PDA

View Full Version : WHY 2D and not 3D?



Tesla-Guy
November 27th, 2001, 15:59
Why only 2D gfx affect the performance when changing resolution and not 3D gfx? :hrm: ???

Smiff
November 27th, 2001, 20:05
You what?!

Ganonboy
November 27th, 2001, 21:53
I thin, that what Tesla guy was trying to say was, when you change resolution in PJ64, why is it only the 2D/backdrops that look less squared/better and not the polygons.
I think that this is because 2D objects can be resized, but when they are, they go all squared up (try walking up to a wall in Goldeneye), so by changing the resolution mode, you give the screen more picles, making the 2D object appear to be less resized (some how). When you resize a polygon, it doesnt go squared - I dont know why...

Smiff
November 27th, 2001, 22:14
yes, the 3d content is vector, the 2d is bitmap. If you don't like the look, stick to close to N64 res e.g. 512x384 or 640x480 and use FSAA.

Tesla-Guy
November 28th, 2001, 12:45
What i mean, is:
i run a game which has only 3d gfx. I have it 1024x768 res. and i get 60fps. i change it to 1600x1200 and i still get 60fps.
i run Rampage, which has only 2d gfx. I have it at 800x600 and i get 60fps. i change it to 1600x1200 and i get 30 fps (this is an example, happening with my old Gf2mx, my new geforce 3 is so damn fast ;) )
Also, i can't turn it to 640x480 since i have a 19", i can see large pixels even with FSAA on. :pj64:

Smiff
November 28th, 2001, 12:50
you're saying that used to happen with a GF2 and not with a GF3?

Tesla-Guy
November 28th, 2001, 17:33
no it doesn't. Well, it was an MX, not Ultra or Pro. GeForce 3 is so fast that i don't know if this can happen and my monitor supports up to 1600x1200, so i can't test it to higher

Reznor007
November 28th, 2001, 18:04
The 2d elements are made up of lots of polyons that each have a different texture. This uses more memory and fillrate.

Tesla-Guy
November 29th, 2001, 13:01
thx Reznoor that's the answer i wanted to read :)

Doomulation
November 29th, 2001, 16:59
Originally posted by Tesla-Guy
no it doesn't. Well, it was an MX, not Ultra or Pro. GeForce 3 is so fast that i don't know if this can happen and my monitor supports up to 1600x1200, so i can't test it to higher
So that's why 2d is rendered more slowly than 3d? The N64 has problems rendering 2d, as do project64. Can this be it?

Firestar007
November 29th, 2001, 21:56
AMD Athlon 1400 MHz overclocked to 1466 MHz, 512 mb ram

One question. Why? ??? Why would you overclock your CPU 66 mhz? Surely it can't give you that much gain.

Tesla-Guy
November 30th, 2001, 19:22
Nah, he does it just to shorten his proccesor life :p

Firestar007
December 1st, 2001, 03:02
'Cause hey, if your CPU burns out, ya gotta buy a new one, right? And of course, you'd have to get the newest, fastest, most insanely up-to-date one while your at it, right? Sounds like a good reason to me. :colgate:

Jake
December 1st, 2001, 03:20
O!!!!!