BFG:
"However if framerate is your only concern as you've hinted in your posts then why aren't you running at 1024 x 768 to instead achieve 105 FPS? Or how about 640 x 480 for a possible 120 FPS?"
Actually, sometimes I do run at 10X7X32 to get those extra fps. Framerate is life in the deathmatch.
"I agree with you that quality anisotropic impacts the performance quite a lot which is why I use performance anisotropic instead, producing performance hits of around 10%-15%"
That's true, but the performance IQ seems a bit more ragged to me.
"Silly comments like this do little to further your cause."
Perhaps, but you have totally disregarded the perspective of the online gamer in your comments. How likely is it the FXs equivalent of ATIs "performance" aniso doesn't offer saisfactory performance?
"Afterall in your lame jokes you didn't seem to feel that addressing jagged edges was a priority."
Hmmm. I thought my jokes were fairly clever and humorous. In any case, 12X10 jaggies are pretty small jaggies.
"Oh, and you do also realise that higher resolutions do more than just increase the visual quality of a game, right? Higher resolutions make targets both easier to see and easier to hit at long ranges. So unless you have a significantly higher framerate, you're at a disadvantage to anyone running at a higher resolution than you are."
Well, for the most part, online shooters are done at fairly close range. For me, 12X10 and 10X7 offer a good compromise. When I want to snipe, I zoom in with alternative fire mode.
"Of those "100s" I wonder how many have overclocked their boards, have poor power supplies and/or other hardware faults."
Well you tell me: I get the scrolling lines with an Asus P4PE (a better motherboard than yours) an Antec 430Watt True Power (a better psu than yours) a P4 2.53 (the same cpu as yours, albeit .13 slower) name brand PC2700, SB Audigy (same as you) Sony HTM A400 19" ($450 after rebate) etc. Not cheap stuff, and on this rig, I got the lines. Nothing overclocked.