• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

CSS Video Stress Test!

1440x900
Everything Maxed
6xAA
16XAF
95 fps

CPU / Video stock clocks

Rig in sig
 
I play CSS at 1920 x 1200, 4xaa but with every other setting as low as it will go.
My ping is always better the lower the settings.

All I know is, my frame rate during game never drops below 100.
And I play with net_graph 0 on and fps_max at 101.
 
1280x1024 All high, max 6xAA/16xAF No HDR and avg 180 - max 300 (source never goes above 300) and min 130. Stress test is 210.
 
1680x1050, everything maxed except water (reflect world), max HDR, drivers at app preference, HQAF, Cat A.I. advanced, 169.8. Rig in sig.
 
I must be having some sort of problem. My specs are in my sig. I get ~75fps using maxxed settings and 1280x1024 res.
I'm using latest det's, and a fresh install of windows. Is something off, or misconfigured?

What the hell am i doing wrong?

edit/ I tried using high quality settings and I get a disappointing 58fps.
 
I have an X600, so to run it at high speeds in order to win, I run it at lowest in 1024x768 and I get avg 150 fps in the stress test. When playing, however, I go between 130 and 200 fps.
 
Opty 146 @ 2.8g 7900GTO 2 Gigs Gskill HZ Asrock Dual Sata II

1680 x 1050 4xaa 8af All high=

150FPS

In game, anywhere from 10-300fps. Gotta love Source's netcode.

OP, if you want more frames, you need more CPU clocks.
 
Let's pick a res that everyone can do since the results can't be compared so far except in the most general terms. How about 1280x1024 4AA/16AF all details maxed. Driver quality settings set to HQ (or at least specify what you have it set to). Just post your rig specs, unless they're in your sig, and what score you got.
 
Originally posted by: Matt2
There's gonna be a lot of CPU limited scores at that res I think.
Click to expand...

True, but it's about the only res that 90% of the posters on this forum could do as it seems to be the most common resolution these days. 1600x1200 or 1920x1200 is somewhat rare. 1680x1050 is better but I'd imagine still a small percentage compared to those people with 1280x1024 monitors.
 
Originally posted by: Elfear
Let's pick a res that everyone can do since the results can't be compared so far except in the most general terms. How about 1280x1024 4AA/16AF all details maxed. Driver quality settings set to HQ (or at least specify what you have it set to). Just post your rig specs, unless they're in your sig, and what score you got.
Click to expand...

With all of those settings, I get 15-40 fps. 🙁 Me X600 can't handle that enough to play well.
 
6x is the max you can set in the game options. While I could probably override it, I'm also stuck using lame CD drivers until my card is properly supported so it's really not worth the hassle.
 
23.2 FPS
800x600 all settings on Low.

HPNC6000 Notebook
1.6Ghz Pentium M
32MB ATi Radeon 9600
1GB PC2700 Memory

Not sure how it will do on my desktop. I don't really play much CS on it.

Desktop:
A64 4000+
2GB Patriot PC3200
ATi Radeon X1600 Pro 512MB
74GB Raptor
SB Live 5.1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top