Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

TDM Benchmark Demo


greebo

Recommended Posts

For people who want to test their rig using a standardised demo, here's a PK4 for you to download and check out your performance using the TDM training map.

 

Thanks a lot to rebb for creating and uploading that file. :)

 

Instructions:

- Download this PK4: http://www.dramtheth...aining_demo.pk4 (~18 MB)

- Save the file into your darkmod/ folder, into where all the other tdm_*.pk4 files are residing.

- Launch TDM

- Install the Training Mission (this will restart TDM)

- Open the console (by typing Ctrl-Alt-~)

- Type timeDemo training.demo and hit enter, the demo will start

 

-timedemo

 

(analysis, recording, warping)

doom -timedemo

 

The -timedemo parameter plays a demo without limiting graphics to 35 frames per second and upon exiting to the command prompt displays the number of screen frames drawn (gametics) and the time taken to play them (realtics), instead of the ENDOOM screen. The average screen frame rate on a level can be determined with this information (realtics/gametics*35=fps). If a demo recording spans more than one level, the resulting values will be incorrect, as the realtics will correspond only to the last level played.

 

Like during the built-in demo sequence normally played at the start of a game, this parameter makes most device input bring up the menu while the demo is playing, so pressing the Tab key to select automap mode or pressing Enter to display the last status message can't be used. Some non-playing functions do still work, such as increasing or decreasing the screen size.

 

Post the results (average FPS, etc.)

Edited by greebo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

timeDemo ran through the demo at a fast-forwarded speed (15 sec total), not sure if that's what it was supposed to do. But it did report results:

Avg FPS: 197.8

 

Hardware:

CPU: Intel i7 920

GFX: 2x Radeon HD4870 512 MB, Crossfire

RAM: 6 GB

 

OS: Win7 64 bit

 

[EDIT: Graphical settings for this run were:]

 

Resolution: 1920x1200

Vsync: off

AA: off

Anisotropy: 8x

Ambient: Standard

Interaction: High Quality

 

(Don't ask me how the settings got this way, they're not what I thought I had set :) )

 

I had Catalyst AI on, and the skybox in the demo was even crazier than what it usually does (display sky with spinning). It just displayed a bizzare reflection of whatever was on the screen in the sky, no sky to speak of. Might get better results with Catalyst AI off, but I have to go to sleep for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's exactly the purpose of such a timedemo, to test various resolutions and setups without having to actually "play" the game yourself each time, going through the same reproducible scenes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Download link does not work for me, only get a site with strange signs :huh:

 

EDIT: :P

Edited by Sonosuke

Ich konnte mich nicht erinnern Teleportation gezaubert zu haben und doch stand ich da... alleine und nackt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, here is what I can tell: on my Radeon, the sky is displaying in a strange way, much like Ishtvan reported. I have Catalyst AI disabled, so the error must be in the map itself. In all other FMs, the sky is shown properly once Catalyst AI is disabled.

 

My system:

 

CPU: AMD Phenom II X3 720 BE @ 3.4 GHz

 

GPU: ATI Radeon HD4870/1G

 

RAM: Corsair 4x1GB DDR2-800 CL4

 

OS: Windows XP 32Bit SP3

 

Settings: 1920x1200, 2xSS-AA, 16xAF, Bloom off, Vsync off, Shader: High quality, Ambient: Standard

 

 

 

My results: 84,7 fps after the third run (being 69,2 after the first run, so I would recommend at least two runs to have the FM completely loaded into the RAM).

 

 

 

I have a request: is it possible to modify the Training Mission in such a way that two (or more) AIs are spawned that start attacking each other? I don't know if the result of such a fight would be the same every time, but this would certainly stress the CPU, wouldn't it?

Edited by 7upMan

My Eigenvalue is bigger than your Eigenvalue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On my wife's laptop

 

Windows Server 2003

Intel Celeron M - 1.6ghz

896mb ram

ATI Radeon xpress 200m -driver 8.573

 

My settings were fast ambient and standard interaction.

 

18.6 fps

 

Seems the portal sky doesn't like the time demo. I had a weird hall of mirrors effect during this where the level ran off into infinity in the sky. Very strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems the portal sky doesn't like the time demo. I had a weird hall of mirrors effect during this where the level ran off into infinity in the sky. Very strange.

 

There are a lot of things that are simply skipped during the timedemo (for instance sound, I forgot what the other things were, in-game GUI rendering? scripts?) so I am not surprised portalskies don't work. I never understood why they did choose such a bad way of making timings (or rather, why they didn't at least add a "full time demo" version, too). With D3, the demo would reflect the renderspeed, but it would not accurately reflect the in_game FPS. It is even worse with TDM, where lots more CPU cycles are spent elsewhere.

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

 

"Remember: If the game lets you do it, it's not cheating." -- Xarax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I suppose it's not so much a "how many FPS will I get in TDM!!" measure as it is simply a benchmark for comparison among systems. Guy1 gets 88, Guy2 gets 121, Guy3 gets 197. Guy3 wins. But he shouldn't expect his framerate will be 197, because it won't. Just like that famous benchmark test, whatever it's called -- it's not 12,000 FPS; the score is 12,000.

 

Anyway it won't mean anything if people attempt to run different versions of the map.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I suppose it's not so much a "how many FPS will I get in TDM!!" measure as it is simply a benchmark for comparison among systems.  Guy1 gets 88, Guy2 gets 121, Guy3 gets 197.  Guy3 wins.  But he shouldn't expect his framerate will be 197, because it won't.  Just like that famous benchmark test, whatever it's called -- it's not 12,000 FPS;  the score is 12,000.

 

...hence my question about if it's possible to have AI in the timedemo, to make the test as close to the actual performance as possible. But I know zero about the inner workings of the Doom 3 engine (or any other graphics engine, for that matter), so you'd be the ones who could give an informed answer.

 

 

My Eigenvalue is bigger than your Eigenvalue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

System:

 

CPU : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5000+
GPU : Nvidia Geforce 9800GT (512 Mbyte)
Ram : 4 Gbyte
OS  : Kubuntu 9.10 64bit
Swap: 4Gbyte configured, but none enabled.
Driver: 185.18.36

 

Basic settings:

 

 
Resolution:  1920x1200
Anisotropic: 1x
Antialising: Off
VSync:       Off
Blur:        Off
Shader:      High quality
Ambient:     Standard

 

Three runs:

 

First:  77.4 seconds, 38.5 FPS (very first run, nothing in diskcache yet)
Second: 61.6 seconds, 48.3 FPS
Third:  64.0 seconds, 46.5 FPS

 

Observations:

 

* Opening the door to the outside area (on the first after starting D3 only) causes a full 2..3 seconds pause, even when everything is already in the diskcache

 

* The sky doesn't work her, either (hall of mirrors). However, a curious effect is that whenever it is in view, things slow down to a crawl. Whenever there is no sky (indoors), everything whizzed by superfast. So we might make a second demo without portalsky, as well as try to figure out if this is a demo-artefact or if portal skys really pose some serious CPU overhead (I know it is not the GPU, see below).

 

* My GPU is a beast. Nothing slows it down. Modifying the settings and doing two runs for each of them (after D3 restarts) shows that regardless of setting, the timing various more across runs than between different settings. For instances setting anisotropic to 4x and antialiasing to 4x results in 65.6 and 59.1 seconds, which is faster than the baseline settings above (the first run can always be discarded due to the caching issue). Turning bloom on made no difference (but I couldn't see a visual difference, either). 8x anisotropic and 8x antialiasing made no difference either.

 

* The timedemo seems to be CPU bound, lowering the resolution to 1024x600 did result in 62.8 and 60.1 seconds, which is not really faster than the baseline above.

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

 

"Remember: If the game lets you do it, it's not cheating." -- Xarax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I suppose it's not so much a "how many FPS will I get in TDM!!" measure as it is simply a benchmark for comparison among systems. Guy1 gets 88, Guy2 gets 121, Guy3 gets 197. Guy3 wins. But he shouldn't expect his framerate will be 197, because it won't. Just like that famous benchmark test, whatever it's called -- it's not 12,000 FPS; the score is 12,000.

 

That is true, however, if the benchmark measures only a subset, the score of "12000" vs. "3000" doesn't mean much,because actual framerates could be "20" vs. "19" on the two systems (or even "19" and "40", depending on what we measure and what is in the real map).

 

Anyway it won't mean anything if people attempt to run different versions of the map.

 

That is true, but something completely different :)

 

As for the question about AI, the original D3 had AI (imp) in them, so we might try this, too.

 

The scripts seem to run (the trainer messages appear), and HUG and GUI work, too, so that is good news. I think we can ignore the "not playing audio" as that would not slow things down on modern systems by more than a few % points.

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

 

"Remember: If the game lets you do it, it's not cheating." -- Xarax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benchmark doesn't seem to want to work for me. Running the provided command simply launches the training mission again. If I try to launch it from the main menu the console complains that it can't open "demo/training.demo". Running Kubuntu Karmic.

Edited by Melcar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Managed to get it to run. Had to place the .pk4 in the /.doom3/training_mission folder instead of the instructed /.doom3/darkmod/fms folder. Also experienced issues with rotating sky/ceiling, even when the actual game runs fine. System specs. and results are below:

 

CPU: Phenom X4 9650 @ 3.0GHZ
RAM: 2x2GB DDR2
GPU: HD4850 512MB @ 750/1100
OS: Kubuntu Karmic 64bit
GPU Drivers: 9.12

 

Game Preferences:
1680 x 1050
4xAA
16xAF
Bloom Off
Vsync. Off
Ambient Rendering Standard
Interactive Shader High Quality

 

Demo Run 1: 69.8fps
Demo Run 2: 88.1fps
Demo Run 3: 87.6fps

 

Edit:

Launched the game a second time and started getting much higher results.

Run 1: 73.5fps

Run 2: 101.2

Run 3: 101.1fps

 

:huh:

Edited by Melcar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My PC:

CPU: AMD Athlon 3200+ 2.01 GHz

RAM: 2 GB

GPU: ATI Radeon HD 4800

OS: Windows XP SP whatever

 

My settings:

Resolution: 1280x1024

Antialiasing: 4x

Anisotropic: 8x

Ambient: Standard

Shader: Standard

VSync: OFF

Bloom: OFF

 

Results:

1st run: 2976 frames in 68.15 sec = 43.7 FPS

2nd run: 2976 frames in 46.6 sec = 63.8 FPS

3rd run: mostly the same as the 2nd

Come the time of peril, did the ground gape, and did the dead rest unquiet 'gainst us. Our bands of iron and hammers of stone prevailed not, and some did doubt the Builder's plan. But the seals held strong, and the few did triumph, and the doubters were lain into the foundations of the new sanctum. -- Collected letters of the Smith-in-Exile, Civitas Approved

Link to comment
Share on other sites

# CPU: AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Processor 4200+

# RAM: 2GB

# GPU: GeForce 7300 GS 512MB GP

# OS: WinXP Pro SP3

# Video Driver: Nvidia 191.07 WHQL

 

Resolution: 80O x 600

FSAA: Off

Anisotropic: 4x

Ambient: Standard

Shader: Standard

VSync: OFF

Bloom: OFF

[/Quote]

 

1st run: 40.7 FPS

2nd run: 49.1 FPS

 

I am still wondering why my FPS sucks that much, even though my settings are already really low...is it the GPU ?

Edited by Chiron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the results of a test I did to compare each different setting and the overall effect they had on the FPS.

 

CPU : Intel Q6600 Core2Duo 2.4GHz
GPU : Nvidia Geforce 8800GTS (384 MByte)
Ram : 2 GByte (1066 MHz DDR3)
OS  : Windows XP SP3 
Resolution:  1680x1050

 

I wanted to keep the resolution native at 1680x1050, which I know

is one of the biggest framerate hogs, but I like full res :rolleyes:

 

Initial test achieved 25.6 FPS with all settings maxed out (except for Bloom, which was off for all tests).

The following represent turning off or altering each setting, whilst leaving the

others at max (to avoid muddying the results):

 

26.3 FPS - Anisotropic: 1x 
31.0 FPS - VSync:       Off
25.7 FPS - Shader: Standard
25.7 FPS - Ambient: Fast
50.6 FPS - Anti-Aliasing: Off
50.4 FPS - AA x4
49.7 FPS - AA x8
25.6 FPS - AA x16 (original test with all settings maxed out)

 

I was expecting anti-aliasing to be the largest hit on FPS, but I was surprised to see that

AA x4 and even AA x8 had fairly negligible effect on framerate, whereas AA x16 had a

huge impact on framerate. Luckily, I can't really tell much difference in visual quality

when using 16, so I'll not use this in future.

 

Since I can't stand not using VSync, the only other option available if a performance

boost is needed is lowering the resolution.

Edited by Midnight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My PC:

 

Melan, just out of curiosity, do you know what type of HD4800 your graphics card is? After all, there are no less than 4 types of the 4800 type on the market: 4830, 4850, 4870 and 4890, and that's not including the X2 and overclocked variants. And your CPU is a single-core AMD Athlon 64 3200+?

My Eigenvalue is bigger than your Eigenvalue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recent Status Updates

    • Petike the Taffer  »  DeTeEff

      I've updated the articles for your FMs and your author category at the wiki. Your newer nickname (DeTeEff) now comes first, and the one in parentheses is your older nickname (Fieldmedic). Just to avoid confusing people who played your FMs years ago and remember your older nickname. I've added a wiki article for your latest FM, Who Watches the Watcher?, as part of my current updating efforts. Unless I overlooked something, you have five different FMs so far.
      · 0 replies
    • Petike the Taffer

      I've finally managed to log in to The Dark Mod Wiki. I'm back in the saddle and before the holidays start in full, I'll be adding a few new FM articles and doing other updates. Written in Stone is already done.
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      TDM 15th Anniversary Contest is now active! Please declare your participation: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22413-the-dark-mod-15th-anniversary-contest-entry-thread/
       
      · 0 replies
    • JackFarmer

      @TheUnbeholden
      You cannot receive PMs. Could you please be so kind and check your mailbox if it is full (or maybe you switched off the function)?
      · 1 reply
    • OrbWeaver

      I like the new frob highlight but it would nice if it was less "flickery" while moving over objects (especially barred metal doors).
      · 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...