Edward Ng wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out what sort of professional requirement would involve overclocking.
Seriously? There's a lot. Think raytracing, video editing, or some kind of encoding, which all has been mentioned in this thread I believe. They all require raw CPU power by the megahertz's. But as someone mentioned, if one needs it so much they should have the fundings to buy the necessary computing power. Well, maybe they don't. There is actually people sitting at home rendering more or less complete movies, even if it isn't Toy Story or Monster's Inc.
Russ already responded to this.
I think it's kind of silly being a computer professional, which you are when writing for SPCR, and saying you can't figure out what professional requirement would involve overclocking. I also understand that Pixar probably don't run overclocked CPU's because they don't have to, but not everyone is Pixar or have their fundings. For a lot of people, a 5% or 10% increase in CPU processing power will be a significant change.
Charlie responded to this one.
And for all of you saying there's no difference between 100 and 120 FPS - sorry to tell you this, but you are so wrong. Sorry to "push you down", but you obviously haven't played FPS games on a really high level, and you shouldn't talk about what you don't have enough experience to talk about. I get so upset when I read the things you write.
A couple of years ago I played in a top ~8 Quake 3 clan in Sweden. Considering how big Q3 was then, and the fact that Sweden has a history of being really good at FPS gaming, I'd say I really know what FPS gaming is all about and what it requires, and that I know what I'm talking about.
First of all, I'm perfectly aware that if I stare at a blank screen, my eyes can't discerne the difference between 300 and 200 FPS, even though you can easily notice the difference between 85 and 120 FPS. Many people tend to think like when thinking about TV's.. "I can't tell it's really just pictures showing at 24 FPS, so my eyes can't see more than 24 FPS". Everybody knows how easy it is to tell the difference between 60 and 85 FPS. But that's not what you talk about when talking about FPS.
1) You talk about minimum FPS. That means, when you say you have "100 FPS", that means you have 100 FPS at the worst moment, when your whole screen is filled with moving stuff. Everybody can have 500 FPS staring at a wall - the point is maintaining that FPS while in the heaviest fight, with multiple enemies, rockets and fire shooting everywhere. Translate this into benchmarks, this most often means that you have to have hundreds of FPS to be sure that you won't suffer from too low FPS while in the heaviest fights.
2) Another point with high FPS is that while you may have 200 FPS while just runnning around, you also have to have those FPS when you make a 180 degree turn in a split second. Having 85 average FPS just won't do it in those situations. You have to have a lot more to be able to compensate for the losses you face when turning fast/being in those resource-hogging moments.
Ok, ranting over.. sorry if I come about as being uptight - I just don't like when I think that people talk about stuff they only have artificial experience with. Try playing a FPS game at a national/international level (granted that it's a fast-paced game like Q3 for example) at a benchmarked average 100 FPS and see if you don't notice the difference when playing at a benchmarked 200 FPS. Trust me, you will notice the difference, if you play long enough.
Russ, when he's talking about frames per second, he's directing it towards myself.
ecto, you're right...
only play games for fun.
To me, that's what it is. A game. On the same token, this is why I aim for playable framerates with maximum eye candy, rather than absolutely high framerates allowing me to compete on a national or international level.
I never said there's no difference between 100fps and 200fps--I can also see an obvious difference between 100 and 200 fps--I said between 100fps and 120fps. On the other hand, I'm only talking about maximum
frames per second, while you're talking about minimum; my mistake for not adding in, "maximum." This alone is proof enough that your aim for overclocking your 3D hardware is completely different than my aim.
Taking my two previous statements there, my point is that I'd easily sacrifice 20fps off my top end for higher visual quality when I play my games. Your stance is obviously the precise opposite; however, I honestly don't think there's more than a handful of professional caliber gamers at the current time here at SPCR; as a matter of fact, judging by the hardware people are using in their silent rigs that can still play games, they're aiming for the same thing as I do; decent eye candy at playable framerates, at silent or near silent acoustics, not extreme framerates for professional competition gaming performance. To get the sort of framerates you're talking about would simply not be possible in the newer games like Doom 3 without pushing the graphic detail down a few notches; Anandtech's own SLI preview today was proof alone; it takes dual 6800GTs to break into the triple digits with extremely fine eye candy. I'd imagine even using four compressor coolers on a dual Opteron dual 6800 Ultra SLI system overclocked to the very hilt still won't result in satisfactory competitive
framerates for you, when the graphic detail is absolutely maxed out (Ultra Detail, maximum aniso and maximum FSAA at a minimum resolution of 1280x960). On the other hand, it would probably be playable enough for myself and moreover--look gorgeous,
is what I
am looking for in my o/c--to raise my eye candy as much as possible while maintaining decent framerates (decent, not stellar, but decent).
As a matter of fact, I don't think a silent rig is particularly appreciable at a place like, say, Quakecon...just a bit noisy to notice.
Sorry if I pushed your gamer buttons the wrong way there, buddy; no offense intended, whatsoever!
And just as Russ said, nobody here said low framerate is better; what I'm saying is, higher eye candy is better--imho