Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

TDM Benchmark Demo


greebo
 Share

Recommended Posts

No, sorry. That's all the info I could get out of Windows; personally, I know next to nothing about hardware. All of the purchasing and assembly was my brother's doing, I only gave him the money. I don't even have the boxes any longer. Sad but that's how it is.

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

Well, you can d/l GPU-Z from here ( http://www.techpower.../SysInfo/GPU-Z/ ). You don't need to istall the s/w, just run it. It will display everything there is to know of your graphics card.

 

Edit: CPU-Z ( http://www.cpuid.com/ )will show you the same for your CPU and RAM.

 

 

Edited by 7upMan

My Eigenvalue is bigger than your Eigenvalue.

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.

 

The instructions actually tell you to place it "where all the other tdm_..pk4's are", which is your main darkmod folder :) Don't worry, tho, I was also caught with that :)

"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

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

 

Do you also have the effect that it goes in slomotion when the sky is in view, but really fast indoors?

 

You could try to see if it is the GPU by making a second test run with much higher settings and see if it stays the same speed or gets much slower.

"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

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.

 

Well, you can double your FPS by lowering antialiasing from 16x to 8x (with no visible difference), so why are you complaining? ;)

"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

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

I would say yes, because a 7300 is bottom line of GF 7000 series. The way I've read the numbering system works is that for a given generation (e.g. 7000), the hundreds value (e.g. 300, 600, 900) indicate low end, mid range, and high end respectively. The same article also indicated that in some measures, a 7300 (low end 7000 series) would actually score lower than a 6800 (high end 6000 series). Pricing among series seems to confirm this information, with high enders costing near double sometimes.

 

Hearsay, as I just read it somewhere, but there you have it.

 

Hey at least it's not an ATI. (sorry ATI users, just a joke)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you can double your FPS by lowering antialiasing from 16x to 8x (with no visible difference), so why are you complaining? ;)

 

Oh, I wasn't complaining at all, though I guess it could have come across that way. I was just remarking how surprised I was that I could still use AAx8 with little difference in FPS, and believe me, if later (larger) missions start to impact on performance then I won't hesitate to drop the resolution. I'll try testing this today, to see what difference lower resolutions have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say yes, because a 7300 is bottom line of GF 7000 series. The way I've read the numbering system works is that for a given generation (e.g. 7000), the hundreds value (e.g. 300, 600, 900) indicate low end, mid range, and high end respectively. The same article also indicated that in some measures, a 7300 (low end 7000 series) would actually score lower than a 6800 (high end 6000 series). Pricing among series seems to confirm this information, with high enders costing near double sometimes.

 

Hearsay, as I just read it somewhere, but there you have it.

 

Hey at least it's not an ATI. (sorry ATI users, just a joke)

 

Thank you for the info. I'll look for a better card (Nvidia Geforce 9800GT or something) as soon as I have the chance (aka money).

Would more RAM also benefit the fps? I know that you can never have enough RAM, but would it make a huge difference to go from 2 to 4 GB ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the info. I'll look for a better card (Nvidia Geforce 9800GT or something) as soon as I have the chance (aka money).

Would more RAM also benefit the fps? I know that you can never have enough RAM, but would it make a huge difference to go from 2 to 4 GB ?

 

If you have a 32bit operating system, going from 2 to 4Gbyte will not gain much for the following reasons:

 

* 2 Gbyte is already quite a lot, use the task manager to check how much you actually use. You might find that TDM under windows might use 700 Mbyte when a map is loaded, your OS uses maybe 300..500, so you still have 1Gbyte free for other programs and the disk cache. Adding more RAM will only improve things if you actually run out of memory and your OS must ether free the diskcache or (even worse) swap out to disk.

* 32 bit can only adress 4 Gbyte, so your graphic card memory needs to be mapped in there, too, plus some other memory. The effect is that with a 512 Mbyte graphic card, you end up with about 3.0 .. 3.3 Gbyte usable memory. (That is not much improvement over 2 Gbyte). If you buy a 1024 Mbyte graphic card, you end up with about 2.5 .. 2.8 Gbyte usable memory only.

 

So in short, upgrading your card to an 9800 GT (about 80 Euros here, probably 100 US$, I have such a card :) will have a huge effect (it is easily 10..50 times faster than the 7300), while upgrading your memory won't be.

  • Like 1

"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

9800 GT with 1024MB costs ~ 100 EUR here ( I guess you meant the 512Mb version), so this what I will get then.

 

Thank you for your help.

 

Yeah, I have the 512 Mbyte version. You might be able to get a silent 8600 GT (or 8800 GT?), it would be a bit (maybe 2times?) slower than the 9800, but most games wouldn't show a difference. TDM might not even, as it probably gets CPU bound even with a 8600 GT. The fan on the 9800 GT is quite roaring, esp. in the moments before the driver is loaded.

"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

Abit IP35 pro Mobo (intel)

Intel 6600 quad core, 2.7 (OC to 2.9)

4 gigs (2x2gb dual) Corsair X3M (?) DDR2 800 (OC to 900)

WD 10,000rpm raptor HD (drive that Doom3 is on) sata

XFX ATI 5850, 1 gig DDR5 (Black edition, factory OC) (9.12 driver, catalyst AI disabled)

Windows 7 Pro 64 bit

(currently Realtek HD onboard audio installed)

 

------

1920x1200

vsynch ON (a must to stop tearing)

AA 4x

TA 1x

AR Standard

HQ interactive shader

Bloom On

 

2976, 53.7 sec, 55.4 fps

 

-----

Same with Vsynch disabled)

 

2976

28 sec

55.4

 

second run

 

2976

24 sec

123 FPS

 

------------------------------

I also had to put PK4 into training mission folder, then reload training mission, then start demo from menu screen (took a few tries to figure out as the instructions are a bit vague)

 

I did have a black sky, and a few things traced like the readables, but I didn't have hall of mirrors on anything else like buildings.

Dark is the sway that mows like a harvest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just recorded a timedemo for "Return to the City", because I wanted to compare the performance on that map to the training-mission. I thought I'd share it. Installation as before: Place pk4 in darkmod folder, install "Return to the City" and then put "timedemo benchmark.demo" into the console.

 

Attention: Don't use this timedemo, if you haven't played the FM yet, as it is a nearly complete flythrough. No secrets are revealed though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok...

 

Test 1:

 

 

shot1.jpg

 

test 2:

shot2.jpg

 

Settings:

settings.jpg

 

System:

Win XP, SP 3

Core 2 Duo- 2,4 GHz (E4600), 775 socket

Geforce 7600 GS, 256 MB

2 GB DDR2 RAM, Singlechannel

 

The strange thing is that on my Pc I get most of the time only 60 (closed rooms), 30 or 20 fps (open rooms/outsides) fix, really rare if i get like 25 or 35 O.o

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

That's vsynch, it clamps at 60, 30 and 20 if the frames are above that but not above the next mark. So instead of getting fps that varies widely between 20 and 29 you'll get an even 20 output. It deffinately gives smoother performance.

 

I have to run it or I get bad tearing on any game, that's my monitor though as I got the same thing on my old and new card (nvidia 8600gts, ati 5850)

Dark is the sway that mows like a harvest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah thanks, here without vsync:

 

 

shot4.jpg

 

wow -30 seconds without vsync

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

 

* 32 bit can only adress 4 Gbyte, so your graphic card memory needs to be mapped in there, too, plus some other memory. The effect is that with a 512 Mbyte graphic card, you end up with about 3.0 .. 3.3 Gbyte usable memory. (That is not much improvement over 2 Gbyte). If you buy a 1024 Mbyte graphic card, you end up with about 2.5 .. 2.8 Gbyte usable memory only.

 

I'm sorry, but are you absolutely sure about that? If you're talking about onboard graphics with shared memory, then yes, the memory the onboard graphics uses is taken from RAM. However, a discrete graphics gard has its own RAM, and while certain addresses are mapped in RAM, it's never the whole amount. For example, my HD4870 has 1GB of VRAM, and my system (4 GB RAM) has 3.4 GB available, just like you have with your 512 MB gc.

 

 

You can test it out with a graphics card that has 1 GB, you'll have the same amount of system RAM available. I experienced the same when I had my HD3870/512MB, I had the same 3.4 GB RAM available.

 

On the other hand, I have no idea what happens once a game is started. Maybe the textures stored in the graphics card's VRAM have to be stored in the system RAM too, but to my knowledge that doesn't happen. But I'm no expert.

 

 

My Eigenvalue is bigger than your Eigenvalue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but are you absolutely sure about that? If you're talking about onboard graphics with shared memory, then yes, the memory the onboard graphics uses is taken from RAM.

 

I was not saying it was taken from RAM. I was saying it is _mapped_ into the 4Gbyte somewhere. With 32bit, you can only address 4Gbyte, meaning you have 4Gbyte addresses available. Now if you have 2Gbyte memory and 1Gbyte on your graphic card, both are mappable into 4Gbyte and you get to enjoy both.

 

Under a 64bit operating system, you can have 16 (or even more) Gbyte main memory on top of whatever VRAM you have. But not with 32Gbyte.

 

However, a discrete graphics gard has its own RAM, and while certain addresses are mapped in RAM, it's never the whole amount. For example, my HD4870 has 1GB of VRAM, and my system (4 GB RAM) has 3.4 GB available, just like you have with your 512 MB gc.

 

That is new to me, older systems definitely had less than 3Gbyte available. (It gets fun if you put two 1Gbyte cards in SLI mode in your system :)

 

You can test it out with a graphics card that has 1 GB, you'll have the same amount of system RAM available. I experienced the same when I had my HD3870/512MB, I had the same 3.4 GB RAM available.

 

Well, I experienced the other scenario :)

 

(Of course, I also had another system where even a 64bit OS could not adress 4Gbyte RAM because the BIOS was buggy...)

 

It depends on the hardware and BIOS. If all the graphic card VRAM is mapped inside the 4Gbyte, yes, with 1Gbyte VRAM you are left with 3Gbyte minus some other stuff the BIOS maps.

 

But maybe nowadays they make it so only 512 Mbyte are mapped in, and the driver is responsible to tell the card "heh, put this into your memory, but the other half, that is not mapped in". That would remind me on the bank-switching with EMS:

 

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanded_Memory_Specification

 

(god, I am old...)

 

On the other hand, I have no idea what happens once a game is started. Maybe the textures stored in the graphics card's VRAM have to be stored in the system RAM too, but to my knowledge that doesn't happen. But I'm no expert.

 

Textures that are stored in VRAM also are quite typically stored as a copy in main RAM, too. But that depends on how much textures a given scene uses and how much the map uses and how much the game caches. That is a completely different topic (namely memory usage :)

 

But beware, under 32bit OS, any process can only get as much as 2Gbyte (windows) or 3 Gbyte (linux) adresses. So you D3 could never use 3.4 Gbyte memory under 32bit windows.

 

http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/brianmadden/archive/2004/02/19/the-4gb-windows-memory-limit-what-does-it-really-mean.aspx

 

The upshot of this is one should use a 64bit OS if possible. :)

"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

Somewhat off-topic, but my work PC (running 64-bit Vista) has 12 GB of main memory, compared to my home computer's 2 GB. When I discovered this I was all like "OMGWTFBBQ". It's a beast. I have no idea how one can even use that much memory at once. :P

My games | Public Service Announcement: TDM is not set in the Thief universe. The city in which it takes place is not the City from Thief. The player character is not called Garrett. Any person who contradicts these facts will be subjected to disapproving stares.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is new to me, older systems definitely had less than 3Gbyte available. (It gets fun if you put two 1Gbyte cards in SLI mode in your system :)

 

Maybe. My first system that had 4 GB had a mainboard with a AMD 690 Chipset, and that was fairly modern. It had 3.3 GB, meaning 100 MB less than what my current mobo and BIOS gives me. 

 

But maybe nowadays they make it so only 512 Mbyte are mapped in, and the driver is responsible to tell the card "heh, put this into your memory, but the other half, that is not mapped in". That would remind me on the bank-switching with EMS:

 

http://de.wikipedia....y_Specification

 

(god, I am old...)

 

No, you aren't, because I remember that too.  ;) EMS, XMS and all that stuff, typing RAM address ranges into... what was it, the config.sys? Well, I'm happy this is far behind us now. 

 

But beware, under 32bit OS, any process can only get as much as 2Gbyte (windows) or 3 Gbyte (linux) adresses. So you D3 could never use 3.4 Gbyte memory under 32bit windows.

 

Unless you use the 3GB switch in Windows 32. Here is my boot.ini:

 

 

[boot loader]
timeout=5
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional 3GB" /fastdetect /usepmtimer /3GB /USERVA=2990 /NoExecute=OptOut
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect=OptIn /usepmtimer

 

This is actually the only way for me to be able to play the Fakefactory Cinematic Mod for Half-Life 2 on my system (WinXP/32), because if I don't set the switch, HL2 can't access the amount of RAM required. (See the Microsoft explanation here)

My Eigenvalue is bigger than your Eigenvalue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhat off-topic, but my work PC (running 64-bit Vista) has 12 GB of main memory, compared to my home computer's 2 GB. When I discovered this I was all like "OMGWTFBBQ". It's a beast. I have no idea how one can even use that much memory at once. :P

 

I'm sure someone doing 3D FDTD simulations (finite differences time domain) could fill up that much RAM, and much, much more. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe. My first system that had 4 GB had a mainboard with a AMD 690 Chipset, and that was fairly modern. It had 3.3 GB, meaning 100 MB less than what my current mobo and BIOS gives me.

 

My main PC has 4Gbyte ram (64bit kubuntu) and my work PC has 16Gbyte ram (64bit, too). It is great for running multiple virtualbox instances, like lets say 8 Windows XPs :)

 

I'll never understand why people still stick to 32bit on PCs, but that must be a windows problem (having to buy the 64bit version? not having it? not having drivers?)

 

No, you aren't, because I remember that too. ;) EMS, XMS and all that stuff, typing RAM address ranges into... what was it, the config.sys? Well, I'm happy this is far behind us now.

 

Welcome to the club :) but:

 

Unless you use the 3GB switch in Windows 32. Here is my boot.ini:

 

Seems the old tricks still live on. Because with the 3GB switch, your kernel now only has 1Gbyte memory left :)

 

This is actually the only way for me to be able to play the Fakefactory Cinematic Mod for Half-Life 2 on my system (WinXP/32), because if I don't set the switch, HL2 can't access the amount of RAM required. (See the Microsoft explanation here)

 

As I said, the old tricks live on - I haven't used a 32bit OS since about 3 or 4 years now. (Ok, thats not true, my laptop is 32bit, but it can have only physically 2Gbyte memory and has a 32bit Intel CPU - and I cannot change these things w/o buying a new one :)

 

 

Edit: We shouldn't hijack this thread.

"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

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.

 Share


  • Recent Status Updates

    • Gilkar

      When I was a young man my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have him around. As I grew older I was amazed at how much the old man had learned in such a short time.
      · 0 replies
    • jaxa

      RTX 3090 Super, RTX 3070 Ti 16 GB, RTX 2060 12 GB
      https://wccftech.com/nvidia-launching-rtx-3090-super-rtx-3070-ti-16gb-and-rtx-2060-12gb-by-january-2022/
      · 0 replies
    • duzenko

      CPU benchmark time - compiling DarkRadiant (2nd run)
      i5 8600K 6C/6T@4.4GHz DDR4 2x2133MHz 9MB cache
      Parallel builds: 1. 3:57 Parallel builds: 6 (default). 2:28 r5 1600AF 6C/12T@3.3GHz DDR4 1x2666MHz 16 MB cache, temp folder on HDD
      Parallel builds: 1. 5:05 Parallel builds: 4. 2:47 Parallel builds: 6. 2:55 Parallel builds: 12 (default). 2:57
      · 6 replies
    • nbohr1more

      Status updates are back so it is also a good time to return to contests!
      https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/21095-christmas-connections-contest-2021
       
      · 0 replies
    • freyk

      Having seen the new scifi stuff from bladeghost/scythwraith, want to continue the cyberpunk project. Only one problem, can't map.
      · 1 reply
×
×
  • Create New...