PDA

View Full Version : amd optimized quake3 dll's


jAkUp
09-09-03, 01:24 PM
from bluesnews...

"The Athlon Optimized Programs Page features downloads of DLLs said to improve the performance of Quake III Arena, among other apps, on AMD hardware. They have posted new Athlon XP DLLs, saying: "Note to people who think these DLLs are "unfair" in benchmarks. This is horribly incorrect. Quake3 (even with an Athlon XP) forces AMD chips to use 3DNow, not SSE. Little do people know the 3DNow! code is completely broken in Quake3. It does not help at ALL. The Pentium 3 and 4 chips however are both detected as "Pentium 3" chips, which automatically uses SSE which DOES work in Quake3 and gives a significant FPS boost. These DLLs don't enable SSE but do help with Athlons.. and if SSE was to ever be enabled in Quake3 for Athlon processors they would blow Pentium 4 chips out of the water even more. In the tests I ran a P4-2.53 @ 3.32GHz, 175/700fsb lost to a "stock" Athlon XP 2700+(2166MHz, 166fsb) using these dlls..."

i havent tested it.. cuz.. well.. i have a p4:D but im curious as to whether these really work...
download here:

http://speedycpu.dyndns.org/opt/

digitalwanderer
09-09-03, 01:29 PM
I almost blew past this post since I keep spacing I got an AMD now. :rolleyes: :lol:

I'm off to investigate. If these work on all Q3 engines rather than just arena I will be CRANKED! :D

Nutty
09-10-03, 04:34 AM
I'm off to investigate. If these work on all Q3 engines rather than just arena I will be CRANKED!

Now theres a thought! I'm a bit peeved that all this time ppl have been thinking P4's are better at the Q3 engine... Stuff like this that undermines AMD's ability. AMD forever!!

saturnotaku
09-10-03, 08:07 AM
Originally posted by digitalwanderer
I'm off to investigate. If these work on all Q3 engines rather than just arena I will be CRANKED! :D

From the FAQ:

Q: Will the Quake3 dlls work with Return to Castle Wolfenstein?

A: No. They will only work with Quake3 v1.27-1.31. I am in the process of making some RTCW optimized dlls though.

That's too bad really that the .dlls only work for Q3 right now. Hopefully he'll work on other games like SoF II and Jedi Knight.

saturnotaku
09-10-03, 08:55 AM
I just ran a quick initial test before heading off to work. On the system listed below, I ran the demo that comes with version 1.32 at 1280x1024, no FSAA or aniso, all details maxed.

Before the .dlls I got a little over 226 fps, after the score went up to 234. Not a big gain, but it's an improvement nonetheless. Perhaps I'll see a bigger difference when AA and aniso is cranked up.

Nutty
09-10-03, 09:06 AM
Surely you'll see a bigger gain when the cpu is the determining factor, i.e. when AA and AF is off, and using minimum resolution. Then cpu improvements yield greater performance.


Try 640x480 with all details minimum.

saturnotaku
09-10-03, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by Nutty
Surely you'll see a bigger gain when the cpu is the determining factor, i.e. when AA and AF is off, and using minimum resolution. Then cpu improvements yield greater performance.


Try 640x480 with all details minimum.

I'm not going to argue the validity of that statement. I ain't thinking straight right now as I'm pretty sure I have some sort of sinus infection. I'm quite sure the performance difference will be rather dramatic at the lower resolution. But I think that really defeats the purpose. Why would I want to run the game at a low resolution and minimum details when I know my computer is capable of much more? I think these .dll files would be of much more benefit to someone operating a lower-class Athlon system with a slower video card where the CPU is more of a bottleneck.

But even at 1280x1024, an 8 fps gain isn't bad at all. :)

The Baron
09-10-03, 11:06 AM
But do they work with Punkbuster?

druga runda
09-10-03, 12:12 PM
Well this is all part of Intel Distortion Field :D... Everyone has one the problem with AMD is that AMD distortion field is so small and that it has to fight on Intels turf again and again... FFS... all those benchmarks get extra optimised for Intel and AMD is lucky if someone really bothers to optimise for their proc... I just hope that the 64 bit adventure doesn't get walked over by Intel as well...

Vash
09-10-03, 12:34 PM
I don't think we're going to have to worry about AMD getting walked on when it comes to the Athlon64. The previews that have been going around on Anandtech and Tomshardware look very good for AMD (we're talking an almost 50% increase in gaming-related scores), and I haven't heard very much about Intel's 64bit desktop CPU solution, other than it's going to be strictly 64bit, and the 32bit code is run under emulation (i.e., much slower).

AMD rules. :cool:

saturnotaku
09-10-03, 12:44 PM
Once 64-bit computing takes off, I think we'll see Intel dominating in the workstation/server market, where exclusive 64-bit software can be run without major worries. But AMD will be for the Joe Consumer/OEM market. I think both companies will do very well if they're able to fill in these niches.