 |
 |
Quake 3 (G3 vs. Celeron)
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Toronto
Status:
Offline
|
|
Installed Quake3 on my sister's old Celeron system in order to play against her on our home LAN. I was expecting it to barely run. I was quite surprised by the results.
Her Celeron system specs: 333MHz, 256MB PC100 RAM, 100MHz FSB, Voodoo3 2000 16MB.
My G3 specs: 300MHz (overclocked from 266), 416MB RAM, 66MHz FSB, Radeon Mac Edition 32MB DDR.
The map: q3ctf4 with 4 bots (hosted on my iBook dedicated).
The result: her Celeron played the map smoothly with no lag or framerate slowdown (about 30fps consistently). My G3 gets about 60fps in dark areas but when lots of action starts to happen on screen the frame rate drops to around 13fps.
Could this be due to the slightly faster FSB on her Celeron? Or is it that Q3 is much more optimized on Windows than it is for Mac?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Highland Park, IL / Santa Monica, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Q3 is optimized for OS X, multiple processors and G4s.
Were you running OS 9? If so, you're not getting Q3's support for newer graphics drivers, and of course not Altivec or SMP.
|
|
Be happy.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by JoNoiD:
Her Celeron system specs: 333MHz, 256MB PC100 RAM, 100MHz FSB, Voodoo3 2000 16MB.
My G3 specs: 300MHz (overclocked from 266), 416MB RAM, 66MHz FSB, Radeon Mac Edition 32MB DDR.
Could this be due to the slightly faster FSB on her Celeron
Slightly faster FSB? It's 150% of yours!
- proton
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: california
Status:
Offline
|
|
i'm not sure about quake3, but when UT runs in glide (only on voodoo cards), it kicks arse left and right. it seems just to be a better (more efficient?) way to do gaming. in my B&W G3 back in the OS9 days, my 8MB voodoo2 (using glide) far outperformed my 16MB ati rage 128 (using rave), although the voodoo2 was an older card.
mac freak: will quake3 run better in OSX than OS9 because of these optimizations? i know UT (yeah, yeah, it could be a totally invalid comparison) runs *way* faster in OS9 than OSX.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Highland Park, IL / Santa Monica, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Well, at least in my experience Q3 runs better in X than 9... might be worth a shot 
Don't expect too much though; might even run worse.
|
|
Be happy.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yeah, UT on Glide kicked arse. I ran a Celeron with Voodoo3 for quite some time, specifically for UT. I switched to a first run Radeon when the Voodoo died, and it was not always as smooth as the Voodoo3 despite being a card several generations later.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Can anyone point me to the OSX Quake 3 patch? I'm having a hell of a time trying to find it online, tried ID, tried Activision, but keep getting dead links...
Thanks!
Josh
|
|
20 Inch Intel iMac * MacBook 2 GHz * 60GB iPod * 4GB iPhone
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Toronto
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yes, running OS X 10.2.8. Haven't touched 9 in years.
I guess my main beef is that Apple continually pushed the megahertz myth upon us. A 300MHz Mac should certainly have been faster than a 333 Pentium II, and this is a Celeron as well.
And for JFischel... ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com/idstuff/quake3/mac/. Download the file called "Quake3-1.32.pkg.sit".
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
