How many fps do you get ??? (Frames Per Second)
- I_Died_Once
- Special Forces
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 5:27 pm
- Location: The Dark Side
- Contact:
How many fps do you get ??? (Frames Per Second)
If this has been posted and asked before, I missed it...
On average, how many frames a second do you get while playing BZFlag ???
Whats the most you've seen yourself have? What the least frames you can have and yet remain playable?
Now, that I've optimized my machine and made some tweaks I didn't know for the longest you can do, I get most anywhere between 125 and 150.
What about you ???
On average, how many frames a second do you get while playing BZFlag ???
Whats the most you've seen yourself have? What the least frames you can have and yet remain playable?
Now, that I've optimized my machine and made some tweaks I didn't know for the longest you can do, I get most anywhere between 125 and 150.
What about you ???
...This has been a recording.
- Joe-Schmoe
- Private First Class
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:10 am
- Location: This field unintentionally left blank.
- Think_Different
- Private First Class
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 3:03 am
- Location: Washington, DC
I keep my FPS at a steady 60 (1680x1050). I apparently am forcing my 8600GTS to 8x anisotropic and 16x anti-aliasing on all OpenGL apps, so the FPS doesn't go above or below 60 usually. The lowest playable fps for me is 25ish.
Last edited by Think_Different on Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Private First Class
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 12:00 am
- Location: hiding behind box...a real Bz coward :/
Long time ago i had in average about 40 fps on a laptop with high resolution.
But now on vista i did set on the same machine JUST VGA resolution and NO effects, in order to get my 15-30 fps!
Cause of playing too often with this sucking system >25fps is now really comfortable for me
And <20fps starts to make me unhappy.
I was wondering when i did meet people who had the same low VGA resolution, but they had even less fps...
It would really help if some mapmakers would care about it. Indeed, the hardware needs to get updated from time to time. BUT sometimes with really little effort a map can be made much better playable (without changing the map-layout).
(Offtopic: My problem is due to "Intel GMA 900" ...
Pathetic Intel claims its cause it hasn't an "HW Scheduler". Whatever that is.
But i say: Dear Intel, GMA900 is DX9 compatible and has kinda exactly the same power like GMA950, so why is it impossible to write Aero Glass drivers for vista??
Btw, STILL in 2007 some systems were shipped with an onboard GMA900 => this new hardware is useless for professional 3D business in vista!!!)
But now on vista i did set on the same machine JUST VGA resolution and NO effects, in order to get my 15-30 fps!
Cause of playing too often with this sucking system >25fps is now really comfortable for me
And <20fps starts to make me unhappy.
I was wondering when i did meet people who had the same low VGA resolution, but they had even less fps...
It would really help if some mapmakers would care about it. Indeed, the hardware needs to get updated from time to time. BUT sometimes with really little effort a map can be made much better playable (without changing the map-layout).
(Offtopic: My problem is due to "Intel GMA 900" ...
Pathetic Intel claims its cause it hasn't an "HW Scheduler". Whatever that is.
But i say: Dear Intel, GMA900 is DX9 compatible and has kinda exactly the same power like GMA950, so why is it impossible to write Aero Glass drivers for vista??
Btw, STILL in 2007 some systems were shipped with an onboard GMA900 => this new hardware is useless for professional 3D business in vista!!!)
Last edited by z[h]ero on Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Wirth's law: "Software is getting slower more rapidly than hardware becomes faster."
-
- Private First Class
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 6:06 pm
- Location: Lancaster, PA
- Contact:
Just double checked. Usually somewhere between 280 and 350 fps (according to bzflag's fps meter) on a pillbox map with several players on the screen.
I run bzflag in windowed mode maximized on one monitor of a dual-monitor setup. The video card is an EVGA geforce 7300GT - AGP on a machine running Ubuntu 7.10.
I run bzflag in windowed mode maximized on one monitor of a dual-monitor setup. The video card is an EVGA geforce 7300GT - AGP on a machine running Ubuntu 7.10.
- Sky King
- Private First Class
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:07 pm
- Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota, USA
On my older desktop machine, I often have to play at 25-30 and can usually do just fine... just used to it I guess.
With all the frills maxed out, I run right at 59 on my nVidia Quadro NVS 135M with 256MB of RAM. I play full screen at 1280x800x32.
Note... there is no point in making your GPU work hard to produce frames you can't even see. If you are running a video card capable of producing 100+ FPS, I would highly recommend manually editing your config file and setting your energy saver frame rate to something like 60 or 75. (it defaults to 30) Then turn energy saver on... You have picked a frame rate you can play well at, and yet, you are not working your GPU as hard. On my previous HP laptop, both fans HOWLED at 60 FPS and would stay off at about 40 FPS, and battery life was much better if I wasn't on shore power.
With all the frills maxed out, I run right at 59 on my nVidia Quadro NVS 135M with 256MB of RAM. I play full screen at 1280x800x32.
Note... there is no point in making your GPU work hard to produce frames you can't even see. If you are running a video card capable of producing 100+ FPS, I would highly recommend manually editing your config file and setting your energy saver frame rate to something like 60 or 75. (it defaults to 30) Then turn energy saver on... You have picked a frame rate you can play well at, and yet, you are not working your GPU as hard. On my previous HP laptop, both fans HOWLED at 60 FPS and would stay off at about 40 FPS, and battery life was much better if I wasn't on shore power.
Retired Army--Proud to have served
Armored Cavalry Crewman, 1981-1984 (M60A5)
Infantry Officer & Paratrooper, 1984-1986
US Army Ranger & Sniper, 1986-1989 (LRSD)
Water Cooled 8-Core Ryzen 7 2700x @ 3.7GHz | Radeon RX590 GPU | 43" 4K Monitor
Armored Cavalry Crewman, 1981-1984 (M60A5)
Infantry Officer & Paratrooper, 1984-1986
US Army Ranger & Sniper, 1986-1989 (LRSD)
Water Cooled 8-Core Ryzen 7 2700x @ 3.7GHz | Radeon RX590 GPU | 43" 4K Monitor
- Triumph of the Soul
- Corporal
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 4:32 pm
- Location: Minnesota
With everything maxed out (except anisotropic), I usually run at about 45 - 55 fps on average for most maps. Not too bad since I'm using an older, entry-level ATI card (Radeon 9250).
As for minimum playability, I can usually do just fine at as low as 17 or 18 fps. Below that, things are just untrackable and I can't play. Luckily, I haven't encountered any maps that push me that low since I built this machine two years ago.
As for minimum playability, I can usually do just fine at as low as 17 or 18 fps. Below that, things are just untrackable and I can't play. Luckily, I haven't encountered any maps that push me that low since I built this machine two years ago.
And the lesson for tonight is:
Never underestimate the ability of a newb to expect instant success and cry "cheat!" when they don't get it. Don't hate the newb, just give them plenty of learning opportunities.
Never underestimate the ability of a newb to expect instant success and cry "cheat!" when they don't get it. Don't hate the newb, just give them plenty of learning opportunities.
- Spazzy McGee
- Sergeant Major
- Posts: 1405
- Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:59 pm
- Location: Planet MoFo, Sheffield Division; United Kingdom
I cap mine at 30 using the energy saver function. I figure, whats the point in letting it go higher, if my battery will go flat in half the time.
Without that IIRC, I can get around 100. Hooray for intel intergrated graphics.
Without that IIRC, I can get around 100. Hooray for intel intergrated graphics.
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." - John Lennon
When I was testing my graphics-card-killing map I found that when I got 30-45 fps on the MacBook Pro, a lot of people had under 20fps, (perhaps 20% found it unplayable?). So I aim for 50-60 fps as the minimum when I'm testing maps.
Here's a picture of someone playing at my map:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/laptops/dell ... 182257.php
Here's a picture of someone playing at my map:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/laptops/dell ... 182257.php
this signature intentionally left blank
I can get around 60-90 on a crowded map like MissileWar2. During a GU match I usually have around 200. Anything below 30 gets a little tough to play on.
dexter ([phagozytose] : http://www.phago.de)
I get about 30-50 fps usually.
A television set runs at about 60hz and is usually about 30fps. And movies play at 25fps. So 30 fps shouldn't be a problemI can get around 60-90 on a crowded map like MissileWar2. During a GU match I usually have around 200. Anything below 30 gets a little tough to play on.
“Roses are #FF0000, violets are #0000FF, all of my base are belong to you.” ~ Nerd on Colour
- Think_Different
- Private First Class
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 3:03 am
- Location: Washington, DC
True, but most monitors refresh at 60Hz (some at 75Hz) so updates generated by the graphics card that are more than the refresh rate(such as 100fps) are discarded, because the display can only update at a rate of 60fps.PETER wrote:A television set runs at about 60hz and is usually about 30fps. And movies play at 25fps. So 30 fps shouldn't be a problemI can get around 60-90 on a crowded map like MissileWar2. During a GU match I usually have around 200. Anything below 30 gets a little tough to play on.
-
- Private First Class
- Posts: 1400
- Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:40 pm
- Location: Somewhere over there.
I get between 20-50, with a mean of around 30. Without energy saver on.
On the other boot on this computer, linux, i can get 120 no problem.
On the other boot on this computer, linux, i can get 120 no problem.
Last edited by dango on Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Bullet Catcher
- Captain
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 7:56 am
- Location: Escondido, California
As Sky King noted, any frames per second above the refresh rate of your display are wasted. In your config file, setting saveEnergy to 1 and fpsLimit to maybe 5 FPS more than your display refresh rate should maximize the useful performance and minimize heat that causes the cooling fans to run loudly.
The FPS I get with my onboard GeForce 6100 GPU varies widely from the limit of 80 I have set (my display runs at 75 Hz) down to the 20s when there is a lot happening. Most of the time I am concentrating on the game and it never occurs to me that there might be frame rate issues, so I guess that means it is good enough for me.
On a related topic, does anyone know how to tell whether the GPU needs more video RAM? I have mine set at 32 MB but it can go up to 128 MB.
The FPS I get with my onboard GeForce 6100 GPU varies widely from the limit of 80 I have set (my display runs at 75 Hz) down to the 20s when there is a lot happening. Most of the time I am concentrating on the game and it never occurs to me that there might be frame rate issues, so I guess that means it is good enough for me.
On a related topic, does anyone know how to tell whether the GPU needs more video RAM? I have mine set at 32 MB but it can go up to 128 MB.
- Bullet Catcher
- Captain
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 7:56 am
- Location: Escondido, California
My GPU is onboard with shared memory. In the BIOS I can set it to use 16, 32, 64, or 128 MB of system RAM. I started out using 16 MB and have had it at 32 MB for about a year, but that change made no remarkable difference. Is there a way to tell if even more would help? (Just trying it would be too easy, after all!)Teppic wrote:Is it on board (shared memory) or PCIe?
-
- Private First Class
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 2:08 am
-
- Private First Class
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:07 pm
- Location: Sweden