Doom 3 demo performance?

Discussion in 'Games' started by Demon Hunter, Oct 16, 2005.

  1. Demon Hunter macrumors 68020

    Mar 30, 2004
    Any Doom 3 players know if the demo has gimped performance? I know what to expect (in other words, not much), but I ask because the Unreal demos are usually like this. When you install the full version you get like 2x the framerates.

    My impression so far on my machine is that, while it will run just fine, for the purposes of any respectable Doom fan, it's clearly not worth it.

    It's not looking good for Quake IV.
  2. gammamonk macrumors 6502a


    Jun 4, 2004
    Madison, WI
    I tried the doom3 demo on my powerbook. It sucked. Bad. How it can run faster on the Xbox (733mhz, gforce4mx hybrid, 64 or 128meg ram) is beyond me.

    True the UT2004 demo was hosed, but the real game is still unplayable on a G4. Even a G5 chokes I hear.

    If you wanna game, buy a console or a dell. Sorry.
  3. ReanimationLP macrumors 68030


    Jan 8, 2005
    On the moon.
    Doom 3 on my 400 MHz G4 Low, 640x480 - 2 FPS

    Doom 3 on my 2.8 GHz Athlon64 Ultra, 1024x768 -50 FPS

    I think the Mac version needs a LOT of polishing.
  4. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Dec 21, 2002
    Yahooville S.C.
    Xbox Doom3 isnt your Daddys Pc version thats for sure, less eye candy,tv resolutions, smaller levels then in the PC version. Xbox is the watered down version for Kiddies. You want to game then a Pc is where its at. Not Consoles.
  5. Patmian212 macrumors 68020


    Apr 11, 2004
    How many FPS you think I could get on my ibook with everything on low? LOL
  6. Striderdm1 macrumors regular


    Oct 24, 2003
    LOL now this i liked! nice1 :rolleyes:
  7. Eric5h5 macrumors 68020

    Dec 9, 2004
    Because they cut the game down so it could run well. If it was the same game, it would run about 5 or 10fps on the Xbox.

    No, it's fine on my G5 + X800 graphics card, with all settings on high. Generally 50-60fps. An equivalent PC would do better, but the Xbox version maxes out at 30fps....

  8. whooleytoo macrumors 603


    Aug 2, 2002
    Cork, Ireland.
    I tried it on my G5 2x2GHz, GeForce FX5200.

    At 1024 x 768, the performance was ok, though every time you enter a room for the first time there's a noticeable stutter, whereas it doesn't occur every other time. I'm guessing this is due to having relatively little VRAM on that card, so when you enter a new area, the new textures need to be fetched from main memory thus slowing things down.
  9. slooksterPSV macrumors 68030


    Apr 17, 2004
    I'm surprised you don't know how Doom 3(any game) can run faster on Xbox. With the Xbox the processor is dedicated. With any OS you have to put your processor resource into another section of the OS to run different things. Let me try to better explain:
    If you had an Intel Celeron 733 128MB RAM 64MB Video card computer you can't run Doom 3 if it has Windoze. You have RAM usage in Windoze, Direct X on the system to convert the data and transfer it to the video card to display the image. + The Video card is using like 8MB RAM for 1024x768 + 32-bit color (that 8-bit alpha can kill performance)
    On the Xbox, the Processor, RAM, and Video Card are one of their own. They require only the intervention of the game.
    bool ready = CallXboxVideoCard(24, 800, 600);
    No RAM is being used up by anything else. No processes are checking everything else, nothing, just playing the game. So if you were to have just the bare bare bare bare minimum OS of Windows 98, very very very few services, nothing in RAM basically, then you could run Doom 3 on a Intel Pentium 3 900MHz, 256MB RAM, 128MB Video Card. + The Xbox caches things to the Hard Drive which doesn't take complete control over the Processor.

    That is somewhat true to a partial sense, but understand how I've placed it into perspective?
  10. G5Unit macrumors 68020


    Apr 3, 2005
    I'm calling the cops
    Wait. UT2K4 is slower in the demo than the full version?
  11. WhiteSavage macrumors regular


    Oct 4, 2004
    I regularly run UT2k4 on my G4. Easily. Settings at default. and this is a 1 Ghz G4 btw :)
  12. harveypooka macrumors 65816

    Feb 24, 2004
    Anybody any idea how Doom would run on the current 1.67 Powerbook? I'm hoping to get the new Powerbook (if they're updated next Wed).
  13. Demon Hunter thread starter macrumors 68020

    Mar 30, 2004
    Can anyone actually confirm that the full version retail is faster than the demo (my original question). :eek:

    Considerably, last time I checked...

    I would try it. :) I tried it on a new standard 12" iBook (1.33/512/4200rpm/32mb) with all options on low. Not really playable but still fun to try. The RAM will help though.

    The PowerBook will accept Low, Medium or High detail settings, up to 4x antialiasing, and a resolution of 1024x768 (if there's a way to enable widescreen I don't know it). The optimal settings are 800x600, medium detail, some extras. As with almost every G4, you can scale the graphics and the framerate won't drop much, because it was low to begin with and the GPU can usually take the pressure. Keep in mind, though, that Doom 3's minimum requirements are obscene, and although certain PowerBook configs exceed those, they are essentially still "minimum."

    I got to compare the lowest standard iBook (see above) with the highest PowerBook config (my rig below), and while the differences are clear and many, both G4s still suffer from the same hiccups. Everybody knows 'em: slow FSB, less than true DDR support, and OS X's infamous ability to multitask -- even when you don't want to.

    The only hope for victory is the Intel chips. A change to PCI-e and/or DDR2 will do almost nothing, without the right chip architecture. If you are planning to buy and hope to do some light to moderate gaming, I think you will be pleased. But for Doom 3 and other next-gen games, the G4 only has enough horsepower for a Sunday stroll.

    That being said, you could spend thousands on a Dell XPS or Alienware laptop and get a firebreathing, mobile monstrosity that gets excellent FPS.

    I am still lamenting the MPC8641D Dual Core Processor.

    My very optimistic prediction for next week is this:
    • 1.8GHz MPC7448 with 200MHz FSB and 1MB L2 cache
    • 128MB or 256MB X700 Mobility (PCI-e)
    • DDR-2
    • Higher resolutions
    • 7200rpm hard drives

    Despite these "dream specs" a game like Doom 3 would only see a modest performance gain. Still, I would be drooling like a newborn baby. :rolleyes:
  14. invaLPsion macrumors 65816


    Jan 2, 2004
    The Northlands
    The Doom 3 Demo is VERY Playable on the system in my sig. Tried it on two settings so far, both worked very well.

    1. Played at 1280X1024 everything HIGH 8X AF Performance was glassy, 30-50FPS when walking around 25-35 in heated combat.

    2. I switched on 2X AA and it slowed down about 10 FPS, so I moved it back to the above configuration.

    Cheers! ;)
  15. crazzyeddie macrumors 68030


    Dec 7, 2002
    Florida, USA
    Doom 3 on a 1.5ghz and 1.67ghz Powerbook (128MB VRAM):

  16. reberto macrumors 65816


    Jul 20, 2005
    I got about 7fps on the G4 iMac in my sig.
    And my G3 iMac died when I tried it (it works now!)
  17. harveypooka macrumors 65816

    Feb 24, 2004
    No way! I didn't realise the FSB on the Powerbook's were less than 200 MHZ! That's made me think twice about spending £1500 on one. I could get a new iMac and a iBook for a little more. I'm going to have to think about this one. I saw that the new 2.1ghz iMac has a 700 FSB...not bad.
    But isn't the performance of Doom 3 much down to not so hot streamlining in the development stage? I mean, Half Life 2 is a prime example on the PC. It has such low spec requirements and looks great because it's been optimised.
  18. RedTomato macrumors 68040


    Mar 4, 2005
    .. London ..
    Doom 3 demo works fine on my G4 1.5GHZ 15'' 64MB vram powerbook. Not played it extensively tho, only up to the first few minutes of killing stuff, then I got fed up / had better things to do.

    (the pre story took me about 2 hours, of just running about and exploring stuff, which I enjoyed more than the killing)

    (Yeah I do prefer adventures / RTS thankyewverymuch.)

    Had to turn the graphics down a bit to get smooth framerate, also quitting everything else / rebooting helped.

    I've noticed that many games are dog slow the first time I play them - Warcraft 3 springs to mind - and then speed up on second and subsequent playings. Happened with the Doom 3 demo. I think it's some sort of OSX pre-catching / binding / adaptive magic.

    Have other people noticed this too?


    .. RedTomato ..
  19. harveypooka macrumors 65816

    Feb 24, 2004
    I know what you mean. Fallout, Deus Ex and the likes are first class shooters (in a variety of styles) but narrative really takes you along with it. Doom 3 didn't have an inch on Half Life 2. Even the enemies ran straight at you and they looked like plastic. I hear the new Quake game is based on a version of ID's engine actually.
  20. mduser63 macrumors 68040


    Nov 9, 2004
    Salt Lake City, UT
    I can't really answer your questions regarding gaming, as I don't play computer games, but IMO, the iMac/iBook combo is a great deal. The iBook is fine for basic stuff (web browsing, email, Office, basic graphics, etc), while the iMac is quite a powerful machine and is the best deal for a Mac right now (yes, even better than the Mac mini).
  21. Demon Hunter thread starter macrumors 68020

    Mar 30, 2004
    Well of course, Quake is made by id. :)

    The above graph is very interesting. A slower G4 is beating a G5. :eek: That's all about the GPU. The 2.0 iMac had Radeon 9600, the PowerBooks have the equivalent of Radeon 9600 XT.
  22. slooksterPSV macrumors 68030


    Apr 17, 2004
    Relating to how Doom 3 will run faster on some G4's than G5's, are the G4's better in anyway than the G5's??? Another perspective to look at is, are they using any 64-bit code in Doom 3 to greatly speed up things?

    I know its the video card that sped things up quite a bit, but do you think there may be a reason that the G5 still didn't beat the G4 (Processor(CPU) wise, not GPU wise)
  23. Sundance Kid macrumors regular

    Sundance Kid

    Feb 16, 2005

    ok so i have the same machine and it sucked on mine :( . It would slow down a lot when i was killing things..... i was extremely unhappy
  24. Eric5h5 macrumors 68020

    Dec 9, 2004
    Not this time. id is still involved, but I get the impression that it's more Raven's game.


Share This Page