Parallels 3.0 Quake 4 test

Discussion in 'Windows, Linux & Others on the Mac' started by speakerwizard, Jun 7, 2007.

  1. speakerwizard macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #1
    Hi, no numbers yet guys but just installed quake 4 in parallels 3.0 and it runs, very playable at 640x480 low quality, slows down when a lots going on on higher settings, low with a higher res or 640x480 with medium not too bad) this is on an iMac c2d 2.16 with the NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT upgrade, at least ir works! ill do some benchs tomorrow and try call of duty 2 :) by the way, the open with diolougue is cool and windows mounts a network disk on ya mac desktop. be sure to activate directx in vm settings if your doing it!
     
  2. speakerwizard thread starter macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #2
    sorry its a bit rushed (i have a 24 inch imac so i should have changed the reolution really) was running a bit slow with screen capture on, but gives you an idea.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu7134gbku8
     
  3. LimeiBook86 macrumors 604

    LimeiBook86

    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Location:
    Go Vegan
    #3
    Thanks for the tip, I was going nuts on why nothing would work. Then after installing some things and restarting clicking that option worked ;).

    I've had some odd results. Some things will run very slow, then very fast. Seems like the speed varies, well at least for me. I was running a very old game however, Star Wars Shadows of the Empire, a DirectX 5 game haha. :p :D Attached is a screenshot just for anybody who has trouble finding it.

    It's under the main Virtual Machine settings (when the machine is not running and after installing the updates) :)
     

    Attached Files:

  4. speakerwizard thread starter macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #4
  5. speakerwizard thread starter macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #5
    ah, something i didnt think of straight away, set the video ram setting in the vm to default, direct x and opengl doNOT access this ram, so save it for one or both of the os's
     
  6. speakerwizard thread starter macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #6
    OK, so this one is a bit odd, quake4 plays best in my native screen resolution (1920x1200) huh, looks really good now
     
  7. CyberPrey macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Location:
    IGH, MN
    #7
    Any chance you could also test Eve Online and Supreme Commander and/or Doom 3??
     
  8. speakerwizard thread starter macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #8
    dont have them games im afraid, only doom for mac. I havnt been able to replicate the smooth performance under native resolution (slows to something like 1fps lol) so it looks capable but buggy, so running on lor res, low quality and no effects for now. have to hit the parallels forums or wait for a .x update
     
  9. speakerwizard thread starter macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #9
    just installed prey, and works better than quake 4, running at 1024x768 low quality is very playable, ill have to have an experiment though, but they are default and look/work quite well, im impressed, cant wait for bug fixes
     
  10. speakerwizard thread starter macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
  11. Anorak macrumors regular

    Anorak

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    #11
  12. speakerwizard thread starter macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #12
    i only started it in bootcamp and then took off bootcamp, might actually play it now its easily accessable :)
     
  13. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #13
    Tnx for the info! :cool:

    Gr8 to see results like these come in. :)

    But, I must admit it seems to perform worse than I expected. Ofcourse, it won't be as fast as Boot Camp-ing, but I would have imagined something like a steady 80 % performance of Boot Camp.
     
  14. contoursvt macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    #14
    Oh man... I'm glad it runs and everything but the framerates look very low (almost slideshow) - is that due to the capture software knocking it down so low?
     
  15. brkirch macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2001
    #15
  16. ReanimationLP macrumors 68030

    ReanimationLP

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Location:
    On the moon.
    #16
    Thats kinda sad how slow it runs, as that card is capable of high settings at 1280x1024 with at least 60 FPS.
     
  17. brkirch macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2001
    #17
    True, but DirectX support in Parallels is currently achieved by translating DirectX calls to OpenGL calls, so performance with OpenGL programs should be at least a little better. Hopefully performance and compatibility will improve with a future update, one-fifth to one-half the performance of Boot Camp is a little more of a performance hit than I would have expected.
     
  18. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #18
    The fact that you only get one core, split RAM and graphics memory, makes the fact that its playable quite amazing...with higher framerates it will satisfy gamers in the future, but right now 3D is great for people who need 3D architecture etc. apps :)
     
  19. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #19
    Very nice. Now I won't have to reboot for my classic games. Here's to hoping for more improvements. :D
     
  20. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #20
    I have no doubt that the improvements will be massive, especially on quad/octo-core machines where more cores will be utilised. It seems like they rushed this version a bit.

    Hopefully improvements will be akin to the speed difference between the original Parallels with the attached interface and the one we have now :)

    [​IMG]
     
  21. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #21
    I just hope Parallels starts using more cores.
     
  22. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #22
    They will have to in order to compete with the pro/demanding users of VMWare's Fusion.

    I would like the nice Expose and shadow effects shown in Unity to come to Parallels. Also, full Ubuntu support...
     
  23. thegrandmaster macrumors regular

    thegrandmaster

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Location:
    Valhalla!
    #23
    Anyone tried AOE2 or SW Galatic Battlegrounds, maybe Pharaoh.

    I'm getting a MBP in a couple of weeks and want to play some old games like that, do they play well in Parallels. I will use bootcamp for stuff like C&C3 and newer games, but for stuff like C&C RA2 or other 'First Decade' games, I'd rather be able to run them right inside OS X.

    Anyone tried any of those in Parallels? :rolleyes:
     
  24. djstarrock macrumors 6502a

    djstarrock

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    Location:
    UK, Scotland, Glasgow
    #24
    Why does everyone like Parallels I personally like VMware Fusion better.
     
  25. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #25
    We've been using Parallels since launch?
     

Share This Page