Performance!
by Galavm Shot · in Torque Game Engine · 08/29/2004 (3:38 am) · 9 replies
Hi
I have a very, very simple scene: just flat terrain and nothing other.
And what i get as Frames Per Second: 76
I use the OpenGL renderer with the latest nVidia drivers 61.77. The vertical sync is Off (the monitor has 85Hz refresh rate).
The computer:
P4 2.4GHz (with Hyperthreading), 1GHz RAM, MSI nVidia FX5200 with 64MB
For comparision: Quake3 never goes under 100 fps
Doom3 - average 10 fps in medium
FarCry - medium - 15-20 fps
Can somebody explain why Torque just sucks?!
I have a very, very simple scene: just flat terrain and nothing other.
And what i get as Frames Per Second: 76
I use the OpenGL renderer with the latest nVidia drivers 61.77. The vertical sync is Off (the monitor has 85Hz refresh rate).
The computer:
P4 2.4GHz (with Hyperthreading), 1GHz RAM, MSI nVidia FX5200 with 64MB
For comparision: Quake3 never goes under 100 fps
Doom3 - average 10 fps in medium
FarCry - medium - 15-20 fps
Can somebody explain why Torque just sucks?!
#2
Torque does not suck, and I think you're configuration is at fault somewhere.
08/29/2004 (5:57 am)
Nah, the above FPS sounds too low. I had 100 fps capped when I was running our test scene with interiors and some foliage.Torque does not suck, and I think you're configuration is at fault somewhere.
#3
Also what compiler do you have? Optimizations might be at play.
08/29/2004 (6:10 am)
Is this with the demo or with what you compiled? If you compiled it did you compile the torquedemo_debug (for debug) or torquedemo.exe? If you compiled to in debug mode (resulting in torquedemo_debug) you will see things run slower. Also what compiler do you have? Optimizations might be at play.
#4
08/29/2004 (7:51 am)
Yeah, check if you're running a DEBUG exe ... and never use the latest NVIDIA drivers, they always suck, especially with OpenGL...
#5
I tested 3 different drivers - the MSI official driver (which comes with the videocard), the nVidia 56.72 version and the latest 61.77.
I got something VERY VERY strange. I changed the videocard - i used ASUS ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
for my new test.
The results:
The same flat terrain: 333 fps (YEAH! 333 fps!).
I can not explain what happen. I can not believe FX5200 really sucks.
Any ideas what happen/does not happen is welcome. I have checked almost everything - AGP 8x enables, Fast write (enable/disable)...
Huh, nVidia sucks, not Torque!
08/29/2004 (9:15 am)
Thank you for your replies. First of all, i use the latest HEAD version, compiled with Visual Studio 2003 - Release mode. The tested resolution: 1024x768 fullscreen.I tested 3 different drivers - the MSI official driver (which comes with the videocard), the nVidia 56.72 version and the latest 61.77.
I got something VERY VERY strange. I changed the videocard - i used ASUS ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
for my new test.
The results:
The same flat terrain: 333 fps (YEAH! 333 fps!).
I can not explain what happen. I can not believe FX5200 really sucks.
Any ideas what happen/does not happen is welcome. I have checked almost everything - AGP 8x enables, Fast write (enable/disable)...
Huh, nVidia sucks, not Torque!
#6
08/29/2004 (10:20 am)
It's the drivers - I believe NVIDIA has had problems from time to time with low OpenGL performance.
#7
Just for your info, running Doom3 on low, at 640x480, a Geforce 4 MX460 can get 18fps average. Even that travesty of a video card is faster than the 5200 series.
12/04/2004 (5:21 pm)
Believe me, the FX5200 really does suck like that. Moreso if you got one with 64-bit memory (most of them).Just for your info, running Doom3 on low, at 640x480, a Geforce 4 MX460 can get 18fps average. Even that travesty of a video card is faster than the 5200 series.
#8
Is there a way to make a deal with one of these videoboard manufacturers to get the best that they produce for your game(s) in return of advertising or so? How does that work, anyone have a clue?
12/22/2004 (6:00 pm)
Do i have to get back to ATI again? i thought is TGE as well, with just a few interiors i never get more than 50 fps on 800X600 and my machine is a beast (a dual cpu prescot with lots of ram and all that BUT with an fx5200). Above this 800x600 my tge plain sucks. It goes around 30 fps wich is sorry ass, cause the maps are really empty at this stage.Is there a way to make a deal with one of these videoboard manufacturers to get the best that they produce for your game(s) in return of advertising or so? How does that work, anyone have a clue?
#9
I have some huge levels with 1000 tress ,fxgrass ,buildings ,over 40 soundemitters,and i dont know how many fire emitters.
On the best places i have around 35 fps and where i have most things about 19 in fps.
I use a gforce 5200 and 1g with 512 mb with res 1024x768x32.
Its fair enoth for me , i think Torque beats most of the above engines .
I hope you talk TGE here ?
12/22/2004 (6:35 pm)
Torque Rocks !!I have some huge levels with 1000 tress ,fxgrass ,buildings ,over 40 soundemitters,and i dont know how many fire emitters.
On the best places i have around 35 fps and where i have most things about 19 in fps.
I use a gforce 5200 and 1g with 512 mb with res 1024x768x32.
Its fair enoth for me , i think Torque beats most of the above engines .
I hope you talk TGE here ?
Torque Owner Ace
Also those other engines are released products and torque is still under development, which means some one already went in and did the tweaking to them other engines.