[Fantinaikos]

2 MB RAM and ATI radeon x1650. Your opinion?

[supergoofy]

Fantinaikos, on May 26 2009, 04:34 AM, said:

2 MB RAM and ATI radeon x1650. Your opinion?

The Radeon 1650 is a little better than GeForce 8600GT, I think.

2GB RAM is the recommended for Windows XP (32 or 64 bit)
4GB RAM is the recommended for Vista (32 or 64 bit)

If you have a P4 3.0 GHz or above, then you can run Polymer, but not with HRP. Polymer + HRP needs a really fast cpu and gpu. But in the future there might be major optimizations to polymer renderer and then we can all run it.

As I said in an earlier post, anyone to convert polymer to assembly? This is extremely hard to do and it needs a lot of work.

[SwissCm]

supergoofy, on May 26 2009, 09:40 PM, said:

The Radeon 1650 is a little better than GeForce 8600GT, I think.

Uhhhhhhhhh no. The 8600GT pretty much thrashes it.

Quote

2GB RAM is the recommended for Windows XP (32 or 64 bit)
4GB RAM is the recommended for Vista (32 or 64 bit)

4GB RAM on Vista x86 would be a gigantic waste of time, considering you wouldn't be able to use about a gig of it. Don't hold me on this, but I beleive video RAM may be more important.

Quote

If you have a P4 3.0 GHz or above, then you can run Polymer, but not with HRP. Polymer + HRP needs a really fast cpu and gpu. But in the future there might be major optimizations to polymer renderer and then we can all run it.

At the moment I beleive that point lights are rather CPU intensive due to being unoptimised. Considering they give my Phenom 9660 a hard time, I seriously doubt you would get playable framerates with a P4 with polymers current state. This of course may change with further optimisation, but I'm pretty sure that if you want to use Polymer's best features, you'll need a pretty beefy PC. In other words, not a P4 with a Radeon x1650.

Quote

As I said in an earlier post, anyone to convert polymer to assembly? This is extremely hard to do and it needs a lot of work.

Not only would that be a pointless waste of time due to the little benefit in performance that would bring, it would also be incompatible with non-x86 platforms. The problem isn't with the programming language the code is written in, but with inefficient algorithms.

[MusicallyInspired]

I've got an X1650 AGP card on a P42.5Ghz with 768MB of RAM and it works. But when I play Hollywood Holocaust with the Polymer HRP and the maphacks it's almost unplayable in some areas. Txtures just turn completely black altogether and I get down to 1 or less FPS. Plus with my sprite issue it's completely unplayable. I had to alter the source so that it would display only models and not sprites when using polymer to even be able to run it.

[TerminX]

asdasd, on May 26 2009, 01:38 AM, said:

great job guys!

minimum requirements?

Can I run it with this? P4-2.66 1.2G.RAM ATI radeon 9200

Hahahahahah no.

[Jokke_r]

i'd say if your computer can run Stalker in DX9 mode you can probably run this. Or say COD4

[Fantinaikos]

But it would easier insert an ON/OFF polymer button in the video section of eduke32 options?

about the RAM and the power of my graphic card, i play Gothic 3 (whit and whitout community patch) almost perfectly so i cannot understand why a game relatively whit minor detail, although polymer, can't run.

[MusicallyInspired]

Fantinaikos, on May 26 2009, 12:53 PM, said:

But it would easier insert an ON/OFF polymer button in the video section of eduke32 options?

There's already a Polymer checkbox on the setup screen on startup.

[d3drocks]

Yatta, on May 11 2009, 01:18 AM, said:

God I love Polymer. It's our new DNF.

Here's a super high quality shot I just took:

http://img93.imagesh...433/polymer.jpg

was that done in real time, or was it rendered as an image slowly?

[Yatta]

d3drocks, on May 26 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

was that done in real time, or was it rendered as an image slowly?

Real time.

Also, to put a little perspective to this, I should mention that I'm on a 2006 rig with an AMD 4200+ X2, 7800 GT 256 MB, and 2 GB ram. Mid-range machine by today's standards!

[Jokke_r]

Fantinaikos, on May 26 2009, 08:53 PM, said:

But it would easier insert an ON/OFF polymer button in the video section of eduke32 options?

about the RAM and the power of my graphic card, i play Gothic 3 (whit and whitout community patch) almost perfectly so i cannot understand why a game relatively whit minor detail, although polymer, can't run.

Polymer uses graphical effects which require shader model 3.0 support from your card. Gothic uses shader model 2.0 so it will work on older cards.
Although i'm pretty sure most of the effects in polymer could be done with shader model 2.0 i'm sure plagman has reasons of his own to use 3.0.

About the HRP though, imo a lot of the textures would probably look fine with half the current resolution, i mean a lot of them aren't THAT complicated or detailed. Especially combined with detail textures i'm sure most textures in the game would look fine with like a max 256x256 res saving a lot of texture memory.

[Ramen4ever]

I'm not even sure what "survival" is but damn that looked sexy. XD

[Danukem]

Jokke_r, on May 26 2009, 12:31 PM, said:

About the HRP though, imo a lot of the textures would probably look fine with half the current resolution, i mean a lot of them aren't THAT complicated or detailed. Especially combined with detail textures i'm sure most textures in the game would look fine with like a max 256x256 res saving a lot of texture memory.

but we wants moar pixels, cuz moar is always betta, if duke had 10000 x 10000 graphix then it would look like crysis

[Moggimus]

I totally agree with scaling down the textures a bit.

[MusicallyInspired]

Yatta, on May 26 2009, 02:31 PM, said:

Real time.

Also, to put a little perspective to this, I should mention that I'm on a 2006 rig with an AMD 4200+ X2, 7800 GT 256 MB, and 2 GB ram. Mid-range machine by today's standards!

And yet, as great as that looks, it looks even better with normal/spec mapping! My jaw dropped when I saw how the rock face textures looked with the (yet unfinished) Polymer HRP pack that was linked to earlier. It's one thing to have awesome lighting and shading and then another thing to have bump maps. And then ANOTHER thing to have parallax mapping!

[Spiker]

What's the point in creating LR-HRP? (Low Resolution High Resolution Pack) Especially if there is a classic mode

[Yatta]

 moggimus, on May 26 2009, 12:58 PM, said:

I totally agree with scaling down the textures a bit.

Just go here:

Attached thumbnail(s)

• 

[Chip]

 TX, on May 26 2009, 04:55 PM, said:

Hahahahahah no.

What about mine then?

Processor: AMD Athlon™ 64 FX-60 Dual Core Processor , MMX, 3DNow (2 CPUs), ~2.8GHz
Memory: 2048MB RAM
Page File: 392MB used, 3037MB available
Card: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series (4850 - 512MB)

[MusicallyInspired]

 Yatta, on May 26 2009, 03:06 PM, said:

Just go here:

That scales down ALL the textures, though. Including the menu fonts, rendering them unreadable. At least it does for me.

[Danukem]

 Spiker, on May 26 2009, 01:03 PM, said:

What's the point in creating LR-HRP? (Low Resolution High Resolution Pack) Especially if there is a classic mode

An HRP that has some textures scaled down, with polymer (including all the various mapping on the textures not available for the 8-bit art) will look like a modern game and nothing like classic mode.

[MusicallyInspired]

I still do hope that somebody also creates normal/spec maps for the 8-bit graphics as well, though.

[Tea Monster]

 MusicallyInspired, on May 26 2009, 12:20 PM, said:

I still do hope that somebody also creates normal/spec maps for the 8-bit graphics as well, though.

GIMP and the normal map plug in are free. All the tools to rip the textures out of the GRP file are free.

Get to it!

[MusicallyInspired]

I actually did start on a couple of the textures already for a map I was making just to see what it would look like. Was pretty cool. But whenever a whole pack is finished it should be included as standard with the Polymer release of eDuke32 eventually (without the HRP).

[Mark]

It took 14 pages of posts before I finally put in my 2 cents worth.I see all these posts about computing power and frame rates. I see screenshots in resolutions as high as 1600 x 1200. With my older machine I'm wondering what the performance will be at the 1024 x 768 rez I usually play at. And it sounds like a lot of others have the same basic machine as I. And I suppose I shouldn't even worry until the final optimized version is released but it would be nice to know performance at that rez right now for comparison.

[Mia Max]

Marked, on May 27 2009, 01:35 AM, said:

It took 14 pages of posts before I finally put in my 2 cents worth.I see all these posts about computing power and frame rates. I see screenshots in resolutions as high as 1600 x 1200. With my older machine I'm wondering what the performance will be at the 1024 x 768 rez I usually play at. And it sounds like a lot of others have the same basic machine as I. And I suppose I shouldn't even worry until the final optimized version is released but it would be nice to know performance at that rez right now for comparison.

Well, I just made a stress test to see the performance for eduke32 polymer renderer.

So I found out that it doesn't affect framerate when I force 4xMSAA (with nHancer) or no anti-aliasing much at all. Changing resolution does nearly nothing.

Some examples for same place in my map:
1920 x 1200: 17 fps
640 x 480: 18 fps
1920 x 1200 + 4xMSAA: 12 fps
640 x 480 + 4xMSAA: 13 fps

And you won't believe it, but changing quality doesn't really nothing, that's no joke!
I can enable/disable HRP, set texture filter trillinar or nearest and I can change all options in nHancer, framerate is always the same!

That's why I think nobody should buy a new graphics card until we get the optimized version.

[Tea Monster]

I've got a Athlon X2 6K, 2 GB of RAM, a GeForce 8100.

My graphics card isn't brilliant, but it runs HL2 Ep1 fine and Q4 without any issue.

I too found that running the HRP and/or old sprites has no real impact on game performance. I didn't do a FPS test, but the game will hang for about 30sec to a full minute if you change weapons or try to fire a weapon.

[atlas]

MusicallyInspired, on May 26 2009, 01:20 PM, said:

I still do hope that somebody also creates normal/spec maps for the 8-bit graphics as well, though.

i do too. i've been trying to follow up on saj and parkar's testing on the 3DR forums. if alot of people are interested maybe we could gather a team of artists to work on a 8bit version of duke enhanced with polymer's features.

[Jokke_r]

Mia Max, on May 27 2009, 03:42 AM, said:

Well, I just made a stress test to see the performance for eduke32 polymer renderer.

So I found out that it doesn't affect framerate when I force 4xMSAA (with nHancer) or no anti-aliasing much at all. Changing resolution does nearly nothing.

Some examples for same place in my map:
1920 x 1200: 17 fps
640 x 480: 18 fps
1920 x 1200 + 4xMSAA: 12 fps
640 x 480 + 4xMSAA: 13 fps

And you won't believe it, but changing quality doesn't really nothing, that's no joke!
I can enable/disable HRP, set texture filter trillinar or nearest and I can change all options in nHancer, framerate is always the same!

That's why I think nobody should buy a new graphics card until we get the optimized version.

Well it is evident then that the CPU is the chokepoint on your end, not your graphics card. Guess it might have to do with the way the lighthacks work currently since it eats cpu resources to have to read the lighthacks file for every frame if i understood correctly. Which i think plagman mentioned earlier he was going to optimize.

[Danukem]

Jokke_r, on May 26 2009, 08:30 PM, said:

Well it is evident then that the CPU is the chokepoint on your end, not your graphics card. Guess it might have to do with the way the lighthacks work currently since it eats cpu resources to have to read the lighthacks file for every frame if i understood correctly. Which i think plagman mentioned earlier he was going to optimize.

I think you're half right. Lighting is cpu intensive, but surely that has nothing to do with reading a simple file. There's a lot of calculation involved in making the lights work, especially the spotlights.

EDIT: AFAIK, Mia Max isn't even using a light hacks file, he is placing the lights as SEs.

[Jokke_r]

Well there are tons of things that can make any computer crawl if they're done inefficiently, i wouldn't know about polymer since i haven't taken a look at the source code nor do i know C. Still here's an example of when doing an early homework in my java course at school, I was running a poker simulation 42000 times to check some probability, instead of using a list for something i used an array, very noobish mistake obviously for this particular thing which required deleting of elements. I thought that because the array was so short the subsequent moving of elements to the correct index after deleting one wouldn't make a big hit on the speed, surely it didn't when doing simply one iteration, but when doing it 42000 times it took nearly 2mins to do compared with perhaps 2 seconds with using a list.