Replaced 4850CF with gtx285 and wow!

Astrodave

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,082
Anyone on the fence with a similar decision you won't regret it. I have been running 4850CF since the day they were released last summer and fought through about 4 months of really, REALLY bad driver support from ati before the cards were performing well and I had no issues with drivers any more.

I was real close to replacing them last December due to driver issues until 8.12HF came out and fixed most of the issues so I decided to keep them. Well microcenter has the BFG OC gtx 285 on sale this month for $289 so I decided to pick one up at that price. All I can say is wow! ALL games are much smoother now and the frame rate is either the same as before or better but somehow the games are much smoother. I can also play with 4x AA and much higher resolutions at smoother frame rates than before. I can play cod5 at 3840x1024 on my th2g with all settings maxed and 2x AA at 45+ fps and on the 4850CF cards I could forget about that. FSX gained almost 40% better frame rates because ati cards are lousy in the MS sims.

I think I had just gotten used to the ati cards and thought they were good but in fact they really weren't. I am by no means a phanboi of any camp because I have had SERIOUS driver issues with both sides in the past 10 years of gaming that they have both been relevant but the gtx 285 is hands down a better solution for me than the 4850CF cards ever were. Thought I would share my experience for anyone else in the same boat.

And I forgot to add: my cpu runs 4C cooler now :)
 
Last edited:
Dual cards = microstuttering = choppy feeling even at the same framerate. I personally have avoided dual-card/chip setups as much as possible, with only a brief stint with 8800GT SLI before dropping one due to that. It affects both sides... a faster single card is always going to be much smoother, and in the case of nVidia, the drivers in my experience are much better (I tried a 4850, then a 4870, before settling on my GTX 280).
 
Heh, you know this is just an invitation for people to tell you that you're imagining things and that multi-GPU setups are just fine. But it's your money so as long as you're happy.....

What did you do with the 4850's?
 
I've only had a 6800gt and a 7800gs before getting CF 4850. I do wish I had stuck with nVidia. I do agree with NVidia having better drivers. I do appreciate the power of the crossfire setup but I really wish that it was utilized.

However I would never upgrade from 4850 to 285
 
Well the proof is in the pudding. I'm just kicking myself for waiting this long. I should have done it a while ago. I'm not looking for an Efight between who's better nvidia or ati. I just thought I would share my experience. I will probably craigslist the 4850's. I was going to throw one of them in my htpc so I could take my entire home theatre system to hdmi but with the tv and receiver I have it would take some effort to do that which I won't get into here so I will probably just keep the 8800gts that's in there instead.
 
However I would never upgrade from 4850 to 285

I thought the same thing because they are so evenly matched in benchmarks you see online etc. I figured for $289 I would give it a try because I am a big simmer and my dodosim helicopter just came out so I am simming a lot more these days. I could never have any clouds with ati cards because the frame rate drops in half with them and I knew that nvidia has no issues like that in FSX. I knew I could always return it to microcenter within 30 days if there was no increase in performance. There is a huge increase across the board though in every game.

Grid: no more annoying 3fps in the menus when 8xAA is selected. Frame rate is lower but gameplay is smoother.

Tomb Raider series: Forget about it. Nvidia owns this space. Night and day faster on the 285.

Flight sims: Much smoother on the 285

Cod4 and codwaw: same frame rate at 1920x1200 with some options checked but select all settings to high and 4xAA and the 4850's would gag. The 285 eats max settings up. I can even play this game on the triplehead now @3840x1024 which I could never do before.

Fear2: Much smoother again.

With all the reviews out there comparing all the cards you just don't get the REAL story. I doubt I will ever go crossfire again after this. Good gaming all.
 
I think I had just gotten used to the ati cards and thought they were good but in fact they really weren't.
AMD makes good cards and they seem to care more about price/performance ratio than Nvidia does. Nvidia has the chance to be simply the card of choice for everyone but they won't be because of 1.) Their elitist attitude that they can never do anything wrong and the world must bend to their will and 2.) Since they make the fastest cards they could just sell them at the price of AMD's "equivalent" and basically have all the sales sinse they are better per dollar, but they won't do it.

Nvidia CEO "We're 30% faster so we charge 30% more"
Nvidia Rep "But sir, nobody is looking for cards in that price range and ... <interupted>"
Nvidia CEO "I don't care"
Nvidia Rep "Don't you think if we had more competitive pricing that we would be ...<interupted>"
Nvidia CEO "You're fired!"
 
Use that 285 for F@H when not gaming. You'll find out why most folder's use Nvidia. ;)
 
Yeah I agree with that. Nvidia is still on my $h1tlist from their vista driver fiasco in 2007 as well and I have not forgotten about that. They both have their issues and I am not partial to either of them but the 285 really is a much better solution for me. Ati cards are good so I didn't mean to say they weren't good. I meant to say for me I thought those cards were performing well until I installed the 285 and saw the difference. I would venture to say the resolutions that I run and the 512mbytes of ram on the 4850's coupled with the inherent issues with CF are the reason for the differences I am seeing between the 2 solutions.
 
Cod4 and codwaw: same frame rate at 1920x1200 with some options checked but select all settings to high and 4xAA and the 4850's would gag.

This sort of makes me think maybe there was something wrong with your setup, since my 4830 pretty much runs both those games at 19*12 with everything maxed and 4xAA without a hitch. Can't say much for the other games as I've not played them so much, but at least Fear2 I remember also playing nice and smooth with maxed or near-maxed settings with the single 4830.
 
This isn't company dependent as much as it's dual card dependent. Any time you can get a single card to do the work of a dual card set-up - even if it involves overclocking the hell out of it and using some elaborate cooling solution - do it. If I could get a single card that could handle 2560x1600 adequately, I would grab it in a second (providing the price isn't astronomical).

Glad you're happy with your purchase Astrodave :cool:.
 
I had a similiar experience just last week when I upgraded from HD4850 in Xfire to HD4770 in Xfire. :)
 
Wow I'm surprised it took this long before the obligatory "there must have been something wrong with your setup" line. Nope, everything was working tip top. Sorry to disappoint. The 285 just really does hand the 4850CF its ass at higher resolutions with higher levels of AA and AF. The 4850's can't even begin to keep up at 3840x1024 and are at full steam just to keep things at high at 1920 while the 285 is just getting warmed up in that space. The frame rate was never the problem really, it was just the smoothness factor due to the dips from min to max.
 
I thought the same thing because they are so evenly matched in benchmarks you see online etc. I figured for $289 I would give it a try because I am a big simmer and my dodosim helicopter just came out so I am simming a lot more these days. I could never have any clouds with ati cards because the frame rate drops in half with them and I knew that nvidia has no issues like that in FSX. I knew I could always return it to microcenter within 30 days if there was no increase in performance. There is a huge increase across the board though in every game.

Grid: no more annoying 3fps in the menus when 8xAA is selected. Frame rate is lower but gameplay is smoother.

Tomb Raider series: Forget about it. Nvidia owns this space. Night and day faster on the 285.

Flight sims: Much smoother on the 285

Cod4 and codwaw: same frame rate at 1920x1200 with some options checked but select all settings to high and 4xAA and the 4850's would gag. The 285 eats max settings up. I can even play this game on the triplehead now @3840x1024 which I could never do before.

Fear2: Much smoother again.

With all the reviews out there comparing all the cards you just don't get the REAL story. I doubt I will ever go crossfire again after this. Good gaming all.

Grid: you are running on a 512MB VRAM of course you will lag...
Tom Raider: Trash game in general.
Flight Sims: Old games, I dont see how 60+fps make it more smoother..
CoD4 and CoD:WaW: same as Grid, 512MB VRAM will not hold it, no idea why you even put AA on a 512VRAM for... and no, CoD4 no matter what you have, ATI will generally have way higher fps on CF setup than top nVidia card, and more smoother of course...
FEAR 2: same thing as above....this game is ATI favor.....no idea how you get it smoother unless you push AA again on a 512 VRAM....

Overall, GTX 285 its a good choice if you want to push up the AA since it have 1G VRAM than a 512 limit, and on the other side, why you even bother to push AA when you have such small VRAM to push? This is your own problem not the card problem...

And please do not start the ATI Driver problem again, they both have their problems, and no, I never experience ATI driver problem beside 9.1 they remove the Multi-Core Optimize things.... but 9.2 came with it, therefore no big deal.. nVidia have something even worse that cause you restart every time due to some odd sys file crash.....seriously annoying..

And no, ATI cards are not bad, they are pretty good if you actually use them "CORRECTLY", such as pushing 4xAA in a 512VRAM, that is just pure retarded....
 
Obviously it can't keep up at 3840x1024, that's self-explanatory with the 512mb vRAM. I was just pointing out that I seem to have had better gaming experiences than you at the same resolution with a single, slower ATI card.

In the case of the CoD games, even one 4850 should max them with 4xAA at 19*12 resolution and give you a smooth experience. That's why I found the whole "select all settings to high and 4xAA and the 4850's would gag." line a bit odd. Like I said, I've been running at those settings with my OC'ed 4830 for months, with no framerate issues or stuttering at all.

Did you try playing the games with just one of the cards to see if that made a difference?
 
Shansoft needs to take a class in tact and learn how to read, but maybe it's his English skills so he didn't understand what I wrote. The whole point of my thread was to say that in higher rezs at 4x AA and higher the 285 is rocking the crossfire setup. Since I play in this realm this is why I am so amazed at the difference. For lower rezs at 1680 and below I'm sure the 4850's are all I would have ever needed. They are all good cards but there is no competition between the 4850CF solution and the 285 at anything over 1680. Very worthy upgrade for the price.

And NO, the tomb raider games are not trash. Maybe in your own mind but not in reality. And flight sims are not 'games' to get a good frame rate in. They are tools to use to learn to fly that some of us take very seriously but I don't expect you to know anything about that.
 
Yeah I agree with that. Nvidia is still on my $h1tlist from their vista driver fiasco in 2007 as well and I have not forgotten about that. They both have their issues and I am not partial to either of them but the 285 really is a much better solution for me. Ati cards are good so I didn't mean to say they weren't good. I meant to say for me I thought those cards were performing well until I installed the 285 and saw the difference. I would venture to say the resolutions that I run and the 512mbytes of ram on the 4850's coupled with the inherent issues with CF are the reason for the differences I am seeing between the 2 solutions.


You were running out of video memory at the higher resolutions with the CF 4850 setup. The main reason you see a big difference at higher resolutions is because you needed more video memory.

If you had gotten a couple of 1GB 4850s, I would venture to say that you wouldn't have seen near as much difference.. if at all.

Also, were both 4850s running at x16? If not, that could also be another reason.
 
I wrote a lengthy response to this absurd thread and decided it would probably fall on deaf ears. So here's the Uber Short Version - 512mb 1920 + AA+ AF + EYE CANDY = big no no.
Anyone who doesn't get that should not start a fanboi thread.
 
Well, it's not quite as simple as that. It's *very* game-dependant, as is obvious if you look at a review that has both the 512mb version and the 1gb version of the same GPU. In some games the 1gb version just won't give you higher fps, even at 25*16 rez, while in other games, most notably Crysis, the 512mb cards start running out at 19*12 even before applying AA.
 
A lot of people look at reviews of 4850 512MB CF and see numbers similar to or higher than a GTX 285, and assume they'll get more from 4850 CF for less than the cost of a GTX 285. OP is saying that isn't true. Bitch all you want to about how 4850 512MB CF was wrong for his situation, but you're just distracting from the point of the post.
 
Shansoft needs to take a class in tact and learn how to read, but maybe it's his English skills so he didn't understand what I wrote. The whole point of my thread was to say that in higher rezs at 4x AA and higher the 285 is rocking the crossfire setup. Since I play in this realm this is why I am so amazed at the difference. For lower rezs at 1680 and below I'm sure the 4850's are all I would have ever needed. They are all good cards but there is no competition between the 4850CF solution and the 285 at anything over 1680. Very worthy upgrade for the price.

And NO, the tomb raider games are not trash. Maybe in your own mind but not in reality. And flight sims are not 'games' to get a good frame rate in. They are tools to use to learn to fly that some of us take very seriously but I don't expect you to know anything about that.

tell me more, I think you are the one who need to take a class on how to read.....

my point state above, WHY WOULD YOU WAN TO PUSH AA/AF ON A 512 VRAM!!!

and also 4850 have 2 version if you didn't notice.... 512MB and 1G, try out 1G first then you will realize you are just stating another point for "512MB isn't enough" rather than GTX 285 can handle games better....

and no, Tomb Raider in generals are just trash lately, I admit they did pretty good on first few game, but the later one....PASS...
 
A lot of people look at reviews of 4850 512MB CF and see numbers similar to or higher than a GTX 285, and assume they'll get more from 4850 CF for less than the cost of a GTX 285. OP is saying that isn't true. Bitch all you want to about how 4850 512MB CF was wrong for his situation, but you're just distracting from the point of the post.

The point being? Ineptitude and lack of foresight means ATi XFire performance sucks?
Gimme a break.
I would also pint out that buying a 285 GTX is an act of foolishness when a GTX275 does 99% of the same job for less money, is that a better point for you?
Sure doesn't build up the OP in my eyes...
Even HD4870 512mb Xfire performance is not great at 1900 and up full blown eye candy, if you haven't figured out why yet, join our OP in clueless land.
 
A lot of people look at reviews of 4850 512MB CF and see numbers similar to or higher than a GTX 285, and assume they'll get more from 4850 CF for less than the cost of a GTX 285. OP is saying that isn't true. Bitch all you want to about how 4850 512MB CF was wrong for his situation, but you're just distracting from the point of the post.

Thank you. At least someone reads :)

And 4850CF with eye candy and AA and AF won't ALWAYS gag in every game as has been pointed out. Just with some of the games I play I was running into a lot of that, but not all of them. Lol @ starting the phanboi thread comment. Not my intention at all since I am a fan of neither and have been burnt by both.
 
Last edited:
I would also pint out that buying a 285 GTX is an act of foolishness when a GTX275 does 99% of the same job for less money, is that a better point for you?
Sure doesn't build up the OP in my eyes...

Even when the gtx 285 was $289 at microcenter? Think again champ. I was all set to head to bestbuy to grab the 275 before I saw the ad at microcenter. I mean I was headed there on my lunch break until I saw the price at microcenter. I paid $30 more for 15% more performance. I would say that counts for performance per dollar. Only reason I bought it.
 
I swear I hate posting on this site at all any more. Constant attacks by noobs for ANYTHING you say or do. This place has really gone down hill from the reviews to the general BS that is allowed to go on here. Sad...
 
I swear I hate posting on this site at all any more. Constant attacks by noobs for ANYTHING you say or do. This place has really gone down hill from the reviews to the general BS that is allowed to go on here. Sad...

then why you even post it in first place?

attacks by noobs? LOL ...... I don't want to reply too clearly, but most people will definitely know what I will say on this ...

look at what people reply to your post before you start anything further...

I don't want to have personal attack or anything, but you really need to realize what exactly you trying to say on your post instead flaming over everyone here...

I think this is your main topic "512VRAM isn't going to keep up the eye candy"...

rather than "4850CF doesn't work as advertise, GTX 285 WORKS BETTER"

you might need to take some writing class before you start another post :rolleyes:
 
I swear I hate posting on this site at all any more. Constant attacks by noobs for ANYTHING you say or do. This place has really gone down hill from the reviews to the general BS that is allowed to go on here. Sad...

I wasnt going to post until you said this, its often not worth the hassle once the kids start posting.
Your original post was well intended, but sadly this kind of topic always ends up with a cat fight.

Its possible you didnt realise that 512MB VRam per card would be a limit, so didnt think to point it out.
I'm cool with that, no need for the "anti fanboi" fanboi's to rip you a new one.
You do have a case anyway given that you find the motion smoother.
Chin up :)
 
Apparently shansoft doesn't get it. The OP wanted to play with all of the I candy on but couldn't because of a lack of vram so he got another card that had more vram. I don't get why you are so worked up about this shansoft?

And I am no fanboy of either as I have owned both ATI and Nvidia hand have been happy with both. Although my last ATI card was a 9800Pro the main reason I have a GTX260 now is that I got a really great deal on it 7 months ago for $130 after MIR and live cashback and the GTX260 is just now hitting that price on Ebay. Most of the games that I play are old (~5 years) and don't scale well with either Xfire or SLI so I will pass on those for the time being. The only reason that I upgraded to a GTX260 is that I went from 1280 by 1024 to 1920 by 1200 (75.8% increase) and my old 8800GTS320 just couldn't handle it on my games.

Also realize that everyone has a different hardware setup that can have an effect on scores on card setups that are normally benchmarked to be very close. And remember that numbers are just that, numbers, and the only thing that really matters is what you see and if it looks better to you and you are happy then nothing else matters.
 
tell me more, I think you are the one who need to take a class on how to read.....

my point state above, WHY WOULD YOU WAN TO PUSH AA/AF ON A 512 VRAM!!!

and also 4850 have 2 version if you didn't notice.... 512MB and 1G, try out 1G first then you will realize you are just stating another point for "512MB isn't enough" rather than GTX 285 can handle games better....

and no, Tomb Raider in generals are just trash lately, I admit they did pretty good on first few game, but the later one....PASS...

I agree with you entirely. astrodave probably is just looking for a reaction. I agree that the 4850 crossfire setup would be faster.
 
[21CW]killerofall;1034115129 said:
Apparently shansoft doesn't get it. The OP wanted to play with all of the I candy on but couldn't because of a lack of vram so he got another card that had more vram. I don't get why you are so worked up about this shansoft?

And I am no fanboy of either as I have owned both ATI and Nvidia hand have been happy with both. Although my last ATI card was a 9800Pro the main reason I have a GTX260 now is that I got a really great deal on it 7 months ago for $130 after MIR and live cashback and the GTX260 is just now hitting that price on Ebay. Most of the games that I play are old (~5 years) and don't scale well with either Xfire or SLI so I will pass on those for the time being. The only reason that I upgraded to a GTX260 is that I went from 1280 by 1024 to 1920 by 1200 (75.8% increase) and my old 8800GTS320 just couldn't handle it on my games.

Also realize that everyone has a different hardware setup that can have an effect on scores on card setups that are normally benchmarked to be very close. And remember that numbers are just that, numbers, and the only thing that really matters is what you see and if it looks better to you and you are happy then nothing else matters.

he did not mention anything about VRAM, apparently you did not read it through and just want to flame over someone....

Also, it is his fault from start trying to push AA/AF on a small VRAM without knowing it would be a limit for him...

or maybe I should even make a thread out and say "I replace my GTX 260 SLI with a 4890 and I couldn't be more happier on that due to GTX 260 SLI lag like shit in 16xAA/16xAF on my native resolution, and I am not a fanboy, it just not work as advertise"

you see the odd point there? it's not the card that have the problem, its about settings and knowing what and why it will not be smooth instead just saying it doesn't work like other have said.

And I do believe on this forum, the VRAM problem should be a general knowledge for most of the user here, especially for someone who has been here since 4 years ago.
From that point, then take a look on the word he use on the starting thread "fanboy" right off the post.... Seem a bit awkward huh?
 
he did not mention anything about VRAM, apparently you did not read it through and just want to flame over someone....

Also, it is his fault from start trying to push AA/AF on a small VRAM without knowing it would be a limit for him...

or maybe I should even make a thread out and say "I replace my GTX 260 SLI with a 4890 and I couldn't be more happier on that due to GTX 260 SLI lag like shit in 16xAA/16xAF on my native resolution, and I am not a fanboy, it just not work as advertise"

you see the odd point there? it's not the card that have the problem, its about settings and knowing what and why it will not be smooth instead just saying it doesn't work like other have said.

And I do believe on this forum, the VRAM problem should be a general knowledge for most of the user here, especially for someone who has been here since 4 years ago.
From that point, then take a look on the word he use on the starting thread "fanboy" right off the post.... Seem a bit awkward huh?

Don't sweat it and just let it go. You have the step up from each of his previous setups (4850-4870CF, and a GTX295), so it's obvious you'd have a better hand at what's being said.

Trust me, arguing with people here will get you nowhere... there's a difference between the truth and what they wanted to hear.
 
Don't sweat it and just let it go.
Words to live by. There are many people who post on these forums who really need to learn how to do this. This is why this will be my last post in this thread and why I won't comment further on anyone's previous posts in this thread.
End of Line. (Like my Tron reference?:D)
 
He said that he is not experiencing microstutter any more, and is getting faster framerates with a GTX 285 vs. a CF 4850 512. What part of that is false? Are you saying he is outright lying about the framerate and microstutter being better? What does it have to do with the statement that one has a different amount of VRAM? Obviously he is correct... he didn't have 4850 1GB CF so, no, that is not something you can use to defend the *512mb* version. Even if he hypothetically had, the microstutter is still better as is the minimum framerate (which is what determines smoothness because constant dips kill the experience) on a GTX 285 vs. two 4850's.

Your arguments are moot.

I swear I hate posting on this site at all any more. Constant attacks by noobs for ANYTHING you say or do. This place has really gone down hill from the reviews to the general BS that is allowed to go on here. Sad...

I absolutely agree... there's a seriously large amount of trolls lately that seem to be slipping under the radar with ease and constantly. Many forums seem to be becoming more hostile in general, but some I visit are seemingly unaffected (different demographics perhaps). I still visit here because some people who are knowledgeable do, but I no longer come here exclusively like I used to and not really need to/want to bother visiting others.
 
Even when the gtx 285 was $289 at microcenter? Think again champ. I was all set to head to bestbuy to grab the 275 before I saw the ad at microcenter. I mean I was headed there on my lunch break until I saw the price at microcenter. I paid $30 more for 15% more performance. I would say that counts for performance per dollar. Only reason I bought it.

We're talking about 50$ champ (if you'd bothered to shop around online) - and no 15% for 50$ is not a good buy in my book.
And I'm backing off, apparently knowing how something is supposed to play out cause you bothered to do your research is not a good thing in this thread.
Congrats on the new card, main thing is your happy (too bad you started this thread with anything but 'I love my GTX285').
 
You guys all need to relax. OP was simply stating his experience when switching from 4850 to 285. Rather than bash him, we should simply keep his experience in mind when considering similar upgrade paths.

I dunno if it is relevant, but I have a 4870x2 and I don't have any problems in any games as far a smoothness with AA cranked all the way. Personally, I wouldn't make the switch if I already had the 4850's. Somebody else might though...

just food for thought
 
Anyone on the fence with a similar decision you won't regret it. I have been running 4850CF since the day they were released last summer and fought through about 4 months of really, REALLY bad driver support from ati before the cards were performing well and I had no issues with drivers any more.

I was real close to replacing them last December due to driver issues until 8.12HF came out and fixed most of the issues so I decided to keep them. Well microcenter has the BFG OC gtx 285 on sale this month for $289 so I decided to pick one up at that price. All I can say is wow! ALL games are much smoother now and the frame rate is either the same as before or better but somehow the games are much smoother. I can also play with 4x AA and much higher resolutions at smoother frame rates than before. I can play cod5 at 3840x1024 on my th2g with all settings maxed and 2x AA at 45+ fps and on the 4850CF cards I could forget about that. FSX gained almost 40% better frame rates because ati cards are lousy in the MS sims.

I think I had just gotten used to the ati cards and thought they were good but in fact they really weren't. I am by no means a phanboi of any camp because I have had SERIOUS driver issues with both sides in the past 10 years of gaming that they have both been relevant but the gtx 285 is hands down a better solution for me than the 4850CF cards ever were. Thought I would share my experience for anyone else in the same boat.

And I forgot to add: my cpu runs 4C cooler now :)

Congrats on the new card. I just purchased the GTX275 myself which is proving very smooth in every simulation I run. I cannot explain it...I personally had good luck with the early ATI's Radeons as far back as the 7200 series.The newest single card solutions however, though very fast seemed to suffer from a low minimum to higher maximum deviation which wound up causing me slight microstutter.They are very fast framerate-wise in FPS but in Racing or Flying games..stutter alot in playback.
 
Last edited:
Congrats on the new card. I just purchased the GTX275 myself....which is proving very smooth in every simulation I run. I cannot explain it...I've personally had good luck with ATI's early Radeons as far back as the 7200 series. The newest single card solutions, though very fast, seemed to suffer from a lower min and higher max deviation which wound up causing me slight microstutter. They were very fast framerate-wise (at peak) in FPS but in Racing or Flying...very stuttery..

"seem" to suffer or it actually suffering from it makes a huge differences between it...

I personally does not see any stuttering at all after that stupid 3870X2 and 9800GX2...

Its not my good luck or anything, there is nothing that makes me getting any lower min fps on each side, green or red, both runs very similar in most cases, beside those game that heavily flavor on either side, which those cases are just having a bad fps in general...

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTYzNiw3LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

check up that apple to apple, maybe you should try ATI card again before there is another topic about min/max fps :D
 
Back
Top