What is your resoultion to play this game?

[eddienghs]

Hi all,

I found that this game is quite strange because it seems almost impossible to use a maximum details at 1027x768x32 resolution. Let me tell you my system config first:

Intel Pentium 4 2.4GHz
Samsung 512MB DDR333 (PC2700) Ram
Segate 60GB ATA100/7200rpm Hard Disk
nVidia GeForece4 Ti4200 w/ 64MB DDR


With the above config, I cannot run 1024x768x32 with maximum details smoothly. I have checked with my friend who is using Ti4200 w/ 128MB DDR and he got the same problem. Actually I just was using nVidia GeForce2 MX before and it seems not big difference it and GeForce4 Ti4200 in this game (since I can run 1024x768x16 at medium details before) but according to the figure from nVidia this two display cards should have a great difference.

Does anyone know why? Is there any settings ened to be tweaked in order to run the game smoothly at 1024x768x32 at maximum details? By the way, is there anyone can run at the above resolution smoothly?

Thanks for your information.

[cocobee]

1600x1200x16

i could play 1600x1200x32 but I think it looks better on 16? weird, the colors look vivid and brighter.

i'm on
amd 1800 xp2100
512 ddr
geforce 4 ti 4600


i'm loving it, can't wait till direct x 9 to come out!

[eddienghs]

So I have got a question here. GeForce4 Ti series 4200/4400/4600 are from the same chipset NV25, I suppose the figure on nVidia web site is accurate, i.e. 4200 slower than 4600 by 25%.

So if you can run at 1600x1200 smoothly, why I can't run at 1024x768?


P.S. I am meaning on maximum details, are you?

[cocobee]

YUP everything is MAXED OUT!

i don't know why--but I'm using the 40.72 drivers

I can send you some screens if you want 8)

BTW--playing Madden in 1600x1200x32 also, and with the new patch that came out a month ago--it looks really good--shiny helmets

[-lac- the goods]

1.6A o/ced to 2.56 160 fsb which = DDR 400, GF3 Ti-200 o/ced I can run

1280X960 maxed out with fps @ around 35 average. I am running a stick

of PC2700 Micron ram overclocked to PC3200. BTW I hit around 10,200

on the 3dmark.

[eddienghs]

My 2.4G is also overclocked from 1.6GA at 150FSB and I have around 10500 in 3DMark2001 SE with 1024x768x32 @ 85Hz

I really have no idea why I cannot run smooth with 1024x768x32 with maximum details in the game with over 10000 3DMark


By the way, how to see the fps in game?
Thanks!!

[-lac- the goods]

What drivers are you running? I use fraps but you can use your console too. I am running 40.72 btw I don't have anything else running when I am in the game. That includes startup items. I only have like 5 things in my startup menu and I disable all of them before I play. I also have live installed on a different patition from Windows (increases performance.)

[eddienghs]

I am also using 40.72 (the latest released WHQL driver from nVidia). I haven't run anything when I run the game. I have nothing in the startup menu. I also installed NBA Live 2003 into another partition. I am using Windows XP with SP1

By the way, could you please kindly advise how to see fps in console?

[-lac- the goods]

Here you go...

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~nbalive/ph ... .php?t=607


BTW what do you mean by smooth? Do you get laggy points when you are playing all the time? I get about 3 seconds of lag right when the game begins but after that its all smooth sailing! After the CD stops spinning its all good.

[eddienghs]

Yeah, by smooth, I mean after the game started (finished loading) its all smooth sailing.

But I found that is not smooth as well during the game started...

[eddienghs]

Hi -lac- the goods,

I have tried to see from console that I have an average about 20-25 fps at 1024x768x16 with maximum details. Is there any options need to be tweaked? I found that in the game menu, the is an option called "V-SYN", it should be "ON" or "OFF"?

And there is another option just under "V-SYN", it should be on or off?

Thanks!

[cocobee]

lac- the goods,
i too get about 3 seconds of lag, actually i get it right after the jump ball--and right when the 3rd quarter begins--but nothing big--but 99.4% of the game runs buttery smooth.

I wish nvdia would come out with another driver soon or direct x 9 comes out, I'm sure that'll cure the 6 seconds of lag I get

do you play with vsync, triple buffer and anti(whatever) ON? I do, but I'm not quite sure whateach of those do, can someone please explain.Thanks

[The Duke]

lac anc coco i also suffer from the brief lag i got a geforce 4 ti 4200 with 128 ram. the game runs smooth but i get that lil stutter after tip then its all gravy baby

[Juntari]

GF4 is not DX9 compatible. One would not see any real benefit from DX9 from using GF4. Now Radeon 9700 Pro or GeForece FX on the other hand...

I did not try it out yet, but I don't think I could run it in 800x600 with everything maxed out.

[3dfx]

1024x768 32bit

Need higher resolution me thinks.

[cocobee]

GF4 is not DX9 compatible

.

explain?

BTW--Duke, that's avatar is funny as hell. Iron Mike baby!

[eddienghs]

DirectX is always downward compatible. So GF4 must be compatible with DX9 later when there is new driver released (of course must wait for DX9 release first).

The problem is, nowadays nearly all games run on Direct 3D with the support of DirectX, so all the display cards are designed for DX actually. At the age of any display card being luanched, it must be tailor-made for the DX version of that time (like GF2 is designed for DX7, GF1 is for DX6 etc...)

Although it is still downward compatible through driver update, it is still not tailor-made for that DX version. So when GeForceFX released, it is for DX9 and so must have better performance.

[cocobee]

but if Nvidia makes a driver for it (which they probably will) then it could utlize direct x9 right?

In any case, I know NBA live is not pushing my video card to the max by any means--but it could always be better.

good to know, thanks man

[eddienghs]

I am really confused by the choppy problem... with my systme config, shoudn't like that....

1 more question to CoCoBeE and -lac- the goods, what is the version of your Windows?

Thanks!

[cocobee]

I'm running XP home edition.

[mjyoung]

Antialiasing: Smooths jagged edges (jaggies) in games. ATI and Nvidia have different ways of doing this. ATi and Nvidia's versions of 2xAA and 4xAA are exactly the same. the method used is alled supersampling. than Nvidia has another option they dubbed QuincunxAA. this uses a different method called multisampling. and Matrox has added in a new way with Parhelia called Fragment AA. it only smoothes the lines, not the whole scene like the other ways do. this takes a much smaller performance hit, but is incompatable with some games.
Image quality: definately gives, AA just makes gaming way better. 2xAA is less effective but takes a smaller performance hit than 4xAA. Nvidia's quincunx is in between, and looks just as good as 4x IMHO
Performance: takes away big time. order of performance hit is 2x, quincunx, 4x.

Anisotropic filtering: filters textures to make depth blur look better from all angles. A step above tri-linear filtering.
Image quality: Improves in order best to worst 8x (64 tap), 4x (32 tap), 2x (16 tap), 1x (bilenear or trilinear).
Performance: Takes away, but not nearly as bad as aintialiasing. performance hit increases as the numbers get higher.

Dynamic lighting: causes moving light sources (weapon blasts and explosions) to cast their light and shadow all over the environment and objects in it.
Performance: Takes away, sometimes substantially. Disable on older cards.
Image quality: gives a lot. definately a good thing to keep on if you can afford to.

Light maps and Vertex lighting: Light maps allow the video card to draw light and shadoeffects on existing textures in the environment. It works to the same degree as Dynamic lighting, but with the environmental light sources and not weapons fire. Vertex lighting turns every light on in the environment on and has all of the light and shadow effects on and pre-drawn to the surfaces, so walking between a light and a wall wont cast a shadow on the wall.
Performance: Light maps takes away, a lot on older cards. GF3 or higher (and Radeon 8500) can handle this fine at most resolutions. Leave vertex enabled on older cards.
Image quality: Light maps Give. makes games exremely more realistic, and IMHO much more fun to watch your shadow on a wall as you walk past it.

Geometric detail: The higher the setting, the more round curves and arcs look in the game. The lower, the more blocky things look. The higher this is set, the more performance it takes away. The performance hit while set on high on my Ti200 is very large, i cant play many games at 1280x1024 at 60+ fps with this setting on high.

Texture detail (quality): THe higher the texture detail, the nicer and more detailed (duh!) the textures skinning all of the polygons look. The performance hit depends on how much RAm your vid card has. If you have 64megs or more, crank it, this one wont usually hurt performance. On older cards with like 16megs of RAM, this can kill performance if set to high.

Bump mapping: adds rough, shiny, or bumpy surfaces to flat textures, without making the video card draw more polygons. this cant be changed in games, a game either uses them or doesnt.

Decals: effects in a game like bullet holes or blood and guts splattered on the walls. the more the better, but in multiplayer games too many can WRECK performance. I usually just leave the games default setting for this if its a number or turn it as high as you can till u start to see lagging.

Texture compression: Uses lossless compression to fit textures into video memory.
Image quality: gives. usually makes textures sharper and letters and words in textures much easier to read.
Performance: gives again, less memory needed=more textures in video ram and less swapping to system RAM

Volumetric smoke (or fog): Makes fully 3d fog instead of flat textures of fog floating around.
Image quality: gives, 3d rolling fog is cool
Performance: Takes away, can cause lag if say a whole bunch of grenades go off and blanket the area. most newer cards are fine with it.

Particle effects: pretty well self explanatory. If you have even a remotely new card just turn it all the way up. particles are cool looking too

AGP fast writes and sideband addressing: fast writes and agp side banding are suppose to be new techniques of the agp bus to transfer data even faster...theoretically. However in practice it does nothing other than give severe stability issues for about 1% increase in performance, if even.

Triple Buffering: Makes the game look smoother and on newer cards run faster. Triple buffer lets the card render foreground, background, and..one scene that the card is currently working on.

Z-buffer: Saves memory bandwidth. Look at every pixel from your angle, the closer one(the one you see) will be in z-buffer and drawn. For transparencies the pixel in front and behind are combined.

The background hardly moves(ex: a sky), foreground is whatever you look at, while the next frame is drawn. As opposed to drawing the background everytime with the foreground and next frame all at once

[PlzHlpPortland]

you guys r smart! someday i will understand all of this

[eddienghs]

Even I understand those technical things on display card, I still don't have any idea.... why I cannot play the game smoothly at 1024x768x16 (maximum details)?? With my system config, shoudn't be that....

[LukeDogg]

seems the nba live programmers dont know much about graphics programming.

my computer specs:
athlon 2400+
512mb ddr-333
radeon 7900 pro

when i play 1024x768x32 (max. settings) i only get about 34-60 fps (depends on how much players are visible). that suckz, i expected to get at least a constant framerate of about 45-50.

[eddienghs]

I would rather heard more replies like LukeDogg and then I can blame the programmers. But the fact is that there is someone using similar config as me but can run smoothly.

By the way, LukeDogg, is yours 9700 pro instead of 7900 pro?