Adoom FPS * ??? *

[Daniele]

Hi to everybody....

just Installed ADoom and ADoom2 on my A1200T and would like to test how many FPS do I have with my turbocards.

a) How can I show the FPS?

b) What resolution do you suggest me to use with AGA and with Voodoo3?

Thanks....

[darksun9210]

hello hello...

1. the following was cribbed from the adoom documentation...

FPS Counter
===========

Use the -fps option to get a frames-per-second display in the upper
right hand corner of the display.  This shows the speed of rendering
at that particular moment.  The proper way to get the average speed
of DOOM is to do the following:

   ADoomPPC -forcedemo -timedemo demo3

(or download the adoom gui front end)

2. sorry, not sure what you mean, to do what with? if you are talking about adoom, then remeber the game was built to run on a 320x240 display. 640x480 is nice enough. and run it on a voodoo screenmode as this negates the need for C2P conversion. AGA shouldn't even come into it.
if you are comparing AGA to Voodoo3, then just run the same screen mode on each and see what you get.

[Daniele]

Actually I am not using the ADoomPPC but ADoom V1.3 with a Blizzard '030!

I'd like to know how show FPS in it!

Many Thanks

[Crumb]

With a 030 you'll get around 9FPS running it almost full screen. Use 320x200 with AGA.

Mediator+Voodoo3 will be slightly faster than AGA, perhaps you get 1 frame per second more if you write directly to the gfx mem.

With a ZorroII card it will be slower than AGA

[darksun9210]

adoom and adoomPPC use the same arguments. so -fps works in both.

[Seiya]

Daniele wrote:
Actually I am not using the ADoomPPC but ADoom V1.3 with a Blizzard '030!

I'd like to know how show FPS in it!

Many Thanks

i remember doom I with my 68030@50 with Doomattack, about 11/12 fps, maybe 13 fps.
With Doom II on 68040@40, 15/16 fps..

[Tension]

Crumb wrote:

With a ZorroII card it will be slower than AGA

How?

[Seiya]

because Aga is faster than ZorroII

[Tension]

Seiya wrote:
because Aga is faster than ZorroII

So if I put a Picasso II in my A1200, it will be slower than a stock 1200??

That doesn`t sound right to me.

[DamageX]

On AGA systems the chipmem is 32-bit, while the Zorro II bus is only 16-bit. So as far as memory bandwidth, AGA is up to 2x faster. But it's still bitplanes, which means the CPU generally has to do a lot more work when rendering graphics on AGA compared to a Zorro II video board. So in some cases AGA could be faster but for a DOOM type game it wouldn't be unless you had a really fast CPU that can do chunky-to-planar conversion in negligable amount of time.

ADOOM is just plain slow on an 030 though, regardless of C2P or framebuffer speed...

[Tension]

Sorry, I meant to say if I put a Picasso II in my A2000 would it be slower than a stock A1200?

Does that make any difference?

(I`m talking about using just WB and some programs, no fancy games or anything like that)

[Lemmink]

ZII is alwasy slower then AGA bandwith wise that's just a simple fact.

The point where ZII GFX cards score is when resolution and color depth is increasing.
While the bandwith for ZII is lower then AGA the GFX chips itself are much faster then AGA. So when resolution goes over standard PAL or NTSC the bottleneck is not the bus bandwith but the speed of the GFX chip.

While PAL highres 16 color is unbeatable by any ZII GFX card the equation looks different when it comes to PalSuperhighresInterlace 256 colors, AGA is just bog slow in rendering such a "huge" screen while any old CL5426 is having a good laugh at it.

[Crumb]

@Tension&DamageX

Yes, *any* zorroII gfx card will be slower than AGA when playing software rendered lo-res games like ADoom, Quake... 040/060 cpus perform chunky2planar at copy speed. That means it takes the same time to copy any random data from fastmem to chipmem than it takes to copy data from a chunky buffer in fastmem, transform it into bitplanes and copy the result on the fly into chip ram.

AGA has a bandwitch writing of around 7MB/s (IIRC) in optimal conditions while you can only expect half of that with ZorroII in optimal situations (I think Jens Schoenfeld or Michael Boehmer pushed that a little with some of his ZorroII cards, reaching around 4.5MB/s (IIRC) but it's not common).

In practice ADoom is much faster using amiga custom chips than using ZorroII.

You can also try out things like WarpOS VoxelSpace demo... ZorroII is damn slow for these things.

ZorroII cards are quite good for "high-res" displays like 1024x768, as soon as you use more than 16colours most of ZorroII gfx cards will run rings around AGA.

On a 320x240 256colour screen AGA wins :-)