Save tweaking

I found out that the option "max frames to render ahead" can serious improve your fps with games and benches. I don't know if this option is available for ati cards but you can use it with the nvidia drivers. In controlpanel search for the line: "Perfomance & Quality Settings". Click on the "+" left of that line and ya see the line: "Additional Drect3D settings".

Now your able to change the frames to render ahead. I think this option works most effective for pc's and/or notebooks with high end graphics card.

If i put "max frames to render ahead" to 0 then i get a 3DMark05 score of 62XXpts
If i choose 3 then my 3DMark05 score will be 78XXpts
If i choose 6 then my 3DMark05 score is 82XXpts.

I think my score increases because my cpu is the bottleneck with 3DMark05.
With 3DMark06 my score i got almost no significant increase of fps. I think it's because then the Gpu is the bottleneck (higher res, Sm 3.0, hdr).

Try it and tell me your difference!

Oh my gpu is a go 7900GTX with 256mb ram and my cpu is a core duo T2400 (1.83ghz).

Put the score in this order:

score of 0 (max) frames to render ahead
score of 3 (max) frames to render ahead (standard)
score of 6 (max) frames to rander ahead

i hope you try it with 3DMark05. Good luck

 

doesn't that essentially put you 3 or 6 behind? how can it render them if it doesn't know how you moved the mouse to aim at that terrorist's head?

 

Two points here. First, don't tell me you are tweaking your graphics performance solely on the basis of a synthetic benchmark? That is about the dumbest thing you can do. You might end up lowering *actual* performance that way. Always test performance in *real world* conditions. If you think a certain setting improves performance in games, then test it *in games*.
The 3dMark score only shows that the setting helps your 3dMark performance. It says nothing about how games will perform.

Second point:
The setting is there for a reason. And it does not force the CPU to render ahead. It *allows* it.
It's not always better to render ahead, just like it's not always better *not* to do it. (We recently had a thread suggesting you disable it in Oblivion, for example)
Setting it to 6 frames might be dangerous, in that it may put the CPU noticeably ahead of the on-screen graphics. With 3 frames, you typically don't notice it, but with 6, it might start being noticeable, even if it improves your framerate. At least, it's worth keeping an eye out for.
It typically helps cover up situations where you might otherwise experience "spikes" of really low framerates. That makes the game *feel* more smooth, by giving you a more stable framerate. You might have an average framerate of 60, but if it dives to 5 every once in a while, it's unplayable. This setting may help avoid those situations.

 

Its true, most tweakguides and tweakguides.com suggest setting that setting to "3" to increase performance, I think its fine as games like BF2 and AA, dont fully use your 256mb of video ram.

 

I did tested this in games too. ut2004 isn't playable when i put it to 0. 6 is also not noticeable with games. 9 is way too much to use.

 

my low end go7300 has the same problem- when at 0 my 3DMark score falls and when at 3 it increases. I havent tried 6 but am happy with it at 3.