I'd have to disagree with the statement that you can get Quake to run fluently on a 060.
I'd go as far as saying: you CAN play it if you can live with , what I see as, extremely low framerate (or extremely low resolution). But, I still have not played a version on 060 (AGA and RTG accounted for) that runs fluently enough for me to bother about playing.
Some could say something like "you can't compare the Amiga version of Quake with running the game on a PC". I beg to differ. The game was MEANT to be played on PC with a decent resolution and decent FPS. So, what you get when playing Quake on the 060 is a port for the Amiga running NOTHING like the game originally was intended to be run. But then again, if someone finds pleasure in playing the game like it can be played on a 060 Amiga, well, I'm glad for them.
Concerning using Warp3D to run Quake instead of the regular 3D-rendering, that will in theory not make much of a difference because Quake's engine doesn't support that kind of 3D. Rather than leaving the graphic card to handle the 3D , and freeing up some CPU (which would be the case with Quake 2) you're just adding some bits and pieces for the CPU to handle. Exactly how this work I have no way of describing since it now was ages since I got it explained to me (and I'm not that technical when it comes to things like this), but someone with good knowledge on Quake's engine can certainly explain it all. Maybe it differs betweens some of the ports, I don't know, but in whatever case, using Warp3D to run Quake will give probably in most of the cases give a much less satisfying result than running Quake II on Warp3D.
