Jump to content


Halo Performance with Universal Binary


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#1 noah_read

noah_read

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 17 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 04:53 PM

I was just wondering if anybody is using the Universal Binary for Halo yet.  I haven't bought Halo until now because the performance on the demo under Rosetta wasn't so great, but if it's improved enough I'd pick it up in a second.  How is the performance for anyone else with a Mactel machine?
NOAH

#2 Syndicomm

Syndicomm

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Tennessee

Posted 16 August 2006 - 06:25 PM

View Postnoah_read, on August 16th 2006, 03:53 PM, said:

I was just wondering if anybody is using the Universal Binary for Halo yet.  I haven't bought Halo until now because the performance on the demo under Rosetta wasn't so great, but if it's improved enough I'd pick it up in a second.  How is the performance for anyone else with a Mactel machine?

So far, I'm pretty unimpressed with the Universal Binary performance.  I'm having to turn the settings on my dual 2 GHz iMac down lower than I used to play it on my dual 1.25 GHz Power Mac G4 (admittedly, the G4 had an upgraded video card, but it wasn't as good as the x1600 in the iMac is).

In addition, my flashlight isn't working.  I turn it on, and the power use indicator appears, and I hear the click, but there isn't actually any light cast by it.  I've tried switching between various shaders, with no apparent effect on this.

It's pretty frustrating, all in all.

#3 mrimac00

mrimac00

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 828 posts
  • Location:Error 404

Posted 16 August 2006 - 09:13 PM

This was worth the wait and the $5. My machines are an iMac Core Duo 1.83 GHz and a MacBook Pro 2.16 GHz. Here's my two problems:

- Finding that perfect balance of graphical settings and performance. Turning everything up (Advanced Pixel Shaders, 1024 x 768, high on textures, decals, etc.) gets steady 30 FPS most of the time. There's moments where it drops though. On the iMac, I noticed it dropped down to 15 FPS in intense gun fights. I did Pixel Shader + Vertex shaders on my MacBook Pro (to see if there's any differences between the two settings) and the performance only went down to 20 FPS. I'm just reporting the lowest I've seen in-game with the rasterizer_fps on command, not time demos. More on those later...

- Old saves are incompatible on the most part. You can move your old profile folder and saved game into the new i386 folder, but be forewarned only your graphics settings and save games transfer over, NOT the levels you unlocked. So, for me, my only save was on the Maw... So I only had the first level and the Maw available to me. I'll finish the Maw and hope that unlocks the rest of my levels. If not, I'll just play through it all again this weekend.

No glitches for me. Perfect conversion.

Time Demo on iMac:

Date / Time: 8/17/06 11:10:8 (0ms)
1800MHz, 512MB
C:\Applications\Games\Halo\Halo.app psn_0_38010881 -windowed -console Frames=4700
Total Time=93.23s
Average frame rate=50.41fps
Below  5fps= 8% (time)  0% (frames) (7.906s spent in 12 frames)
Below 10fps= 8% (time)  0% (frames)
Below 15fps= 10% (time)  0% (frames)
Below 20fps= 14% (time)  2% (frames)
Below 25fps= 20% (time)  4% (frames)
Below 30fps= 23% (time)  6% (frames)
Below 40fps= 34% (time)  14% (frames)
Below 50fps= 50% (time)  28% (frames)
Below 60fps= 67% (time)  47% (frames)
###Sound Options###
Hardware Acceleration= No
Sound Quality= Low
Environmental Sound= No
Sound Variety= Medium
###Video Options###
Resolution= 800 x 600
Refresh rate= 0 Hz
Framerate throttle= No Vsync
Specular= Yes
Shadows= Yes
Decals= Yes
Particles= Off
Texture Quality= High

Notice the settings are different from what I was playing with. I also noticed watching the timedemo, everything move super fast. The cut-scenes look like they were on fast forward. The audio was fine, but in order to keep up with the speed, parts of dialogue were overlapping. Cortana was going rampant, methinks ;) If the game was running like that while I was playing, that would've been heaven.

I'm gonna do another run of Halo with the timedemo's settings. Maybe it'll run well. I'll report in tomorrow.

#4 Quicksilver

Quicksilver

    Verbal Windbag

  • IMG Writers
  • 4227 posts
  • Location:Chicago Illinois
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 16 August 2006 - 09:43 PM

For future reference, you don't need to post the entire output of the timedemo.  For anyone else who wants to post their framerate numbers, try to stick to the following standard setting so that people can compare systems:

- 1024x768
- Advanced Shaders
- All graphical and aural settings maxed (except FSAA, which should be off)
- NO VSYNC
Former Senior Hardware Editor
InsideMacGames.com

#5 Syndicomm

Syndicomm

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Tennessee

Posted 16 August 2006 - 09:49 PM

View PostQuicksilver, on August 16th 2006, 08:43 PM, said:

For future reference, you don't need to post the entire output of the timedemo.  For anyone else who wants to post their framerate numbers, try to stick to the following standard setting so that people can compare systems:

- 1024x768
- Advanced Shaders
- All graphical and aural settings maxed (except FSAA, which should be off)
- NO VSYNC

This is very odd; I get totally unplayable performance on my 2 GHz iMac Core Duo system unless I select lower shading than that, and even then it's only marginally playable, and still not gorgeously smooth like it was on my dual G4 system.

I'm pretty disappointed.  I should certainly be able to set things at least as high as the G4 did -- 1024x768 is lower than I used on the G4 (I used 1280x1024 there).

#6 a2daj

a2daj

    Uberspewer

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3400 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 16 August 2006 - 10:01 PM

I've only done one basic set of benchmarks for curiosity's sake (don't have time to do my usual full sweet) and at 640x480 I noticed a very large performance drop on my Dual 2.5 G5 w/ X800.  Think mid 70s down to low 60s.  I have both the latest PPC native app and the new UB one installed on the same machine, same drive partition, using the exact same settings.  I ran each benchmark 3 times and ignored the first since that one is typically  the slowest.  If I get more time I'll try a full suite of tests but free time is very sparse these days.

I haven't tested my MBP yet.
Dual 2.5 GHz G5-RADEON X800 -4 GB RAM-Revo 7.1
MBP 2.0GHz -Mobility RADEON X1600-2 GB RAM

#7 Batcat

Batcat

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2907 posts
  • Location:In Flux

Posted 16 August 2006 - 11:50 PM

View Postmrimac00, on August 16th 2006, 10:13 PM, said:

- Finding that perfect balance of graphical settings and performance. Turning everything up (Advanced Pixel Shaders, 1024 x 768, high on textures, decals, etc.) gets steady 30 FPS most of the time. There's moments where it drops though. On the iMac, I noticed it dropped down to 15 FPS in intense gun fights. I did Pixel Shader + Vertex shaders on my MacBook Pro (to see if there's any differences between the two settings) and the performance only went down to 20 FPS. I'm just reporting the lowest I've seen in-game with the rasterizer_fps on command, not time demos. More on those later...
If I surmise correctly, Ken Cobb & Co. have managed to finally support Halo PC's MRTs. This alone means more work for the videocard, but better effects. Apple's OpenGL has improved since 12/03.


Quote

Notice the settings are different from what I was playing with. I also noticed watching the timedemo, everything move super fast. The cut-scenes look like they were on fast forward. The audio was fine, but in order to keep up with the speed, parts of dialogue were overlapping. Cortana was going rampant, methinks ;) If the game was running like that while I was playing, that would've been heaven.

I'm gonna do another run of Halo with the timedemo's settings. Maybe it'll run well. I'll report in tomorrow.
Timedemo is based on 4 of Halo's cutscenes, which were rendered at XBox's 30 f/s. Timedemo mode removes that cap.


View PostQuicksilver, on August 16th 2006, 10:43 PM, said:

For future reference, you don't need to post the entire output of the timedemo.  For anyone else who wants to post their framerate numbers, try to stick to the following standard setting so that people can compare systems:

- 1024x768
- Advanced Shaders
- All graphical and aural settings maxed (except FSAA, which should be off)
- NO VSYNC
Killjoy. :P  Shorten them if you must, but a detailed performance report is revelatory.


View PostSyndicomm, on August 16th 2006, 10:49 PM, said:

This is very odd; I get totally unplayable performance on my 2 GHz iMac Core Duo system unless I select lower shading than that, and even then it's only marginally playable, and still not gorgeously smooth like it was on my dual G4 system.

I'm pretty disappointed.  I should certainly be able to set things at least as high as the G4 did -- 1024x768 is lower than I used on the G4 (I used 1280x1024 there).
Again, more video work being done, better effects. Probable graphics parity with PC Halo at last.

#8 AV8

AV8

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 17 August 2006 - 12:34 AM

Great performance here on a 2.16 15" MacBook Pro at 1024x640.  Seems faster then a 2GHZ G5 20" iMac at 800x600.  I have not run a time demo, but it seems obviously faster.

However, I can not seem to "Command-Tab" to change applications while in Halo.  Command-Tab worked fine in the PPC version.  Anyone else notice this?

#9 Blackshawk

Blackshawk

    Narcissist Extraordinaire

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1790 posts
  • Location:Blackshawk Inc.

Posted 17 August 2006 - 07:47 AM

I think most people typically shut off the other applications to get maximum performance.
I Can't Feel My Torso Your Gaming Fix From Blackshawk

I'm going to the vet to get tutored.

#10 mrimac00

mrimac00

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 828 posts
  • Location:Error 404

Posted 17 August 2006 - 08:23 AM

If you pause, you can do command-tab.

#11 Syndicomm

Syndicomm

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Tennessee

Posted 17 August 2006 - 09:45 PM

If I set my screen to 1024x768, the game plays acceptably, but I'm still confused about why I should need to set the resolution that low in order to play.  Weird.

BTW, anyone know where I can get a nice label to print onto my new Halo CD? :)

#12 broaddd

broaddd

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 32 posts

Posted 17 August 2006 - 10:44 PM

It sounds like either the UB version isn't utililising the dual-core, or it's limited by the greatly underclocked graphics card in the MBP (and to a lesser extent the iMac). If I boot into Windows XP on my 2ghz MBP, and clock the card back to its usual specification; I can get a 30% boost in framerate under Halo for the PC (compared to leaving the card's clock alone).

It's a shame you can't do that under OSX, AFAIK.

#13 Batcat

Batcat

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2907 posts
  • Location:In Flux

Posted 18 August 2006 - 02:24 AM

Halo is single-threaded, and mainly graphics-limited.

#14 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 18 August 2006 - 04:39 AM

have it at 1024x768, and turn the FSAA up. That should make things better.

Keep an eye on ATIccelerator, it gives you on the fly clock speed changes for ATI cards, and hopefully soon NV cards too... At the moment, it doesnt support a number of newer cards (read intel), but at some point in the future it should do...
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#15 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 18 August 2006 - 12:13 PM

View PostBatcat, on August 18th 2006, 01:24 AM, said:

Halo is single-threaded

The patch notes say they replaced the cooperative threads with real threads.

#16 converted2truth

converted2truth

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Location:Mountain West

Posted 18 August 2006 - 12:48 PM

View Postbobbob, on August 18th 2006, 12:13 PM, said:

The patch notes say they replaced the cooperative threads with real threads.
Actually, i thought it said they replaced cooperative threads with premptive threads...

don't threads share the same PCB(process control block) and thus are required to run on the same CPU (in order to be in sync)?  I would imagine that most games are multi-threaded, but not many are multi-process... sychronized... utilizing dual-core/processors.
Mac Pro/2.66/2GB RAM/X1900/1.5TB & 250GB X partition/250GB XP partition/Dell 24" LCD
MBP CD2.0/2GB ram/100GB HD (20GB XP partition)/ATI X1600m

#17 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 18 August 2006 - 01:30 PM

isnt premptive threading what Aspyr used to get a performance boost on Doom 3??

or was that something different.

What does premptive threading do exactly?
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#18 tthiel

tthiel

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Az

Posted 18 August 2006 - 01:31 PM

Most games, including PC games, are not multi-threaded which is why you see no performance increase, and in some cases a performance decrease, on dual core procs.

#19 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3513 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 18 August 2006 - 02:18 PM

View Postconverted2truth, on August 19th 2006, 04:48 AM, said:

don't threads share the same PCB(process control block) and thus are required to run on the same CPU (in order to be in sync)?
Certainly threads in the same process share a PCB, otherwise they wouldn't be in the same process. They don't have to run on the same CPU though. SMP-capable CPUs have SMP-aware synchronisation instructions. You may be confused by Linux's pre-NPTL approach to threading.

#20 rob_ART

rob_ART

    Bare Feats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 792 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 18 August 2006 - 04:05 PM

Halo UB tests at 1920x1200 and every setting at max except lens flare set to low:
Quad-Core G5 with GeForce 6600 GT = 18 fps
Quad-Core G5 with GeForce 7800 GT = 55 fps
Quad-Core G5 with GeForce 7800 GTX = 72 fps
Mac Pro 3GHz with GeForce 7300 GT = 22 fps

Ugh. Can't wait for my special order Radeon X1900 XT kit to arrive for the Mac Pro.
rob-ART morgan
mad scientist
BareFeats.com