10.3.6

[vraxtus]

10.3.5
For further information, please visit the timedemo FAQ at: http://halo.bungie.net/site/halo/features/hpcperformancefaq.html
Date / Time: 9/1/04 8:23:53 (0ms)
1800MHz, 1024MB
Macintosh G5 HD\Applications\Halo\Halo -console Frames=4700
Total Time=200.50s
Average frame rate=23.44fps
Below 5fps= 5% (time) 0% (frames) (10.829s spent in 11 frames)
Below 10fps= 6% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 21% (time) 8% (frames)
Below 20fps= 42% (time) 23% (frames)
Below 25fps= 60% (time) 41% (frames)
Below 30fps= 81% (time) 64% (frames)
Below 40fps= 91% (time) 79% (frames)
Below 50fps= 96% (time) 88% (frames)
Below 60fps= 97% (time) 91% (frames)
###Sound Options###
Hardware Acceleration= No
Sound Quality= Normal
Environmental Sound= No
Sound Variety= High
###Video Options###
Resolution= 1280 x 1024
Refresh rate= 0 Hz
Framerate throttle= No Vsync
Specular= No
Shadows= Yes
Decals= Yes
Particles= Off
Texture Quality= High


10.3.6
For further information, please visit the timedemo FAQ at: http://halo.bungie.net/site/halo/features/hpcperformancefaq.html
Date / Time: 11/6/04 4:44:28 (0ms)
1800MHz, 1024MB
Macintosh G5 HD\Applications\Halo\Halo -console Frames=4700
Total Time=188.47s
Average frame rate=24.94fps
Below 5fps= 5% (time) 0% (frames) (9.754s spent in 12 frames)
Below 10fps= 6% (time) 0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 20% (time) 7% (frames)
Below 20fps= 37% (time) 19% (frames)
Below 25fps= 55% (time) 35% (frames)
Below 30fps= 72% (time) 54% (frames)
Below 40fps= 89% (time) 77% (frames)
Below 50fps= 95% (time) 87% (frames)
Below 60fps= 97% (time) 91% (frames)
###Sound Options###
Hardware Acceleration= No
Sound Quality= Normal
Environmental Sound= No
Sound Variety= High
###Video Options###
Resolution= 1280 x 1024
Refresh rate= 0 Hz
Framerate throttle= No Vsync
Specular= Yes
Shadows= Yes
Decals= Yes
Particles= Off
Texture Quality= High


Comments:
The increase is still within the 5% margin off error but it remains an increase. I'd like to see any other benching posted here, thanks.

[Littleodie914]

Hmm... In the 10.3.6 benchmarks it also states that the "Specular" option was turned on, while it was off in the 10.3.5 tests. Is this just a typo, or did you really get BETTER results with the specular effects turned on? 'Cuz I know that when I turn them on in the PC verion, it slows to a crawl.

[woxel1]

I'm just going to do an eyeballing test and say that 10.3.6 is the best update (graphicswise) since 10.3.3. I'm on a 1.25 G4 iMac, and I'm playing UT2k4 on maximum settings (hovering somewhere between 40 and 20 fps depending on the environment). So sweet. Everyone update! Woo!

[Capt Underpants]

I'm just going to do an eyeballing test and say that 10.3.6 is the best update (graphicswise) since 10.3.3. I'm on a 1.25 G4 iMac, and I'm playing UT2k4 on maximum settings (hovering somewhere between 40 and 20 fps depending on the environment). So sweet. Everyone update! Woo!

With maximum settings? I find that hard to believe...

[vraxtus]

Hmm... In the 10.3.6 benchmarks it also states that the "Specular" option was turned on, while it was off in the 10.3.5 tests. Is this just a typo, or did you really get BETTER results with the specular effects turned on? 'Cuz I know that when I turn them on in the PC verion, it slows to a crawl.

MMM good call, I'll have to verify that and get back to you.

[bousozoku]

I'm still seeing a problem with seams in a certain CBP2 map for UT2004--you can see light where the objects' parts meet and you shouldn't. I noticed this same mess in the Tiger Woods 2003 game when I updated from 10.2.8 to 10.3.

However, even the UT2004 menus seemed a bit better, especially since I'm running two instances of folding@home in the background.

[cluthz]

The increase is still within the 5% margin off error but it remains an increase. I'd like to see any other benching posted here, thanks.

Don't have Halo, but I've done a test with Ut2003.

UT2003 Build UT2003_Build_[2003-04-07_17.42]
MacOS 10.3.5
Unknown CPU @ 1333 MHz
NVIDIA NV34MAP OpenGL Engine
dm-antalus?game=engine.gameinfo exec=../Benchmark/Stuff/flybyexec.txt -benchmark -seconds=77 -nosound
15.622748 / 48.433643 / 132.648178 fps rand[93372187]
Score = 48.201378

UT2003 Build UT2003_Build_[2003-04-07_17.42]
MacOS 10.3.6
Unknown CPU @ 1333 MHz
NVIDIA NV34MAP OpenGL Engine
dm-antalus?game=engine.gameinfo exec=../Benchmark/Stuff/flybyexec.txt -benchmark -seconds=77 -nosound
16.838791 / 50.734070 / 145.222137 fps rand[93372187]
Score = 50.488918

My results also showed a roughly 5% increase, i also tried the botmatch test, but the difference was about <1% (10.3.5 was faster...). Anyway the botmatch test is much more cpu bound than the flyby tests.

The test was run in 1024x768, else standard UT2003 config on a Powerbook 12-inch with 768MB RAM