Reaper Grimm
Register | User Profile | Member List | F.A.Q | Privacy Policy | New Blog | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Classic Doom > Source Ports > ZDoom vs. GZDoom
Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]  
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:10. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Graf Zahl
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 7688
Registered: 01-03


Probably not. Unless someone comes along and helps me. I've got far too little time to work on this... :(

Old Post 09-01-09 19:12 #
Graf Zahl is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Dancso
Registered just to make one post


Posts: 1
Registered: 10-06



Graf Zahl said:

Whoo said:
You need to optimize the engine, seriously.


You need a reality check, seriously! Have you even read Myk's post above about Doom and hardware rendering? Doom will never *ever* be able to get the same performance out of modern hardware as newer games. Modern games optimize their data so that they can handle it with a relatively small overhead before passing it to the hardware. Doom can't do that. A lot of stuff has to be recomputed each single frame - and there's very little that can be done about it.



http://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.ph...=21478&p=421972

Is there a problem with doing whatever's possible to optimize? Hell, it could be an option to toggle on or off.

Or better yet, adjustable draw distance!

Old Post 09-16-09 17:14 #
Dancso is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Graf Zahl
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 7688
Registered: 01-03


Cheap, shitty and generally a bad idea. Not going to happen - ever!

Old Post 09-16-09 19:12 #
Graf Zahl is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
phi108
Member


Posts: 557
Registered: 03-08


I think mipmapping helps performance in that regard. The areas are still drawn, but the texture isn't full resolution.

I'm not sure though, but I think mipmapping increases performance in GZDoom and the Source engine.

Old Post 09-16-09 19:30 #
phi108 is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Mike.Reiner
Senior Member


Posts: 1165
Registered: 01-05


Gonna be honest: Outside of running stupid shit like nuts.wad, I've never managed to bring GZDoom to a low framerate.

What exists for GZDoom that gives most people performance issues?

Old Post 09-16-09 19:43 #
Mike.Reiner is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Graf Zahl
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 7688
Registered: 01-03


On some extremely wide open maps the frame rate may break down, e.g. UTNT's final map. Another issue may be certain portal effects. They require a setup that can badly stall the hardware.

Disregarding that, none of these issues are coding related. They all are caused by the GFX card hitting the limit and no code optimization will make them go away.

The last few days I implemented VBO support for flat rendering (no walls yet) and the code execution time measurably decreased. But the frame rate did not increase because this is not the limiting factor.

Old Post 09-16-09 19:51 #
Graf Zahl is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
AlexMax
Senior Member


Posts: 1114
Registered: 01-03



esselfortium said:
Well, I for one can't wait to not be able to play any new GZDoom mods on my 2007 laptop that runs Doom 3, Half-Life 2, and Portal flawlessly. Bring it on.


It's funny that you bring this up because Half Life 2 and Portal both use...*gasp*...different rendering pipelines for older cards. Unless Graf is removing the old renderer anytime soon (hint: he's not), it's just like Half Life 2 defaulting to DX8 or DX7 mode when it detects DX9 is too hard on your system.


Whoo said:


You might not be able to get it as opitimized, but you certainly could do a hell of a lot better. Take a look:

Column A is Gzdoom, Column B is GlBoom



Didn't Doom have a 35fps cap? These are hundreds of frames per second.

Play prBoom+ then if it's so much faster for you. Besides, anything over 60 is unnoticeable unless you're a quake playing sperglord anyway.

Old Post 09-16-09 20:12 #
AlexMax is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Baby Bonnie Hood
Junior Member


Posts: 120
Registered: 05-09


I mainly stick to ZDoom. Not out of favoritism, but because I can't play GZDoom more than once per PC session (it'd BSoD my laptop if I tried to play it again a second time).

Old Post 09-18-09 05:25 #
Baby Bonnie Hood is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
entryway
Forum Staple


Posts: 2711
Registered: 01-04



Graf Zahl said:
The last few days I implemented VBO support for flat rendering (no walls yet) and the code execution time measurably decreased. But the frame rate did not increase because this is not the limiting factor.

GLBoom-Plus can use VBO for skybox and flats. I have these results on map05 @ epic.wad with my config and Core2Duo 3.0 + GForce 8800 GTS:

glboom-plus_immediate - 272fps
glboom-plus_drawarrays - 282fps
glboom-plus_vbo - 282fps

Old Post 09-20-09 17:18 #
entryway is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Graf Zahl
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 7688
Registered: 01-03


Interesting.

My results are a bit different.

Immediate and VBO are nearly the same speed but glDrawArrays with a software storage buffer is noticably slower. And if I use glArrayElement performance breaks completely down.

What driver version are you using?

Old Post 09-20-09 18:06 #
Graf Zahl is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
entryway
Forum Staple


Posts: 2711
Registered: 01-04



Graf Zahl said:
What driver version are you using?

The latest WHQL. 190.62 I think.

Old Post 09-20-09 18:10 #
entryway is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
entryway
Forum Staple


Posts: 2711
Registered: 01-04



Graf Zahl said:
Immediate and VBO are nearly the same speed but glDrawArrays with a software storage buffer is noticably slower. And if I use glArrayElement performance breaks completely down.

Strange. glDrawArrays should be faster.

gl_sky_detail 8192 (SkyDome drawing code is from o-o-old gzdoom, but with support of VBO)
glboom-plus.exe -geom 640x480w -nosound -warp 12 (32 bits, trilinear, Aniso16x, AA4x)

immediate - 36 fps
drawarrays - 53 fps
vbo - 487 fps

Last edited by entryway on 09-20-09 at 19:38

Old Post 09-20-09 18:23 #
entryway is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Starke Von Oben
Banned


Posts: 252
Registered: 09-09


I've toyed around with Gzdoom, but to be honest if I want to make true 3D floors I'll edit Quake.

Old Post 09-28-09 03:05 #
Starke Von Oben is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:10. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]  
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Classic Doom > Source Ports > ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.