Please take 5 minutes to benchmark your machine...

[Chuft-Captain]

Off-topic ... removed from here to it's own thread:http://shatters.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=16814

CC

[danielj]

I pressed Ctrl+link,but something get wrong and after a while,I almost lost my driver and the video card almost stop work.Do you know what is happening?

[danielj]

Graphic card: GTS 250
Main RAM: 4 GB RAM DDR2 800
Processor Core 2 Duo E7200@2.53 Ghz
Screen Resolution: 1280X1024
Type and speed of disk: HDD 320 GB SATA II 7200 rpm+HD 160 GB SATA 7200 rpm+HD 500 GB SATA II 7200 rpm
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate
Antialiasing: 8XAA e 4XAF
Windows prestation index: 5,9 (lowest in HDD)

Measured fps: between 28,7 and 60,1 fps
But I didn?t use the link.I simply get to LEXX and press follow.

[Boux]

Hi Boux,

Not sure if your setup is represented in the Passmark benchmarks.
The website:http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
lists the following (in decreasing order of performance):

Radeon HD 4870
Radeon HD4870 X2
Radeon HD 4870 X2
ASUS EAH4870x2
Mobility Radeon HD 4870 X2
Mobility Radeon HD 4870

I don't know which of these (if any) is a close match to your setup.

Hi, Captain,
This setup consists in two Radeon 4870 video cards in Crossfire configuration (equivalent of Nvidia's SLI).
They are factory overclocked with better power supply circuits (hence the nickname "Golden Sample" that Gainward give their best cards).
A crossfire of two 4870s is faster than a single (dual GPU) 4870 X2 because, among other reasons, each card uses the full bandwith of two x16 pcie lanes instead of a single lane.
At their best working conditions (let's say 90-95 % scaling) a Crossfire of these 4870s is probably in the same class as a single Radeon 6950/6970, or pretty close.
They are - were - very good cards but support only up to DX 10.1. No DX 11 here. Latest cards also support tessellation, Open GL 4 and more.

As far as OGL is concerned, here is what Celestia is currently saying:
- Vendor: ATI Technologies Inc.
- Renderer: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series
- Version: 3.3.11407 Compatibility Profile Context
- GLSL version: 3.30
- Max simultaneous textures: 8
- Max texture size: 8192
- Max cube map size: 8192
- Point size range: 1.000000 - 63.000000
Hope this clarifies.

[Chuft-Captain]

Hi Boux,

Thanks for the clarification. I did however know exactly what your config is, I just couldn't find a benchmark for it at the website. (One of the few configs they haven't tested I guess)

As expected, I am clearly CPU limited on this old machine..

Assuming a Radeon 6950 as the nearest equivalent as you suggest would give it a score of ~ 3000. This would place your 8x performance (which is not at all bad) at the far right of the 4x trend line on my chart above. The fact that the brakes do not appear to be coming off on your performance when you disable AA altogether suggests that you may be right... something is limiting it's capabilities. (However, if you always have AA on, this is not so much of an issue I suspect, as you're still getting good frame rates.

CC

PS. To those who have had issues with this addon (Linux users etc) my apologies, however I did not design or make this addon. I just chose it for it;s high poly count. (I did notice the various capitilizations in file suffixes, etc, but as I'm a WINDOWS user they had no effect on me. )
If however, in the course of your struggles, you have repaired it, then why not submit the repaired version to the ML as a multi-platform version.

[danielj]

Real word perfomance vs theoretical perfomance
What matters more for Celestia?
Both the Geforce GTX 560 Ti 448 and GTX 570 loses in texel rate EVEN to the GTX 260 216
http://www.hwcompare.com/11200/geforce- ... 60-ti-448/
It only wins the GTX 470 and GTX 260 but by a small margin.
In pixel fill rate,it wins over the HD 6950/6970 and all VGAs below it, with the exception of the GTX 295
http://www.hwcompare.com/11179/geforce- ... 60-ti-448/
In memory bandwidht,it loses for the HD 6870 and GTX 285
http://www.hwcompare.com/11167/geforce- ... n-hd-6870/
It wins over HD 6850,GTX 280 and GTX 470
http://www.hwcompare.com/11198/geforce- ... 60-ti-448/

[selden]

Daniel,

What matters is how a card performs for you. Different mixes of Addons will perform differently on different systems, and that mix is going to vary depending on your interests. Also, some people will only be satisfied when they have the fastest possible combination of features, while others will be satisfied with "good enough".

If Celestia takes too long to start or if texture loading is too slow, you need a faster disk subsystem.
If rotating a single complex model is too slow, you need a faster graphics card.
If viewing many simultaneous Addons is too slow, you need a faster CPU.
In some cases, the fastest available isn't fast enough.

[danielj]

My video card and processor is very fast,but my HD isn?t.
I only was able to have a 5900 rpm SATA3.I couldn?t buy a SSD or even a 7200 rpm HDD.

[CAP-Team]

I get steady 60 fps with 4 time antialiasing.

Specs see below, I run from SSD.

[Chuft-Captain]

CAP-Team,

I suspect you have it locked to the vertical sync. Try temporarily disabling vertical sync to see what FPS your graphics sub-system is truly capable of (see Selden's first post in this thread). You might get a pleasant surprise.

CAP-Tain

PS. This (vertical sync) is a non-issue for me at present, because I never get anywhere near the vertical sync rate of 60fps, let alone above that.

[Fenerit]

Why just only 60Hz lock? My very old 17'' monitor does allows 75Hz; for new monitors it might be even more (I think).

[John Van Vliet]

--- edit ---

[Fenerit]

LCD screens are very different that CRT screens
digital VS analog

Sorry; I forgot to specify: my old monitor is a LCD (LG Flatron). I choose the refresh rate/VS through the videocard software panel (Nvidia). There are 60/72/75 Hz at 1024x768x32, and when I push the hardware button on the chassis to check up its status, I got on the monitor's OSD the same value I choosed. I can't believe it isn't possible on new LCD monitors.

[Fenerit]

This is a screenshot of my Nvidia panel (I forgot to say that there is also 70 Hz)

75refresh.png

And this is an old snapshot made with the webcam and relevant to the thread viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11646&hilit=webcam&start=15



in which is shown the hardware check on 75Hz. Same thing for secondary 17" monitor (Samsung)

[selden]

Cap-Team, having a fixed 60 fps means that you have Vertical Sync set to either "Force on" or "use Application setting". (Those are the Nvidia terms. Intel and AMD may use different terminology.) Those settings are appropriate when you're actually using Celestia. They cause smooth motion with minimum CPU and GPU usage. Celestia redraws the screen only as fast as the screen gets refreshed.

When doing benchmarks, though, Vertical Sync should be set to "Force off" so that Celestia redraws the on-screen image as fast as it can, starting a new image immediately after it finishes the previous one. If there's much change in what's being drawn, you may see "tearing" because the image is changed while the screen is still being redrawn.

[selden]

Fenerit,

The least expensive LCD panels only support a 60 Hz refresh rate. That's fast enough that most people don't notice the flicker (or "lag" during high-speed gaming) when the screen is updated. Some people do notice it, though, and more expensive LCDs support faster updates.

[CAP-Team]

I turned vertical sync off for Celestia.
Result is a 190 fps @ 1920x1200

[danielj]

I have almost the same computer,except for the SSD,the video card (mine is a GTX 560 Ti 448) and memory (8 GB, in my case).Also,my CPU is a Core i7 2600 NON K.Do you think a SSD speeds the thing,even if the other HD is a convencional one?Do Celestia have to stay in the SSD?I have a good chance of getting a SSD next month!

[selden]

While the model is being shown on the screen, the disk is not involved at all.
Using a faster disk (e.g. using an SSD) will help Celestia start faster and Addons load faster.

[danielj]

I take the benchmark,more or less,since the link didnt?work.
The frame rate was between 270 and 320 fps

Resolution 1920x1080
Core i7 2600@3.4 Ghz
8 GB RAM DDR3
GTX 560 Ti 448 1.2 GB
HD Seagate Barracuda Eco Green 1.5 TB SATA3 5900 rpm
Windows 7 Ultimate
Office 2010