Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Return to Castle Wolfenstein - OS X Client Available

Re: 30fps?

Originally posted by shoeish
I have a Geforce2 GTS 32mb and a 800mhz athlon and get 35fps in 1600x1200x32bit. How can a GF3 only get 30 at any setting?

Shoe
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, and as for "how" the P3 could've been AGP2, or had 64MB of RAM. Either one could do it. The GF3 could run at insane speeds. The CPU can't feed it fast enough in almost all cases. There's a 3D benchmarker for macs that actuyally shows how much faster your throughput is when using Altivek vs CPU vs FPU. I think it was OpenGL 1.2.1 what was Altivek enabled. It ran about 15FPS faster in every game w/OpenGL. I love OpenGL it's my favorite.
 
Get a life



OK! So you are comparing the top Apple CPU with the low end PC CPU and you are happy that the MAC wins? A dual P3 in the world of PC games is a single P3 until uncle Bill gives to the people multiprocessor capable Windows. Until then I CAN ALSO TELL you for sure that a 733MHZ G4 with a GForce 3 delivers more fps than a 486 with an S3! 😛PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP. Stop posting these stupid and totaly unreliable "tests" and even make conclusions out of them!
 
P3 low-end?

That is hilarious that you are considering the P3 to be a low-end CPU. It is the best thing that Intel has. Plus, I would assume that Graeme is using a version of Windows that has MP support (otherwise I see no reason for him to mention it, plus all Windows developers seem to use Win2K). I know that an Athlon would have been nice to see but I hope you aren't thinking about using a P4 instead of a P3. It wouldn't be much better and it is evident of your lack of intelligence if you own one. Graeme is supposed to be a smart guy so I doubt he would want some crap CPU.

Anyone else wonder why half the people on Mac message boards are PC trolls? I never understood what they are trying to prove. Perhaps that is just because they never succeeded.

~/indigo
 
YES INDIGO, SHOW US THE RIGHT WAY!



OK Indigo:

a) Go to a Computer store and ask about CPUs... The lowest priced and clock CPU today is the P3 in 800MHZ. Forget the Celerons. THIS MAKES IT LOW END.
b) Technicaly speaking, except for the far largest pipelile the P4 trash the G4. 133 MHZ Bus in 2001 is pathetic. My 4 year P2 in 350MHZ has a 100 MHZ bus.
c) If the G4 had 256 cache like the new 733G4 it would be eliminated by even a 1GHZ P3. I think that it is mentioned in this site that the cacheless 733 is slowest than the old 533 G4. QUESTION: TAKE 733(without L3)=533. IS the 533 G4 fastest than a 2 GHZ PENTIUM 4 ???????????? THEN THE 256 2nd level cache 733 MHZ is slowest too......
d) THERE IS NO WINDOWS VERSION THAT SUPORTS MULTIPROSSECING FOR ANYTHING BUT SERVER PURPOSES!!!!!
Put 786593455893597357 P3 or P4 and the Windows will only use one no matter which games you play. MAC OSystems until version 9 were also not supporting multiproccesing so a DUAL G4 with OS 9 has some limited functioning for the second processor in very few PROFFESIONAL applications. FORGET GAMES.
e) Instead of most of you MAC obsesed snobers, I the "PC troll" am open minded and can see the advantages and dissadvantages of both platforms. Thats why I plan to buy a G4 or G5 for music production.
f) Indigo come in terms with the fact that people using a different system from you are not inferior. You can clame that you are different but not more clever.
g) IF MAC WAS THE PERFECT PERSONAL COMPUTER IN BOTH SPEED, OS AND APPLICATIONS IT WOULDN'T HOLD A PATHETIC 3% MARKET SHARE WORLDWIDE!

GREETINGS....
 
Re: YES INDIGO, SHOW US THE RIGHT WAY!

The reason to this is simple. It's because of Apples license strategies. Apple is the only company on earth that is allowed to make macs and they have always had the problem of not being able to deliver according to demand. Back when Apple allowed other companies to develop macintosh computers, the clones were popping up like crazy, and with their cheap prizes they almost put Apple out of buziness. If Apple would have allowed other companies to make and sell macintosh from the start and focused themselfes on applications and their OS, I'm sure Windows computers would hardly even excist today. At least they would not be what they are. Remember that Apple was the first company that started making an object based OS.

g) IF MAC WAS THE PERFECT PERSONAL COMPUTER IN BOTH SPEED, OS AND APPLICATIONS IT WOULDN'T HOLD A PATHETIC 3% MARKET SHARE WORLDWIDE!

GREETINGS....
[/B][/QUOTE]
 
re:



OK .. Apple did some mistakes but it's marketing strategy the final years is correct. It's main purpose is to try to make people switch from PC to MAC platforms or even inform them that something else other than Windows exists. Slogans like: "think different", the creation of iMAC, TV commercials, and the appearance of MACs in about 50% of Holywwod productions are all very clever Apple moves, in my opinion.
However since its market share is still very tragically low, I believe that something in the product itself goes wrong. Take individual PC companies with comperable priced products with that of Apple. Dell, IBM, Compaq all sell the same thing (more or less) but each one sells more than Apple.
I am sure that MACs are great computers for many uses, but secondary things like limited software (official and cracked one), limited hardware, expensive components, Jobs"we make the best computers in the world" snobism and lies keep Apple's market share low. Moreover the high end PowerMACs are in my oppinion overprized for what they offer.

(NOTE HERE: Intel also has told many lies.. One of its greatest is this: Do you remember the 486 CPU. It was devided in 486DX and 486SX and their difference was that the latter lacked the math co-processor part. Intel sold 487 chips as co-processors for SX systems but they finaly turned out to be 486DX CPUS!!!)

Finaly it is not an excuse for Apple that it can't meet the demand-deliver in time. It shoud either buy the semiconductor part of Motorola or make a deal with IBM in order to get the PowerPC chips on time!


 
You cant' compare a dual p3 800 with a DP G4800. First of all, the price difference is insane...I could build a Dual 1.6 Palamino System with a 1gig of PC2100 DDR Ram, mobo, and everything for 1000 dollars less than a DPG4800, and trust me, it would smash 90fps.
 
Ah, sweet ignorance...

I have to say that as I long time windows based gamer I find this thread bizarre.

30fps on a pentium 3(even WITHOUT a dual) with a geforce 3? That's not right. You should be expecting at least about 60. It's really the Geforce doing all the work, the CPU isn't that big a factor, as long as it's "enough" to keep the data up. (To my understanding anyway.)

I also have to agree with the guy using an Athlon 800. I have an Athlon 1.1 and would expect at LEAST 50 frames a second, not 30. And I only have a Geforce 2 MX. (I have not yet tried it, because it doesn't that much interest me.)

Putting the comparison of an 800mhz P3 is bizarre. It's not exactly cutting edge. Try putting 2 x 1.2gig athlons in there and see how you go.

And I totally agree with the last post. Price for performance wise a G4 dual 800 is not exactly a bargain games machine. Gimme Athlons any day.
 
Re: Ah, sweet ignorance...

He could have written in a little wait in the code so that both systems would get lower fps to make a better comparison with lower fps. And also, the processor is also doing ALOT of work. I once put a Voodoo-2 in a 200Mhz 603e, and compared that to a G4 with the same card. The fps was about 40 fps higher on the G4. The difference was even clearer in a game such as UT which is putting ALOT of work on the processor.
To sume it all together, Windows systems make me sick 🙂

Originally posted by whitegold
I have to say that as I long time windows based gamer I find this thread bizarre.

30fps on a pentium 3(even WITHOUT a dual) with a geforce 3? That's not right. You should be expecting at least about 60. It's really the Geforce doing all the work, the CPU isn't that big a factor, as long as it's "enough" to keep the data up. (To my understanding anyway.)

I also have to agree with the guy using an Athlon 800. I have an Athlon 1.1 and would expect at LEAST 50 frames a second, not 30. And I only have a Geforce 2 MX. (I have not yet tried it, because it doesn't that much interest me.)

Putting the comparison of an 800mhz P3 is bizarre. It's not exactly cutting edge. Try putting 2 x 1.2gig athlons in there and see how you go.

And I totally agree with the last post. Price for performance wise a G4 dual 800 is not exactly a bargain games machine. Gimme Athlons any day.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Ah, sweet ignorance...

Why bizarre... have you got any better idea to prove the Mhz-myth? You will have to look at his motive here to understand why he compared those two systems. Why oh why do we have all these PC-people here, I'm trying to keep my lunch down and you are making it hard for me to do so.

Originally posted by whitegold
Putting the comparison of an 800mhz P3 is bizarre. It's not exactly cutting edge. Try putting 2 x 1.2gig athlons in there and see how you go.
[/B]
Click to expand...
 
Yes you can, hmm... what's that smell... oh no, it's another PC-head on fire! Turn of that brain, it can't use more than 10 brain cells at once!
I don't care about your piece of crap smashing anything, it's using windows, it's dangerous for the environment, and your head!

Originally posted by beav
You cant' compare a dual p3 800 with a DP G4800. First of all, the price difference is insane...I could build a Dual 1.6 Palamino System with a 1gig of PC2100 DDR Ram, mobo, and everything for 1000 dollars less than a DPG4800, and trust me, it would smash 90fps.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the response...

Ah, the informed intellegent discussion I expect from mac people... sigh...

In todays computers, where the code is so heavily optimized for "hardware texture and lighting" (T&L, to save me typing) the drain on the CPU is much lower. I'm not saying that it's not relevant, I'm saying that it's less of a factor than it used to be.

I've seen machines with vastly different CPUs (Pentium 3 600 and my Athlon 1.1gig) get almost identical 3DMark scores, due to their identical T&L video cards. This is particularly so on older, less detailed games, so may not be accurate to wolfenstein here.

Your Voodoo2 didn't have T&L I'm guessing? Hmmm... So that's... hmmm... not in any way relevant?

Anyway, my post was mostly to back up the guy above me.

I'm not going to bother arguing further. (unless I decide to lately). I'm glad mac people are happy with their systems, and I hope you have fun on all four games that are available.

And what's with the "windows is crap" thing? Deal with it people! Translucent plastic buttons is not everything in an OS. Stop treating PCs like they're the enemy. I use windows all day ever day. I rarely have any problems with it. I've found it very stable unless you get weird on it, and really don't get what you people are bitching about.

Or could it be... gasp! Maybe you don't know what you're talking about?! Nooooo... that couldn't be it...
 
Re: Thanks for the response...

Hypocrite is what you are. "Stop treating PCs like they're the enemy". Well mr.whitegold, I have never ever met any PC-head which have not spoken badly about Macintosh, this is even if they haven't tried them! If you read your own post you'll see that your post is so full of conflict-seeking that it's absurd.
And also, I don't know everything about computers, far from. But I program for a living so I should know a tiny bit about computers.

"Translucent plastic buttons is not everything in an OS."
I agree, I want a system that I can rely on. Windows is so far from this that it's really no idea to bother.

"I use windows all day ever day. I rarely have any problems with it. I've found it very stable unless you get weird on it, and really don't get what you people are bitching about."
Well, I've had and know what I'm bitching about.

"Or could it be... gasp! Maybe you don't know what you're talking about?! Nooooo... that couldn't be it..."
Ah, screw this, I have no strength left dealing with this idiot. Get out of this forum, you d**khead.

Originally posted by whitegold
Ah, the informed intellegent discussion I expect from mac people... sigh...

In todays computers, where the code is so heavily optimized for "hardware texture and lighting" (T&L, to save me typing) the drain on the CPU is much lower. I'm not saying that it's not relevant, I'm saying that it's less of a factor than it used to be.

I've seen machines with vastly different CPUs (Pentium 3 600 and my Athlon 1.1gig) get almost identical 3DMark scores, due to their identical T&L video cards. This is particularly so on older, less detailed games, so may not be accurate to wolfenstein here.

Your Voodoo2 didn't have T&L I'm guessing? Hmmm... So that's... hmmm... not in any way relevant?

Anyway, my post was mostly to back up the guy above me.

I'm not going to bother arguing further. (unless I decide to lately). I'm glad mac people are happy with their systems, and I hope you have fun on all four games that are available.

And what's with the "windows is crap" thing? Deal with it people! Translucent plastic buttons is not everything in an OS. Stop treating PCs like they're the enemy. I use windows all day ever day. I rarely have any problems with it. I've found it very stable unless you get weird on it, and really don't get what you people are bitching about.

Or could it be... gasp! Maybe you don't know what you're talking about?! Nooooo... that couldn't be it...
Click to expand...
 
You're right, and my apologies. My last post was not all that concilatory.

I still stand by what I said, in so much as my experience with windows has been almost solely positive. Much of my response was based on YOUR abrasive tone.

Still. I will reiterate in a neutral tone the point I intended to make.

1. 30fps on that hardware seems too low to be a viable benchmark, and should be looked at with some question, not praised as some sort of evidence.

2. I wanted to support the few Wintel people here game to risk the flames and post their own experiences and opinions on games.

3. I wanted to bring up the fact that modern graphics cards use advanced texture and lighting features that mean the CPU is far less relevant than the good old days.

4. To join my voice to the people saying that old hardware compared to new hardware is possibly not the best benchmarking system.

While I made some derogatory remarks about Macs, regarding gaming, I only made those after you called me an idiot for using a PC. I'm still going to claim the high moral ground here.

I've also never been one of those Mac bashers. I only visited this site because I'm genuinely interested in what's happening in Appleland, and like to keep informed. I believe Macs are a good computer. I just don't believe they're as good as they're claimed to be by mac users, nor do I think that windows is as bad as claimed. I also have to point out that in my experience windows users are far less critical of Macs than Mac users are of PCs.

We don't care. We don't have to care. We don't have to defend ourselves, our little market share, our high cost.

I hoped to come here for an interesting informed adult discussion free from zealot fools with their McArrogance in full steam.

I should have known I'd have a snowman's chance in hell.
 
Re: Thanks for the response...

Originally posted by whitegold
And what's with the "windows is crap" thing? Deal with it people! Translucent plastic buttons is not everything in an OS. Stop treating PCs like they're the enemy.
Click to expand...

If "translucent plastic buttons" are not everything, then why is Windows attempting to put them into XP? Or is that just another "windows innovation" ?
 
There aren't any there

Actually, there's no translucent plastic buttons on XP.

Some of the default buttons are slightly more rounded, and have a different overall look, if that's what you mean.

Also the start button is green and rounded. Doesn't look very plastic, though. To be honest, it looks stupid. Sadly you can't change it in the color settings either.

My comments were not intended to refer to specifics of design, more the overall attitude that aesthetics are not all important. Don't get me wrong, they are important. One reason I like XP is that the interface looks much better (than old windows).

I've heard a lot of people say that XP is a ripoff of OSX. I don't really see it.

Though that dock looks familiar somehow. Another Mac innovation 🙂

There's give and take in any design. Apple stole off Xerox, Microsoft stole off Apple... Microsoft stole off Linux, Microsoft stole off netscape, Microsoft stole off everyone. Linux... didn't steal off anyone, but probably should have... 🙂

Anyway, apple has certainly "adopted" PC technologies and concepts. This will always happen. It's a good and healthy thing. If you see an idea that works adapt it and make it better. For example, while the dock is obviously a ripoff of the taskbar, it's much more functional, and looks far cooler.

 
Re: There aren't any there

Originally posted by whitegold
I've heard a lot of people say that XP is a ripoff of OSX. I don't really see it.

There's give and take in any design. Apple stole off Xerox, Microsoft stole off Apple... Microsoft stole off Linux, Microsoft stole off netscape, Microsoft stole off everyone. Linux... didn't steal off anyone, but probably should have... 🙂
Click to expand...

Just to clarify :

Rumor has it that the Macintosh development team visited the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) at Xerox. While there, they saw a demonstration of a graphical user interface that was later copied to develop the Mac OS. Is this true?

Hardly. While members of the team did visit PARC, the Apple graphical interface project was well under way before the "famed" visit by Steve Jobs. Members of the early Mac team have gone on record noting that Jobs was taken to PARC so that he could gain a better sense of the concepts that the team was working on regarding the interface. Many of the elements that we associate with the Mac GUI, like drag and drop manipulation of files, the Finder, and types and creators were and are unique to the Mac development team.

From- http://macos.about.com/library/weekly/aa062899.htm

Some other reading for the boards enjoyment:

http://www.best.com/~mxmora/JefRaskin.html
--an article on the history of the macintosh

whitegold I am not trying to start a war here, I just wanted to state that although XP does indeed look good, some of it's design elements are noticably mac-like.


[Edited by akuma on 10-04-2001 at 01:52 PM]
 
Re: There aren't any there

Originally posted by whitegold
Anyway, apple has certainly "adopted" PC technologies and concepts. This will always happen. It's a good and healthy thing.
Click to expand...

How about the windows world adopting Firewire (an apple technology)?

"Adoption" goes both ways, ya know 😉
 
Re: Get a life

no MP windows? what do you think XP pro, Win2000 ad NT all are?

Originally posted by fragiledreams


OK! So you are comparing the top Apple CPU with the low end PC CPU and you are happy that the MAC wins? A dual P3 in the world of PC games is a single P3 until uncle Bill gives to the people multiprocessor capable Windows. Until then I CAN ALSO TELL you for sure that a 733MHZ G4 with a GForce 3 delivers more fps than a 486 with an S3! 😛PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP. Stop posting these stupid and totaly unreliable "tests" and even make conclusions out of them!
Click to expand...
 
Re: 800Mhz What!?

dual processor PC doesn;t need to processes to utilise both processors. Run photoshop, after effects or maya on a MP pC and look at the task manager. Most games aren't made to take advantage of the second CPU.

Originally posted by MasterX (OSiX)
Someone said their Athlon got better than the dual 800P3. Duhh, OK, i'l try to be nice. Mhz myth, cache structure, Ram type. Most Athlon systems beat P3 systems because of one of more of these. Windows has multi-tasking less advanced than OSX (ok a lot less) but still more than OS9. But besides for special Apps (Photoshop) a Dual-PC needs 2 tasks at once to fulfil both processors. Thus the test FPS of 30 is the same of a single 800-Mhz PC. And as for your GeForce2, keep in mind until OSX 10.1 there was no dedicated GF3 acceleration, so if the dual-800 was on a 10.0.4 build, the GF3 would've acted like a 64MB MX +20% or so, plus another 20% for 10.1's faster OpenGL.

Now what I wanna know is will Apple be cool and spring FSAA out onto the OpenGL drivers finally. I want FSAA damn it! 3Dfx was soo cool for completly re-writing all the FSAA code for Glide so It'd actually run on a mac VooDoo5. Apple still hasn't added that (or truform, see Ati.com) to the OGL libraries. The sad thing is that DirectX 8, OpenGL, and APPLE graphics card support FSAA. A friend once said "Ever wounder why your Mac crashes so much? ATi can't program drivers." No kidding...
Click to expand...
 
Re: There aren't any there

if any one has XP and has the silver colour scheme go to apple.com and you'll see an instant similarity with teh shiny grey bars...however there is no translucent buttons.

Yup the dock looks suspiciously like a Windows task bar. = mac copies ms

The new file viewing system of OSX is very PC like also. = mac copies ms

XP desktop burning = ms copies mac

funky interface = ms copies mac

new half arsed task manager in OSX = mac copies ms

desktop publishing = ms copies mac

desktop video = ms copies mac

But the mac had the CD ROM first so windows stole that?....

rip mix burn = apple virtually claims they invented mp3's, burning, and CDDB. these were all on pc first.

see they are both at fault. if you really want to get picky ... windows had the DVD and DivX first so are macs are just copycats?

intel new marketing...center of your digital world
apple...the digital hub

so who's the center of it all apple or intel? (apple had the slogan 1st however)





Originally posted by whitegold
Actually, there's no translucent plastic buttons on XP.

Some of the default buttons are slightly more rounded, and have a different overall look, if that's what you mean.

Also the start button is green and rounded. Doesn't look very plastic, though. To be honest, it looks stupid. Sadly you can't change it in the color settings either.

My comments were not intended to refer to specifics of design, more the overall attitude that aesthetics are not all important. Don't get me wrong, they are important. One reason I like XP is that the interface looks much better (than old windows).

I've heard a lot of people say that XP is a ripoff of OSX. I don't really see it.

Though that dock looks familiar somehow. Another Mac innovation 🙂

There's give and take in any design. Apple stole off Xerox, Microsoft stole off Apple... Microsoft stole off Linux, Microsoft stole off netscape, Microsoft stole off everyone. Linux... didn't steal off anyone, but probably should have... 🙂

Anyway, apple has certainly "adopted" PC technologies and concepts. This will always happen. It's a good and healthy thing. If you see an idea that works adapt it and make it better. For example, while the dock is obviously a ripoff of the taskbar, it's much more functional, and looks far cooler.
Click to expand...
 
add firewire to that list of technology apple has made 'cool' that pc's have jumped on the bandwagon.

usb was first on the pc but apple made it popular by 'forcing' people to adopt it over ****** parellel and serial ports.
 
Re: Re: There aren't any there

Originally posted by nudge

Yup the dock looks suspiciously like a Windows task bar. = mac copies ms
Click to expand...


Actually, didn't NeXT have the dock even before the Windows Taskbar?

So therefore

ms copies NeXT

--
Akuma
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back