Re: Strange 2.1.11 bug

Alexander Sanda (
Sat, 23 Nov 96 23:43:48 GMT

>Oh, would somebody care to check out the new 1.06 Quake/i386 release? Does
>it give comparable performance as the previous release? Do things actually
>work? It's on, but I
>hope somebody will mirror it. I haven't really had time to test it, and
>I'm not going to take the time either as I'm still supposed to do my

Ok, just downloaded and it seems to work fine, except for sound/fx. I notice
about 0.5 to 1 second delay with most sound effects. Also, some sound/fx
(background/ambient sounds) sound choppy and somewhat crippled. (I have a SB16

Now someting, which may be interesting:

I'am running xquake on my P133/64MB/matrox millenium + Accelerated-X 1.2.
Ususally, I resize the quake window to about 640x400 (I also play this
resolution under DOS, except for network games).

Under linux, I get about 14.3 fps (timerefresh after map start) with Accel-X,
12.5 fps with XFree-3.2 (XF86_SVGA).

DOS quake scores about 13.5 fps (same resolution 640x400) under plain DOS, and
about 12.5 fps under Win95. Also, if running under Win95, there is some
noticeable slowdown in netgames. It _seems_ that the linux version does not
slowdown that much. The reason may be Linux' superiour TCP/IP performance (we
all know, that Win95' TCP/IP stack sucks :) ).

Currently, linux-quake seems to be the fastest quake for the x86 platform (I
didn't expect anything else).

Now, let's see, if WinQuake (after it's released) can beat this, if running
under NT 4 (I don't really believe, that it will).

# /AS/                                        
#              God save the screen ! #