Quake 060 performance

[litwarski]

Hello all,


I have been trying to get Quake running on my Amiga in a reasonable manner, but up to this point the FPS has been too low for it to be playable. The slowdowns occurring when there are visible enemies are too severe.


My setup is the following: Amiga 4000 with a Warp Engine 4040 card having an 060 CPU running at 80 MHz, with 64 MB of RAM on the CPU card, ZZ9000 graphics card, and OS 3.2.1.


The version of Quake I'm running is AmiQuake (RTG version).


I have tried to tweak my Amiga a bit to get some more speed out of it, but Quake didn't benefit from those tweaks. Namely I tried the demo version of HSMathlibs, MuRedox and the MuFastROM utility in MMUTools. None of these made any noticeable difference in Quake. I also tried to install OxyPatcher 3.14, but the program kept giving me the error message "Can't open OXYRON-patchport!".



I have seen from Youtube that it's possible to get Quake to be playable with an 060 CPU even without RTG, so I don't really know why I'm not getting similar results. Can someone help?

[zipper]

Your Oxypatcher should not open patchport - probably a wrong non-patched Oxy. OxyPatcher314 and OXYP3_14 on EAB server seem to be the patched versions by "Fixed by MM " I remember Quake crawling 5 fps w/o Oxypatcher / Cyberpatcher.

[Thomas Richter]

If MuRedox doesn't help, then Oxypatcher wouldn't, either. The latter program is out of support.

[trixster]

you should be getting over 16fps in timedemo demo1 with that machine in AmiQuake RTG. That's what i get with an 80mhz 060 warpengine and a Radeon for RTG

[litwarski]

I just checked and I got an average 13.9 FPS from timedemo demo1. The demo seemed to slow down when there were flashes from the weapons, and when there were multiple enemies. When I watched the demo a sceond time, the FPS jumped to 15.9.

When I play the game myself, the slowdowns appear when the room I'm in is big. If I look at a nearby wall, the game looks smooth enough.

[zipper]

Here you can see for instance QuakeWos and GLQuakeWos performance on different hardware in the past - begins from around 15 fps on RTG: http://web.archive.org/web/201002021...gaspeed.de.vu/

[Kppot]

For AGA/RTG (yes to my biggest surprise RTG Quake performance difference not that much from AGA), you won't get as far as 15 FPS fpr AGA and 16.8-17 for RTG
With 060@100 you will get 16.5 for AGA and 17.5 for RTG

You cannot get 30FPS with 80-100MHz CPU,and software rendering - that's it.

[Kppot]

Originally Posted by zipper

http://web.archive.org/web/201002021...gaspeed.de.vu/

Brilliant resource, cheers!

[litwarski]

I agree that I won't be getting 30 FPS with this setup. However, the timedemo test gave me 13.9 FPS which is 2 frames lower than the 16 FPS @trixster said I should be at least be getting. It seems to me that the slowdowns in big areas are bringing the average FPS down, and the severe slowdowns are the precise thing that make this unplayable for me.

I used the console command "timerefresh" and got just below 10 FPS in the first spawn point (when you start a new game). I wonder if other people have such low FPS in that spot. Could someone check that?

[trixster]

Lower cl_maxdynamics and r_maxparticles

80mhz Blizzard 1260 gets 16.3fps with AmiQuake.
80mhz WarpEngine (slower fastmem and chipmem access) gets 15.8 with AmiQuake and 16.3 with AmiQuakeRTG
100mhz tf1260 gets 17.3fps with AmiQuake. I can’t test rtg as I just have indi aga

[Estrayk]

Maybe people have forgotten it but the Quake in a Pentium is not that it gave superior results either, watch this video. 11fps on a 100Mhz pentium

[ Show youtube player ]

[Daedalus]

That's a 486 at 100MHz, not a Pentium. The 200MHz Pentium manages around 45FPS, so all other things being equal you might expect around 22FPS from a 100MHz Pentium.

[Marce]

Quake uses fpu
that's why is faster on a pentium 100 than a 486/100
because the fpu in the pentium is 2x faster

the 060 fpu is something around the 486 fpu speed

on the Amiga + overclocked 060 you can expect 12-13 fps at 300x200 not 16
there is nothing else that can be done to speed up this game
personally I prefer to be jailed instead play a 3d game at 12-13 fps

technically the game Quake should never have been made for the Amiga
because the Amiga does not have enough power to run that game at descent speed
it was a simple matter of business

[crazyc]

Originally Posted by Marce

Quake uses fpu
that's why is faster on a pentium 100 than a 486/100
because the fpu in the pentium is 2x faster

the 060 fpu is something around the 486 fpu speed

on the Amiga + overclocked 060 you can expect 12-13 fps at 300x200 not 16
there is nothing else that can be done to speed up this game
personally I prefer to be jailed instead play a 3d game at 12-13 fps

technically the game Quake should never have been made for the Amiga
because the Amiga does not have enough power to run that game at descent speed
it was a simple matter of business

I play Amiquake AGA on my a1200 with TF1260@100mhz and find it quite playable actually on 320x256

[str0m]

I used to play Quakeworld tons back in the day, in the top UK Clan etc, the battle for FPS was ever present! (and low ping times). We mostly ran the software version until PC specs got quick enough that OpenGL was ok and it would never drop under 60fps etc

Anyway, iirc a couple of the best commands to speed up FPS at the expense of making it look mega ugly but at least giving higher framerate were

d_mipcap
d_mipscale

Probably defaulted to 1, set them a higher number, 1-10 I think. Basically removes most of the textures so looks ugly but big speed increase at least on the PC versions. I'm sure this will work in normal Quake but if not then just ignore me

[Marce]

Originally Posted by crazyc

I play Amiquake AGA on my a1200 with TF1260@100mhz and find it quite playable actually on 320x256

because surely you are not used to playing 3d games on pc at 120 fps or so
ie in 1997-1998 pentiums machines were yet expensive and lot of gamers yet had 486 machines and used to play quake anyways and found it playlable

another game which is and was unplaylable in the Amiga even on the 060 is Alien breed 3d2, fantastic game but was done to be playlable in the future on a fast PC
This game is blocked at 39 fps but run amazing and is very smooth only in winuae
Yet there is no real Amiga hardware capable to run such game at such speed not even close

[crazyc]

Originally Posted by Marce

because surely you are not used to playing 3d games on pc at 120 fps or so

ie in 1997-1998 pentiums machines were yet expensive and lot of gamers yet had 486 machines and used to play quake anyways and found it playlable

Very true I think. But it is playable although you could argue its also playable at 50mhz but I cannot enjoy the game like that as too jerky.
I suppose yes if you are used to playing it on a modern PC then it will feel terrible. But then why bother on an amiga if that's your other option.

[Aardvark]

Originally Posted by Marce

another game which is and was unplaylable in the Amiga even on the 060 is Alien breed 3d2, fantastic game but was done to be playlable in the future on a fast PC
This game is blocked at 39 fps but run amazing and is very smooth only in winuae
Yet there is no real Amiga hardware capable to run such game at such speed not even close

Seems pretty playable on a real 060 to me [ Show youtube player ] it's a slow paced shooter and doesn't require super smooth framerate to be enjoyable, unlike Quake.

[utri007]

http://aminet.net/package/game/patch/FastPatchQuake

This makes a big difference. You can add it to PAK file with PakMan http://aminet.net/package/game/patch/PakMan so that fix is usea automatically.

[Marce]

Originally Posted by Aardvark

Seems pretty playable on a real 060 to me [ Show youtube player ] it's a slow paced shooter and doesn't require super smooth framerate to be enjoyable, unlike Quake.

perhaps is playlable for you but is not smooth, specially in later levels with lot of enemies coming around
on a 060 AB3d2 run around 11-12 fps in full screen

here is a video done by a guy who is using winuae, he do not enabled the FPS counter but should run at 39 fps if his PC is enough fast,
This is far smooth compared with your video

[ Show youtube player ]