clutch

I love my Intellimouse Explorer in Q3 and UT. It kix ass. However, I would have to say that when I used PS2 Rate (in my sad and lost days before IE USB) gaming in Q1, Q2, and Q3 got a huge shot in the arm with a 100hz clock rate. I never noticed the diff with 200Hz tho... ------------------ Regards, clutch

Yep, that sounds about right . I usually run 192.168.1.x for small networks with a 255.255.255.0 mask. I recommend this setup for small networks like your own as it's easier to keep track of. At home I have my NT 4.0 Server acting as DHCP with WINS to keep the machines under control while giving all my boxes the gateway and DNS numbers. This way I can just plug in anything that's setup for DHCP and not have to worry about configuration. In your setup I would start from 192.168.1.1 and go from there. BTW, it's customary to have the router/proxy box set to the lowest numbers (i.e. 192.168.1.1) and servers set to higher numbers (i.e. 192.168.1.99). But you can do whatever u like. ------------------ Regards, clutch

Well, I get 58.7fps in HQ mode. I have heard of driver probs with certain mobos before. I don't know if you would get that great of a jump with your processor, but I think that you are getting robbed. Did you have Win9x on that same setup before? How well did it perform then? A friend of mine got around 30fps no matter what he did in Q3 with an AMD K6-350 and a Banshee. I believe that you have a much better machine than that, so you should cross 43fps at least in some game. I also know that my Celeron 450 was not that much slower than the P3 that I using now, and it's a good deal faster than your current setup. I have to study for my TCP/IP exam 2nite but I will take a look further into your hardware to see if there is anything that I can think of. ------------------ Regards, clutch

Dumb question for ya, is the subnet mask the same on all the machines? Also, I would set all the NICs to autodetect as 9x doesn't support fast ethernet (this is according to MS, and yes I know that many people have 9x boxes using 100Mbps setups cause I am one of them ) and forcing the issue makes things worse most of the time. And personally, on a small scale network like that I like to use NetBEUI (but I game a lot, so that rarely happens). ------------------ Regards, clutch

Well, the vsync setting will only affect you if your setup can run at, around, or over your monitor's vertical refresh rate. And at 20fps, I don't think there will be much of a threat . How does this setup run in other games? You have Q3? I would like to know how your machine is doing in other OpenGL games. How is the D3D? Maybe we can determine if it's just Q2, OpenGL, or all gaming in general that's affected. BTW, what version of Q2 are u running? I was using 3.20 ------------------ Regards, clutch

The reason why I bring up the diff between the GeForce and the TNT2U is becuase I have seen machines similarly equipped to mine but using a GeForce get between 2x and 3x my framerate. And since mine was maxed out as well (32bit, max textures) the number falls inline with other benchamrks that I have seen. As far as "hype" goes, I am not certain about that. It seems that you would have a fast machine for gaming, whether you know it or not. Tristan777, have you tried the ver 5.13 drivers yet? I used the 5.14 set yesterday and fell to 6fps at 1024x768. I proceeded to can them ASAP and went back to my favorites, the 5.13s. You may want to try them yourself ------------------ Regards, clutch

The only thing "wrong" with our setups would be the TNT2U vs. the GeForce in your setup... :-) ------------------ Regards, clutch

Well, here are the numbers: crusher 800x600@32bit 38.0fps 1024x768@32bit 33.6fps demo1.dm2 800x600@32bit 74.4fps 1024x768@32bit 54.1fps This is a fresh install with no mods or tweaks (weapon is visible, etc) and I left McAfee, a web browser (with ntcompatible.com!) open, and AOL Instant Messenger open as this is the way I normally play. My TNT2U is clocked at 170/202. I hope this helps. ------------------ Regards, clutch

Fat32 has been noisier for me. Not to mention much slower to work with at larger partition levels (I have 8, 12, and 16GB partitions that I use at work and home). NTFS just kicks a$$. Just make sure to keep an eye on fragmentaion. The free version of Diskeeper that comes with Win2K works pretty well, and I have used the full versions (4 and 5.0) for the last 1.5 years. NTFS is faster, more stable, more secure. ------------------ Regards, clutch

Now that I am thinking about it, what kind of mother board do you have? The processor and video card sound cool, and there have been problems in the past with a poor mobo causing degraded performance. Maybe there is a BIOS update or drivers that you may want to look in to. clutch ------------------ Regards, clutch

I am doing a boot-time defrag of my Win2K Pro box (using Diskeeper 5) so I can't run the benchmark yet. However, I know that I was getting much better performance than you are stating. Here are my specs: PIII 550 256MB RAM Asus P3B-F Viper V770 Ultra (ver 5.13 drivers) 25GB IBM HD Win2K Pro (Retail Box) Turtle Beach Montego Sound Card Intel Pro/100 Mgmt Adapter I hope that this defrag will end soon (2.5hrs and still going)... clutch ------------------ Regards, clutch [This message has been edited by clutch (edited 15 April 2000).]

I have a question about using beta DX versions. Does it do any good to use a new beta if you don't have drivers for your hardware that take advantage of it? I just thought that if you aren't a tester with a personal interest in development (like a programmer or something) then the new version wouldn't seem that great to use. Is this the case, or would having a hopped up DX with regular drives be an improvement for your system? Or, do you get modified drivers from the vendor for your hardware? ------------------ Regards, clutch

I have a P3 550 and 256MB with a TNT2U (5.13 Drivers). When I ran Q3 and UT on this driver rev, I gave up on dual booting with Win98. Both games run so well on Win2K that I only have 98 on my other machine just for controller/CD-RW support. As a matter of fact, UT runs better in Win2K than in Win98! I am not certain why you would have problems, but I know that I can run UT at 1024 in 32bit w/o any probs. ------------------ Regards, clutch

OK, I hope that I am not too late here. I haven't had any problems with UT, Q2, Q3A, Half-Life, Forsaken. But, I have this "...Dummies" book that I am using to review for the NT Server in the Enterprise and it has some dinky little game. When I tried it (it appears to be DOS-based) I kept having a "sticky-keys" problem. If I held the key past the initial pick-up to the point where it would repeat the strike, the ship would keep moving in that direction until I hit that same key again. I didn't try this game in 98 because it was stupid anyway. I just thought that the game was trying to interpret KB commands directly (passing the HAL?--I didn't know if this situation applied to the KB as well) and it just freaked. Other than that, nothing else. My System Win2K Pro (Retail Box) P-III 550 @ 617 256MB RAM Asus P3B-F Turtle Beach A3D sound card (Win2K default) TNT2 Ultra (5.18--These bad boys ROCK!) Intel Pro/100 Mgmt Adapter (Win2K default) Intellimouse Explorer (Using USB-Win2K default) MS Natural KB (PS2) ------------------ Regards, clutch [This message has been edited by clutch (edited 03 April 2000).]

I have Adv Server and Pro at home as well (just so everyone knows, I have the retail version of Pro complete with nifty hologram cd, and beta 3 of adv server from a Win2k AS deployment class) and it takes A LOT more to move it than anything else I have used. I honestly can't imagine that you will be able to do much gaming with it even if you can get it running. I hate just going in to work with the DNS settings (which I still can't get to work, but that's another forum). My server is a: cel 333 ASUS P3B-F 196MB RAM Matrox G200 no sound card Maxtor 6GB UDMA WD 4.3GB EIDE (3) It's a dog whenever I have to go and do config changes, and I had a problem getting Netshield to run on it (4.5). Just from all the headache that I have had already from things that *normally* run on it, I would think that it would be rather difficult getting HL to run (as a game and not as a service) with all that overhead. clutch BTW, I did get Win2K Pro to run HL with a very similar config when it was Beta 3.