UT2004 new FINAL CTF Benchmark

Discussion in 'Games' started by Santaduck, Feb 26, 2004.

  1. Santaduck macrumors 6502a

    Santaduck

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Honolulu
    #1
    I started a new thread because I've abandoned the original benchmark, and have finished my own based in a GUI, so you don't have to mess around in the Terminal. It even got press at insidemacgames.com and xlr8yourmac.com =]

    Anyways now I have both a mac GUI version 3.1 and an equivalent windows bat version 1.2. The mac version is completely new, it's not an adaptation of the old demorec-based 3dcenter benchmark, which gave "inf" results in 3120.1.

    Download both & read more at: http://www.santaduck.com or directly here: mac version and windows version

    Post results here.

    My results:

    Mac G4 Cube/ PL 7457 1.4Ghz/ 1.5G RAM/ Radeon 9000pro/OS 10.3.2

    640x480 : 4.719166 / 17.371588 / 36.755592 fps -- Score = 17.388031
    1024x768 :4.968113 / 17.220768 / 41.075905 fps -- Score = 17.237736
    1280x960 : 5.164147 / 16.880972 / 36.076271 fps -- Score = 16.898134
    1600x1200: 4.797451 / 15.839938 / 36.605736 fps -- Score = 15.854218

    Exact same Cube as above, with OEM Cube Radeon

    640x480 : 5.258971 / 18.200377 / 39.155235 fps -- Score = 18.219358
    800x600 : 5.276948 / 18.155190 / 51.263905 fps -- Score = 18.172644
    1024x768 : 2.930723 / 17.439754 / 39.389664 fps -- Score = 17.457092
    1280x960 : 3.491599 / 15.054925 / 38.744164 fps -- Score = 15.068023
    1600x1200: 2.275341 / 10.831214 / 38.467617 fps -- Score = 10.838161



    ____________________________________________________

    Compaq Presario 2570US Laptop/ Intel P4 2.4Ghz/512M RAM/Radeon IGP 345M/ Win XP Pro SP1

    640x480 : 5.244830 / 18.749954/ 74.888000 fps -- Score = 18.779989
    1024x768: 3.92237 / 10.964916 / 32.848793 fps Score=10.978272
    1280x960: 1.804364 / 10.983126 / 33.716251 fps -- Score= 11.031237


    Let's see some hotshot 2Ghz G5/9700-9800 results !

    By the way from preliminary results it looks like ut2004 is not very optimized yet, as values tend to be half of ut2003 benches... or maybe they really did add that much.

    EDIT: in response to oingo boingo below, I added results from a lower-end vidcard on my mac cube, above. As you can see, with the lower-end card, FPS is significantly lower at highest resolutions. I agree with you that wiht higher-end cards, the ut2k4 demo is basically CPU-bound, even with faster macs including some G5s.
     
  2. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #2
    I downloaded the Mac .sit file, unstuffed it, and dropped the folder into my Application folder. At first run, it gives me the install dialog as noted in the read me, and I click OK, and navigate to the CTF folder as requested. It gives me an error: "Error installing Benchmark .ini or.txt files. Please try again. Quitting now." I ran the app muliple times with the same result.
     
  3. AssassinOfGates macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    A cardboard box.
    #3
    Right after the 2 jump off the platform and the rocket explodes, the thing either quits or crashes (can't tell). If all went well, then I still can't find the results... any help?
     
  4. Santaduck thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Santaduck

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Honolulu
    #4
    stoid: I double checked the code and it seems OK. The only explanation I have is that you did not yet run the UT2004 demo yet even once (as explained in the documentation). If you haven't installed ut2004 demo yet, then the installer doesn't work because your application support folder for ut2k4 doesn't exist.

    Try running ut2004demo once, then quit. Then try installing again.


    _____________

    AssasinOfGates: All went well: The rocket explosion is indeed the end of the benchmark (it is not a crash). The results should pop up in a new application called "Console" (check your dock).
    If for some reason you don't have Console, you can look in benchmark.log located in your (boot drive)/Users/(your username)/Library/Application Support/Unreal Tournament 2004 demo/Benchmark/

    Let me know if this works.
     
  5. oingoboingo macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #5
    Scores for 1.6GHz G5/Radeon 9600

    My system setup is a G5 1.6GHz, Radeon 9600 Pro, and 1.25GB RAM. UT2004 has the latest update. Scores are:

    800x600: 7.018461 / 22.550531 / 47.727844 fps -- Score = 22.568077
    1024x768: 3.400930 / 21.563698 / 48.459431 fps -- Score = 21.579165
    1280x960: 6.999010 / 21.789639 / 46.707302 fps -- Score = 21.805939
    1600x1200: 6.915529 / 21.468527 / 47.128071 fps -- Score = 21.483715

    Basically there is very little change in the scores going from 800x600 all the way up to 1600x1200. This could indicate that the system is CPU-bound (ie: increasing graphics resolution does not decrease performance, because even at low resolutions the CPU is the bottleneck), or that the UT2004 code is really freakin' strange.
     
  6. cb911 macrumors 601

    cb911

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Location:
    BrisVegas, Australia
    #6
    well they did make a big move to software rendering...

    i really hope they optimize UT2004 for Mac. it'd be sweet to be able to beat people playing on PC's for once without having to think 3 seconds ahead because of lag. :p
     
  7. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
  8. Mav451 macrumors 68000

    Mav451

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2003
    Location:
    Maryland
    #8
    Whoo, thanks Santaduck for the good work. Your benches work rite out of the box, unlike the other one i had before with the infinity score LOL. Anyway here are my results:

    640x480:19.712912 / 56.272144 / 161.556473 fps -- Score = 56.558212
    800x600:19.820021 / 56.302464 / 160.377655 fps -- Score = 56.328781
    1024x768:18.677559 / 50.942139 / 137.288925 fps -- Score = 51.065140
    1280x1024:20.113623 / 45.414165 / 128.893066 fps -- Score = 45.666080
    1600x1200:5.722300 / 31.922544 / 115.784981 fps -- Score = 32.101318

    It seems you guys with the Macs have more than a gig of memory...I wonder how much that helps in games like these (as I am currently stuck with only 512).
     
  9. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #9
    MDD PowerMac G4 Dual/1.42 ATI9800Pro and 1GB RAM.

    640x480 1.700332 / 35.494110 / 100.019432 fps -- Score = 35.386284

    1024x768 1.914620 / 35.434017 / 99.408890 fps -- Score = 35.330215

    1600x1200 2.180550 / 34.883617 / 100.075859 fps -- Score = 34.779556


    This demo is all about the graphics card as the texture sizes are half the size of the release version. This mean for one you don't need as much cpu to drive and also you don't need as much VRAM to drive it just a fast video card.

    I have seen quite a few results from tests like these and from what I have seen as long as you have a 900MHz or so CPU and above if you have the same video card as even a Dual/2GHz G5 you will get very similar frame rates.

    As for how much system RAM you have from the tests I've seen there's little need for more then 512 MB nearly any game on PC or Mac.

    Also nearly none of the optimizations made to UT2003 are in the UT2004 demo. They say all of them and more will be making it into the final version.
     

Share This Page