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.
User avatar
drfrag
Vintage GZDoom Developer
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:51 am
Location: Spain

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

Post by drfrag »

@invictius: so the engine runs and on exit you get an error message like 'could not open the file zdoom-<some junk here>.ini? Is that your problem? My junk test machines are not in very good shape.
invictius
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:44 am

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

Post by invictius »

drfrag wrote:@invictius: so the engine runs and on exit you get an error message like 'could not open the file zdoom-<some junk here>.ini? Is that your problem? My junk test machines are not in very good shape.
I don't seem to be able to replicate the error now. Other weird things were happening, such as it crashing on startup if I ran it a second time without restarting windows... the system is also doing some weird stuff such as not getting past the bios unless I switch it off and back on. The config file it's writing to is made up of garbage characters though.

Btw, what's the difference between CE and the legacy edition?
User avatar
drfrag
Vintage GZDoom Developer
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:51 am
Location: Spain

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

Post by drfrag »

Then it's not a bug but a problem with your machine. Could be faulty ram or psu or mobo.
Anyway could you try the attached exe? What's the performance @320x200? ZDoom CL is an old ZDoom version mainly for 486 and pentiums.

http://www.fileconvoy.com/dfl.php?id=g8 ... cdb55c76f2

Edit: are you really running win95? The link will expire in one day.
koverhbarc
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:26 am

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

Post by koverhbarc »

Graf Zahl wrote:The reason for that was that 320x240 required an undocumented hack mode that couldn't be guaranteed to exist on all hardware.
Not really. Doom already used a 'hacked' mode, and the way to modify it to 320x240 had already been made publicly available, and why it necessarily worked on all VGAs was also known - to the timing hardware of the chip, and of course to the monitor, it was the same as a 640x480 mode which was BIOS standard. I think merely that 320x200 had always been _the_ resolution for DOS games was enough to continue it, and only with the start of true-3D engines did non-square pixels become a programming problem. But as far as I know there's never been an official answer to this question, so I can't be certain.
invictius
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:44 am

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

Post by invictius »

drfrag wrote:Then it's not a bug but a problem with your machine. Could be faulty ram or psu or mobo.
Anyway could you try the attached exe? What's the performance @320x200? ZDoom CL is an old ZDoom version mainly for 486 and pentiums.

http://www.fileconvoy.com/dfl.php?id=g8 ... cdb55c76f2

Edit: are you really running win95? The link will expire in one day.
I am indeed running win95. Either osr2 or 2.5. With this timedemo, doom2 map 1: ]http://www.fileconvoy.com/dfl.php?id=g ... 5ea79144ea

39.5fps. Pentium 133, 48mb ram, onboard video.

486-100, 24mb ram, onboard video gets 11.5fps.
User avatar
drfrag
Vintage GZDoom Developer
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:51 am
Location: Spain

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

Post by drfrag »

I already tested win95c and ran fine, i've discarded the changes. It's really slow on that 486, probably fmod is holding it back.
User avatar
leileilol
Posts: 4436
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 10:16 am
Preferred Pronouns: She/Her
Location: GNU/Hell

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

Post by leileilol »

1987's new VGA standard only allowed it in doublescan (effectively 640x400).

Around 2004-2006 is when it started slipping out of many video mode lists on drivers. The newest card I could initialize 320x200 on with Engoo was an ATI R200-based chip

There's also many laptop video chipsets that don't provide modes <640x480 in the 90s as wel (but could display VGA fine anyhow under dos)l. Trident comes to mind
koverhbarc
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:26 am

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

Post by koverhbarc »

drfrag wrote:I already tested win95c and ran fine, i've discarded the changes. It's really slow on that 486, probably fmod is holding it back.
Test with -nosound to check that; that's what I do all the time. Seriously is there any reason to hold on to FMod when OpenAL (which runs on all machines) is now available to replace it?
User avatar
drfrag
Vintage GZDoom Developer
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:51 am
Location: Spain

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

Post by drfrag »

As i mentioned several times openal is actually clearly faster than fmod on very old machines, on a pentium ii there's not much of a difference. But the old openal backend i'm using have some limitations (that one was modified to be compatible with win95), it's fine for old machines though.

@leileilol: did you ever manage to run GZDoom @320x240 in hardware mode on 9x with old cards? I wonder how it would look. According to Graf it could use any resolution reported by the driver and i think the quake2 engine games supported that resolution natively if i'm not wrong (i know you're developing that quake 3 version).

Return to “Legacy Discussion”