Post your Quake3 benchmark results!!!

[WarmAndSCSI]

Let's see your Q3 benchmark results!!!
I get 107.9 fps with sound at my fav. settings: 1024x768x32 max qual. no tex. compression.
And I get 133 fps without sound! (demo001)

We all know 3DMark sucks, so let's compare Q3 benchmark results!!!

highly detailed results can be found at IONWD2's Q3 Benchmarks

*Yes, my computer's name is IONWD2. It's part of a business VPN.

 

[AmdEmAll]

I have patch 1.17 for Q3 and I can't get the timedemos to work anymore. I try timedemo 1, then demo demo001 and it doesnt work. How do I get it to work ??

 

[WarmAndSCSI]

My 1.17 works fine with it... Version 1.27 needs a patch to get the demos to work. I believe you have 1.27. 1.27 is MUCH slower, also!!

 

[bjc112]

well with my Gf 2 MX.. i get 74 .. with no sound 84..not bad for an MX

 

[kormaster]

where do you guys get the demo???

 

[Renob]

Unhappy your Ultra Wont beat my G-3 not even close. Im getting 149fps using your settings with sound on.

 

[bjc112]

Ouch!

 

[AmdEmAll]

oops I ment 1.27. Where do I get the patch?

 

[randomlinh]

in demo127, i get crappy frame rates w/ things turned off... i have to play w/ things turned down at picmic 3 Altho, it makes it a lot easier to see sometimes A few of my friends are picmic 10+ freaks.

 

[WarmAndSCSI]

My little "My GF2 U will beat your GF3" thing is just supporting my opinion-along with 1000's of others'- that GeForce3s suck. Remeber... i have ALL the settings maxed. (plus u have a Tbird o/ced to 1.5(WHOO HOOO))

 

[Wingznut]

unhappy camper, which version (patch) of Q3 are you using?

 

[WarmAndSCSI]

I'm using 1.17 b/c 1.27 doesn't support mods.

 

[Shockwave]

GeForce 3's suck?? Wow, thats a bold (idiotic?) statement......

 

[Wingznut]

Ok, I'll play.

NOTE: All benchmarks were done in High Quality, with the only thing being changed is the resolution.


640x480
Demo 1 = 209.3 fps
Demo 2 = 206.4 fps
Quaver = 185.2 fps
NV 15 = 49.9 fps

800x600
Demo 1 = 204.0 fps
Demo 2 = 203.7 fps
Quaver = 183.2 fps
NV 15 = 50.5 fps

1024x768
Demo 1 = 175.4 fps
Demo 2 = 181.1 fps
Quaver = 165.5 fps
NV 15 = 50.0 fps

1280x1024
Demo 1 = 121.4 fps
Demo 2 = 125.5 fps
Quaver = 118.1 fps
NV 15 = 49.4 fps

1600x1200
Demo 1 = 85.2 fps
Demo 2 = 87.4 fps
Quaver = 84.4 fps
NV 15 = 44.0 fps


So seriously... What's not to like about the GF3?

 

[TunaBoo]

<< Ok, I'll play.

NOTE: All benchmarks were done in High Quality, with the only thing being changed is the resolution.

So seriously... What's not to like about the GF3? >>

'

This kinda important thing called 2D quality.

*Ducks*

 

[TunaBoo]

I think I get 29.93 fps no matter what setting I do.

System -
Tbird 1@1.425 GHz.
EPOX 8k7-a
ATI Rage 128

w00t, I wonder what my bottleneck is.

 

[Wingznut]

Actually the 2d quality is just about as good as my Radeon. It's MUCH better than the GF2. Last upgrade, I picked the Radeon over the GF2, simply because I didn't want to take my chances with crappy 2D quality.

 

[Renob]

Unhappy I ran the test with the SAME video settings as you but left the sound on. BTW why do you think the G-3 sucks, and you have seen 1000's of others post that they think the G-3 sucks You have got to be kidding.. Have you seen what the G-3 can do with software written for Dx8?? You should see the tests in 3dmarks 2001 that are for Dx8 vidcards... You sound a little angry that maybe you should of waited and got a G-3 insted of the Ultra.

 

[Wingznut]

Apparantly you didn't get the news, Renob... &quot;We all know 3DMark sucks&quot;.

 

[Muerto]

640x480x32 => 97.4 fps

1024x768x32 => 64.4 fps

Both done w/o sound. Eh, not bad.

 

[TunaBoo]

<< Unhappy I ran the test with the SAME settings as you. BTW why do you think the G-3 sucks, and you have seen 1000's of others post that they think the G-3 sucks You have got to be kidding.. Have you seen what the G-3 can do with software written for Dx8?? You should see the tests in 3dmarks 2001 that are for Dx8 vidcards... >>



I don't know what the other dude says gf3 sucks. I personally consider NVida as overpriced and can't do anything for me that the competition cannot. I am buying a Kyro2 to support a new technology, and promote competition to the giant.

 

[flood]

0 fps
i dont play q3
cs 0wnz j00 4ll!

 

[Renob]

Wingnutz apparantly you did not read all the posts he said the 1000's said the G-3 suck also I never said that 3dmarks 2001 did not suck I just said that the tests in 3dmarks written for Dx8 cards were something to see they show off the hardware. And Tunaboo I dont care who makes the hardware I just like to have the best.

 

[Wingznut]

Yeah, I read all his posts. And yes, the nature scene is pretty cool. I'm real interested in hearing why a GF2 Ultra is so much better than a GF3.

&quot;My GeForce2 Ultra will beat your GeForce3's butt!!!!&quot;

Hmmm... I've looked quite extensively. And I can't seem to find a &quot;butt&quot; on my video card. Maybe Visiontek didn't include that.

 

[Degenerate]

<< Hmmm... I've looked quite extensively. And I can't seem to find a &quot;butt&quot; on my video card. Maybe Visiontek didn't include that. >>



LOL!!!!!!!!!!!

I get with my crap system (well yeah) P3 600, GF 256 DDR 32mb.

1024X768 => 85.7

By the way what types of textures (i think trilinear and stuff) do people use?