Taulatin Quake Demo scores

[nucro]

I get 103 fps in Quake 3 in Demo001 (the oldest demo) at 640*480
w/fastest settings. I'm courios about the performance of Taulatin
Celerons so can you write down your scores for 640*480 res. . Btw my system
is Celeron 900 (100 fsb) and MX@200core-190mem. And I get over 60 fps
@1024*768* 32 bit High quality.

[6502kid]

How do you get Quake III to show the FPS ?

I have used the "set timedemo 1" command to speed up
the demo to an insane rate, but it reports no kinda stats......

I also downloaded a Crusher.dm3 timedemo file, but have
no clue how to get quake to load and run it.

[oldfart]

My Q3A scores:

PIII-S @ 1.5 GHz
Geforce 3

Benched with all video quality settings set to maximum, trilinear filering, etc. No FSAA. No sound

Q3A version 1.30 demo four.dm_66
1024 x 768 x 32
197 Fps

1600 x 1200 x 32
118.6


6502, it depends on the version of Q3. Demos and benches have changed with various versions. In general, bring down the console with the ~ key. Then type:

timedemo 1

Hit enter, the escape. There will be demos in the main menu (it varies depending on the version). Run the demo and go back to the console. You will see a score.

[nucro]

Originally posted by oldfart
My Q3A scores:

PIII-S @ 1.5 GHz
Geforce 3

Benched with all video quality settings set to maximum, trilinear filering, etc. No FSAA. No sound

Q3A version 1.30 demo four.dm_66
1024 x 768 x 32
197 Fps

1600 x 1200 x 32
118.6


6502, it depends on the version of Q3. Demos and benches have changed with various versions. In general, bring down the console with the ~ key. Then type:

timedemo 1



197 fps @1024 x 768 x 32 :eek: wow !!

I'd really like to see your 640*480 score. Because it depends on the processor more than the graphic card.

And how do you disable sound?

[oldfart]

640 x 480 x ?????? fastest??

I disable the sound card in device manager. All the major HW sites test with no sound since different sound cards will have different affects on performance,

[nucro]

Since I'm interested in the cpu speed I'd like to know @16 bit and low quality settings (that being the "fastest" setting)

I tried to disable the sound card in device manager but still it didn't worked. Isn't there a command for it?

[oldfart]

640 x 480 x 16 fastest:

[oldfart]

640 x 480 x 32 high quality:

[6502kid]

With the fastest setting, my 1.1a @ 1386 (126fsb)
scored 158fps.

The P3-S at default speed 1.26 scored 187fps.

[nucro]

Originally posted by 6502kid
With the fastest setting, my 1.1a @ 1386 (126fsb)
scored 158fps.

The P3-S at default speed 1.26 scored 187fps.

P3-S ishows its power here.
Kid, can you try with the sound disabled? It makes a difference between %15-%25!

Sound card disabled the in device manager
Celeron 600@900 : 124 fsb
Celeron @950 : 131 fsb.

[oldfart]

PIII-S is a fast CPU. It does very well in games. The games that I play like UT, Serious Sam, RTCW all really fly with this setup. If you are comparing scores from one system to another its tough. You have to be running the same game version, same demo, same video settings/tweaks, no sound..etc.

Here is a Post I put up @ Anandtech comparing different nVidia drivers:

All games were benched with highest quality video settings, trilinear filering, etc. No FSAA. No sound.

Q3A v1.30 four.dm_66
1024 x 768
197

1600 x 1200
118.6

RTCW retail checkpoint.dm_57
1024 x 768
100.8

1600 x 1200
62

UT 4.36 D3D UTbench
1024 x 758 min/max/ave
34/97/59

1600 x 1200 min/max/ave
33/85/55

Serious Sam v1.05 Karnak Coop demo
1024 x 768
119.9 KB used for demo profile:
Originally recorded: 6086 frames in 75.4 seconds => 80.8 FPS average.
Without excessive peaks: 5758 frames in 68.3 seconds => 84.3 FPS average.
High peak: 151.5 FPS
Low peak: 55.0 FPS
High sustained: 102.9 FPS (37 frames in 0.4 seconds)
Low sustained: 64.2 FPS (118 frames in 1.8 seconds)


1600 x 1200
60.1 KB used for demo profile:
Originally recorded: 3027 frames in 75.4 seconds => 40.2 FPS average.
Without excessive peaks: 2811 frames in 68.6 seconds => 41.0 FPS average.
High peak: 62.5 FPS
Low peak: 29.4 FPS
High sustained: 49.6 FPS (58 frames in 1.2 seconds)
Low sustained: 32.9 FPS (36 frames in 1.1 seconds)

[bittermann]

Why run a benchmark with sound off??? Do you play games with the sound off? If you want real world numbers then you should leave it on...just my 2 cents...:beer:

[nucro]

I don't think the graghic card will make a considerable difference @640*480*16 bit fastest settings unless you have something lower than a mx. For me I scored the same with the mx and the GH2ti@480 mem @640 fastest .
But disabling the sound is really important since it makes a huge diference.

I'd really like to see what a Celeron 1A@1.45 can do on Quake fastest. But I still doubt it can reach the performance of a P3-S.

[funnyperson1]

bittermann is right.....sound should be on because sound is (can be) a cpu intensive process.....

[oldfart]

Why run a benchmark with sound off???
If I'm testing a change in my own system, I leave sound on. If I run a bench to compare to other systems, I turn it off. Why? Same reason the HW sites test with no sound. You cant get an even comparison from one system to the next. One soundcard may use 30 FPS, one might use 10. Typically, benches of this type are used to compare video card performance, not soundcard resource drain. You will note that benchmark programs such as 3Dmark do not have sound.

[nucro]

Originally posted by bittermann
Why run a benchmark with sound off??? Do you play games with the sound off? If you want real world numbers then you should leave it on...just my 2 cents...:beer:

We are trying to figure out the power of the proccessors not the whole system. This is why I'm asking for the results@640 fastest settings. And disabling the sound card gives results independent of the quality of a sound card.

[woofer]

Quake timedemo oo1 @ 640x480.....347 FPS

[oldfart]

I don't think I have Quake 1 anymore...I'll have to look around. Here is Quake 2 640 x 480: I remember when I fist got this game tweaking my system to get over 20 FPS!!

[Cooler666]

oldfart do you still play in the KopyKatz forum? or is this a different oldfart?

[oldfart]

Nope, thats not me.

[Overclocker550]

Originally posted by nucro
I get 103 fps in Quake 3 in Demo001 (the oldest demo) at 640*480
w/fastest settings. I'm courios about the performance of Taulatin
Celerons so can you write down your scores for 640*480 res. . Btw my system
is Celeron 900 (100 fsb) and MX@200core-190mem. And I get over 60 fps
@1024*768* 32 bit High quality.


Thats not a good score at all......try disabling sound. I get 95fps on a 550MHz celeron without sound and a geforce2mx. If I use a faster video card, id get like 110 to 150fps! even on a 450 celeron I still get 80 something fps. you should be getting at least 150fps!

[Overclocker550]

Originally posted by 6502kid
With the fastest setting, my 1.1a @ 1386 (126fsb)
scored 158fps.

The P3-S at default speed 1.26 scored 187fps.

is it true that getting a cpu twice as fast only gives you 50% more fps? I thought they scale almost linearly! your cpu is over twice(more like 120%) the speed of my 366@550 celeron yet you get only 60% more fps! in fact my celeron outperforms earlier pentium3's! weird! :eek:

[nucro]

Originally posted by Overclocker550



Thats not a good score at all......try disabling sound. I get 95fps on a 550MHz celeron without sound and a geforce2mx. If I use a faster video card, id get like 110 to 150fps! even on a 450 celeron I still get 80 something fps. you should be getting at least 150fps!

You get 95 fps w/celeron 550?! Which test and resolution are you running? I think there's no way you can get 110 or 150 fps with a celeron 550.

[Overclocker550]

Originally posted by nucro


You get 95 fps w/celeron 550?! Which test and resolution are you running? I think there's no way you can get 110 or 150 fps with a celeron 550.

640x480x16 fastest mode. the same as you guys are doing. I can get 110fps if I had a geforce3 or something. if I use tweaks then I could get 150fps :) im not using tweaks though cause no one else is.

[oldfart]

You guys all using same version of Q3 and same demo? Mine was done with Q3 version 1.30 and the "four" demo. If you are comparing scores, you have to be at least using the same version and same demo.

[Overclocker550]

Originally posted by oldfart
You guys all using same version of Q3 and same demo? Mine was done with Q3 version 1.30 and the "four" demo. If you are comparing scores, you have to be at least using the same version and same demo.

im using verson 1.11 timedemo 1, demo map7

[nucro]

Yes I think you are right . We should try with the same same demo . I thougt that the fps @640*480 fastest wouldn't differ much but Overclocker550 gets really high scores.
I reinstalled the quake and didn't update it. (version 1.1) And I used demo1.

[6502kid]

I got Q3 ver 1.11. Just run Demo0001.dm3

I just ran some tests with the sound card on, and disabled.
All with a P3-S at 151fsb, 2xs256 cas 2 2 2 OCZ ram,
Gainward Ti450 GF2 card.

With the sound on, I get 191.8 fps at the 640x480x16 fastest
settings.
With the card disabled, I get 236.8 at those settings.

At 1024x768x32, High detail, max quality, the sound didn't
seem to make as much difference.

145.0 fps with sound on, 147.7fps with sound on.

I guess I can live with the 145.0fps settings when I play......

:rolleyes:

[Overclocker550]

Originally posted by nucro
Yes I think you are right . We should try with the same same demo . I thougt that the fps @640*480 fastest wouldn't differ much but Overclocker550 gets really high scores.
I reinstalled the quake and didn't update it. (version 1.1) And I used demo1.


I shall help you so you can get like 140fps. your system is more than 50% faster, yet you are getting just a few fps more than my 550 celeron. something may be amiss with your system. the same thing happened to me before, I found out my board became defective and I lost 1/3 of my fps so I was getting only 60 something instead of 95. It happened oneday when I did a timedemo1. I tried everything, even reinstalling quake3 and windows when someone said someting in windows was hogging cpu cycles. I even removed one HDD and the cd rom and the modem thinking they were slowing the game down. I tried everything and then. I even underclocked the cpu then overclocked it back, disabled cache, removed the cpu and inserted it again. finally the only thing left was I figured something on my motherboard broke, it still worked but slower. it happened to my 56k modem, but that was later on and the modem would only do 18k I reinstalled drivers, no go. I used another 56k modem and im back to 50k and im still using it today. oh make sure your cache is enabled, disabling cache by accident may explain your low performance. what hardware do you have?

[oldfart]

The 1.30 update is free you know....;)

6502, what ram chips does your OCZ have? Also, what kind of sound card do you have?

[6502kid]

CTSPD and Sandra both tell me the DIMM manufacturer
is Wintec. Cant tell whats on the chips, since they got
those SIMM cooler covers glued on them.

Sound card is an Sb Live

[nucro]

Originally posted by Overclocker550



I shall help you so you can get like 140fps. your system is more than 50% faster, yet you are getting just a few fps more than my 550 celeron. something may be amiss with your system. the same thing happened to me before, I found out my board became defective and I lost 1/3 of my fps so I was getting only 60 something instead of 95.

I have a celeron 600 at 900 on Abit BE6 and 256 mb Kingston Ram and MX400 at 190 mem-200 core.

I think my fps is normal for my system. If you look at the other’s fps’s and to yours, your fps seems high.

I found some Quake demo scores at 640-480 and they are parallel to what we get :




http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q1/020121/images/image004.gif

www.hardware.fr
http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_news/00/03/IMG0003999.gif http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_news/00/03/IMG0003994.gif http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_news/00/03/IMG0003995.gif

[Overclocker550]

the only explanation I can give you is that the older celerons are superior to the newer celerons. in fact, my 550MHz celeron gave me as many fps as a 750MHz pentium3 copermine. I actually owned one of these copermines but sold it when it gave the same fps as my 550MHz celeron. go figure :rolleyes: :eek:

[Flu!d]

Due to the fact that the older Celeron's run a 32 bit data bus as compared to the cumines 64 bit data bus and have less cache I can assure you that the cumine P3 is definatly faster than the Celeron without a shadow of a doubt, you must have done something wrong setting it up as it should have kicked the Celeron's arse - Especially considering that it has support for SSE and the older Celeron's do not (which Quake III thrives on).

If you sold a 750 mhz P3 for a Celeron @ 550 mhz than you made a big mistake....;)

[Overclocker550]

Originally posted by Flu!d
Due to the fact that the older Celeron's run a 32 bit data bus as compared to the cumines 64 bit data bus and have less cache I can assure you that the cumine P3 is definatly faster than the Celeron without a shadow of a doubt, you must have done something wrong setting it up as it should have kicked the Celeron's arse - Especially considering that it has support for SSE and the older Celeron's do not (which Quake III thrives on).

If you sold a 750 mhz P3 for a Celeron @ 550 mhz than you made a big mistake....;)

I bought the celeron 366@550 long ago. then oneday i wanted a faster cpu so I bought a 600MHz p3 that he said will do 800. he was right, in fact I got it to 840MHz but it was no faster than my celeron :( and I had my abit be6-2 board at that time. so I figured the coppermine was defective. I bought another one from pricewatch and it was only marginally better and would only OC to 900MHz and beat the 840MHz by a little and at 750 was as fast as the 550 celeron. I sold the 600eb on ebay and returned the 750 but the 750 came back to me cause I had it over 3 months. I sold it on ebay for a loss :( I lost faith in pentium3's ever since so I only buy pentium2's and older celerons and OC em as high as I can but I never got one past 550 so Im now going to get a thunderbird :) I already bought the mobo :)

[oldfart]

PIII @ 840 will dust a Celeron @ 550 in a big way. No question. When you say it was no faster, how were you measuring it? If you have a low end video card and are VC limited, a faster CPU wont do you a bit of good.

[Ebola]

Originally posted by oldfart
PIII @ 840 will dust a Celeron @ 550 in a big way. No question. When you say it was no faster, how were you measuring it? If you have a low end video card and are VC limited, a faster CPU wont do you a bit of good.

yup definantly. cumines smoke the old cores.

I've had a slot one celeron 400, socket celeron 466, celeron 566 cumine, p3 1000E, p3 1000EB.

the p3's smoke the cellys, and the cumine celly smoked the old ppga cellys.

[Flu!d]

The only way the Cumine core'd chip would be no faster than the older Celeron core'd chip is is the video card was the bottleneck (which sounds like the case here).

I repeat, there is 'no way' an older, non cumine celeron, would beat a P3 cumine in 'anything'....No way. The older Celerons technically can't compete....

You got any screen shots?

[Overclocker550]

Originally posted by oldfart
PIII @ 840 will dust a Celeron @ 550 in a big way. No question. When you say it was no faster, how were you measuring it? If you have a low end video card and are VC limited, a faster CPU wont do you a bit of good.


I was using a geforce2mx. I think I can find some 3dmark2000 scores which I submitted as proof

Score 1786


Date 2001-05-31
CPU Intel Pentium III 750 MHz
GPU NVIDIA GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Res 640x480 16bit



http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1784106


Score 1627


Date 2001-06-01
CPU Intel Celeron 500 MHz
GPU NVIDIA RIVA TNT2/Pro
Res 640x480 16bit



http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare.shtml?1786802

NOTE: I also tested it on a geforce2mx and it beat the pentium3!
same thing in quake3, the celeron won!

[oldfart]

I dont know how you had that system setup, but that PIII score is abysmal, even for a GF2 MX. You should have been in the 4500 -6000 range.

Your Celeron 500 system scored about what it should with a TNT2. That score should have ~ doubled with the C500 GF2 MX.

Point is this: A PIII 750 MHz 256 K cache CPU is MUCH MUCH faster than a Celeron 550 MHz 128 K cache CPU. No question. Period. End of story.

There was something very screwed up with your system. Who knows what.

[Overclocker550]

maybe my abit be6-2 board didnt like pentium3's thats the only theory I could think of, since I had optimal hardware and all I did was swap cpus

[nucro]

Originally posted by nucro

I'd really like to see what a Celeron 1A@1.45 can do on Quake fastest. But I still doubt it can reach the performance of a P3-S.

It's nice to answer your own question :beer:

At last I got my Taulatin and here are my scores :

@143 Cas 2-2-2 182.3 fps
Sound off : 205.6 pfs :cool: