Poll: What is your typical fps?

Grumbler · Post by **Grumbler** » Mon Feb 09, 2004 6:53 pm

What is your typical framerate?

....to make this a little relative, I would suggest you try HIX 2.0 and secretplace and average those two fps together.

(to get fps, hit the t key while playing.....the number will change depending on number of players/bullets/blocks/pyramids..etc)....but you should be able to get a rough number.

(if you lock your VSYNC, please indicate so.......since this will limit your fps)

rcx21000 · Post by **rcx21000** » Mon Feb 09, 2004 9:06 pm

about 30fps...... But thats with my old gfx card, and I'll wait until I get my new one (28days) to vote

EDIT: Oh, yeah v-sync is off

Post by **Fiberchunks** » Mon Feb 09, 2004 9:22 pm

It depends on whether or not I've got vsync limits enabled. For example, if I do limit it, then obviously my fps is limited to the vsync of my monitor.

If I unlock vsync limits (in windows), or use my linux client, then it goes anywhere from ~80-199 (depending on the map).

If I have time, I'll try it unlocked on the 2 servers you mentioned.

Peace
Fiber

creeperz · Post by **creeperz** » Mon Feb 09, 2004 11:17 pm

i get an average of 20 fps on good days

your dog · Post by **your dog** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 12:00 pm

I usually get between 50 and 60 fps. Unless spamassassin is running, then i get a VERY jerky 25 fps

SGI · Post by **SGI** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:29 pm

70~75 vsync on.....133~145 vsync off.
BzFlag 1.10.4 high res.
If I have time, I'll try it on the 2 servers ......

Noodleroni · Post by **Noodleroni** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 3:17 pm

I get around 100-120 fps.

Death Barrel · Post by **Death Barrel** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 3:56 pm

i generally get around 27 FPS. But i use an SGI-320 w/ the cobalt graphics.

Post by **blast** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 3:56 pm

There are a few things that will make a big difference in the results here. First, the screen resolution and color depth affect performance dramatically. Second, the texture settings and other display settings in BZFlag affect frame rate as well. Another factor is Antialiasing and Anisotropic filtering. The high resulotion textures will also slow down video cards a bit. So if we want a more accurate poll, those settings should be defined at the start and used by the people taking the poll.

I typically get 70+ FPS with V-Sync On with a screen resolution of 1024x768x32 @ 85Hz. All settings (except shadows) are maxed out, including Experimental quality with high res textures. Antialiasing and Anisotropic filtering are disabled.

I was getting an average of 50FPS on Secretplace with 20 players online. I was maxing out my V-Sync at 85FPS on HIX 2.0

System specs: 800MHz PIII, 384MB RAM, GeForce FX 5200 PCI w/ 128MB RAM, XP Pro.

Post by **Fiberchunks** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:19 pm

ah, well then blast, let me add this:
I run at 1600x1200x32 @ 85 hz, and all my quality settings are maxed. I also run the win high-res client for the above measurements.

Specs:
Athlon XP 2100+, 1G ram, GeForce Ti4800 w/ 128M Ram (iirc)

Peace
Fiber

rcx21000 · Post by **rcx21000** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 5:57 pm

I get that (30fps) with 800x600 16bit 75hz (highest my monitor will do

) Low-res textures, all settings max (except shadows/vsync, which are off) w/ PIII-866/nVidia TNT2 32MB....

Can't wait until I build my XP 2500+ w/ FX 5200 64MB comp

Grumbler · Post by **Grumbler** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:07 pm

yeah, there are a lot of factors to consider..........i just want to keep it simple. My interest in vsync lock on/off is more curiosity then what impact it has on the poll. Some players in the 70fps-80fps may be able to get higher fps, but dont like the tearing unlocking the vsync creates.

The other options that may impact fps are more statisical noise to me. When it comes down to it, when someone logs onto secretplace and plays, they are going to be using the most comfortable settings for themselves. Some of those choices are in their control, some are not, either way, the fps is the fps.

This sort of question can help those building/designing maps to identify/target a fps. It can also help those developing bzflag to understand what a typical player gets playing. My interest is the first, I have been getting several "great" maps that are just too detailed to be played by all but a few. Part of this is due to the pure number of blocks, the other part is the number of overlapping blocks.

note: I was going to ask if one of the communities more "scripty" folks to write a program that would automagically reduce the number of overlaping blocks.......any voluteers?

Post by **Fiberchunks** » Tue Feb 10, 2004 7:23 pm

patlabor221 tried to explain to me once the culling mechanism that bz uses, and iirc, indicated that it is extremely inefficient. I don't know whether that has been modified for the new code base (oc trees and what not), but that should give everyone a boost fps wise (making the larger / more complex maps playable)

PL, care to comment / correct me?

Peace
Fiber

JeffM · Post by **JeffM** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 7:32 am

it has not been changed yet.

triclops · Post by **triclops** » Thu Feb 12, 2004 9:33 pm

Gidday All

I think your ping has a big impact on your fps too.

triclops

Post by **blast** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 6:48 pm

triclops wrote:I think your ping has a big impact on your fps too.

Yeah, it sorta does. The reverse is true as well. A really low FPS will increase your lag.

creeperz · Post by **creeperz** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:54 pm

wow, i wonder what my lag would be with a better video card

SportChick · Post by **SportChick** » Mon Mar 22, 2004 1:48 am

Well, I didn't vote because our fps is generally WELL under 49 fps...It's generally around 18-24.

EvilChickenNugget · Post by **EvilChickenNugget** » Mon Mar 22, 2004 2:36 am

I run 1.10.4 Hi-Res on Windows XP. 1024x768 32bit 75hz. With OpenGL on all the highest settings (16x Quality Anisotropic Filtering, 6x FSAA, Textures and Mipmap detail on highest quality settings) I usually get a FPS between 180 in "busy" maps and 250. When using OpenGL settings set more for performance I can get 400-500 FPS.

Athlon XP 2100+
512Mb PC-2100
ATI Radeon 9700 128Mb

Grumbler · Post by **Grumbler** » Mon Mar 22, 2004 2:44 pm

SportChick wrote:Well, I didn't vote because our fps is generally WELL under 49 fps...It's generally around 18-24.

...there is a selection for under 49 fps.....so vote

I am using this to get a general feel for what everybody sees for fps, once you are under 49fps, there is not much in map design i can do to help.