Yesterday i started to play point lookout, and with a big surprise i found a big fps drop (from 30 in the wastes to 18). I tried to fix this by taking off the AA, but little changes..so i edited the FALLOUT.INI file and changed the value iPresentInterval from 1 to 0, and the value iFPSclamp from 0 to 60(i also tried 20, 30, 40). The very strange thing is that with the value at 60 I play in slow-mo, with 20,30 and 40 I found some improvement (micro stuttering finally gone). So you'd think, what's the matter? Well, while looking to the sky or the ground, my fps jumped from 18 to 50 and the speed itself of the game increased a lot. I really dont know how to fix this, other then setting the INI to its original settings, moreover i'd really like to know if theres a way to improve Point Lookout performance.

I run it with the ultra settings and a 4x AA

My pc specs are:
3gb ram (i'm also using a tool which allows fo3 to use more than its native 2gb)
2,87 ghz processor
ATI radeon x1950pro 512mb

By clamping the FPS at 60, you are telling your computer to ONLY show 60 FPS at all times. Now since your computer would normally dip to 18 FPS, it needs to make that 60 FPS because that is what you told it to do, and that is why you get the slow-motion effect.

Now, onto your problem. Nor really a problem, as simple understanding of hardware explains why you get the slowdown.


If this is indeed your graphics card, then this is why you are getting the slowdown. It is rather old and weak. But why does the game speed up when looking at the sky? Well, its a simple concept of not having your graphics card render what it does not see, so when looking at the sky, you cant see the surrounding landscape and objects, so the card is only rendering the sky, thus the "boost" in performance.


This is another issue. You only have 3GB and you are giving the game access to more then 2. So you are basically forcing yourself into a bottleneck as the operating system and all background applications require ram as well.


this tells nothing. Is it a dual core or single core?

Partly wrong answer there. Here are the side by side comparisons with the official requiremnets from Bethesda (which are inaccurate, as usual).

X1950 Pro vs. recommended HD 3850
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=466&card2=546

X1950 Pro vs. Minimum X850 Pro
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=466&card2=54

The accurate anologue to the Geforce card named was the X800 Pro, or maybe even X800 Vanilla; they just didn't try it with the Omega Drivers. The X1950 is closer to the HD 3850 performance by quite a bit, than it is to the X850.

An X1950 Pro is getting somewhat long in the tooth, but hasn't fallen far enough to cause a lot of problems for its owners:

- ATI Radeon HD 3800 series
- ATI Radeon HD 4600 series
- ATI Radeon HD 2900 series
- ATI Radeon X1950 series
- ATI Radeon X1900 series
- NVIDIA GeForce 7900 series
- ATI Radeon X1800 series
- ATI Radeon X850 series

That's the way the Radeon ranks looked when the 3800s were new, and I know that the HD 2900 XT actually was faster than an HD 3850, but the developers seem to prefer to lump them all together, so the "series" averages moved the 2900s there same as the individual ranks of the HD 4670 and HD 3850 don't show up (roughly equal for speed).

P. S. The above is a development of the lists created for Oblivion by NTK.

I got a dual core, anyway the ram tool just give access to additional memory to fallout, which is not a problem, in fact with task manager i noticed that my system only uses 864 mb ram, and fallout a maximum of 1.600 mb. So this result in other 600mb free ram space, which is quite good.
I gotta say that I always played with the AA off, because my card settings went in conflict with fallout 3 settings, but the fps were quite good. Sure, I also got something like 5gb of mod installed :clap: , but id never expected such a drop in performances.