View Single Post
Old 29 September 2010, 06:33   #16
Mequa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 497
Cool Quake benchmarks

I got 900+ MIPS in my SysInfo results (enclosed).

As for Quake on WinUAE:
I found that this port of Quake 1.09 was a bit faster than the Clickboom edition, so decided to test that (with PC Quake data files).

On my laptop (HP Pavilion dv9000 series, model dv9299ea), which has Intel Core 2 Duo T7200 @ 2GHz CPU and nVidia GeForce Go 7600 GPU, I decided to benchmark WinUAE with the fastest JIT settings and RTG by running a simple "timerefresh" test in Quake immediately on starting a new game.

Just for fun, I compared the results with the latest version of DOSBox (max CPU settings) and Quake 1.07 (the last version I could find for DOS).
Let's just say, the results were interesting:

(resolution): WinUAE -- DOSBox - WinUAE (no JIT) -DOSBox (no JIT)
320x240 --- 138 fps -- 52 fps --- 9.5 fps --------- 7.8 fps
640x400 --- 61 fps --- 28 fps --- 5.6 fps --------- 4.2 fps
640x480 --- 52 fps --- 24 fps --- 5 fps ----------- 3.6 fps
800x600 --- 37 fps --- 18 fps --- 3.7 fps --------- 2.8 fps
1024x768 -- 24 fps --- 12 fps --- 2.5 fps --------- 2 fps
1152x864 -- 19 fps --- 10 fps --- 2.1 fps --------- 1.7 fps

(Also got 14fps in 1440x900 with WinUAE + JIT - though WS modes can be buggy)

For comparison purposes, the native WinQuake build (without 3D acceleration) can struggle to reach 60fps in 1024x768 on this setup.

Looks like WinUAE's JIT performed around twice as fast as DOSBox. Not bad.
I'd like to see how fast WinUAE does on an i7. Could it push 60fps in Quake at 1024x768 or even 1920x1080?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	MySysinfo.jpg
Views:	767
Size:	205.9 KB
ID:	26589  

Last edited by Mequa; 30 September 2010 at 01:49. Reason: Added DOSBox (no JIT) results for comparison
Mequa is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.07732 seconds with 10 queries