Benchmarking with UT2004 Demo?

[splenda20]

Does anyone know if/how to benchmark with UT2004 Demo? Are there differences between the UT2003 engine and 2004?

 

[Vimp]

I don't think any of the UT games is a good game to use as a benchmark personally. My Geforce2 GTS plays each on its highest settings without a problem. That includes UT2004 demo which I play at full settings and with 32bots and only occasionally noticed a very minor slow down.

<font color=blue>_____________________________________</font color=blue>
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Asus A7N8X-X, Athelon XP 2500+ Barton,
Samsung 512mb DDR400, Creative Geforce2 GTS,
SoundBlaster Live! Value.

 

[compn00b]

i think that must be inaccurate vimp, probably at 640x480

 

[pauldh]

Good question. There is not benchmark in the system folder like ut2003. You can bring up the console and type "stat fps" to see your framerates while you play. Framerates seem incredibly high, but as with ut2003 I am sure it will become a benchmarked game.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

 

[hogfather]

Perhaps when the game is released, but as it stand I see little point in it - texture detail is only 50% of the real game's details, and it really isnt much different from UT2003

XP2000, 256ddr 2100ram, GF4 MX440, XP Pro

 

[Vimp]

Compnoob, I never play any games in 640x480. I play UT03 and the UT04 demo in 800x640 with 32bit color in full screen mode with all graphical settings on maximum. I havn't checked my fps in UT04 but in UT03, the full game not the demo, I play on same res and color depth and put it on maximum settings and I average 30fps and occasionally get a low of 20fps which is still fairly smooth and very playable. In UT04 demo I havn't checcked my fps yet but I'm betting I get an even higher average fps since its maximum settings arn't as high as UT03's full game settings.

<font color=blue>_____________________________________</font color=blue>
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Asus A7N8X-X, Athelon XP 2500+ Barton,
Samsung 512mb DDR400, Creative Geforce2 GTS,
SoundBlaster Live! Value.

 

[tombance]

I think your idea of playable is different to mine. My LCD has a native resolution of 1280x1024 so I like to play at that and I need fps to be above about 50, so I set the details accordingly.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7454540" target="_new">Yay, I Finally broke the 12k barrier!!</A>

 

[pauldh]

UT2004 demo will give you the same fps as UT2003 I bet. Very high, compared to many games out there. Yes, the full version may be different, but the demo still looks good. I haven't had much gaming time this week, and I have just been playing that demo at 1024x768 max with 2X/8X for now, but the average fps is near 100 on a R9800 Pro.

I'd drop the max settings if I were averaging 30fps and dropping to 20fps. Everyones different, but I hate seeing ANY hesitation and do not find sub 30 fps enjoyable at all. I'd rather lose a little details and average 40-50fps, minimizing the chances of the lows dropping into the 20's. Just MO

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

 

[hogfather]

How do I fix the impossible to read menus? Its all very blurry.

XP2000, 256ddr 2100ram, GF4 MX440, XP Pro

 

[Vapor]

They're always blurry...cranking up antialiasing might help, but doubtful. Cranking resolutions do nothing, I run at 1600x1200 and it's still nasty looking. I'd imagine the full version will have cleaner looking menus.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.

 

[ecar016]

while I admit, I'm not a huge fan of unreal T. but My 9800pro on a P4 3.0 runs full settings at 1280x1024 on a sony 19" LCD.......looks really nice, no lag but I find the game play a bit repetitive and boring.

EC


<font color=red> Quantum Computers! - very interesting </font color=red>

 

[GeneticWeapon]

Here's how to benchmark the UT2K4 demo.
First, download <A HREF="http://webpages.charter.net/smithcm/ut2004/ut2004_benchmarks.zip" target="_new">this</A> file, and unzip it to your C:/UT2004/Benchmark folder. Let it overwrite files as necessary.
After you've unzipped it, look in C:/UT2004/Benchmark and you will see a strange looking folder that say's "Benchmark all". Double clicking that will launch the benchmark.
<b>YOU MUST GO INTO THE GAME BEFORE YOU BENCHMARK AND TURN ALL OF THE SETTING TO THEIR HIGHEST DETAILS, OTHERWISE YOU WILL NOT GET AN ACCURATE MEASUREMENT TO COMPARE TO OTHERS WITH!</b>
After your benchmark is completed, go back into the UT004/Benchmark folder, and click on the file named "lowframerate.log" and your score's will be displayed there. Average fps will be the ones in the middle. Here's mine, Max detail, No AA or AF.

dm-rankin
25.548897 / <b>54.555683</b> / 95.445442 fps
Score = 54.622540

as-convoy
15.814389 / <b>34.990032</b> / 65.241776 fps
Score = 35.033905

ons-torlan
2.629423 / <b>201.842697</b> / 1.#INF00 fps
Score = 199.440979

br-colossus
4.729132 / <b>225.159164</b> / 1.#INF00 fps
Score = 222.043503

dm-rankin
28.960491 / <b>60.448544</b> / 137.681412 fps
Score = 60.537834

as-convoy
16.041159 / <b>36.186356</b> / 67.503639 fps
Score = 36.233978

ons-torlan
11.744162 / <b>57.242756</b> / 96.670418 fps
Score = 57.324745

br-colossus
21.663151 / <b>83.901756</b> / 171.865173 fps
Score = 83.979309

ctf-bridgeoffate
25.329420 / <b>83.517838</b> / 204.422638 fps
Score = 83.646950

This benchmark is EXTREMELY CPU/Memory dependent, so having a fast, all around system will produce the best scores. My XP2100+/DDR266 combo is obviously choking my score. The "flyby" benchmarks <b>do not</b> work as of yet, I'm sure someone will fix them before too long.
Let's see your scores you numbnuts!

<A HREF="http://rmitz.org/AYB3.swf" target="_new">All your base are belong to us.</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1819095" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[GeneticWeapon]

bump

<A HREF="http://rmitz.org/AYB3.swf" target="_new">All your base are belong to us.</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1819095" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[Vimp]

I unzipped the file you linked to the folder you specified and it did not create any folder or anything else called "Benchmark all".

<font color=blue>_____________________________________</font color=blue>
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Asus A7N8X-X, Athelon XP 2500+ Barton,
Samsung 512mb DDR400, Creative Geforce2 GTS,
SoundBlaster Live! Value.

 

[GeneticWeapon]

Unzip to C/UT004/Benchmark
Open folder, and you'll see this.
<A HREF="http://downloads.garyandnicole.net/ut04.jpg" target="_new">http://downloads.garyandnicole.net/ut04.jpg</A>

<A HREF="http://rmitz.org/AYB3.swf" target="_new">All your base are belong to us.</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1819095" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[mrface]

great link in sig GW, could you post the UT2k4 dl link again?

<A HREF="http://www.cameronwilliamson.com" target="_new">-={Apostalic Alcoholic.}=-</A>

 

[GeneticWeapon]

<A HREF="http://webpages.charter.net/smithcm/ut2004/ut2004_benchmarks.zip" target="_new">http://webpages.charter.net/smithcm/ut2004/ut2004_benchmarks.zip</A>
That link works for me?!?

great link in sig GW

Thanks!...I really like it too

<A HREF="http://rmitz.org/AYB3.swf" target="_new">All your base are belong to us.</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1819095" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[pauldh]

What resolution did you run it at? 1024x768x32? Can you also post a screen of your settings menu from within the game. This will help show people what you mean by settings at max. Should be obvious I know, but for anyone in doubt it might help. I used highest settings on all, everything checked, and fog distance set all the way up.

Somethings wrong, I am getting the almost same results with AA/AF off or with the ATI slider set to max quality, which is 4X/16X?


1024x768x32 no AA/AF

dm-rankin
30.062040 / 70.282944 / 192.380600 fps
Score = 70.358009

as-convoy
14.930321 / 44.932476 / 84.745888 fps
Score = 44.991669

ons-torlan
6.957833 / 64.156303 / 117.808990 fps
Score = 64.240959

br-colossus
24.886301 / 107.991692 / 208.418457 fps
Score = 108.109894

ctf-bridgeoffate
28.890591 / 104.660042 / 248.193710 fps
Score = 104.827507


1024x768x32 4x/16X ATI max quality (!?)

dm-rankin
35.408875 / 70.058174 / 184.391357 fps
Score = 70.138687

as-convoy
17.860136 / 45.416901 / 84.665215 fps
Score = 45.475441

ons-torlan
6.827567 / 64.167023 / 120.507362 fps
Score = 64.252831

br-colossus
24.887451 / 108.108398 / 200.239655 fps
Score = 108.217705

ctf-bridgeoffate
28.999302 / 105.056747 / 248.095581 fps
Score = 105.227722




ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

 

[mrface]

i actually meant the game demo link. thanx for the other though

<A HREF="http://www.cameronwilliamson.com" target="_new">-={Apostalic Alcoholic.}=-</A>

 

[GeneticWeapon]

What resolution did you run it at? 1024x768x32?

Actually I was running at 1280/1024, so I need to rebenchmark

Can you also post a screen of your settings menu from within the game. This will help show people what you mean by settings at max.

<A HREF="http://downloads.garyandnicole.net/UT2004 2004-02-16 17-19-14-74.jpg" target="_new">Here</A> is max detail.

<A HREF="http://rmitz.org/AYB3.swf" target="_new">All your base are belong to us.</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1819095" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[pauldh]

Thanks, now no one has an excuse for posting results from the wrong settings. Oddly, I get almost identical results at 800x600, 1024x768, and 1280x1024. 3 out of 5 were higher at 1280 than 1024. Can't figure these results out. I was pretty excited that you posted instructions for this. But my results don't seem to make sense.

1280x1024x32 no AA/AF
dm-rankin
35.626358 / 77.332207 / 166.692062 fps
Score = 77.430565

as-convoy
14.373200 / 47.296135 / 83.839737 fps
Score = 47.356777

ons-torlan
11.027723 / 69.463448 / 128.429260 fps
Score = 69.562134

br-colossus
19.614182 / 100.493759 / 208.293518 fps
Score = 100.578934

ctf-bridgeoffate
31.142088 / 103.571053 / 206.643982 fps
Score = 103.734810


ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

 

[Vimp]

I find it very odd that you think 30fps is not playable. Quite honestly I can not see a differencee between 30fps and 100fps. When it goes to 20fps the occasional time, I can see a difference, but that difference is minor and the game is still very playable. I'm sure I would see a very slight difference between 30fps and 100fps if I were to study the screen while the fps switchs from one to the other but considering how slight that difference is I can't believe anyone on earth would find 30fps in UT04 to be unplayable or even the least bit hindering for that matter.

<font color=blue>_____________________________________</font color=blue>
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Asus A7N8X-X, Athelon XP 2500+ Barton,
Samsung 512mb DDR400, Creative Geforce2 GTS,
SoundBlaster Live! Value.

 

[pauldh]

The problem is, an AVERAGE of 30fps is very different than a low of 30fps. A low of 30fps isn't bad, but if you average 30, that means for all the indoor tight spots where you are alone and getting 40+ fps, there are open outdoor areas with other players where you are getting half that much. I'm more concerned with minimum than average, but I just feel the average has to be 40+ to keep the minimum playable.

I can say any system I have benchmarked with fraps that average 30fps in a game, is full of hesitation and visual slowdowns. Maybe I am just picky, but I prefer much higher than 30fps. You can not claim a game runs SMOOTH if you average 30fps. And I like em' smooth.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

 

[pauldh]

I have to agree with you. I like to see my average fps being at least 50-60 fps, or better yet 70 or more. I just feel that when I have played games that don't seem to be running smooth, and then enable fraps or in game fps counters, when it mostly sits in the 40's or below , it can be seen by the eye. Especially when the lows drop to below 30.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

 

[Vimp]

I'd have to disagree with you on this. The map I play most and the one I used fraps on is the huge outdoor Onslaught map with 31 bots playing. I used FRAPS to benchmark well over 1000 frames of regular playing and my average was 33.7fps with a min of 27fps and a max of 47fps. The game ran very smooth with no slow downs at all. I would dare anyone that is able to watch me play to notice thee slightest slow down or hesitation at all. So far in the many many hours I've been playing the demo on maximum settings at 800x640 res I have only taken notice of one slow down that lasted about 1-1.5 seconds and that was when a huge number of bots all happened to be in close proximity to me in a huge fire fight. It still didn't effect my game though snce it was such a brief slow down.

<font color=blue>_____________________________________</font color=blue>
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Asus A7N8X-X, Athelon XP 2500+ Barton,
Samsung 512mb DDR400, Creative Geforce2 GTS,
SoundBlaster Live! Value.