PDA

View Full Version : ET performance



dfusion
27th Jun 2003, 22:58
I have a p4 2.6 ghz with 768 mb ddr ram and a r9700 pro and still get low fps (50 fps soemtimes) I know theres people who have to put up with alot less but i'm thinking 50 fps isnt exactly good for my spec pc.

I was wondering if splashdamage could release a config file with the best performace settings in ET, purely setup to get the most fps out of the game, this would benefit alot of people like me who come from different games and dont know what works well with the wolf engine.I'v taken a look through 5/6 detailed guides (redtops/rtcw for dummies/q3 guides) an alot of cmds they say increase performance actually gives e worse fps, an who knows the engine better than the creators.

Just a thought/request.

also howcome PB restricts the r_rmse value to 0, surely up to 22 or so is fine?

//dfusion ( gg an thanks in advance :DDD )[/i]

tigerx
28th Jun 2003, 01:19
u might want to check your internet connection first. and then may be there's other program running in the background and eat up all of your resources and memory.

twiFight
28th Jun 2003, 01:41
I have between 10 and 20 fps usually. Sometimes (explosions, lot's of players in FOV) going down to 8 fps. On quiet moments i get up to 40 fps.

This doesn't bother me mostly. Only when I play on a server with about 20 players, it's just too slow then. I play on 800x600x32 with most detail around the middle, so I could lower it a bit to get more fps, but I don't really want to. I like a bit of detail when playing and most of the time the fps is high enough for me to play.

I wonder tho why it is so low, since i have 100 fps with Q3A everything on high detail. Ofcourse the engines are not the same (Q3 --> RTCW --> ET) but still it's a big difference. Then again ET maps are pretty big and have lots of objects (trees, bushes, buildings etc). Some more fps would be great but since the project has been cancelled this won't be a priority to SD. I hope to get a new pc soon which should get rid of the problem with lots of players (I have a p3 600 mhz now, a AMD 2100+ then). That should be sufficient. If you want to have lots of fps then go play Q2

n00ber
28th Jun 2003, 02:02
I have between 10 and 20 fps usually. Sometimes (explosions, lot's of players in FOV) going down to 8 fps. On quiet moments i get up to 40 fps.

That's the exact description for me, but I have a 533mhz comp. :???:

DasMonkey
28th Jun 2003, 02:18
heh.... well i got a p4 1.7ghz 768 sdram... and a cheesy ti500.... but my fps ranges from 40-50 low/outside... and 125-160 high/inside

kotkis
28th Jun 2003, 02:28
I've done some tweaking and this is the best I have got this far:
My High FPS-config (http://koti.mbnet.fi/ote/etconfig.cfg)

Screenshot:
http://koti.mbnet.fi/ote/kuvat/ET/highfpscfg.jpg

I've got AMD Duron 800mhz with GeForce 2 MX. If anyone knows any settings I could still mess up with to gain better fps, let me know.

dfusion
28th Jun 2003, 02:33
nah m8 im positive its not my connection or settings, and nothigns dfective in my pc as im aware of, i can run a similar game ( SoF2 [Q3 engine]) with 250-300 fps (with a slightly tweaked cfg ofc) so i cant see why im getting 50 with ET, i dont expect to be getting as many as SoF because of the mao size differences but i expect more than 50.

What im asking is if a Splashdamage programmer or someone who worked on ET could release a config of pure fps enhances, so that people who are not familiar with wofl/et config commands can play the game with decent fps.

//dfusion (thanks)

kyleb
28th Jun 2003, 03:07
the game pushes a lot more polgons than any other q3 engine that came before it, seems to be cpu limited as well as even swtiching the resoltion does not seem to help. i recomend just comeing to terms with the ~50fps low spots and make use of that 9700pro with a bit aa and af as things look much more pleaseing with them on and unless you crank them up too high it does not really hurt the pefromace much at all.

WolfWings
28th Jun 2003, 03:23
Sad thing here, is that I average around 40-50fps on a 64MB Kyro2 video card. I WAS getting 10-15fps on average at first.

Know the two single biggest change I made that boosted FPS?

rename or copy ET.exe to Quake3.exe so the video-card driver auto-optimizes for Q3-style rendering. Redirect GameSpy/ASE to the new executable, servers don't give a damn what the executable is called.

seta r_primitives "0"

Q3 always had r_primitives set to 0, so this makes the rendering mimic Q3A even more. Just this change by itself gave me double to triple the FPS, renaming the executable smoothed out the FPS even more.

twiFight
28th Jun 2003, 03:25
seta r_primitives "0"

Q3 always had r_primitives set to 0, so this makes the rendering mimic Q3A even more. Just this change by itself gave me double to triple the FPS, renaming the executable smoothed out the FPS even more.

what does seta r_primitives "0" do exactly.
I ofcourse want more fps but not if it makes the game look like crap.

WolfWings
28th Jun 2003, 03:33
Zero visual difference at all.

It changes only how the game engine passes the polygons to the video card, as far as I can tell. And Q3A used the setting of 0, so most video card drivers optimized for Q3A won't run well unless it's set to 0, which defeats the whole purpose of copying or renaming your executable like I did. :-)

Chiller
28th Jun 2003, 13:51
I have not "tweaked" my config file. I just checked it and the seta r_primitives "0" was already there.
http://www.ultimategamerz.com

dfusion
28th Jun 2003, 13:58
the Quake3 thing didnt really work for me.

What i was also wondering is why does picmip 3 give me less fps than picmip 1 (about 2 fps... lowering the picmip should increase the fps)

Wraith2k3
28th Jun 2003, 14:17
I get around 50 - 60 fps average (sometimes higher) on most maps with my GF4 ti4200 and the game on default settings (with Quincunx Antialiasing activated on the card). Never drops any lower than about 40.

The game looks just fine for me, graphics wise. So if your only getting 50 fps on a 9700 then you must have your graphics settings turned up pretty high or something.

btw, 50 FPS is not "low" at all. For most games it would be considered average. 10 - 20 FPS is low. There is no need to have 200 FPS or something stupid like that, cos once you reach a certain point it just doesnt make a difference anymore.

kotkis
28th Jun 2003, 14:22
btw, 50 FPS is not "low" at all. For most games it would be considered average. 10 - 20 FPS is low. There is no need to have 200 FPS or something stupid like that, cos once you reach a certain point it just doesnt make a difference anymore.
True, but many gamers (including myself) want a stable fps of 76 to get a bit longer/higher jumps.

dfusion
28th Jun 2003, 15:42
ok no i dont have my gfx too high on my radeon.

about 50 fps being fine.. say you buy a new pc an it performs 'ok' but not to what it should be.. youd want it to perform to its full potential right? no body wants things to just be 'ok'.

Yes when it gets to a certain point the eye doesnt notice over a certain amount but my point is with a proporly tweaked config (iv followed alot of guides an for some weird reason tweaked configs give me less fps so im asking SP to rlse one) i could (you could) be getting more fps.

the thing i dont understand about this game is if you lower your settings too low you actually start getting less fps, if Sp wants i can show screenshot evidence of this, whats also strange is a lower resolution doesnt affect the fps.. this cant be right surely...

Brinkman
28th Jun 2003, 15:45
goddamn either you're lieing about your specs or you have no idea how to maintain your pc because i have a 2000+ athlon, geforce 4200, 512 kingmax pc2700 system and i get 90 fps with max settings running at 1280x1024..

and for hte people that are running the 800mhz with the geforce 2's.. BUY A NEW FREAKING MACHINE

you expect companies today to spend the time to design the gmaes based around 6 year old technology?. get real


"man john carmack better design doom 3 to run on my commodore 64" :blah:

kotkis
28th Jun 2003, 16:09
and for hte people that are running the 800mhz with the geforce 2's.. BUY A NEW FREAKING MACHINE
you expect companies today to spend the time to design the gmaes based around 6 year old technology?. get real

Umm... Why should I? ET works fine for me with some "minor" tweaking.

dfusion
28th Jun 2003, 16:12
goddamn either you're lieing about your specs or you have no idea how to maintain your pc because i have a 2000+ athlon, geforce 4200, 512 kingmax pc2700 system and i get 90 fps with max settings running at 1280x1024..

heh why would i lie about my specs?

(CPU) 1-IntelĀ® PentiumĀ® 4 CPU 2.60GHz, 2599MHz, 512KB (14% Load) .:. (RAM) usage: 181/767MB (23.60%) .:. (GFX) RADEON 9700 PRO - Secondary, (Display) 1024x768/32bit/75Hz
(OS) Windows XP Home Edition, Service Pack 1 (5.1 - 2600), (installed for) 1w 6d 19h 31m, (uptime) 2h 52m 28s .:. (HDDs) 98.4G/111G(88.1%) free

i seriously get 50 fps with that spec

which is why im not happy...

twiFight
28th Jun 2003, 16:53
and for the people that are running the 800mhz with the geforce 2's.. BUY A NEW FREAKING MACHINE

you expect companies today to spend the time to design the gmaes based around 6 year old technology?. get real
First of all I only have a 600 mhz.

but why should I buy a new machine? Just because every week a new game comes out that demands a better machine?!

Secondly, obviously you're the rich pimp if you can buy a new machine, but some of us have to work hard for our money and can not just afford a new machine. Feel free to donate me a new one tho, since you don't have a problem with it.

dfusion
28th Jun 2003, 17:11
stop deviating off the subject, the point is I have a new pc an it still wont run et with decent fps... pointless bringing out a game that needs more than any current system can perform... :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

From what i hear the original wolf was extremely tweakable.. all im asking is if the devs will release a performance config..

DG
28th Jun 2003, 17:43
r_fastsky 1
cg_wolfparticles 0
cg_atmosphericaffects 0
cg_shadows 0
cg_marktime 0
cg_brasstime 0
r_drawSun 0
r_detailtextures 0
r_colorbits 16
r_texturebits 16
r_picmip 1 to 3
cg_showblood 0
r_dynamiclight 0
r_flares 0

er, forgotten what gives the "lego" effect like the screen above :o

k1ll3r
28th Jun 2003, 20:42
r_rmse limited to 0 is a problem for me too. I don't see what's wrong with it till the tree leaves etc start going away and they don't with 75. And i get extra 30 FPS by using r_rmse 75 and no choppy gameplay..

kyleb
28th Jun 2003, 22:16
goddamn either you're lieing about your specs or you have no idea how to maintain your pc because i have a 2000+ athlon, geforce 4200, 512 kingmax pc2700 system and i get 90 fps with max settings running at 1280x1024..

no, he is talking about wost case senerio, like all the way in the back of the axis side of radar and looking across the whole map.

WolfWings
28th Jun 2003, 23:26
er, forgotten what gives the "lego" effect like the screen above :o

r_texturemode GL_NEAREST_MIPMAP_NEAREST

The above command, BTW, has never gained any FPS in any test I've run on any of the following:

ANY GeForce 2 or above
ANY Radeon 7000 or above
ANY Kyro
ANY Matrox G200 or above

r_texturemode GL_LINEAR_MIPMAP_NEAREST

THIS command can gain FPS for some cards, but any modern card will gain no performance from this setting. It's commonly referred to as Bilinear Filtering.

r_texturemode GL_LINEAR_MIPMAP_LINEAR

This is the standard 'Trilinear' filtering option. Anything except Voodoo-based video cards should run in this setting, ESPECIALLY if you have compressed textures enabled, which you do by default unless you specifically disable them.

WolfWings
29th Jun 2003, 01:09
I have not "tweaked" my config file. I just checked it and the seta r_primitives "0" was already there.
http://www.ultimategamerz.com

If you copied your config from RTCW, it would already have that set. ET changed something from RTCW and Q3A in that r_primitives defaults to 1 instead of 0 now.

twiFight
29th Jun 2003, 01:49
I have never changed the value and r_primitives is set to 0 here also.
never played RTCW in my life.

kyleb
29th Jun 2003, 04:42
nope, default in et is 0. it says so in console when you enter the command.

ExPLiCiT
29th Jun 2003, 05:52
what it comes down to is once again games are exceeding the hardware, its just time for the hardware sector to catch up. hopefully soon before half-life 2 comes out, i will be getting at least a 3.2 gig for that.

twiFight
29th Jun 2003, 14:56
By the way, you don't have a laptop do you?!
cos a friend of mine got a laptop (at Aldi for dutch & german people) which has a P4 2,6 ghz and Geforce 4 something, but he can't even play Quake 3 cos the hardware is regular desktop hardware and not mobile, so it generates massive heat with the result that it has to cool down so the laptop starts running slower, resulting in 15 frames per second in a normal game of quake.

uglok
29th Jun 2003, 15:18
I just upgraded to Windows 2000 from ME (ugh) and now my FPS in Enemy Territory is cut in half. No other game is like that for me; now I get 20 fps best while moving around and even less in combat.

I have a p4 1.8ghz, GF4 Ti4200 128mb, 512mb ram.

I've had to switch to full time panzer because my accuracy sucks beyond belief with this fps cut. Likewise the fps cut has dropped my accuracy in half.

I have the most recent drivers and every other game I have works fine, so I guess it's splash damage's fault. my q3f framerate sucks too :P

Freedom[]Tickler
29th Jun 2003, 15:57
Uglok, did you do a clean format upgrade or let 2k install over WinME, b/c win2k shld not run a game slower at all, so something is wrong there.

dfusion, is your 2.6 P4 a 533 FSB w/ DDR333 RAM? Depending on which P4 mainboard chipset you have could affect your FPS by a good 20 on average. Did you build the PC or buy it prebuilt, Im just curious which mobo you have and what speed RAM.

I have an nforce2 w/ 1.7 gig OCd to 2.23x333FSB- w/ a g3ti500 that gives me min 40 FPS in worst case situations, but spikes up to 250 in hallways.

ET and RTCW are modified quake3 Team Arena engine based game, not vanilla q3 engine. Team Arena ran like a dog too, just part of the sacrifice of tweaking the engine to work w/ large outdoor maps.

I didnt vote in the poll b/c I disagree w/ your wording. If you play on PB servers, alot of speed tweaks in CFG may be disallowed. Those options are tweaked by server admins, which moots an SD written speed CFG. I also do not believe it is possible to CFG tweak this game to run an avg of 20fps faster.

What would be interesting is to know the system specs of SD guys and what settings they preferred. Id be willing to bet most SD guys arent running the latest greatest hardware, coders are fussy about stability - very quirky I think : )

uglok
29th Jun 2003, 17:31
I let win2k install over ME, but like I said, every other game runs the same or better. I will reinstall ET later, but from the looks of it I'm not going to be getting a large performance gain. A few people here have better setups than me and are getting the same or equal FPS.

Awol
29th Jun 2003, 18:28
Ugg you upgraded ME to W2K. thats the problem MS has never managed to make an upgrade work correctly. I suggest you make a backup of all the stuff you want then do a format and then install W2K. You will notice alot of speed increase in many areas.

As for you getting back FPS your setup is close to mine and the lowest FPS I get is on Radar and thats 40

2Ghz P4
512 MB ram
Geforce4 Ti42000 with 64 MB of ram


Also check your video drivers to make sure AA isn't on sometimes it is on by default.

twiFight
29th Jun 2003, 18:35
Doing a clean install instead of an upgrade is always the better option.
Not only will games run better/faster but also your whole pc will run better after a clean install. And put SP4 on when you're at it, it will bring your pc uptodate in a few seconds..

I used to have win98 on my pc and never really had the need to upgrade. Untill I once was bored and installed win2k. It was the best damn choice i made (with pcs) in my whole life.