1

I have two new (compared to my Win95) boxes (OK, they're both over 3 years old but whatever). One runs WinXP SP3 and the other one has WinVista SP2.

The XP box has an onboard VIA/S3G UniChrome IGP (64 MB) graphics card, 2GB of RAM and a AMD Athlon XP (2.08GhZ) processor.

The Vista has a Radeon X300/X550 Series (128 MB) graphics card(sorry, I don't know the exact model number; I bought it used to replace a fried GeForce 7300), 2GB of RAM and an Intel Core 2 Duo (1.8GhZ) processor.

The interesting thing is, on the XP; the 3D Text screensaver runs very slowly and the iTunes visualizer can only get to 10FPS max, but Empty Clip runs at 50-60 FPS.

On the Vista, the screensavers run fast, the iTunes visualizer gets 20-25FPS, but Empty Clip only gets 5FPS max!

Does anybody know why one box can get great FPS but the other one doesn't and vice versa?
Both cards support DX9.

8
  • What's the mystery? One has much better graphics hardware than the other. Empty Clip is 2D, so isn't harmed too much by the lack of a real GPU. Oct 31, 2011 at 0:00
  • but then why would it run so slowly on one with a (comparatively) good GPU? Oct 31, 2011 at 2:19
  • Hard to say without knowing what CPU that machine has. Is it an E6300? If so, for single-threaded programs, the performance of the Athlon XP 1.8GHz is comparable. Oct 31, 2011 at 2:32
  • yes it is an E6300 - but wouldn't the graphics rendering run on the GPU anyways? Oct 31, 2011 at 18:03
  • 1
    Maybe the game is not using the same set of features (like resolution, textures quality, anti-aliasing etc) on both cards. Maybe your settings on the VIA card are less-demanding than your settings on the ATI card. I ran the game out of curiosity and I could not find a way to change the settings, so the game is probably deciding for you and is not doing a good job at it.
    – yms
    Nov 1, 2011 at 0:41

0

You must log in to answer this question.