Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Gaming => Topic started by: CU_AMiGA on September 29, 2004, 02:53:14 PM
-
Hi,
Was wondering whether Quake would run on the A2000, A500 and A600 with the aid of an accelerator and graphics card? I would imagine it would be possible with an A2000 and A500, with the Blizzard accelerator and Cybervision graphics card. Not too certain about the A600 though...
Regards,
-
If you have an '060 accellerator and a graphics card (Cybervision PPC, PicassoIV, etc..) the game is playable although there are some very minor screen lags on occasion. I have never attempted to run the game on an '040 with AGA only but I have read that gameplay is not really good due to severe lag. I suspect (opinion only) that play on ECS / OCS is not even a consideration.
Clickboom says that the minimum CPU is an '020 but I don't even want to think about that.
Regards,
ltstanfo
-
In theory it can be startet with a mere 020 and 8 MB fastram on PAL / NTSC (that at least what is stated on the packageing of the official clickboom Version) but that would only be a really slow slideshow.
I played it through on a Blizzard1240 @ 40MHz on a Picasso IV back then and it was damn slow (nearly 1 second beween each shot of the nailgun)
Playable it is only on a 060 with GFX-card in 320x240.
-
Hello,
I still own Quake, even though i have no Amiga to play it on. But it was fairly playable on my A1200 with 060 and AGA, i got between 10-20fps. It was okay, but a 060 AGA is the bare minimum i reckon. It flies pretty well on PPC, i got 30-40fps on my 160. The minimum hardware requirements for Quake are: 020+FPU, AGA and 8meg RAM. So this game will not run on OCS/ECS. That is why a complex setup on A2000 and A500 seems more likely.
-
I'm going to try tonight and run it on my A2000 with a GVP030/40MHz/PicassoII+/16MB under CybergraphXv.4. afaik there is no ECS/OCS version. The AA version is playable with a 68060 and lots of RAM in low-res mode (320x200). The best AA/CyberGraphX/P96 version is the one on Aminet (Quake68K by Steffen Hauser, et al.). The Clickboom versions are buggy and slow, imho.
-
Hi mate,
That would be cool. I would love to know what happens, any chance of posting a video clip?
Regards,
-EDIT-
The Quake on Aminet was the version i used as well. It flies compared to the Clickboom version. Apparently, Quake 2 runs better than the first one, but this needs a GFX card. I recently copied the WAD files from my Amiga CD to my iMAC to play iMAC, and it is full speed! :-) I have also heard that Clickbooms WAD files also uses special tricks in order for the speed to be good? Is this true?
-
Argus wrote:
The Clickboom versions are buggy and slow, imho.
Curious...my experience is the opposite. I have on '060 A4000T with CybervisionPPC video (CyberGrafx4) and always got better performance with the Clickboom version over the aminet versions. interesting....
Regards,
ltstanfo
-
interesting.....
-
Would Quake at all run on a A600? I was thinking about that Shapeshifter card - as that can display 256, the same as AGA and GFX cards.
Regards,
-
> If you have an '060 accellerator and a graphics card
> (Cybervision PPC, PicassoIV, etc..) the game is playable
> although there are some very minor screen lags on occasion.
Clickboom's Quake ran about 9FPS average on my 060/66MHz/PicassoIV A4000T. Wasn't smooth at times, but I played through the whole game. There were supposedly ways to improve FPS a bit with certain settings, but I never found a good howto or anything on how to do that and it never happened for me, but perhaps there's some tips to help on a web site somewhere that I never found... There's also been ports of the GPLed codebase that may have been better optimized, and I imagine there's an OpenGL version that would take advantage of a Voodoo3 and maybe even Cybervision64-3d card.
-
The Clickboom version wasn't stable on my GVPTRexx060 w/ PIV card under CGX. The Aminet Quake68K version was much quicker overall and more stable. The OpenGL 3D versions of Quake need a PPC running WarpOS to work, afaik. This is not true for QuakeII, which you can run on a 68K under Hyperion's MiniGL with a Voodoo3 card (as I've done via a Prometheus card). The one caveat is that you need a lot of free fast RAM (64MB+).
-
I dont know where I heard this from.....
But I was told that if you do a PCI upgrade, and a voodoo card, then I think it was Doom that would be fully playable?? But not sure if Doom is an intensive as Quake.
-
On older systems you mentiond (A500, 600, 2000) it is rather painful any way you cut it. The bare minimum I'd recomend is a 060 and Voodoo 3(Via Prometheus). Also newer Quake ports like GLQuake are MUCH better than Clickbooms.
HERE (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=42630) is an old benchmark comparison I did a few years back.
Test system:
A3000 MK-II 060/66 64meg ram
Prometheus w/Voodoo3 3000(SGRAM)
All tests done in full screen(no size reduction), the GLQuake68K version is using the fastrender option.
screenmode | Clickboom fps | GLQuake fps
320x240------------10.8-------------23.0
400x300-------------7.8--------------21.1
512x384-------------------------------21.1
640x480-------------------------------19.9
800x600-------------------------------16.0
1024x768-----------------------------11.9
:-o
-edit-
Removed Quake II results, irrelevant. Oops;-)
-
kd7ota wrote:
I dont know where I heard this from.....
But I was told that if you do a PCI upgrade, and a voodoo card, then I think it was Doom that would be fully playable?? But not sure if Doom is an intensive as Quake.
Actually Doom was fairly(barely) playable on my old A500 with GVP A530(030/50). Any Amiga with 040 should be sufficient, even only ECS.
-
Well, I just got Clickboom's Quake installed on the A2000. It works with the GVP Combo030/40MHz, 16MB Fastram and PicassoII+ combination in my machine on a 320x200 CGX screenmode, but it's really not playable. It crawls along even in the smallest window size at low-resolution. I think a 68040 would probably make it playable though, but I my 040 Combo board doesn't work anymore. Well, in any case since there are no 040 or graphics cards for the a600, I think that pretty much tells the story.
-
Argus wrote:
Well, I just got Clickboom's Quake installed on the A2000. It works with the GVP Combo030/40MHz, 16MB Fastram and PicassoII+ combination in my machine on a 320x200 CGX screenmode, but it's really not playable. It crawls along even in the smallest window size at low-resolution. I think a 68040 would probably make it playable though, but I my 040 Combo board doesn't work anymore. Well, in any case since there are no 040 or graphics cards for the a600, I think that pretty much tells the story.
lol :-) Yes, but it ran! Have you tried the GLQuake version on A2000 yet? That may speed it up a frame or two. Doesn't the Graffiti card count as a GFX card for A600? Graffiti GFX (http://www.amiga-hardware.com/graffiti.html)
Regards,
-
@CU_AMiGA
Oh yes, it runs quite nicely and loads in less than a minute; the problem is playability (speed), maybe get a couple frames per second. I take back what I said about Clickboom's version, it's their 060 version that I remember being not too stable.
I'll check out GLQuake 68K and let you know how fast it is, or if it works at all (it may need 3D hardware). I only have a SVGA card (PicassoII+) in the A2000. The only Zorro II 3D capable card is the Cybervision3D/Virge card from Phase 5. Hopefully, there is a software renderer but that is probably going to be slow.
As for the Graffiti card, it plugs into the RGB external port on all Amigas (including A600) and gives chunky modes. afaik there is no Quake support for this card. Some earlier 2D games (NemacIV, Gloom) do work with it. Perhaps a driver could be written but again it would be probably very sloooooww with Quake.
-
I really dont understand why are so many Amiga users fascinated with FPS games. All of them seem like crap to me.
(they make me wanna throw up, especially when they are fast)
The only one I do like is Call of Duty mupltiplayer in LAN, but thats [OT]
-
i dunno, i got a good enuff FPS on my warpengine040/40 + CV64/3D to network play my then gf on her P2/333. GL quake requires gut loads of ram and preferably a faster card than the CV64/3D. but it still works. i'm not sure if Clickbooms quake could deal with the ECS chipset, otherwise i think it would be a laugh to see it running on an A500, even if it is a slideshow. "the ol' girls still got it! :-D"
-
not true... pc glquake needs just a voodoo class gfx.... I suspect terrible porting of Q to amiga, I remember playing it on my 486@100Mhz ~30-35fps, with a mere VLB 5428 Vga... Afterwards I upgraded to a p200mmx/voodoo2 card and was playing at a steady glquake 60fps...
-
keropi wrote:
not true... pc glquake needs just a voodoo class gfx.... I suspect terrible porting of Q to amiga, I remember playing it on my 486@100Mhz ~30-35fps, with a mere VLB 5428 Vga... Afterwards I upgraded to a p200mmx/voodoo2 card and was playing at a steady glquake 60fps...
Bus speed is an important faxtor here. VESA is much faster than Zorro.
-
Would the GLQuake run on the AGA chipset? I remember on 060 update of Quake 060, but this was bugged (especially with the water/scramble effect. I remember a few Quake hacks available to puch AmiQuake to the edge.
-
@redrumloa
I want to try out that GLQuake to see if it is faster on my 4000! I have a 060/66MHz, 272MB RAM and CV64/3D. Where can I get the latest update? I am also interested in a PCI board! When I get my 3000T soon we shall talk! ;)
-
Argus wrote:
I'll check out GLQuake 68K and let you know how fast it is, or if it works at all (it may need 3D hardware). I only have a SVGA card (PicassoII+) in the A2000. The only Zorro II 3D capable card is the Cybervision3D/Virge card from Phase 5. Hopefully, there is a software renderer but that is probably going to be slow.
Any news?
-
whabang wrote:
Bus speed is an important faxtor here. VESA is much faster than Zorro.
Maybe Zorro 2, but not Zorro 3. IIRC, VESA bus theoretical max was ~16MB/sec.
-
Y'know it's funny - when the first leaked Quake builds got "into the wild" and people were compiling/converting the game for the Amiga, I seem to recall the framerates that people were reporting - 320x200 @ 8-10fps, that sort of thing, and describing it as eminently playable (a fact that I found just astounding considering the standards most PC gamers put on FPS's, even back then).
One man's slideshow is another's gaming dream, I reckon.
EDIT:
Lest anyone think I'm slagging off the Amiga, I'm not - I mean, there's platform games on the PC that "look" just fine to me yet don't move as smoothly as some for the Ami circa '88, so I know there's different kinds of parity.
-
Maybe Zorro 2, but not Zorro 3. IIRC, VESA bus theoretical max was ~16MB/sec.
Well and how much do you expect from ZIII in real live ??? Theoretical it should be something like 25 MB/s but you won`t get near it even with an 11 Buster that could need some fixes.
-
PCI is supposed to be 135mb/s max but I think real world it's @85. ISA was supposed to be about 8mb/s but real world was @4. At least this is what I recall reading about different buses. Makes sense and is probably the reason why 10/100 ISA network cards were never made.
-
Lemmink wrote:
Well and how much do you expect from ZIII in real live ??? Theoretical it should be something like 25 MB/s but you won`t get near it even with an 11 Buster that could need some fixes.
It depends on the ZIII card being used and the accelerator. I am getting about ~14MB/sec on my setup writting to the VRAM on the Voodoo 3(in the Prometheus).
-
yogisumo wrote:
Makes sense and is probably the reason why 10/100 ISA network cards were never made.
Wrong. 10/100 ISA netcards have been made by Intel, HP, etc.
-
VRAM bus speeds. I get deja vu every time this comes up :lol:
-
Oh well. :) Thanks for the correction. The question now is, why? The card would, if 4mb/s is correct, saturate the bus... I know I've never seen any.
-
@yogisumo
I've only experienced the HP cards which used proprietary 10/100VG Ethernet, so it's hard to compare it with modern 10/100 equipment. But, even on the 386 and 486 machines at the time they were very fast. I never got a raw transfer speed but you could definately tell the difference between the 10Mb cards. Just a note that even at 4MB/s that's more than 3 times the speed of a 10Mb card which is "why".
-
@adolescent
Ok. That explains why I haven't seen them. Those would have been pretty expensive systems in their day. I'm guessing the technology didn't trickle down to the general public. PCI would have shown up by the time 10/100 became more mainstream...
-
GLQuake needs 3D hardware to work. Sorry about taking so long to re-post.
-
Quake on 680x0 is only really feasable on 68060. It's mostly the calculation overhead that kills it - VRAM speed is a secondary concern that has more impact once you move to PPC / GL.
I have a BPPC 040 25MHz and BVision. Under AGA it managed around 3-4 fps, peaking at 6. On the BVision it also managed about 3-4fps, peaking at 6. In this case the AGA speed / C2P time was not the limiting factor at all. It was already so slow that simply rendering the frames killed it.
To really enjoy (software only) quake on 680x0, use a CSMK3 060 and a graphics card (preferably on as fast a bus as possible). I've seem almost 20fps on such a setup.
GLQuake2 on 68060 is also rather playable, if you have a supported 3D card. GLQuake1 is actually slower than GLQuake2 largely because GLQuake1 was a hack whereas Quake2 was written from the ground up with GL support in mind.
-
I thought an 040/25 MHz were faster than an 030/50 MHz. I played this on a 68030@50 MHz wirh 48 MB of Fast mem and I got 2 FPS in the smallest screen size. To play Quake you need a FPU or the game doesn't work.
Play Quake (Clickboom version with 060 patch) on a 68060@50 MHz with 128 MB of Fast RAM, I got 10 FPS in Full Screen, with the open source version 14 FPS. This on AGA resolution 320x256 (PAL).
-
amiga1260 wrote:
I thought an 040/25 MHz were faster than an 030/50 MHz.
It is, but Quake will bring both very much to their knees. The 3-4fps was for 50% screensize.
You should play NTSC if possible - 320z200 will give you a bit faster FPS.
On my BPPC, WarpQuake ran nicely at 320x400 (NTSC laced) on AGA, getting about 15-20fps fullscreen.