Edit: Haha oops I was looking at the wrong page

Any word on if the new Cat will fix this problem? The latest one doesnt have it in the know issues section

Plus Omega Drivers are no different for me :/

Quote from iNfa-ReD :

Edit: Haha oops I was looking at the wrong page

Any word on if the new Cat will fix this problem? The latest one doesnt have it in the know issues section

Plus Omega Drivers are no different for me :/

Anybody try these (not sure on the revs of these): http://download.hightech.com.h ... 4-051211a-028709C-ATI.zip

I know that the X1900 drivers we put out for x64 do fix the problem. Otherwise, it will be Cat 6.2

Quote from sireric :

Anybody try these (not sure on the revs of these): http://download.hightech.com.h ... 4-051211a-028709C-ATI.zip

I am getting an Inf error "no video driver found" when installing in xp pro

are these the CD drivers for the 1900?

I will continue trying to install its probably me

SD

I had the problem where 5.12 and 5.13 generally didn't perform as well as the latest 6.1, big performance loss. Updating to 6.1 helps quite a lot.

Does the latest 6.1 driver from ATI fix this problem?

Quote from cohagen :

Does the latest 6.1 driver from ATI fix this problem?

no, aparently 6.2 will, but that will be out soon

Anyone try these > http://www.nordichardware.com/news,2979.html

Dan,

I have 6.1 and no problems ...

6.2 cat is out !

SD.

Quote from SparkyDave :

6.2 cat is out !

SD.

Yep. It should fix the issue. Let me know if there's a problem.

Currently I am not in front of my "big" computer, so I can't test if the game runs smooth now, but I can see no reference at all to the game problem in the release notes. Let's hope they missed up typing it... If anyone tests it please tell

just tested on my dual core pc all is fine so far ,better than 5.11 by a few fps .

Thanks ATI and sireric

SD.

hmm, live for speed isnt mentioned in the release notes!

Quote from SparkyDave :

6.2 cat is out !

SD.

WOOHOO just intime for mondays ERCC race

Yeah, worrying that, no mention of LFS in the release notes, only a few hours till home time, so I'll find out for sure soon.

edit: can confirm LFS is now back to its former glory

Dan,

Quote from danowat :

edit: can confirm LFS is now back to its former glory

Dan,

I can confirm it too, everything is fine now. Live for Speed isn't listed in the resolved bug of the Cat 6.2 but the problem is solved.

even tho ima nV user, mad props to sireric and Scawen for working with each other to sort out the issues.. tis wha a game should have, heaps of support from the devs and manufactures.. dunno how many games have turned arse end up cause of lack of dev support cause distributers bailed out for support..

hmmmmm, use the Omegas my self, they on 6.2 yet?

EDIT:Obviously not!

Quote from Doorman :

X800XT 256mb memory 5.12 and 5.13 of any description, any configuration, AA-AF on or off, 10-15fps
I've also got another machine with a 9700pro and get the same problem.

Try the omega drivers for ATI based cards. I have the x800xt same as you,and I was getting like 30fps no matter what the setting. Now that I downloading the OMEGA Drivers it runs at 120fps or greater.

You guys, check this out:


Thats my graphic settings, set pretty low you see (Catalyst 6.2)


Thats an ingame screenshot. I can live with that graphic, but take a look at my FPS. It's totally unplayable

What do i have to do?

My computer:
3 GHz P4 Prescott HT
2x 256mb DDR, dualchannel
128 megs radeon 9250 (The tv-out on my XT/TD 9600 went out of order, when i moved my computer - cant get any signal - so bought a 9250)
60gigs something hdd
Onboard sound, lan, etc.

It really can't be true that it runs so low framerates - it's not that bad a computer! Help me - i'm desperate!

Oh, and i probably should tell, that with the 9600 xt/td - at same settings, it does not get over 25 FPS. I have shortly seen 30, but that where when i held still, and looked into a wall!

Quote from neRu :

It really can't be true that it runs so low framerates - it's not that bad a computer! Help me - i'm desperate!

Well, you are running 1280x1024 with 2X AA and AF on a Radeon 9250. That is a seriously low-end card. Try checking the "Let application decide" boxes in the Catalyst Control Center, and try lowering your resolution. 1024x768 og 800x600 or something.

With my Radeon 9600 I get about 40-60 FPS, with full details and 2x AA and AF, so there's probably something wrong with your settings. Check if Hardware Vertex Shading is enabled in the LFS graphic options.

Quote from GP4Flo :

With my Radeon 9600 I get about 40-60 FPS, with full details and 2x AA and AF, so there's probably something wrong with your settings. Check if Hardware Vertex Shading is enabled in the LFS graphic options.

yep, i get the same FPS as you on those settings on my 9600 XT (256 mb edition tho)

neRU, I just bought a new PC, AMD 64 3500 but it only has onboard gfx (ati chip with 256 mb shared). I have a 9250 (256 mb)as well from the old PC and tossed it in just to test and got the same results. The 9250 is a very old and outdated card. My onboard was better due to faster system ram than the card ram.

A note: My 9250 is almost brand new as well. I had just bought it for the old system as it was the best card I could do in it and it WAS better than the 8 mb onboard. But it is such a slow card, that current onboard gfx offerings are better.

Quote from GP4Flo :

With my Radeon 9600 I get about 40-60 FPS, with full details and 2x AA and AF, so there's probably something wrong with your settings.

But the 9250 is a completely different animal though. The 9600 was middle to high end when it was launched, but the 9250 was low-end... three generations ago. I wouldn't expect that card to deliver playable framerates with AA and AF enabled. Especially not in that resolution. I mean, LFS itself costs more than that card right now.