@ASiegel
Quote:
The game happens to have been ported by someone who has also been contracted by A-eon [...] they will fly him out for Amiwest all the way from Europe even. [...] I do not think it is far fetched to assume that the version for [AOS4] is the most optimized one compared to the AROS and MorphOS ports. [...] if you want to gauge the credibility of the published benchmark numbers, all you need to remember is that results on AROS were not included
This is what you wrote. It's pure discrediting speculations / accusations / claims, nothing else. It remains to be that even if you add the phrase "hey, it's okay" (actually that phrase makes the former stuff appear even more fact-like) and now try to qualify the former by foregrounding that.
Don't want me to call your crap "conspiracy theories"? Fine with me, let's call it ASiegel's groundless fanboy diarrhoea instead.
And the fact that you keep up your stuff despite my corrective statements just underlines it. But I should really stop wasting my time with people like you, it's pointless and I should know better.
@koszer
Quote:
I just can't understand why G5 2.5 GHz (I know, an antique system) gives him around 60 FPS, even with stock Radeon 9600.
That such an antique system reaches 60+ fps with this game is actually a great result.
Quote:
And even then, using a low-end video card against Radeon HD 7xxx is a bit childish, isn't it? ;)
Maybe. But those are simply the setups he got, so as long as he stated the configurations, well.
@redrumloa
Quote:
With one lone person who is a disgruntled customer whom might have come off rude
naTmeg? Rude? No, I at least felt not offended by him in any way. Others were the problem.
Quote:
I find his benchmark post to be disingenuous, but as mentioned, he has computers to sell.
Again, such claims are groundless speculations / claims.
Quote:
Don't see conspiracy theories where there are none.
I am not the one who sees things that aren't there...
Quote:
If you have an issue with my opinion Trevor's benchmark was disingenuous, I can't help that.
If you still think that those were made up even when I told you that this is certainly not the case, I can't help you. Then you obviously simply want to believe what you want to. Besides that the numbers were absolutely plausible.
Quote:
Now we know Tower 57 is not a benchmark candidate.
It depends. It actually delivers nice valid comparisons - for a certain type of system use, of course, but certainly more real-life than most synthetic benchmarks. But the fact that it has no built-in automatic benchmark mode like Q3 makes it hard to use for true benchmarking. Btw., this is what I told the beta-testers for doing benchmarks
Quote:
Benchmarks:
***********
If you want to provide me with benchmarks, please do the following:
- download the file Benchmark_ReferenceSavegame.zip
- in case you want to preserve eventual savegames:
- rename Work:Tower57/current Work:Tower57/current_backup
- then
- makedir Work:Tower57/current
- delete Work:Tower57/current/#?
- then copy the content of the downloaded archive into this now empty folder.
- activate tooltype fps=1
- launch the game.
- cancel the ASL screenmode requester if it appears, we want window-mode.
- use the mouse to control the menu.
- select "continue game" and select the first and only savegame.
- once the level has been loaded and the level-name at the bottom disappeared,
important: move the mouse-cursor over the legs of the character and wait
for a few seconds to let the fps-counter settle.
- give that value to me :)
Btw., those here were the last fps comparisons I made and published (all but the G5 results were made by me, don't know anymore by whom the G5 results were). But even those are outdated (some weeks before the actual release of the first version), so the current version is certainly faster (exception are the WinUAE and PC tests, those were done with some release version).
Quote:
Sewer test savegame, windowed:
MOS, PowerMac G4, 733MHz, Radeon9000, hicolor: 30
AOS4, sam440ep, Radeon M9, hicolor: 28
AOS4, sam460ex, Radeon SI, hicolor: 49
AOS4, sam460ex, Radeon SI, truecolor: 39
AOS4, Tabor SPE, Radeon SI, hicolor: 78
AOS4, Tabor SPE, Radeon SI, truecolor: 66
AOS4, X5000, Radeon SI, hicolor: 155
AOS4, X5000, Radeon SI, truecolor: 122
AROSx86, AMD C-60 APU, 1 GHz, hicolor: 71
AROSx86, AMD C-60 APU, 1 GHz, truecolor: 65
MOS, PowerMac G5, 2.7GHz, Radeon 9800 Pro, hicolor: 84
MOS, PowerMac G5, 2.7GHz, Radeon 9800 Pro, truecolor: 78
WinUAE, i7 4790K, 4 GHz, on-chip gfx, truecolor: 50
Official Steam-build, Sony Vaio i5 2.3 GHz: 27
Windows-build based on Amiga version, Sony Vaio i5 2.3 GHz: 330
Windows-build based on Amiga version, i7 4790K, 4 GHz: 1000+
