320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

ZDoom LE, Pentium 133's, Windows 98, and DOS 3.1 all go here! A bygone era, of particular interest to some folks.

320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby invictius » Wed May 31, 2017 6:56 am

Started up my "use this xp system if games fail to run whatsoever in 7" system (p4 3.2, geforce 9500gt). Went to benchmark an older version of zdoom, no 320x200. Opened a recent gzdoom, same thing. When did nvidia and amd drop 320x200 support?
invictius
 
Joined: 03 Aug 2012

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby Rachael » Wed May 31, 2017 7:01 am

They never really "dropped" it, per se, you can still coax both sets of cards to do it, but it's pretty tricky.

Intel adapters will still expose that mode, though.
User avatar
Rachael
^ walking stack of unfinished projects ^
Admin
 
Joined: 13 Jan 2004
Discord: Rachael#3767
Twitch ID: madamerachelle
Github ID: madame-rachelle

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby invictius » Wed May 31, 2017 8:27 am

Rachael wrote:They never really "dropped" it, per se, you can still coax both sets of cards to do it, but it's pretty tricky.

Intel adapters will still expose that mode, though.


Could you link me to the workaround? I don't know how to tell google that I'm looking for that mode, I get results for the geforce 320m and such.
invictius
 
Joined: 03 Aug 2012

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby Rachael » Wed May 31, 2017 8:49 am

I, unfortunately, do not have such a work-around. I believe it can be accomplished with registry hacks on both cards, but such things inevitably require driver restarts. If you are using any WDDM-capable adapter (either you're on Windows 8+, or you are capable of running "Aero" transparency windows in Vista/7) all you have to do is disable and re-enable your display adapter in the device manager (this restarts your display driver) - otherwise you will have to restart Windows.

This tool may be sufficient to perform this task - but keep in mind I have never used it before - so use virus scans, etc, and check it before you attempt to run it.

Keep in mind - Windows actively blocks the use of 320x200 (for good reason) when using the desktop. As such, the mode may not even be exposed.

If you are running in windowed mode (not fullscreen) on GZDoom (versions 3.0 and later) you can simply use "vid_setmode 320 200" to force GZDoom itself to dynamically resize its window to any resolution you desire. This option is not available on prior ZDoom/GZDoom versions, but can be hacked in if you recompile it. Grep for "CCMD (vid_setmode)" in the source files and simply remove the verification check.
User avatar
Rachael
^ walking stack of unfinished projects ^
Admin
 
Joined: 13 Jan 2004
Discord: Rachael#3767
Twitch ID: madamerachelle
Github ID: madame-rachelle

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby invictius » Wed May 31, 2017 9:32 am

Rachael wrote:I, unfortunately, do not have such a work-around. I believe it can be accomplished with registry hacks on both cards, but such things inevitably require driver restarts. If you are using any WDDM-capable adapter (either you're on Windows 8+, or you are capable of running "Aero" transparency windows in Vista/7) all you have to do is disable and re-enable your display adapter in the device manager (this restarts your display driver) - otherwise you will have to restart Windows.

This tool may be sufficient to perform this task - but keep in mind I have never used it before - so use virus scans, etc, and check it before you attempt to run it.

Keep in mind - Windows actively blocks the use of 320x200 (for good reason) when using the desktop. As such, the mode may not even be exposed.

If you are running in windowed mode (not fullscreen) on GZDoom (versions 3.0 and later) you can simply use "vid_setmode 320 200" to force GZDoom itself to dynamically resize its window to any resolution you desire. This option is not available on prior ZDoom/GZDoom versions, but can be hacked in if you recompile it. Grep for "CCMD (vid_setmode)" in the source files and simply remove the verification check.


Can I simply, and safely assume that 640*480 is going to be exactly (well within 10% variation) half the timedemo result as 320*240 with the same system on the same card? Because that would be problem solved. Oh and is a 320*200 timedemo in a window going to be the same result as running it fullscreen? My preliminary tests suggest this, but I can't completely rely on it because I was using a not really supported video card on 7 and the colors went funky (like trying to run doom95 on a modern system)
invictius
 
Joined: 03 Aug 2012

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby Rachael » Wed May 31, 2017 9:37 am

No, you cannot. First off, 320x200 / 640x480 is actually 5/24 (less than 1/4th).

Secondly, doing simple math such as that only covers pixel fill - it does not account for node walking, clipping processing, etc. all of which take some amount of CPU time - and if you are profiling the software renderer, your mileage can vary quite a bit at different horizontal runs just because each column does such different tests from another.

It would be better to simply benchmark on 640x480 directly.
User avatar
Rachael
^ walking stack of unfinished projects ^
Admin
 
Joined: 13 Jan 2004
Discord: Rachael#3767
Twitch ID: madamerachelle
Github ID: madame-rachelle

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby invictius » Wed May 31, 2017 9:54 am

Rachael wrote:No, you cannot. First off, 320x200 / 640x480 is actually 5/24 (less than 1/4th).

Secondly, doing simple math such as that only covers pixel fill - it does not account for node walking, clipping processing, etc. all of which take some amount of CPU time - and if you are profiling the software renderer, your mileage can vary quite a bit at different horizontal runs just because each column does such different tests from another.

It would be better to simply benchmark on 640x480 directly.


Damn, I've benchmarked all my retro systems at 320x200 - mainly because my pentium 133 can't really handle zdoom at 640, and my 486-100 definitely can't - (9fps on an e1m1 speedrun timedemo @ 320x200!!!)
invictius
 
Joined: 03 Aug 2012

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby Rachael » Wed May 31, 2017 10:05 am

Well it's worth trying the vid_setmode command anyway - you never know, it might just work...
User avatar
Rachael
^ walking stack of unfinished projects ^
Admin
 
Joined: 13 Jan 2004
Discord: Rachael#3767
Twitch ID: madamerachelle
Github ID: madame-rachelle

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby invictius » Wed May 31, 2017 10:20 am

Rachael wrote:Well it's worth trying the vid_setmode command anyway - you never know, it might just work...


Can I confirm that 320x200 in windowed mode isn't going to give a similar result to the same resolution in full screen? I wasn't sure whether you were referring to my "just double the timedemo result for 640" or if you were referring to windowed vs fullscreen as well.
invictius
 
Joined: 03 Aug 2012

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby wildweasel » Wed May 31, 2017 10:25 am

invictius wrote:
Rachael wrote:Well it's worth trying the vid_setmode command anyway - you never know, it might just work...


Can I confirm that 320x200 in windowed mode isn't going to give a similar result to the same resolution in full screen? I wasn't sure whether you were referring to my "just double the timedemo result for 640" or if you were referring to windowed vs fullscreen as well.

For older computers/older Windows, running in windowed mode can also result in performance drops.
User avatar
wildweasel
from a different perspective.
Moderator Team Lead
 
Joined: 15 Jul 2003

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby drfrag » Wed May 31, 2017 10:56 am

320x200 was only supported natively up to win9x. That 320x200 on intel cards is a pixel quadrupled low resolution mode. You could test ZDoom 2.1.4 Classic on that 486 BTW, i also still keep a couple of them but they are just DX33s.
User avatar
drfrag
Os voy a romper a pedazos!
Vintage GZDoom Developer
 
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Location: Spain
Discord: drfrag#3555
Github ID: drfrag666

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby invictius » Wed May 31, 2017 11:17 am

drfrag wrote:320x200 was only supported natively up to win9x. That 320x200 on intel cards is a pixel quadrupled low resolution mode. You could test ZDoom 2.1.4 Classic on that 486 BTW, i also still keep a couple of them but they are just DX33s.


Windows kept complaining that "a device attached to the system is not functioning" whenever zdoom classic on the 486 would exit and try to write a new config file.
invictius
 
Joined: 03 Aug 2012

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby drfrag » Wed May 31, 2017 2:50 pm

Which windows version? 95 osr2(95b or 95c)? 95a? How much system ram?
Edit: what's the full error message? (that missing shell32.dll:... stuff).
User avatar
drfrag
Os voy a romper a pedazos!
Vintage GZDoom Developer
 
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Location: Spain
Discord: drfrag#3555
Github ID: drfrag666

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby koverhbarc » Wed May 31, 2017 6:33 pm

320x200 has actually been quadrupled by the video card since the original VGA! If it is now quadrupled in software (before the video card), then it's not the card's fault it is not available.

Anyway 320x240 should always work as a substitute for 320x200 - indeed, Doom should have originally been 320x240, but Carmack et al. did not see the advantages of square pixels - would have saved a lot of headache, wouldn't it!

Andrew Usher
koverhbarc
Banned User
 
Joined: 06 Dec 2010

Re: 320x200 suppot, when was it dropped on video cards?

Postby Graf Zahl » Thu Jun 01, 2017 12:51 am

The reason for that was that 320x240 required an undocumented hack mode that couldn't be guaranteed to exist on all hardware.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Next

Return to Legacy Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests