0 in the Windows Vista / 7 performance rating...

3.0 ... Core 2 Duo E8400 ?

Quote from Takumi_lfs :

YiYeah, I have 6,2ghz mawfakers. and 2gb dual channel memory makes it 4gb!

Guys with triple-channel 6GB have really long e-penises now