AmiQuake new 68k Quake Port for AGA/RTG

[Karlos]

Originally Posted by trixster

Radeon 9250 in this case, so plenty quick enough I’d say but I concede your point!

How is it attached? For example on an A1200, for the same BPPC board the "slower" BVPPC is faster than a mediator attached "faster" card because the bus speed is rather lower.
Copying software rendered chunky data to the bitmap can become the bottleneck.

This can even impact hardware accelerated 3D when there's a lot of geometry data to keep pushing, until you increase to a resolution where fill rate dominates.

[trixster]

Originally Posted by Marce

guys : the quake ' FPS numbers you posted are very weak

here is my report

Winuae , TIMEDEMO DEMO1

clickboom quake AGA 320x256 : 969 frames 3.3 seconds 290.3 FPS

**********

Amiga quake: AGA - 320x200 : 4.6 seconds : 209.7 fps

Timedemo report from an emulated Amiga? Literally what is the point of that?

[trixster]

Originally Posted by Karlos

How is it attached? For example on an A1200, for the same BPPC board the "slower" BVPPC is faster than a mediator attached "faster" card because the bus speed is rather lower.
Copying software rendered chunky data to the bitmap can become the bottleneck.

This can even impact hardware accelerated 3D when there's a lot of geometry data to keep pushing, until you increase to a resolution where fill rate dominates.

What is a way to test this? P96Speed results comparison between different rtg setups?

[Marce]

Originally Posted by trixster

Timedemo report from an emulated Amiga? Literally what is the point of that?

because means that winuae is far better than real hardware
and I do not see very much the point comparing outdated hardware if exists something 10x faster

you guys I think you are wasting ur money and time

[eXeler0]

Originally Posted by Marce

because means that winuae is far better than real hardware
and I do not see very much the point comparing outdated hardware if exists something 10x faster

you guys I think you are wasting ur money and time

Thanx for the insight Marce

[hammer]

Originally Posted by tomcat666

Running perfectly fine here on pistorm and emu68... must be some other problem...

I'm using Coffin R60's Quake installation with Emu68 nightly builds like https://github.com/michalsc/Emu68/ac...uns/3317879118

In the same Coffin R60's Quake folder, "quake.gcc-2.95.3.030" works fine with Quake data files. Quake.gcc-2.95.3.030 supports HAM6 mode.

GLQuake68K_blitz works okay within the same Coffin R60's Quake folder.

P96's driver is "Emu68 VC4 0.2.0 (20.09.2022)".

This particular pre-configured AmigaOS distro/PiStorm/RPi 3a+ combo is from Poland and I modified Workbench icons into Coffin R58's icon set.

[ Show youtube player ]
The PolyNet NG icon bar setup indicates this particular pre-configured AmigaOS distro.

I'm licensed for AmigaOS 3.1.4, 3.2, and 3.2.1 and I haven't applied installation refresh from AmigaOS 3.2 CD setup.

I'm using AmigaOS 3.2.1 Kickstart ROM image despite the physical AmigaOS 3.2.1 Kickstart ROM being installed.

-

[hammer]

Originally Posted by NovaCoder

As long as my old ports work on real hardware then I'm happy, if they also run on emulated platforms then that's a bonus.

From the WinQuake source code's draw.c

"Draw_Pic: bad coordinate" error seems to be in void Draw_Pic (int x, int y, qpic_t *pic).



I don't have this particular AmiQuake source code and Amiga development environment to fix it. I do understand Visual C++ on Windows XP/7/8/10/11.

Modifying config.cfg

viewsize "120.000000" = result: able to play demo1, but on the menu, it has a "Draw_TransPic: bad coordinates" error.

viewsize "100.000000" = result: "draw_pic: bad coordinates" error.

[Marce]

Originally Posted by eXeler0

Thanx for the insight Marce

no, thanks to you

btw, clickboom quake is way faster than amiquake

that is more noticeable as the Amiga is faster
in my tests there are almost 100 fps of difference between both ports

[grelbfarlk]

Originally Posted by trixster

What is a way to test this? P96Speed results comparison between different rtg setups?

Yeah so what you do is start Quake and say timedemo demo1
And then you hit ` so the console is minimized. Then you post your results.

Like the last time I did it on my A4000 with a CS-II I got 71fps at 640x480.
That was at 16bit so say that's double at 8-bit or 142fps at 8bit. Or four times that at 320x240.

[trixster]

Your rtg is strong!

[hammer]

Originally Posted by NovaCoder

As long as my old ports work on real hardware then I'm happy, if they also run on emulated platforms then that's a bonus.

FYI, the workaround, I resolve the Error by disabling the "304 x 224" resolution mode.

304 x 224 resolution is used for the Neo Geo emulator.

304 x 224 has 68,096 pixels.

320 x 200 has 64,000 pixels.

Resolution selection could be confused.

[grelbfarlk]

Originally Posted by trixster

Your rtg is strong!

CrayGA has so many FPS. Even on my UAGA system I got 119fps at 320x240 at 16bpp, which means I got 239 FPS at 8bpp.

[NovaCoder]

Originally Posted by hammer

FYI, the workaround, I resolve the Error by disabling the "304 x 224" resolution mode.

304 x 224 resolution is used for the Neo Geo emulator.

304 x 224 has 68,096 pixels.

320 x 200 has 64,000 pixels.

Resolution selection could be confused.

Cool, good to know that you got ot working

I just had a quick look at the code and noticed that I'd missed an optimization with the last release so I'll fix it up and upload it to aminet (will be v1.35).

[hammer]

Originally Posted by grelbfarlk

CrayGA has so many FPS. Even on my UAGA system I got 119fps at 320x240 at 16bpp, which means I got 239 FPS at 8bpp.

2200+ fps on vkQuake @ lowest 640x480 resolution mode with RTX 3080 Ti.

[Leon Besson]

Originally Posted by trixster

Your rtg is strong!

Give it a rest please Trixster, your getting boring now.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by NovaCoder

Cool, good to know that you got ot working

I just had a quick look at the code and noticed that I'd missed an optimization with the last release so I'll fix it up and upload it to aminet (will be v1.35).

FYI, I looked briefly look at the source code from both amiga_changes.zip and WinQuake, and I traced the Error back to the resolution setup section. I applied my best guess to disable Neo Geo's 304 x 224 resolution in Picasso96Mode since it's close to 320x200 VGA gaming resolution.

I'm looking at various open-source projects to sink my teeth into, but I would need to set up my own Amiga C++ dev environment.

[grelbfarlk]

Originally Posted by Leon Besson

Give it a rest please Trixster, your getting boring now.

To be fair, Trixster probably has the strongest living Amiga. I was looking up places to get a 15"x15"x4.90" block of titanium to have it cnc milled down to the case parts of an A4000 to have a stronger one to beat his.

[NovaCoder]

Originally Posted by hammer

FYI, I looked briefly look at the source code from both amiga_changes.zip and WinQuake, and I traced the Error back to the resolution setup section. I applied my best guess to disable Neo Geo's 304 x 224 resolution in Picasso96Mode since it's close to 320x200 VGA gaming resolution.

I'm looking at various open-source projects to sink my teeth into, but I would need to set up my own Amiga C++ dev environment.

Have a look here about setting up a GCC environment

http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=85474&page=71

[chucsmom69]

Originally Posted by Marce

because means that winuae is far better than real hardware
and I do not see very much the point comparing outdated hardware if exists something 10x faster

you guys I think you are wasting ur money and time

and I think your an idiot - this is an Amiga community so of course we want to use real hardware. I dont have kids, I dont smoke and I dont drink so I will absolutely spend money on Amiga's!

[lilwshu]

Extra indicated 2fps on my 1200/060@50mhz on time demo of demo1 with the latest version.