[ut2003io] Is this list archived?

Matthew Arnold marnold at ez-net.com
Sun Sep 15 17:38:10 EDT 2002

Michael wrote:

 > The linux performance is significantly slower, but having just read the
 > digest and tried a quick -nosound walk-around I think that's pretty much
 > where the difference occurs - a similar smooth feel in linux with
 > nosound that I'm getting with sound in w2k. Makes sense logically too,
 > since changing detail levels, resolution etc (even enabling 2x aa and
 > aniso and overclocking the card) wasn't having much impact on the 
performance (well, not as much
 > as I would have expected) suggesting that the bottleneck wasn't the
 > rendering...of course - the -nosound qualifiers in the flyby won't help
 > show this.

I added -nosound to the botmatch-citadel file right before the %1 to
test that theory on my box. The -nosound results were virtually the same
as the ones with sound. At 1024x768x32 I got 25.28 fps without sound and 
25.21 fps with it. This is with a SoundBlaster Audigy and the latest 
released open-source drivers in Red Hat 7.3.

When I dropped to 800x600x32 the difference was slightly more 
pronounced: 32.56 fps with sound and 34.72 without. Still, that doesn't 
even come close to making up the difference between Linux with OpenGL 
and Windows with Direct3D.

For now, I'm sticking with 1024x768x32 with sound (naturally). My 
framerates still stay plenty high even in botmatches. If I feel 
industrious, I'll try playing at 800x600 to see if I notice anything 
worth talking about whilst playing. I would think that the two outdoor 
maps would benefit most from a lower resolution.

My $.02, $547 Canadian,

More information about the ut2003 mailing list