Good Graphics Render Poorly

First time poster here...i've searched the threads but have been unable to find an answer to my question.
Basically, ever since I updated to Final Cut Pro HD (V5.0.3 - I had 4.5 before) evertime I import a graphic and drop it into a dv timeline, it looks fine until I render it. This even happens when I use Final Cut's title tool. When I render, the graphic looks distorted (like if you too a very low-res file, which is not the case.) I'm viewing through an AJA i/o box (component) on a professional sony CRT monitor and on the lcd computer monitor. This is not a monitoring issue. If i render the graphics in an 8-bit sequence, it's beautiful. Unfortunately I can't always do this due to drive space. This was never an issue in 4.5 so why now?
any help would be much appreciated!
thanks

When you import the graphic...it is at the full resolution that graphic is. All FCP does is make a pointer to that clip. So when you drop it in the DV timeline, it needs to be rendered to playback in the DV codec, so it creates a render file that is DV.
When you drop that same clip into an 8-bit timeline, it loses the connection to the DV clip and wants you to re-render. When you do, it looks at the source file and now renders it in the 8-bit colorspace....and therefore looks MUCH better.
And yes, edit in a DV timeline until you are done, then go 8-Bit for the final.
As for the 4.5 and 5 thing...this has happened to me since I started with FCP 3, so it is nothing new. How it didn't look like this before...couldn't say.
Shane

Similar Messages

Graphics render bug in FCP 6 and 7 - Dare to prove me wrong?

I have an issue with an HD video that contains red and purple text and graphics in the edit. I've looked for an answer tirelessly online, with friends, and through trial and error for a good 7 hours before giving up. Here's the deal,
Sequence settings: HD 1440x1080 16:9, 23.98, HDV 1080p24 for editing the canon7d footage that came in - this however doesn't matter because i tested with every setting imaginable including animation raw and ended up with the same results for the graphics problem I'm having (kind of unrelated to the actual footage).
I need to output this 9 minute edit I have to an HD file 1280x720 for youtube upload. So, it has to be under 2gb (youtube's limit) but for client purposes, it needs to be crisp and great looking as you would imagine.
I have a bunch of PSDs, each show a different line drawing of a brush. For each one, the line is a different color. For any of the colors that aren't red or purple, they render crisp and wonderful in final cut pro over top the video. However, the graphics that have the lines that are red or purple, come out pixelated and blurry no matter how i try to render them. The only solution that worked was to render and output them with the animation codec. ProRes HQ worked too but not as well. However, this makes a file way too big. Whenever I went from animation to h264 or from FCP to h264, or any other web friendly format, graphics come out way pixelated. It makes me frustrated as to why all the graphics that were exactly the same except not red or purple came out perfectly crisp. Also, why is animation codec the only codec out there (besides uncompressed obviously) that will create clean edges in these red/purple graphics?
Conclusion: Found that reds and purples are the only colors that seem to be effected when rendering the graphics. Everything else comes out nicely. Animation and pro res codecs aside, any codec making the video small enough for the web (less than 2gb) resulted in the problem of pixelation with the red and purple graphics. Based on extensive research I did online, I was surprised not to find many people posting about the exact same problem. For the issues I did find that seemed related, people concurred that HD nor regular DV video do a good job rendering bright reds or variations of red. Because I found no solutions online or from all the things I tried in the list below
-re-rendered the PSD's in Final cut pro with variation of sequence setting to see if that would make any difference - it didn't. Tried all kinds of different settings in export for h264, keyframes, max quality, etc. no luck.
-tried rendering to "Animation/uncompressed" as far through the process as possible. For instance, I outputted a perfectly crisp "Animation" file that was perfect looking. As soon as I re-exported to h264, mpeg4, or sorenson, or any other codec dropping the file size down, all results returned pixelated results for the reds and purple graphics.
-made sure photoshop settings were all good, even copied and pasted psd into new 1920x1080 project, played with DPI up to 300 to see if it did anything, saved as different formats TIFF, png, eps, layers, flattened, 8-bit, 24-bit, 36-bit, etc., none of the formats worked correctly.
-outputted my own purple and red graphics and text and rendered in final cut to see if the file had anything to do with it. same problem with my red and purple graphics and text.
-Tried adding slight moving grain to the graphic in Final cut to try and trick FCP to thinking it was a video instead of a graphic and therefore render it smoothly.
-consulted with 2 other video editors/media experts, ended up frustrating them as well (and hurting their ego a little since they were sure they could figure it out)
-Ran the shot and graphic through after effects and premiere pro separately (different video programs) to see if final cut pro was causing the problem, same problem with those programs.
-tried rendering on a different mac, still the same.
-Actually upgraded my final cut pro version to the new version (now Final cut studio 3). Ran tests on new version of final cut pro, same exact problem.
-added black edge to purple graphics to see if that did anything different to the rendering. Didn't help
-Changed the hue of the graphic to anything other than red or purple. Wouldn't you know...That fixed it.
Here is a link to the Animation Output of a half second of the edit with a sample red graphic crisp as can be for you to test (12.7mb) -
http://www.robinsonhope.com/downloads/makeup_animationtest.zip
Here is a link to view screenshots before and after to show you what rendering does to the graphics.
http://www.robinsonhope.com/downloads/makeup_ss.jpg
In case you'd like to try and find a solution, please download the link to the HD animation half-second clip and output to h264 or any other web friendly codec that would show these red graphics clean and not blurry and pixelated. Other rule is after doing the math, a 9 minute video with the compression you choose would need to be under 2gb. This shouldn't be too much of a problem because even a 1280x720 h264 at max quality for a 9min video is still under 2gb.
The first person to show me that you are truly a FCP guru and can solve this, post a link of your successful solution, I will praise you as genius all over this forum. I will also be eternally grateful. Live in LA? I'll also buy you dinner, Haha. But seriously...

Welcome to this forum,
Sorry to hear you so struggling with this issue.
And I doubt whether I can solve this for you, but I can say a few things.
The title of this thread is:
Graphics render bug in FCP 6 and 7 - Dare to prove me wrong?
I'll prove you are wrong. Or actually you've already proved yourself wrong in your post:
-Ran the shot and graphic through after effects and premiere pro separately (different video programs) to see if final cut pro was causing the problem, same problem with those programs.
Seams that I try to annoy you, but I'm not. It's not a joke. The fact that other applications can't handle it as well AND the fact that Animation Codec (Which is pretty lostless) does not have this problem, tells you that the problem is likely the low compression you want OR the footage itself. And I dare say it's BOTH.
I downloaded your testfile and have opened it in FCP and I can see in the Vectorscope that your color Red is too hot.
[Click here|http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/zz356/rienkL/Screenshot2010-04-02at1324 20.png] to see the vectorscope of your picture?
You also see the small boxes (clockwise)
Red, Magenta, Blue, Cyan, Green, Yellow. The signal of your picture should stay somewhere between those boxes. You should read [this article|http://www.larryjordan.biz/articles/lj_scopes.html] (two third on the page) about the vectorscope. Also has a picture with the range to be broadcast safe.
So back to your picture and your vectorscope. You'll see that just along the right side of the R in the vectorscope there's a peak which goes way out of the range. And that's exactly the color of your graphic.
I tried isolating that color, reducing the saturation, and then do an export, but that failed. You should adjust that within the PSD's first and then see how exporting goes.
So now you are thinking: My client wants his own colors! Sure he does. But those colors were probably designed for print, which does have another colorrange. Simple technical story. You're bound to specific saturation. Going over that means troubles....
And I'm not claiming that your problem will be solved when you adjust this. It is still possible that h264 just doesn't like red too much. Maybe that's on purpose. Our eyes are most less sensitive to red, so that gives the compressor some extra room to compress in the reds (Don't know if this is what compression developers do; just thinking out loud, just an idea...)
Hope this helps at least a little.
Rienk

Does anyone recommend a good graphic utility to prepare files for the web?

Does anyone recommend a good graphic utility to prepare files for the web?

GraphicConverter as noted by Don, or Photoshop Elements are the favourites. Both will allow comprehensive editing, and save for web facilities including reducing the .jpg quality to shrink file size without making the picture smaller.
There is a free application calld Gimp (open source) but I don't know how good it is or whether it's updated for Lion.

Whats your take on a good graphics card?

hi all
at the moment i was looking in investing in buying a new graphics card, my old one i believe is past its prime so i wanna get a better card.
so can someone help me out here?
i havent had to look at graphics cards for a while and a top notch card back when i bought my card was my geforce 4 ti 4200 and im just confused with all the geforce 5xxx range of cards and whats better than what, i wanna know whats the go in terms performance and price.?
so whats a good graphics card these days?
is a MSI GC gonna be better running on a MSI M/B?
i obviously will be playing games and running DVDs
cheers people
zalman CNPS Cu cooler
Windows XP HE SP2
BIOS version 2.3
480w Enermax coolergiant
MSI 865PE Neo2 series motherboard
Intel P4 3Ghz (800 FSB) HT (prescott)
DDR SDRAM PC3200 ( dual channel ) 512mb
120gb western digital IDE HDD
20gb Western digital IDE HDD
LG DVD RAM DL burner
liteon DVD ROM
sparkle geforce 4 Ti4200 8x graphics card
10/100 network card
winfast tv2000 xp expert tv capture card

Quote
Originally posted by UAW
5900xt is a good card i don't like ati drivers at all.
It's good for playing OpenGL games.
However, all of the FX series have crappy DirectX9 performance. They are so bad that HL2 defaults to treating them as DX8.1 cards to get decent performance out of them.
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/geforce_fx_half-life2/

Is nVidia Geforce GT640 good graphics card for PrE10 despite low memory bandwidth?

Can anybody confirm that the nVidia Geforce GT640 is a reasonable graphics card for Premiere Elements 10 and Photoshop Elements 10?
The person who assembled my Core i7 3770K desktop with 16Gb of RAM at 1600mHz installed the nVidia GT640 card with 2Gb of DDR3 memory. He said that this was a good (fairly low cost) card for video editing because it has 384 CUDA cores - very helpful in video editing. I am pretty ignorant about graphics cards, but like the low power usage, 65 watts, and reputed cool operating temperatures. I have since read that DDR5 memory would have been much faster because of greater memory bandwidth - say 80-90Gb per second compared with 28.5Gb per second for the DDR3 memory on the GT640 card. I was after economical power use. DDR5 cards use 110 watts upwards and run much hotter than DDR 3 cards, all other things being equal. The really fast cards require special power units and cooling.
Does anybody know whether limited memory bandwidth is important in video editing? Is speed much more critical in gaming than in video editing? Are other attributes such as 384 CUDA cores, nvenc syncing, dedicated encodment, 28nm Kepler architecture, 2Gb memory frame buffer, 1.3 billion transistors, plenty of texture units - more important than memory bandwidth in video editing? Does bandwidth limited by DDR3 memory affect quality of image?
I read that the GT640 would be much faster (producing better image quality?) than the HD4000 integrated Intel graphics of the Core i7 Ivy Bridge processor. Is this so?
Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit and all programs are installed on a 120Gb OCZ Agility 3 solid state drive. My data drive is a 1Tb Seagate SATA 3 at 7200 RPM. I have a beautiful 21 inch ASUS vs228n LED monitor and LG blu-ray burner.
I did lots of editing with PrE 3 with a Dell 3.06 gHz hyperthreading desktop and Win XP. The output and even the preview monitoring was clear and stable. I am still capturing standard definition mini dv tape by firewire from a 3MOS Panasonic handycam, but plan to upgrade to HD 3MOS with flash memory. I make the preview monitor really small - about 7cm wide - in PR10, because the quality of the preview picture is much poorer than the quality that I experienced with the Premiere Elements 3 program with Win XP. Is this just an indication of memory-saving in PrE 10 previews? I expect output to be much superior, although still mpeg2-DVD quality until I upgrade my camera. I have set rendering on maximum bitrate.
Anyway, despite these reservations with preview quality, the GT640 seems to be performing fine. Picture quality in Photoshop, online and elsewhere on my computer is excellent.
I updated the nVidia display driver only yesterday to version 306.23.
Nearly all graphics cards forums are about gaming. I hope to see more forums about graphics in editing here.
What do you think of the 2Gb nVidia GT640 for editing with PrE 10 and Photoshop Elements 10? What would you say about picture quality in the PrE 10 monitor versus quality of output? Was picture quality in the PrE 3 monitor sharper and more stable, as I imagine?
Regards, Phil

Sheltie,
Thank you for the kind words. We all work very hard to help others with video-editing. Some of us also show up on other Adobe forums, depending on the products that we use most often.
Besides helping out, I also find that I learn something new every day, even about programs that I have used for decades. Heck, I just learned something new about PrE vs PrPro (my main NLE program), when I went to try and help a user. I probably actually use PrE more to test my theories, or to replicate a user's problem, than I do to actually edit my videos. Still, when applicable, I do real work in the program.
With about a dozen "regulars" here, if one of us is not around, several more usually are. Personally, I do not understand how Steve Grisetti and John T. can dedicate so very much time here. Steve is a noted author of books on PrE, PSE, Sony DVD Architect, and others, plus helps run a video/photography Web site, Muvipix.com, that is very active, and has so very much to offer. John T. is always under the watchful eye of The JobJarQueen, and gets dragged, kicking and screaming, out into the yard, or up on his roof, so can be gone for a bit.
Neale usually beats us all, since he's in the UK, and normally answers all the questions, that come in too late for us to see. He is also a PrE power-user, so beats me hands down.
I travel a great deal, but no one ever misses me. Was supposed to do a trip to Sydney last Dec., but had to cancel. Have not gotten details on the reschedule of that trip, but it would have been my first jaunt south of the Equator. Gotta' make that happen.
Good luck, and happy editing,
Hunt

PDF file graphics are poor - AI to Word to Acrobat

I've been learning to use AI to build the simple, mostly vector, grapics I want available to Word and other end points like web. Sizing and then exporting AI files to PNG and then using those directly in web apps works fine.
The story isn't so good for grapics put into Word.
After trying a number of options, taking the graphic to a TIFF worked best for viewing in Word. But when converted to a PDF the images (lines, text) errodes noticably. I'm assuming that's because I'm having Acrobat convert a raster image. I'm also assuming that manipulating the image (e.g. line width, font size, etc.) will not improve things although, if I'm wrong, I'd like to hear back.
I decided that getting the vector objects into EMF files would help but that actually produced poor results when viewed in Word.
It may be the method I'm using so if there's some wisdom about AI to Word to Acrobat I'd appreciate hearing it.
Thanks
Tom

I do not use WORD, but another word processor that allows me to see the format of the graphics as bitmaps or metafiles. The imported vector files are metafiles (this is a form of vector file used in Windows. Imported bitmap files are kept as bitmap files. There are some conversions that depend primarily on the compatibility of the graphic vector form and the windows metafile format. The results are generally excellent for me. What you could do is import in general formats like eps (include a bitmap if you want to see it in word and print to PDF to see the actual vector form), an emf file saved from AI (it should be retained as a vector form), and a bitmap, then also include clipboard versions of the same files from the original vector and bitmap files. You can judge for yourself. I am still interested in the comment from the other individual about not using the clipboard and why.
EPS is a vector graphic format developed by Adobe (as I recall, would have to look at my graphic book to be sure) along with PS files. It allows a bitmap preview file to be included -- what you see on screen in WORD. EMF files should be able to be loaded from the insert pictures menu in WORD (it is there in my WORD 2007 along with EPS and WMF files -- I do not there are any other formats that support vectors there). WMF is the old Windows MetaFile format and EMF is the Enhanced Windows MetaFile format. Actually, EMF and WMF files can include both vector and bitmap formats, similar in a sense to what Adobe can do I guess with PDF. The standard EMF is what is actually used in the clipboard. You can get more info at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Metafile. A similar discussion of EPS file is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encapsulated_PostScript. The main difference between the EMF and clipboard in WORD is that they are scaled differently when inserted. One problem with vector graphics in WORD 2007 and 2010 is that fonts of the text are not embedded. So someone without the fonts and looking at the WORD file would not see the proper text -- this is a MS issue introduced with their XML form of a DOC file. It is even messed up in their DOC compatibility format.
The AI file format is supposed to actually be a variation on the EPS file format from what I have read -- Apparently EPS is an outgrowth of AI?
In any case, the WORD file may not show the EPS file correctly. It appears that WORD 2007 does an attempt at displaying the result, but with errors (I have been looking at some line drawings and the WORD display shows line breaks. I printed the various forms of graphics in WORD to a PDF and the results for the EPS was not good. I think this may be a MS issue, but am not sure. Actually, the WORD converter to PDF even messed it up. That would suggest that at this point, EPS is not a good choice because of the way WORD handles things.
Don't know that my long winded description helps or not.
The EMF file can be inserted with the Insert>Picture menu. If you use the special paste, you can insert either WMF or WMF versions from the clipboard. Generally the results are the same. From my short experiment with EPS and WORD 2007, it looks like the result is a problem. However, that could have been the EPS save of my application, don't know. The best way to see what works for you is to do what I just did and that is create a vector graphic and save it as EMF and EPS. Then clipboard it into work and insert both the EMF and EPS in the picture menu. See what the result looks like and then also print to PDF and see what you get. Then draw your own conclusions rather than depending on someone like me who is just indicating results I have gotten.
Good luck.

Help me choose a good Graphic Card for my Laptop

Hello guys, first let me say I'm glad I've found this forum, It's been some time that I wanted to decide and buy a new graphic card for my laptop, but I guess this is the time and I'll start by asking for some help from you.
My laptop is HP Pavilion g6, the specs are the following (using CPU-z)
CPU: http://prntscr.com/5fqo9f
Caches: http://prntscr.com/5fqohx
Mainboard: http://prntscr.com/5fqomk
RAM: http://prntscr.com/5fqos4
SPD: http://prntscr.com/5fqoxh
Graphics: http://prntscr.com/5fqp1b
I wanted to ask you what kind of graphic card would suit my laptop, and which one do you recommend me buy?
I would to play all the latest games... I believe I need another 4GB of RAM memory, and I believe my CPU is good enough, what do you say guys?
Thank you!
This question was solved.
View Solution.

Hi,
What is the model/product of your laptop ? Generally speaking: we can't upgrade video card for nearly all laptops.
Regards.
BH
**Click the KUDOS thumb up on the left to say 'Thanks'**
Make it easier for other people to find solutions by marking a Reply 'Accept as Solution' if it solves your problem.

Converted pdf shows graphics with poor resolution

Hi,
Using keynote for iCloud, I noticed that while inserted graphics (and effects like shadow etc) appears fine in the browser screen, if I open the
PDF generated file (Acrobat Reader) the graphics are quite poor (jagged lines etc.). Any suggestions ?
Cheers,
Marco

Hi,
Using keynote for iCloud, I noticed that while inserted graphics (and effects like shadow etc) appears fine in the browser screen, if I open the
PDF generated file (Acrobat Reader) the graphics are quite poor (jagged lines etc.). Any suggestions ?
Cheers,
Marco

Good graphics cards for Gigabit Ethernet PowerMac?

Yesterday I ordered a 400 MHz (single processor, of course) Gigabit Ethernet PowerMac running OS 9.2.2 (most likely being upgraded to 10.3 in the future, and then 10.4 if I can get a good enough processor upgrade). I plan on giving it a pretty good deal of upgrades, the graphics card among them. I've researched it, but I'm not clear on how to know which graphics cards would be compatible and which ones wouldn't. Whether you can clear that up for me or simply recommend some good cards, I'd appreciate the help.
I want to spend $150 at the most on a good card, but I'm flexible. Thank you!

Hi-
The best available graphics card for the Gigabit Ethernet is a Radeon 9800 Pro.
No need to spend extra for the 256MB model, as the 128MB model usually benchmarks faster.
Look around eBay, and you should find one for $100-$120.
Make sure that the card you buy is stated as Mac compatible.

PrEL 2 or 7? and can PrEL use a good graphics card

I am using PrEl 2 at the moment on a P4 computer which are getting slow (also using Photoshop elements)
what is the benifit of upgrading to PrEl 7 and PES7?
if I buy a new motherboard and graphics card - is there some GPU functions that PrEL can use to make rendering etc faster?

In addition to Steve's tips above, here are some thoughts on your proposal:
1.) graphics card vs chip - most intel on-board graphics chips are minimal at best. I'd suggest going with an inexpensive card, and probably a lower-end ATI. I use more nVidia cards on my systems, but lately people have been having all sorts of issues, especially with the recent nVidia drivers. Guess that I am just lucky. At the same time, ATI's are getting high marks.
2.) your I/O is very important, as you state. I feel that 2 physical (no partitions!) HDD's is the minimum and three will be even better. As for SSD, I feel the price vs performance is still not even close. Maybe next generation (next week - next month - next year?), but not yet. Though a RAID configuration will likely be faster (depends on how one sets up their array), I would advise against using one for the system HDD. I would only consider them for media discs if one did any configuration ending in 0, i.e. 0, 30, 50.
3.) as for RAM, and taking Steve's comments to heart, I'd stick with XP, or Vista 32-bit for the OS, so you will be limited to 4GB RAM, knowing that your OS will only be able to use ~ 3.4GB of that. Depending on the application, the rest might not be totally wasted, but you will get that >3GB usage, and that would be worth it to me, even if ~ 0.6GB goes to "waste." All of my machines are running XP-Pro 32-bit w/ 4GB RAM. Some with the 3GB switch, and some without it.
4.) if you do go with the new MoBo, CPU and say 3x HDD's, pay close attention to your PSU (Power Suppy), and make sure that it can handle the new CPU, plus any/all HDD's. This is often overlooked, when one is upgrading.
Good luck,
Hunt

Looking for a good graphics card for World of Warcraft

I've been looking around these forums and it seems like the consensus is to go with the ATI HD 4870. I'm more a fan of NVidia, but if it works it works.
I have a first gen mac pro and just want to confirm that the ATI card will work on my machine. Right now I'm still using the stock (6800?) card and WoW doesn't look all that great at it's optimal settings on a 1900x1200 display - I'd like to maximize the settings as much as possible.
I am completely open to any other suggestions though. On the side I do some graphical work with Maya and Photoshop so any new card should certainly help out with those as well.
Thanks,
Adam Lawton

To this list I would add:
Radeon 2600XT
Nvidia 8800GT EFI32 version
You must purchase the Mac Pro version of these. With the 8800GT, it needs to be the EFI32 version for 2006/07 Mac Pro.
Sadly, neither the 2600 not the 8800 are easily available new. (at a reasonable price) EBay or your local Craigslist (in big city)

Good graphics for black and white books?

Can anyone suggest a website where I can get good compostion ideas for black and white work, layouts for books? Actually I’m working on a book on house designs so would like to get ideas for visual layouts for the same, captions, blow-ups etc.The book would have 3d sketchup model views of different types of house designs.

Maybe a library or bookstore would be a better source, since you're designing a book.

Bitmap graphics print poorly in PDF

For bitmap graphics, I find that the online version has to be
shown at 100%. When the true image is bigger and I specify a
smaller size, the image "crunches" in an illegible way. So I make
the image size correct for showing at 100%. But this same image
comes out ugly and often unreadable in the PDF version. This
problem occurs not only with screen shots but even with Visio
diagrams saved as GIF. How are people handling this problem?

ID @ 100%
PDF @ 100%
The PDF always looks this way, irrespective of the magnification. You can even see variations in size of each dot along the vertical line.
I've tried outputting from ID with and without compressed line art, and have adjusted Acrobat Pro to smooth (and not) for LCD screens. No dice.
One other thing: don't know why there's a size difference between ID and the PDF. Both set 100% @ 96 DPI. Odd.
Ta,
NR.

6600GT: Good in benchmarks, poor in games?

Hi,
I have just gotten a MSI 6600GT (AGP).
Benchmarks seems to perform as expected, 3dmark03 gives 7399, 3dmark05
gives 3037. Googling around, it seems to be ok scores?
However in games the performance is far lower than I expected.
In Counter-Strike:Source video stress test (1280x1024, all settings
high, reflect world, trilinar, no aa) FPS scores 47. In Half-Life 2 FPS
goes from around ~25-30 to ~60 (getting off train in the start =
~30FPS, going though train station = ~50FPS, outside station = ~30FPS).
In Anarchy Online (1280x1024, medium settings) FPS goes from ~20 to ~60
depending on scene.
What the heck is going on? Why the discrepancy between benchmarks and
real games? Surely the FPS in games are way low?
Rest of system is [email protected], ASUS P4PE motherboard, 2x512Mb PC3200 RAM.
Chieftech 360W PS. Driver is downloaded from MSI, version 71.22.
BIOSes for MB and 6600GT are the latest.

Quote
Originally posted by Mikael
Hi,
I have just gotten a MSI 6600GT (AGP).
Benchmarks seems to perform as expected, 3dmark03 gives 7399, 3dmark05
gives 3037. Googling around, it seems to be ok scores?
However in games the performance is far lower than I expected.
In Counter-Strike:Source video stress test (1280x1024, all settings
high, reflect world, trilinar, no aa) FPS scores 47. In Half-Life 2 FPS
goes from around ~25-30 to ~60 (getting off train in the start =
~30FPS, going though train station = ~50FPS, outside station = ~30FPS).
In Anarchy Online (1280x1024, medium settings) FPS goes from ~20 to ~60
depending on scene.
What the heck is going on? Why the discrepancy between benchmarks and
real games? Surely the FPS in games are way low?
Rest of system is [email protected], ASUS P4PE motherboard, 2x512Mb PC3200 RAM.
Chieftech 360W PS. Driver is downloaded from MSI, version 71.22.
BIOSes for MB and 6600GT are the latest.
Well i got the same problem and I got a Asus Motherboard to and I have tried "EVERYTHING" (all drivers, updated everything, format) .
This is in any new games low fps but sometimes higher for some seconds.
Another funny part is that I have the exactly same FPS with the lowest settings and the highest. Don't know whats problem... maybe the asus motherboard chipset?. I know that nvidia fixed a issue with SIS chipsets but that only helped the graphic corruptions/artifacting problems. I'm getting crazy over this... really considering about doing something "bad" soon :hypecrite:.

Really good graphic games for iPad Mini??

Hello, I really want to make my ipad mini's GPU and CPU work at 100%. Are there any free great graphic games for the ipad mini?

Go to the App Store in iTunes and start searching

Good Graphics Render Poorly

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for