zlacker

[parent] [thread] 9 comments
1. orbita+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-03-05 14:35:42
More like 4K gaming today. PII 450MHz + Riva 128ZX or TNT easily ran Half-Life at 1152x864. (FPS expectations were also lower, however - nobody expected 100fps+ like we do today)
replies(5): >>eecc+Uh >>rasz+vK >>Aardwo+011 >>ajnin+P33 >>argleb+C63
2. eecc+Uh[view] [source] 2023-03-05 16:25:13
>>orbita+(OP)
I had a Riva 128 and it was garbage, I was constantly kicking myself for cheaping out and not getting a Voodoo2
3. rasz+vK[view] [source] 2023-03-05 19:06:17
>>orbita+(OP)
>nobody expected 100fps+

but thats exactly what you got on Voodoo2 with P2 450 back then in 640x480 https://www.bluesnews.com/benchmarks/081598.html

4. Aardwo+011[view] [source] 2023-03-05 20:53:59
>>orbita+(OP)
> nobody expected 100fps+

Not for the games framerates indeed, but I did set my CRT monitor at 120 Hz to avoid eyestrain. You could effortlessly switch between many framerates from 60 Hz to 160 Hz or so on those monitors and it was just a simple setting.

Today it seems there now exist LCD monitors that can do (much) more than 60 Hz, but somehow it has to have all those vendor lock in sounding brandnames that makes it all sound a bit unreliable [in the sense of overcomplicated and vendor dependent] compared to back then, when it was just a number you could configure that was just a logical part of how the stuff worked.

replies(1): >>synthe+FS1
◧◩
5. synthe+FS1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-03-06 03:17:07
>>Aardwo+011
With respect to raw refresh rates, it's mostly the connectivity standards at fault. After VGA things got a bit out of hand with one connector after another in various form factors.

The part you're probably thinking of is GSync vs Freesync which is a feature for making a tear-free dynamic refresh rate, something that was simply impossible in the CRT days but does add some perceptual smoothness and responsiveness in games. Not using a compatible monitor just means you're doing sync with the traditional fixed rate system.

What has gotten way more complex is the software side of things because we're in a many-core, many-thread world and a game can't expect to achieve exact timing of their updates to hit a target refresh, so things are getting buffers on top of buffers and in-game configuration reflects that with various internal refresh rate settings.

replies(2): >>Aardwo+Xp2 >>rasz+BJ2
◧◩◪
6. Aardwo+Xp2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-03-06 09:49:18
>>synthe+FS1
I don't buy that it has to be this complex.

We could write to buffers at 60 Hz effortlessly with computers from 1999, speeds have increased more than enough to write to buffers at 120 Hz and more, even with 16x more pixels.

1/120th of a second is a huge amount of time in CPU/GPU clock ticks, more than enough to compute a frame and write it to a double buffer to swap, and more threads should make that easier to do, not harder: more threads can compute pixels so pixels can be put in the buffer faster.

If there's problems with connector standards, software side of things, multithreading making it require third-party complexity, then that's a problem of those connector standards, the software, things like the LCD monitors themselves trying to be too smart and add delay, etc... Take also for example the AI upscaling done in NVidia cards now: adding yet more latency (since it needs multiple frames to compute this) and complexity (and I've seen it create artefacts too, then I'd rather just have a predictable bicubic or lanczos upscaling).

Same with audio: why do people tolerate such latency with bluetooth audio? Aptx had much less latency but the latest headphones don't support it anymore, only huge delay.

◧◩◪
7. rasz+BJ2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-03-06 12:57:58
>>synthe+FS1
>GSync vs Freesync which is a feature for making a tear-free dynamic refresh rate, something that was simply impossible in the CRT days

fun fact: the very same technique used by Freesync, delaying the vsync, works with CRTs

Genericness of Variable Refresh Rate (VRR works on any video source including DVI and VGA, even on MultiSync CRT tubes) https://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=8889

8. ajnin+P33[view] [source] 2023-03-06 14:53:07
>>orbita+(OP)
I remember that the framerate was pretty important in Quake. Because player positions were interpolated linearly, you could miss the top of the parabola when jumping if your framerate was too low. I don't remember any numbers but getting a high framerate was definitely a concern when playing a bit competitively.
replies(1): >>orbita+nB5
9. argleb+C63[view] [source] 2023-03-06 15:08:13
>>orbita+(OP)
My 200+ fps quake 2 config sure did. If you weren't running 200+ fps for online quake 2 you were in for a bad time.

Between a Celeron 333A running at 550MHz and a dual voodoo2 you could drive games at pretty ridiculous frame rates.

◧◩
10. orbita+nB5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-03-07 04:10:16
>>ajnin+P33
Competitive play, sure, especially at low resolutions and everything disabled. Single player games were running at pretty low framerates though, with a few exceptions like Quake/Half-Life. Even 60fps was more of a luxury than a rule.
[go to top]