Yes, the manual has lots of mistakes in it. This is just one of them. fps_max works fine at 1200 and I recall someone else having a screenshot of it at 1300 fps (or something extremely high). In my test, I used 1200 and got only 273 fps (with a range from 250-something to 290-something. Whether I used v-sync as on or off it made no difference. The d3d_triplebuffer setting made absolutely no difference. My 2D game is an excellent frame rate tester when in frame advance or paused mode.

In my case, however, I doubt I have newest the drivers (from 8/12/2004, supposedly mid-August, the ones off the CD) and Radeon 9600 XT on Windows XP Pro. ATI's website is not only hard to read (I always have to press control+A to select everything just to read it which is annoying - I gave the webmaster an E-mail a while ago and even called ATI's support about this (and known issues about the X800 and X850 thinking of upgrading) I haven't been there in a while so I don't know if this has been fixed or not), there isn't a download for Radeon 9600 XT.

This is something very weird. I posted this in the bug hunt forum I was told by JCL not to spam the bug hunt. It seems like others are getting this as well so there is something going on. Another question: did this only happen when you installed one of the public betas (6.40.4 I think) or did you get it without having installed the public beta? When I had 6.40.2, I never had this issue. With 6.40.4, I did and even with installing 6.31.4 (on top of 6.40.4), I get it as well. The only other option is to try the 6.22 update from the old downloads. This behavior is also causing the motion to be jerky when moving the camera around where it suddenly speeds up then suddenly slows down, and going erratic. Even with my speed display, it's going all over the place from 30 mph to clear up to 60 mph.

Does anyone else get this same thing?

I get it as well , i just set the fps_max at 64 and left it there , seems to be working fine on that setting , fps shows to be 63 , but the game plays steady , which is all i really care about , though i dont recall having this behavior untill recently , unless i just hadnt payed attention to the fps , and untill recently i kept running the old 6.22 , till i decided it was time to upgrade to 6.31 , i'll do a reinstall one of this days on another drive and see if it's the 6.31 update that caused it , though i can live with having the fps_max at 64 rather than 60.

It would take fps_max being above 16,384 and actually having the frame rate like this in order to run into these problems. But yes, higher frame rates mean less precision. At 1024 fps, the time variable is only at 0.015625 which still has considerable precision.

Above 512 fps is when acceleration will malfunction in that method. However, if you used some mathematical trick, you can work around this issue to some extent thus the limit really isn't 512 fps, but still 16384.

I agree. Much above 60 fps isn't really all that reasonable as it's already very smooth and near the limit of the human eye (and brain). 30 fps is the lowest recommended frame rate where it's still somewhat smooth and playable, but 60 should be the most recommended low end.

The actual range is otherwise seemingly unlimited (from 0 to nearly 2.1 million), but the recommended high end is more around 240.

But since monitors cant refresh much above 100hrz or so there is little point to these high frame rates.