Game Development Community

TSE Demo Performance and Feedback

by Joe Bird · in Torque Game Engine · 06/03/2004 (2:20 pm) · 44 replies

I am curious to see what kind of performance (fps) people are getting with the TSE Demo. I thought it ran pretty well on my machine, especially with so many effects going at once. However, my mouse response was really lagging.

-PC Specs-
Microsoft Windows XP-Home
DirectX 9.0b
Asus P4P800 mobo
2.4GHz Intel Pentium 4c
512MB 3200 Kingston DDR RAM (currently not running dual-channel)
NVIDIA GeForce 5600FX 128MB RAM (Driver 56.72)


-Graphics Options-
800x600
32bit
Auto Texture Setting


-FPS Counts-
The Orc Dance: 16-26
Specular/Bump mapped floor: solid 32
Glow Buffers: solid 16
Texture Animation Box: 24-26
Complex Materials Knot: 17-22
Per-Vertex Refraction: 18-21
Per-Pixel Refraction: 15-21
Cube-Map Generation 19-21
------------


I suspect that I could get good framerates if I were selective about what effects I want. Mostly I want shadows though ;)

I think the Demo looked great overall and was very impressed by some of the effects. It could really use some sound effects and music. Also, the Orc dance was a bit funny looking since his arm would go through his armor pads. But like I said, my main issue was the slow mouse response.

Keep up the great work guys!
NextNext Thread
PrevPrevious Thread
More from Torque Game Engine
Page «Previous 1 2 3 Last »

Torque Owner Stefan Lundmark
#1
06/03/2004 (2:58 pm)
I don't know why your specs are so low for your kind of system.

-PC Specs-
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
DirectX 9.0b
1.4GHz Intel Pentium 4
256MB RDRAM
NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti4800 64MB RAM (Driver 56.72)


-Graphics Options-
800x600
32bit
Auto Texture Setting


-FPS Count-
The Orc Dance: 68-102
Specular/Bump mapped floor: 93-104
Glow Buffers: 61-70
Texture Animation Box: solid 102
Complex Materials Knot: 93-107
Per-Vertex Refraction: 79-93
Per-Pixel Refraction: 68-82
Cube-Map Generation 71-102
------------

Torque Owner Peter Andersson
#2
06/03/2004 (3:01 pm)
I'm going keep about the same format as the poster above. I'm sure this thread could prove useful for GG. If you want to show your FPS while running the demo just hit the tilde "~" key and type "metrics(fps);".

-PC Specs-
OS: Microsoft Windows XP Pro
DX Version: DirectX 9.0b
CPU: AMD Athlon XP 1700+
RAM: 512 Mb
GFX: NVIDIA GeForce 3 64 Mb
GFX Driver version: 56.72

-Graphics Options-
Resolution: 800x600x32bit
Texture Quality: High (Low is too crappy to be playable at 800x600)

-FPS Counts-
The Orc Standing Still: 1.5
The Orc Dance: 32
Specular/Bump mapped floor: 79
Glow Buffers: 43
Texture Animation Box: 80
Complex Materials Knot: 65
Per-Vertex Refraction: 81
Per-Pixel Refraction: 64
Cube-Map Generation 60
Dancing Orc In The End: 80
Outdoor Scene: 1.5

Torque Owner Francisco Canedo
#3
06/03/2004 (3:03 pm)
Maybe Video Card Driver,,, In my system any Forceware xx.xx send my fps to hell...


-PC Specs-
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
DirectX 9.0b (4.09.0000.0902)
INTEL D865GLC_
Intel Pentium 4 HT CPU 2.40c GHz
2 x 512MB 3200 Shikatronic DDR RAM
eVGA NVIDIA GeFORCE 3 TI 200 64MB RAM 4X (Driver Detonator 45.23)

-Graphics Options-
800x600
32bit
Auto Texture Setting


-FPS Counts-
The Orc Dance: 37-50
Specular/Bump mapped floor: 64
Glow Buffers: 37
Texture Animation Box: 64-72
Complex Materials Knot: 42-61
Per-Vertex Refraction: 67-70
Per-Pixel Refraction: 50-57
Cube-Map Generation : 44-54

Torque Owner Hank-Ahn
#4
06/03/2004 (4:51 pm)
Interesing. My computer did not perform as well as I would have hoped. I might try using the latest official drivers (I am using betas). I had a friend try it with an Nvidia Quadro 2 and he said most of the stuff on the screen was white. Just thought I would throw that in there.

Edit: I just realized I was testing using the debug build. Things were much better with the release build (obviously :) ).

-PC Specs-
OS: Microsoft Windows XP Pro
DX Version: DirectX 9.0b
CPU: Intel Pentium 4 3.0C (Hyperthreading)
RAM: 1024 MB Corair PC3200 (dual channel)
GFX: NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 256 MB
GFX Driver version: 60.72

-Graphics Options-
Resolution: 800x600x32bit
Texture Quality: High

-FPS Counts-
The Orc Standing Still: 43-45
The Orc Dance: 18-47
Specular/Bump mapped floor: 46-50
Glow Buffers: 45-50
Texture Animation Box: 72-81
Complex Materials Knot: 50-70
Per-Vertex Refraction: 56-69
Per-Pixel Refraction: 54-64
Dancing Orc In The End: 46-49
Outdoor Scene: 26-27

Torque Owner Westy
#5
06/03/2004 (6:06 pm)
PC Specs-
Microsoft Windows XP-Home
DirectX 9.0b
Gigabyte GA-7VAXP
Athlon XP 2600+ @ 2.1GHZ
1024 MB DDR400 RAM
Gainward GeForce 3 Ti200 Golden Sample 128MB DDR


-Graphics Options-
800x600
32bit
Auto Texture Setting


-FPS Counts-
The Orc Standing Still: 40
The Orc Dance: 25
Specular/Bump mapped floor: 55
Glow Buffers: 25
Texture Animation Box: 50
Complex Materials Knot: 40
Per-Vertex Refraction: 45
Per-Pixel Refraction: 35
Dancing Orc In The End: 50
Outdoor Scene: 70
------------

Torque 3D Owner Chris "DiGi" Timberlake
#6
06/03/2004 (6:16 pm)
PC Specs-
Microsoft Windows XP Pro
DirectX 9.0b
Pentium 4 1.2ghz
156 MB RAMBUS 1200mhz
ATI Radeon AIW (All In Wonder) 9200 128 meg DDR


-Graphics Options-
1024 X 768
32bit
Force High


-FPS Counts-
The Orc Standing Still: 25
The Orc Dance: 23
Specular/Bump mapped floor: 26.7
Glow Buffers: 30
Texture Animation Box: 20
Complex Materials Knot: 30
Per-Vertex Refraction: 25
Per-Pixel Refraction: 26
Dancing Orc In The End: 27
Outdoor Scene: 20

Torque 3D Owner Xavier "eXoDuS" Amado
Default Studio Name
#7
06/03/2004 (6:38 pm)
Just to clarify on the differences of FPS by the first 2 posters. First poster has an FX based card which supports 2.0 pixel shaders, while the second poster has pixel shaders 1.3. Since 2.0 shaders are 'better' they take more power to render, so people using ps2.0 will see lower fps than people using ps1.3, but they will get better visual quality, namingly the refratcion shaders and the specular bumps.
If you want to force a ps version you can do so by editing the prefs.cs file, and setting these vars:
$pref::Video::forcePixVersion = 1;
$pref::Video::forcedPixVersion = 1.3;
First one toggles forcing on/off and the later specifies the version to force to. 
NOTE: DONT FORCE A HIGHER PS VERSION THAN YOU CAN SUPPORT!

By forcing ps1.3 on a ps2.0 video card you will see over 80fps, better than the poster who had a geforce4 ti.

Hope that helps.

Torque Owner James Sun
#8
06/03/2004 (6:56 pm)
Agreed. I've got both Ti4600 and FX5600, on dual Athlon 2700 with 1GB Ram
My score is consistent with Joe Bird's and Stefan Lundmark's performance. TSE runs MUCH faster on the Ti cards, but since FX is DX9 and Ti is DX8, the output of Ti cards has lack considerable amount of eye candy. On the other hand, 5600 is a very slow card, most of every test runs slower on 5600 than on 4600, including shader 1x tests. The only difference is that 5600 can do fancier graphics...at a much slower speed.

Associate Kyle Carter
#9
06/03/2004 (9:08 pm)
Another very important note - if you force high res textures you will see a significant performance loss. Our basic texture budget is 128mb for the demo. If we squeeze stuff down (ie, low res textures) we can fit in 64. But going over results in all sorts of really awesome visual artifacts and in some cases huge performance losses.

Benjamin
#10
06/03/2004 (9:43 pm)
What I cant understand is that my Leadtek GeForce FX 5950 Ultra is kinda slow on this demo. I get an average of about 30-50 fps when I would expect about double that given how good this card is supposed to be.

I'm using 56.64 driver set. And on top of that I've got a pretty decent system - AMD XP 2500+ with 1GB of DDR400 RAM and an nForce2 motherboard. Running Windows XP home edition OEM.

I'm pretty disappointed that this card on this system is not up to speed.

Is there anything I'm doing wrong? Or is my card no good? I've also tried forcing the shader version down to 1.3 but I only get about 60% increase in performance.

Torque Owner Prairie Games
Prairie Games, Inc.
#11
06/03/2004 (10:04 pm)
"...but I only get about 60% increase in performance."

I played Magic Carpet at 320x240 at 10fps and I thought it was tits... How expectations have changed.

-J

Torque Owner Jess Crable
#12
06/03/2004 (10:08 pm)
I'll get the exact specs later, but it ran great on my 2.4ghz/512mb ram/radeon 9700.

I also tried it on an approx. 2 ghz/1024mb ram/geforce 4 (64mb memory card, not sure of exact type), and got worse results there. It dropped to below 3 FPS consistantly around the dancing orc. The rest was pretty speedy, but some of the texture effects seemed to be missing.

Torque Owner Joe Bird
#13
06/04/2004 (12:15 am)
I forced my PixVersion to 1.3 and my framerates jumped to 75-85! Everything still looked nice too.

Prior to that I had tried downgrading to the Detonator drivers 45.23 and the rendering looked much worse, and with a 5-10 fps drop. Another factor might be that I recently had a DDR RAM chip die when my PSU died. I am temporarily running different brands of DDR Ram 2x256 in virtual-single channel mode. When my replacement gets in and I am going dual-channel again I might get better performance.

The performance/visual effects I get with ps1.3 is great though. It's good to know that anyone on a crappy 5600FX card has an option. By the way, I would not recommend the 5600FX to anyone. I got it simply because of the ps2.0 support and because I had bad experiences with ATI in the past. It runs ps2.0, but like James said previously, "...at a much slower speed."

Also, I have run games in the past at 20-30fps without losing much mouse response. I think my mouse should still respond well at those fps ranges, but in the demo it does not.

Torque Owner Banshee
#14
06/04/2004 (12:25 am)
I think once OpenGL is supported the engine will run much quicker for many of you, it just depends what your card is good with, in this case my 128mb Geforce3 tends to run better with OpenGL drivers(like on Halo) then with DirectX

Torque Owner Dylan Sale
#15
06/04/2004 (12:42 am)
I have a 2800+ Athlon XP. Radeon 9600 Pro. Latest drivers. I get ~40fps@1024x768, auto textures, on all scenes in the demo. But there are these 'jumps' when turning fast or entering rooms. They are only for a small time, but they do get annoying :\

Benjamin
#16
06/04/2004 (12:49 am)
Very true. OpenGL has much better performance with my system. The Orbz demo ran as smooth as silk with OpenGL and VSync on.

But the Orbz demo with DirectX didn't run as good and tended to be more choppy. So I don't think it's my card, I think it's because OpenGL is more stable.

I just upgraded my driver set to the latest and I saw a pretty good increase in performance. Not as smooth as silk, but a lot better than it was. And I don't expect rendering to be as smooth as silk when I've got shaders running. Believe me, shaders will throw a spanner in the works when it comes to overall performance on ANY card, even on the FX 5950 Ultra, and probably even on the 6800.

Torque Owner Dean Calver
Cloud Pixies Ltd
#17
06/04/2004 (1:17 am)
OpenGL has no major speed advantages as an API (there is some for lots of object due to its driver model but thats it). There is some advantages speed wise to GLSL vs HLSL but thats for the future.

The reason games with options for both API tend to run faster on OpenGL is almost all of them are natively OpenGL and have a layer to translate to Direct3D which steals performance. The other reason its there are usualy vendor specific extension to allow with extra programming effort to get closer to the silicon.

API overhead is usally the least of your worries (though with LOTS of small objects it can become a problem).

Indeed with the earlier state of GLSL compilers vs the HLSL compiler, I tend to find GLSL is currently slower for the same work but thats just a temporary glitch in theory GLSL should be faster until Dx10 comes out with the new shader model.

Torque 3D Owner Michael Cozzolino
Big Monk Games
#18
06/04/2004 (3:41 am)
My results from the demo:

This is with $pref::Video::forcedPixVersion = 2.0;

-PC Specs-
Microsoft Windows 98 SE
DirectX 9.0b
733 MHZ Intel Pentium III
256MB Rambus RAM
NVIDIA GeForce 5200FX 128MB RAM (Driver 56.64)


-Graphics Options-
800x600
32bit
Auto Texture Setting


-FPS Counts-
The Orc Dance: 11-19
Specular/Bump mapped floor: solid 24.8
Glow Buffers: 11.4-13.6
Texture Animation Box: 17.8-19.3
Complex Materials Knot: 12.1-16.3
Per-Vertex Refraction: 12.8-15.2
Per-Pixel Refraction: 11.2-15.1
Cube-Map Generation 12.0-15.2

Torque Owner Stefan Lundmark
#19
06/04/2004 (4:02 am)
Xavier: I had no idea of that, thanks for clearing that up for me :D So maybe it would be practical to have that as an option in the options menu later on? I mean, to force lower PS.

Associate Kyle Carter
#20
06/04/2004 (9:53 am)
Be aware that upping the pix version or texture quality will make the demo chug beyond all reckoning - we're talking about something like 1% of normal performance...
Page «Previous 1 2 3 Last »