Tribal Instinct

I have a dual 800 MHz G4 (mac) makes easy work of tasks related to work and school, I only end up with avg frame rates from say 24 - 38 fps with spikes upwards of 50. It looks OK and is playable, but I really wonder, do I suck just because I of my lack of skillz (partly true, regardless...) or would a cpu upgrade really help out? I sometimes think people seem to move faster than me but I can't really prove it - or can I? Has anyone here had an upgrade from something like this and seen a real change on the same connection? My graphics card was upgraded already (mac version of nvidia 4600 for 4x AGP slot) and could certainly keep pace with a better CPU.

And I guess that's the other part of the question. I'm within my 30 day trial period, and after that I'm committed for a year. Comcast is offering a student special (or at least they were) for $30., my cost for the dsl is only $14.95. (cheap DSL capped at 768kbps,) but I thought the cap is on bandwidth, and latency would still be good. Does this make sense? Am I crippled by this setup vs. faster DSL or Comcast cable? If I show a decent or comparable ping rate is this a reflection that my DSL is OK?

Thanks for any thoughts...

Hey Squirrel,

The latency/ping is the biggest issue. You could play better on a 56k baud modem than a cable internet with 8mps download if the cable had crappy ping/latency. I have dsl which doesn't download as fast but beats the hell out of my crappy comcast connection which could download half life 2 off the steam servers at 8mps at certain points.

As far as the computer, I think your setup is probably fine. Try turning down all the settings to the lowest or next to lowest and uncheck all the options like weather effects, etc. and lower the resolution to say 800x600. Go into a game and see if you move better. If you do then I would say just keep your settings lower and save money if you can tolerate the weaker looking graphical representation. (ace can somehow)

Let me know how that goes.

thanks nonstop.

first, glad to hear my hope/theory for the latency vs. bandwidth choice with the cheap DSL is on target.

What has stirred me up is I’ve spectated a few times, and it just seems like things move faster than when I play. The players seem to move a little faster, and the display is like watching a movie at 30 fps but with every other frame taken out. So it is smooth but discontinuous and just a bit faster...hard to describe but I think that makes sense.

All the sites that talk about hardware rate games in fps, it has planted a seed in my head that there has to be something to all the fuss. Guys (and girls) aren’t satisfied with 50, or 60, or 70 or 100 fps it seems. I guess I know what I need to do. I need to try and play on a really fast, modern machine and see how much change there is. How much extra visual input/competitors’ movement cues/responsiveness difference there can be.

Thinking this out now in light of your comments reinforcing my thoughts about the latency-vs.-bandwidth issue, I am I am likely hamstrung by the cpu the most then.

The fps data I gave is actually already with ALL settings at their lowest config - I have no problem trading detail for playability. The graphics card in my system is probably the strongest link in the chain, and there are only 2 cards (ATI 9600 and 9800) that would even fit my machine that have higher performance...apart from slight programmable shader effects I would gain minimal change at considerable cost (and would loose support for pre-OS X systems and apps - though I probably haven’t gone back to the legacy OS in 2 years I like knowing I still can boot my old stuff and have full system support).

MacSoft (who makes the mac port) recommends a minimum of 867 Mhz. My (2001 “quicksilver”) dual 800 works as a single 800 in the game except for being able to offload sound to the second processor which only accounts for 1-2 % of cycles, but keeps any other tasks from bogging down my stressed cpu.

So, if I can see what it’s like to try a modern machine and there is a difference, I will weigh a CPU upgrade (on my ancient 133 MHz bus) vs. trying to pick up a different machine somehow...it is just tough to do when the only justification I would have for the $$ is to game and I quit my job to go back to school full time...boo hoo poor me...

Anyway. I’ve rambled too long.

At least I enjoy the game for what it is now as is I have an excuse for my play...imagine my dissapointment if I had a modern machine and still got owned as hard...

THANK YOU.

There could be a chance that your cpu is holding you back. I do think you need to play it on a faster machine and see. Some of the 'faster' gameplay your talking about might just be how that person moves. I'm sure you know about double jumping, double dodge jumping etc but some people do move very fast. If you want to really be freaked out watch lunatic when he's on.

Nonstop:

I'm not sure when, where or how, but I will try and get on a different/newer machine to see the difference.

I totally understand that I need to work on my footwork too and should probably spectate some more to try and learn when I'm not running and ducking...

It's OK, 'cause I'm still having fun with it either way.

Thanks again!

'fun' is the most important spec, yes..

good news: No, I didn't run into extra cash for the upgrade, but I did find what may have been causing some problems: a recent HP driver upgrade had an errant thread for HP Printer that was gobbling up to 23% of cpu cycles and increasing memory that was out of control. Uninstalled, did disk repair, reinstalled and it is now functioning in the background with 0.5 - 2 % cpu cycle usage so this should help.

You would think that the game would work on the processor without that running, but I don't know/understand how the OS priortizes which CPU to assign things to, but I haven't seen the really jerky motion that was driving me nuts.

I still have crap frame rates with all features off, and still think there would be a sizable gain from a cpu upgrade or new rig, but I think this was what did it, and having been away for so long it didn't occur to me what was happening....doh!

And Nyte is right, fun is the key and there's plenty of that to be had...

Thanks for the input...

i was playing on a 1700+ athlon amd with 256 mb mem and a g-force 2 graphics card.i had everything on low and lowest and all the extra detail turned off. this certainly helped a bit but because my comp was getting old and doing stupid things i decided to buy a new comp

now i have a 3500+ amd athlon 64 with 1gb mem and a radeon x700 and yea it looks a lot sweeter on graphics play and smoother to play but i still felt as though i moved the same speed etc but at least it stopped jerking a bit. my ping did not change at all. i play on the DXII servers and on me old comp i was pinging in the 140's and i still am pinging in the 140's and has nonstop said, its the ping thats the worst thing but i have to make do with the crappy connection my mam and dad want.

i also noticed that when we were on 512 broadband and moved to 2048 broadband my ping only went down about 10-20.

my mate comes on same server as me and he has same connection speed different isp and he pings 20-25 better than me.

try playing on instant action and you will see that u hit more there than u do online coz basically when you are on instant action your ping will be '0' meaning no delay.

hope this helps a little

'fun' is the most important spec, yes..

this is why we all play....for fun

ClownMajik in PC land did a complete reinstall and it got me to thinking...running out of space on main partition anyway, so cleared a partition of stored crap and did a fresh install.


- didn't install HP OfficeJet Driver which runs constantly in background
- Killed the Dashboard which runs constantly
- Killed/Deactivated Spotlight which runs in background indexing file names and All content, making metadata which is great for normal ops, bad for gaming
- Did not install the Kensington Mouseworks Driver for trackball - this eats up just a little cpu, but the real advantage came from the fact that my right click button would work upon release, the left click upon depressing, now the right click works as you would expect with a flak gun, for instance, firing when pressed!!!

When I started playing about a year ago things were worse! My performance has gotten steadily better as Apple has updated OpenGL (No DirectX optimizations available for Macs...), and with patches on UT...

Santaduck Bench ( I think this is standardized between platforms?) reports for 800*600, then at 1024*768, both at "minimum settings" which aren't really the absolute lowest (for instance player chatter and some gore are on, etc...) but to stick with the benchmarks:

9.422641 / 25.908823 / 60.427395 fps -- Score = 25.924448 rand[1336578545]

9.137365 / 23.551991 / 59.955952 fps -- Score = 23.559013 rand[152854225]

Not too shabby given what I've got to work with, but at least with these processes killed and nothing else to gum up the works hopefully will be able to maintain this performance...still dip into the teens on big maps, organic maps like Rarjigar (spelling?) drag things down alot...but making the best until can upgrade to something new.

With the announced switch to intel chips and mobos coming would like to hobble along until can get one of these then boot in Windows to game...should be drastically better!! Can't bear giving up investment and familiarity with OS X/ Mac.

you know.. this may be the biggest help offered. Backup your user and UT ini files and read this 13 page tutorial carefully. I have spent a few hours myself tweaking this way with good success. Since you have a slower machine than mine, I bet it will do you good. Hopefuly this will greatly inprove your FPS. Once you reach page 9, it will start explaining everything in the ini files and how to manage them properly. Including manualy adjusting your open GL settings.

http://www.tweakguides.com/UT2004_1.html

ClownMajik: Roger! I'm on it. I've seen a few scattered tips on boards, but this sounds intense. Will get it now.

Thanks man!!

played around a bit with some of the settings, don't seem to make much difference. Think I am getting about everything out of the machine I can...which is saying alot for a 2001 box that is just barely below what they say the minimum requirement is...can't whine on that one.

As far as a new machine goes, the new macs (mactels w/ the intel chip) won't currently boot Windows XP due to Intel's mobo EFI . Win XP only supports this mobo in the 64 bit flavor, and unlike the IBM G5 chips it will be replacing, the first crop of new macs are 32 bit. Win Vista will support the EFI bios in 32 bit machines, so it is widely believed that when this is replaced in the fall the new machines will be dual boot capable....For now, anyone buying a mactel will have crippled gaming as code not ported/recompiled for the new processors will run in an emulation layer called "Roseta", but when dual boot happens, this will make gaming really amazing. Amazing to us, just normal everyday stuff PC people take for granted...

So, all that said, and in light of the fact I am still sorting out budget/school/work issues, not to mention the bill to repair my laptop, take the DAT and get applications out, so in limbo for a while longer...watching and waiting, making the best for now.

Do want to thank everyone for input so far!!