LZDoom 3.87a 10/18 released

Game Engines go in this forum
Forum rules
The Projects forums are ONLY for YOUR PROJECTS! If you are asking questions about a project, either find that project's thread, or start a thread in the General section instead.

Got a cool project idea but nothing else? Put it in the project ideas thread instead!

Projects for any Doom-based engine are perfectly acceptable here too.

Please read the full rules for more details.

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Graf Zahl » Mon Apr 20, 2020 12:31 pm

Darkcrafter wrote:Clipping on big maps with lots of 3D floors and overall linedefs seems to be the cause here, in such conditions "stat rendertimes" feature reports clip time around 5.00 whereas in vanilla doom maps it's about 0.04-0.20. Do you have any thoughts on why this happens?


Do 50x the amount of work and it takes 50x longer. Never forget that vanilla allowed 128 visible segs at most, but large maps can have several 1000 visible lines.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Teddipetzi » Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:17 am

Has anybody else noticed the sharp uptick of LZDoom downloads over the last 6 months?
The numbers are quite easy to compare because they are roughly 2 months apart each - and each new release has higher numbers for its two month period, and for 3.85 they are nearly double that of 3.83a.

I am a bit confused here - why is a legacy port like this increasing its user base? Normally people should upgrade their hardware and move on to the high end product, but for some reason the opposite seems to happen here.
Teddipetzi
 
Joined: 17 Aug 2019
Operating System: Windows 10/8.1/8/201x 64-bit
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Graf Zahl » Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:13 am

My guess would be two reasons:

- Some people are still attached to the old font in the menu.
- It may run Brutal Doom better. This should never be underestimated. :twisted:

it surely has nothing to do with running it on old systems - those are on a general decline.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Kamil » Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:07 pm

Last dev build shows error in Doom 2 - level 1
https://www.dropbox.com/s/srs5vaphgjsx28y/log.rtf?dl=0
Kamil
 
Joined: 21 Sep 2019
Discord: @Kamil#8122
Operating System: Windows Vista/7/2008 64-bit
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby 3saster » Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:53 pm

Graf Zahl wrote:My guess would be two reasons:

- Some people are still attached to the old font in the menu.
- It may run Brutal Doom better. This should never be underestimated. :twisted:

it surely has nothing to do with running it on old systems - those are on a general decline.


It might have something to do with the impression quite a number of people have (I see suggestions to use LZDoom/ZDoom 2.8.1 on DW and Reddit a lot) that if ZDoom/LZDoom can run the mod, it will run it better than GZDoom. This has twisted around into a myth that LZDoom/ZDoom are faster and better ports than GZDoom, even for people with decent computers. Weird how things like that go :/
User avatar
3saster
 
Joined: 11 May 2018
Location: Canada

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Kamil » Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:37 pm

Why not make an additional version of the old font for GZDoom? I realized that LZDoom was not created to improve performance, but to support a CPU that does not support OpenGL 3.0 and higher
Kamil
 
Joined: 21 Sep 2019
Discord: @Kamil#8122
Operating System: Windows Vista/7/2008 64-bit
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby TDRR » Wed Apr 29, 2020 7:39 pm

3saster wrote:This has twisted around into a myth that LZDoom/ZDoom are faster and better ports than GZDoom, even for people with decent computers. Weird how things like that go :/

It's nothing weird or surprising. They are basing their claims off their experience, and if they got an Intel iGPU, then LZDoom more likely than not runs the same mods but at least 1.5x faster. (And, depending on the amount of cores on their CPU, ZDoom may also run MUCH faster)
Source: I have a craptop myself :p

Kamil wrote:Why not make an additional version of the old font for GZDoom?

I wonder the same, couldn't it just be done as an addon or something? I mean, I wouldn't stop using LZDoom over GZDoom just because the fonts were reverted, but I imagine a ton of people absolutely would.
User avatar
TDRR
A living work in progress
 
Joined: 11 Mar 2018
Location: Venezuela
Discord: TDRR#5820
Operating System: Windows Vista/7/2008 64-bit
Graphics Processor: Intel (Modern GZDoom)

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Graf Zahl » Thu Apr 30, 2020 12:12 am

TDRR wrote:
3saster wrote:This has twisted around into a myth that LZDoom/ZDoom are faster and better ports than GZDoom, even for people with decent computers. Weird how things like that go :/

It's nothing weird or surprising. They are basing their claims off their experience, and if they got an Intel iGPU, then LZDoom more likely than not runs the same mods but at least 1.5x faster. (And, depending on the amount of cores on their CPU, ZDoom may also run MUCH faster)
Source: I have a craptop myself :p



At least on modern Intel hardware, GZDoom on Vulkan should run a LOT better. Our internal tests showed that even the oldest still supported Intel iGPU should run just as well with the more recent renderer that received a few optimizations for AMD hardware.

TDRR wrote:
Kamil wrote:Why not make an additional version of the old font for GZDoom?

I wonder the same, couldn't it just be done as an addon or something? I mean, I wouldn't stop using LZDoom over GZDoom just because the fonts were reverted, but I imagine a ton of people absolutely would.


No, it doesn't work like that. The option menu font was replaced to give more space to the menus' content. If it was reverted to the old ones, several menus wouldn't fit anymore, especially in non-English languages.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby mjr4077au » Thu Apr 30, 2020 1:52 am

Graf Zahl wrote:At least on modern Intel hardware, GZDoom on Vulkan should run a LOT better. Our internal tests showed that even the oldest still supported Intel iGPU should run just as well with the more recent renderer that received a few optimizations for AMD hardware.

Just curious if that perf improvement is limited to the Intel iGPUs? NVIDIA has always had a solid OpenGL implementation and with GZDoom running a fresh config except for a lifted frame limiter, I get about 75% more FPS out of the OpenGL renderer.
User avatar
mjr4077au
 
Joined: 17 Jun 2019
Location: Gosford NSW, Australia
Discord: mjr4077au#1027
Github ID: mjr4077au
Operating System: Windows 10/8.1/8/201x 64-bit
OS Test Version: No (Using Stable Public Version)
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Graf Zahl » Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:09 am

On NVidia - at least on my system - the performance of both backends is roughly the same, sometimes OpenGL is in front and sometimes Vulkan.

On AMD and Intel the far higher overhead of OpenGL draw calls really makes a difference.


If you say 75%, what map is this about? If you run something at very high frame rates you start measuring things that are mostly irrelevant once performance becomes an issue.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby mjr4077au » Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:17 am

Graf Zahl wrote:If you say 75%, what map is this about? If you run something at very high frame rates you start measuring things that are mostly irrelevant once performance becomes an issue.

Just the start of E1M1, standing in place at the spawn point. I haven't ran a proper benchmark as such. From the current texture_rework branch under the aforementioned conditions, ~330fps for OGL, ~230fps for Vulkan.

Right on about the irrelevancy, I play with vsync on at 60Hz so could not care less :wink:
User avatar
mjr4077au
 
Joined: 17 Jun 2019
Location: Gosford NSW, Australia
Discord: mjr4077au#1027
Github ID: mjr4077au
Operating System: Windows 10/8.1/8/201x 64-bit
OS Test Version: No (Using Stable Public Version)
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Graf Zahl » Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:21 am

Yes, that's not really surprising, what you see there is the optimizations in NVidia's GL driver. But when maps get larger, that part will become less and less relevant.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby 3saster » Thu Apr 30, 2020 3:35 am

mjr4077au wrote:
Graf Zahl wrote:If you say 75%, what map is this about? If you run something at very high frame rates you start measuring things that are mostly irrelevant once performance becomes an issue.

Just the start of E1M1, standing in place at the spawn point. I haven't ran a proper benchmark as such. From the current texture_rework branch under the aforementioned conditions, ~330fps for OGL, ~230fps for Vulkan.

Right on about the irrelevancy, I play with vsync on at 60Hz so could not care less :wink:


Yeah, any of the stock maps are poor choices for the rendered, they run so high it doesn't matter or really test it well (if they dont, you have bigger problems). For actual testing (with and without nomonsters), Sunder MAP09 and MAP15 are great test cases (Sunder in general is almost designed to be a benchmarking tool), as is that bridge in Frozen Time.

From my experience on Nvidia hardware, Vulkan really shines when you start turning on certain effects. 32x multi sampling, for example, has a high framerate hit on OpenGL, but a negligable performance hit on Vulkan. On default settings, they are about equal for me, but once you start turning on various post processing effects and whatnot, Vulkan is way ahead for me when it matters.
User avatar
3saster
 
Joined: 11 May 2018
Location: Canada

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Graf Zahl » Thu Apr 30, 2020 3:43 am

3saster wrote:Yeah, any of the stock maps are poor choices for the rendered, they run so high it doesn't matter or really test it well (if they dont, you have bigger problems). For actual testing (with and without nomonsters), Sunder MAP09 and MAP15 are great test cases (Sunder in general is almost designed to be a benchmarking tool), as is that bridge in Frozen Time.


Other good maps are the view from the church steeple in Hellcore's MAP09 (you got to noclip there), the opening cave in P:AR's E1M6 and the crane in P:AR E1M3, especially when benchmarking less performant hardware.

3saster wrote:From my experience on Nvidia hardware, Vulkan really shines when you start turning on certain effects. 32x multi sampling, for example, has a high framerate hit on OpenGL, but a negligable performance hit on Vulkan. On default settings, they are about equal for me, but once you start turning on various post processing effects and whatnot, Vulkan is way ahead for me when it matters.


Interesting. I normally run the game a6 8x MSAA, I never tried higher settings - but I think one problem that comes to the surface here is that in order to support original GL3 hardware the renderer cannot use the most efficient methods to set up its postprocessing chain - haven't we heard this story of old hardware getting in the way of performance a few times before...?
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: LZDoom 3.85 02/29 released

Postby Darkcrafter » Thu Apr 30, 2020 6:50 am

I always support and appreciate what Graf is doing as well as drfrag. But I honestly think Graf greatly underestimated the amount of people that have older hardware. How this happened you could ask - they simply didn't participate in poll e.g. didn't install GZDoom with polling code. I feel like there is a solid 20% of them.

What they don't like? I think this:

- new video mode menu;
- ditched gl 2 support due to having old cards and intel hd plague;

What they like about LZDoom - the way drfrag tries to optimize it like including those distance culling options, I honestly think that should go over GZDoom too, as well as idea I'm trying to propose in this short video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-TVan7IJAo

By the way, I should have been reported this probably but while Vulkan indeed runs 3-5 FPS more than OpenGL it has some visual glitches in my dynamic skyboxes, so I still play with OpenGL.
User avatar
Darkcrafter
 
Joined: 23 Sep 2017
Location: South Russia
Operating System: Windows 10/8.1/8/201x 64-bit
OS Test Version: No (Using Stable Public Version)
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

PreviousNext

Return to Game Engines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests