This seems to be a common problem, a slower performance than you'd expect with version 2.0...at least with Linux users.

I'd be interested to see the results!

EDIT: If you're experiencing lower than expected frames per second (If answering YES), post your setup!

My setup, which is experiencing lower than expected frames per second in Nexuiz:

OS: Kubuntu 6.06
CPU: AMD64 3200+
Graphics card: Gigabyte GeForce 6600GT 128MB (500Mhz GPU/1000Mhz MEM)
HDD: Seagate 300GB 7200RPM 8MB cache SATA150
Slow FPS experience still experienced with the LOWEST resolution/detail/extras etc etc...

EDIT: Update - Why of why did the last poll answer disappear?!?!?

What about Yes and I'm running OsX?

I run on both Windows and Linux, no problems.

Athlon XP 2400+, 1Gb RAM, 6600GT 128Mb. I run at 1280x960 on highish settings no problems.

I can run Doom 3 on medium settings OK But this game lags even with low settings,Strange but true.

I must confess I think this poll is rather useless.

What's "slower than expected"?

There can be no doubt that 10-25 fps for e.g. a GeForce 6800 would be "slower than expected". That'd be a definite "yes"

However, some people still seem to think that Nexuiz should run at > 100 fps at all times because it's "just a Quake 1 mod". It is NOT.

So without defining *exactly* what is ment this poll is utterly useless.

At least *describe* your problems if you chose to vote for "yes" (CPU, GFX card, OS, actual numbers). This way we at least have a chance to pull useful information out of this poll.

Thanks alot.

tChr wrote:What about Yes and I'm running OsX?

I'm pretty sure I put it there when I was creating though after I created the poll it was gone! No way to add more options to the poll in the edit function, so I just appending my original message

TehTux wrote:

tChr wrote:What about Yes and I'm running OsX?

I'm pretty sure I put it there when I was creating though after I created the poll it was gone! No way to add more options to the poll in the edit function, so I just appending my original message

Yeah. I know.. tahts a bit stupic with phpBB, you have to ress "add optioin" _after_ you create the option, not just to get the dialogue for it.

Heh, I was expecting a bit more. I tried Darkplaces engine for Quake (The engine Nexuiz utilizes) and without realtime shading (Only shaded when a light, such as a gun comes by) I get around 100 FPS.

I enable shading and it drops to around 15fps.
Fun.

I expect 300 fps.
I only get 100 with all of the settings off.
I want my money back.

Dave wrote:I expect 300 fps.
I only get 100 with all of the settings off.
I want my money back.

!!!

My rig as follows:

AMD X2 4200 Dual Core CPU
1GB DDR 400 RAM
Nvidia 7800 GT 512MB
Windows XP SP2
Sound Blaster Audigy 4 Pro

I have latest drivers for all hardware. I wouldn't say the game is unplayable at max details, but I have to tone down down details somewhat.

Considering my system spec....shouldn't it be silky smooth? Even at 1024x768 with most of the next gen features disabled it's not as smooth as I thought it would be.

Am I missing something?

Cheers.

hard to believe that you get low fps with such a computer, and all effcts turned off... there must be something wrong.

Do you expect to run the game at a constant 300 fps value ?

P4 3.6 GHZ
2 GB RAM
ATI x700 pro 256MB
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS

I except more fps. And I don't think its only because of the player models.
I think Darkplaces is to blame. I used to get more fps in fteglqw engine (last time I tried).

Gregs2k2 wrote:Even at 1024x768 with most of the next gen features disabled it's not as smooth as I thought it would be.

Can you provide numbers?

morfar wrote:P4 3.6 GHZ
I except more fps

Can you provide numbers?

SavageX wrote:

morfar wrote:P4 3.6 GHZ
I except more fps

Can you provide numbers?

Around 50 fps on Silvercity (NO BOTS, NO PLAYERS). Default gfx settings at 800x600.

I allways use latest drivers.
My computer is completly clean from adwares, trojans and viruses (use best-in-test antivirus software and its up-to-date).
Windows XP sp2, plus patches.

Acctually, I don't except to get more fps from a free game, and I can't demand more either. But if this was a comercial game I would excect far more (around 250 fps maybe)

morfar wrote:Around 50 fps on Silvercity (NO BOTS, NO PLAYERS). Default gfx settings at 800x600.

Ah, I see.

I just tried on my rig (Athlon 64 3000+, GeForce 6800 LE (slower than a 6600GT), 1 Gig of RAM) with *7 bots* on default settings (800x600) and it hovers between 50 fps and 70 fps.

Personally I don't expect more frames because I know that this shitty level (hate hate hate) puts some rendering stress onto the GPU. I do agree it doesn't deliver good looks for that speed at all.

Here's a comparison between our gfx cards - on the paper the X700 should be faster.

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php ... &card2=322

Got an older computer (amd800 768mb gefti4400).. and framerate ain't what it could be.
I could play quake 3 with 42-99.
Nexuiz waddles along at no more then 20-50 fps. eeehm? maby its because i can't get fullscreen working i don't know (which sux btw). But 1.0 was also a bit slow
GG thought.

SavageX wrote:

morfar wrote:P4 3.6 GHZ
I except more fps

Can you provide numbers?

Well, still running at 1024x768 with key features turned off I was getting abround 30-50 (maybe lower when the game got hectic). This was with 5 bots on too.

I'm not bitching about it, just surprised that it's the first game that's bought my PC to struggling point!

Hope this helps anyway.

Cheers!

Gregs2k2 wrote:Well, still running at 1024x768 with key features turned off I was getting abround 30-50 (maybe lower when the game got hectic). This was with 5 bots on too.

This is your rig?

AMD X2 4200 Dual Core CPU
1GB DDR 400 RAM
Nvidia 7800 GT 512MB
Windows XP SP2
Sound Blaster Audigy 4 Pro

Now, right - that's what I'd call unexpected framerates...

I think I read that DP may have a dual-core problem and that forcing it to one core would solve those problems... can someone comment if I'm talking bullshit?

It is my rig indeed. I'll try using just one core. See if there's any improvement. I'll get back to you.

Gregs2k2 wrote:It is my rig indeed. I'll try using just one core. See if there's any improvement. I'll get back to you.

Did it work?

Phenax wrote:without realtime shading (Only shaded when a light, such as a gun comes by) I get around 100 FPS. I enable shading and it drops to around 15fps.

Realtime lights and shadows ARE slow. Its a very advanced feature and as long as you do not provide hardware specs i guess its normal for you hardware
Hey Doom3/Quake4 is the only other engine that does realtime light and shadows and it is backed up by millions of dollars. I still think DarkPlaces does a good job and you can turn off those effects. Its rather stupid for online playing anyway in my opinion..

Could people with dualcore problems please take a look at this and report if it does help or anything?
http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=m ... e&sid=3964

Code: Select all

This hotfix also addresses the following issues on computers that have multiple processors that support processor performance states:
• Possible decrease in performance on single-threaded workloads when processor performance states are using demand-based switching

this does sound interesting..

Ok, I've been doing more testing. I've installed Kubuntu 6.06 LTS on my second machine, installed the legacy Nvidia drivers and installed Nexuiz 2.0.

I connected both machines to the Australian server and started testing out FPS. Before I start, I'll give the machine specs:

1st Machine:
OS: Kubuntu 6.06 64bit
CPU: AMD64 3200+ (2000Mhz)
MEMORY: 1GB DDR400 (Geil ram with heat spreaders - memtest OK!)
Graphics card: Gigabyte GeForce 6600GT 128MB (500Mhz GPU/1000Mhz MEM) Using latest Nvidia drivers
HDD: Seagate 300GB 7200RPM 8MB cache SATA150
FPS recorded in glxgears (~$ glxgears -printfps): 4261

2nd Machine:
OS: Kubuntu 6.06 32bit
CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2500+ (1826Mhz overclocked to 1958Mhz)
MEMORY: 3GB DDR333 @ DDR356 (memtest OK!)
Graphics card: GeForce 2 Pro 64MB (using latest Nvidia LEGACY drivers)
HDD: Seagate 60GB 7200RPM 2MB cache ATA100
FPS recorded in glxgears (~$ glxgears -printfps): 1755


So, as you can see, the second machine doesn't have great FPS using glxgears, more than half that of the first machine. Yeah, it's got three times the RAM, but the HDD is old school ATA100 and the CPU is 1 architecture behind, 32bit and minimal 42Mhz slower.

I connected both these machines to the Aussie server, and set both to 640x480, lowest and no effects. The results (the map was runningman.bsp if anyone cares):

Machine 1 (the 3200+ 64bit 6600GT):
Looking at a wall: ~170FPS
Standing infront of other player (the other machine): ~33FPS

Machine 2 (the 2500+ 32bit GeForce 2 Pro):
Looking at a wall (same wall as before btw): ~275FPS
Standing infront of other player (the other machine): ~112FPS


So, as you can see, my slower machine using an old legacy graphics card plays Nexuiz better...

What I'm deducting from this is that there is a problem with Nexuiz 64bit...

If anyone has anything else to add to this, or can do further testing (or back up my testing) please post your results.

I should mention that general gameplay was much better with my older, slower machine. If I'm going to be playing Nexuiz, I'll be using that machine from now on...

Also, the drop from 'no characters' to just ONE character was EPIC, 170FPS to 33FPS on the main machine and 275FPS to 112FPS on the older machine. Definately explains why you get good FPS and then it drops to low low numbers when fighting...I know it's the character graphics, is there anyway that these can be refined? Quake 4 has WAY better character graphics and I don't experience the same massive drop in FPS when there is 1, 2 or 32 characters on the screen...

TehTux wrote:What I'm deducting from this is that there is a problem with Nexuiz 64bit...

No, I don't think so. Swap the graphics cards and you will see that the 64bit system will perform better. Or to test this easier: run the 32bit binary on your 64bit system.

The problem is that DP uses some enhanced graphics features if they are available. If you manage to tune down all graphics settings to Geforce 2 level on your high-speed card, you probably will be faster. Most of these variables are not in the menu, though, and IIRC nobody has done such tuning yet. A start would perhaps be gl_picmip 3.

divVerent wrote:Or to test this easier: run the 32bit binary on your 64bit system.

I did try that, I tried running nexuiz-linux-686-sdl, though got:

Code: Select all

./nexuiz-linux-686-sdl: error while loading shared libraries: libSDL-1.2.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Any other way to run the 32 bit version on my 64 bit Kubuntu?

As for the swap the graphics card approach, that's not going to happen. To downgrade my graphics card just to play Nexuiz and forsake all other games is insane, if that is indeed the cause.

Something is causing sub 20 FPS during gameplay, and it's not happening on my older, slower machine - which is running the same OS (Kubuntu 6.06) though is 32 bit...

If anyone has a similar setup, or can confirm my test results let me know, as unfortunately I cannot blow away my main machine and install a 32 bit OS as I'm living in 64 bit land for better or for worse

lol, I thought it was just a cruel joke that there is no yes option for osx in the poll...

So yea, I am not getting expected FPS on OSX - and yea I know about the shell script in the .app to force GLSL off.

For the record, it doesn't matter if I use a hacked shader file that works around the AppleGL driver's GLSL parser bugs and subsequently enable GLSL in Nexuiz; nor does it matter if I just leave GLSL disabled - in either case the new version of Nexuiz performs like slug in molasses compared to previous versions (no offense).

BTW I thought it an odd choice not to have vanilla DM as the default for the instant action.

Was going to say what esteel said and also ask if people with AMD X2 CPU have the X2 DRIVER installed, and suggest also to look at the OPTIMIZER:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_871_13118,00.html

@tehtux did you try increasing your res on the higher-end machine? Even a GF 5900-FX ultra is faster at 1280x1024 than it is at 640x480.

divVerent is right, there are more var's to just type into con to adjust things, but using picmip is a drastic and unnecessary approach IMHO. I>E> although forgot to check w/ the 2.x series Nexuiz, the last pull from cvs up to the release had the GLSL option in menu doesn't do anything bug BACK AGAIN. It was gone for a while, but after the big redesign the Nex genie poofed it in, so just try setting things via con.

GLuck

TehTux wrote:

divVerent wrote:Or to test this easier: run the 32bit binary on your 64bit system.

I did try that, I tried running nexuiz-linux-686-sdl, though got:

Code: Select all

./nexuiz-linux-686-sdl: error while loading shared libraries: libSDL-1.2.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Any other way to run the 32 bit version on my 64 bit Kubuntu?

Yes, you would need to install the 32bit version of libSDL (on Fedora: yum install libsdl.i586). Or use the glx build.

As for the swap the graphics card approach, that's not going to happen. To downgrade my graphics card just to play Nexuiz and forsake all other games is insane, if that is indeed the cause.

No, but it would help for testing.