Quake will require Pentium to run.
Chryalisis
> I have heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except
>perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution.
I would doubt this would happen. Many people (in fact, the majority
of the market still) have at tops 486/66 with 8 Meg. This will
probably be the minimum for the game.. but yes, I could see a
slow down.. but a Pentium only game? Haven't seen it yet..it is
forthcoming, I'm sure, But I think it will take a little while..
hell, games now are still coming out claiming "Minimum: 386/40"
instead of "Minimum 486/66" A rarity. We'll wait and see.
Chris. TMS...@KSU.KSU.EDU
Aaron E Croft
: SA...@getty.onu.edu (Sparky) writes:
: > I have heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except
: >perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution.
: I would doubt this would happen. Many people (in fact, the majority
: of the market still) have at tops 486/66 with 8 Meg. This will
: probably be the minimum for the game.. but yes, I could see a
: slow down.. but a Pentium only game? Haven't seen it yet..it is
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Slam City, a full-video basketball (sort-of) game is for
Pentium only. It bites either way. Check out alt.games.quake
for more info on what it will run on.
Later.
--
(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-
Aaron Croft http://www.cyberspace.com/acroft
Try My Game Demos/Hints Archive, Only The Best via WWW
-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)
Bill Corner
>Chryalisis (tms...@ksu.ksu.edu) wrote:
>: SA...@getty.onu.edu (Sparky) writes:
>
>: > I have heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except
>: >perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution.
>
>: I would doubt this would happen. Many people (in fact, the majority
>: of the market still) have at tops 486/66 with 8 Meg. This will
The majority?????!!
>: probably be the minimum for the game.. but yes, I could see a
>: slow down.. but a Pentium only game? Haven't seen it yet..it is
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Slam City, a full-video basketball (sort-of) game is for
> Pentium only. It bites either way. Check out alt.games.quake
> for more info on what it will run on.
> Later.
>--
> (-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-(-
> Aaron Croft http://www.cyberspace.com/acroft
> Try My Game Demos/Hints Archive, Only The Best via WWW
> -)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)-)
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Bill Corner
Okstindan Research Project
Department of Geography, phone: 0161-275-6366
Mansfield Cooper Building, fax: 0161-273-4407
University of Manchester, e-mail: mfv...@afs.mcc.ac.uk
Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL URL: tba
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Jason Spears
>> Sparky (SA...@getty.onu.edu) wrote:
>> : I have heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except
>> : perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution.
>
> a going to be made up of texture mapped polygons, with any more than two
> monsters, the game is going to stop on a 486. Unless there is some new video
> card capapble of handling that stuff that I haven't heard about.
I think id has mentioned that there will seldom be more than two
opponents at a time (except netgames). I wouldn't worry too much about
low performance on a 486DX2/66 with local bus, just don't try it on that
old SX25 "multimedia machine." |-P
--
Jason C. Spears -- jsp...@freenet.fsu.edu
"...back and to the left...back and to the left...back and to the left"
Chris Hash
>
>Sparky (SA...@getty.onu.edu) wrote:
>: I have heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except
>: perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution.
>
>I'd believe it. Since Bitmapped graphics aren't being used and the monsters
>a going to be made up of texture mapped polygons, with any more than two
>monsters, the game is going to stop on a 486. Unless there is some new video
>card capapble of handling that stuff that I haven't heard about.
I think you've got it there. From listening in on id people on irc, they're
heading towards major support for such polygon graphics accelerator cards. So
both sides are likely right. Without the accel cards, 486's may struggle a little.
I see these cards being marketed as "Game accelerator cards" or something similar.
There may already be a few around, I'm not sure. Heard a rumor about Matrox being
into this now.
-- ch...@ibm.net --
-- Signatures are irrelevant. --
-- Witty remarks are irrelevant. --
moe...@raven.cybercom.com
The fact of the matter is, Quake _will_ run well on a DX2/66 computer.
Here's why. American McGee told me that Quake will support the new
Yamaha polygon rendering acceleration chip. I'm still waiting for his
reply on whether support for any others is plannes at this time.
But basically, this chip will improve the frame rate on a DX2/66
computer by better than 10 times. It will allow the rendering of
500,000 50-pixel polygons per second. Note: It's important to
remember that a polygons/second rating is useless without the
polygon pixel count. So when you're reading about competing
chips, look for that number also. I hope id will support others as
well. As was written above, Matrox does have 3d-acceleration on
their MGA Impression boards. In conclusion, the Yamaha chip will give
a lowly DX2/66 computer the speed of at least a p5-100 when playing
games that take advantage of the chip.
chance...@empire-east.com
Thanks,
Chance Glasco
... "Yield to temptation, it may not pass your way again." - L. Long
~~~ [ LHL v2.33, Evaluation copy(30 days) - Made in Quebec... ]
\LB--- \LCLHL\BLBlue \LBv2.3\LC/\CY v2.33\NO
chance...@empire-east.com
chance...@empire-east.com
Brad Grace
>
>ch...@ibm.net (Chris Hash) wrote:
>>
>> In article <D7MIx...@scu.edu.au>, pfle...@scu.edu.au (Nightfox)
says:
>> >
>> >Sparky (SA...@getty.onu.edu) wrote:
>> >: I have heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems,
except
>> >: perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution.
>> >
>> >I'd believe it. Since Bitmapped graphics aren't being used and the
monsters
>> >a going to be made up of texture mapped polygons, with any more
than two
>> >monsters, the game is going to stop on a 486. Unless there is some
new video
>> >card capapble of handling that stuff that I haven't heard about.
>>
Actually I heard that Quake will employ a technique for the characters
that is in between the bitmapped characters in Doom and the full 3d
texture mapped polygons in Virtua Fighter. They will be like 4d boxing
with textures on the polygons. There will be flat planed representing
the body parts, ie upper arm, lower arm, and those will have the
textures on them.
Brad
JEFF DALLACQUA
-> The fact of the matter is, Quake _will_ run well on a DX2/66
-> computer. Here's why. American McGee told me that Quake will support
-> the new Yamaha polygon rendering acceleration chip. I'm still waiting
-> for his reply on whether support for any others is plannes at this
-> time.
Excuse me for asking, but who's American McGee?
Anyways, I've heard a tiny bit about Yamaha's YGV611 chip. If you can
point me anywhere as to where I can find any info on it(or any other 3D
chip) or info on planned support for it, I'd REALLY appreciate it(and
I'm interested in that reply you're expecting also).
Believe it or not, I've been hoping for over 3 years for a better PC
video standard in games, and I sure hope it happens soon. Thanks!
chance...@empire-east.com
>> Sparky (SA...@getty.onu.edu) wrote: : I have heard that
> Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except : perhaps
> on a DX4-100 with low resulution. > I'd believe it. Since
> Bitmapped graphics aren't being used and the
> a going to be made up of texture mapped polygons, with any
> more than two monsters, the game is going to stop on a 486.
> Unless there is some new
> card capapble of handling that stuff that I haven't heard about.
JS> I think id has mentioned that there will seldom be more than two
JS> opponents at a time (except netgames). I wouldn't worry too much
JS> about low performance on a 486DX2/66 with local bus, just don't
JS> try it on that old SX25 "multimedia machine." |-P
JS> --
JS> Jason C. Spears -- jsp...@freenet.fsu.edu
JS> "...back
JS> and to the left...back and to the left...back and to the left"
Do you think that it would run on a 486 50 with 8mb RAM?
... Lead me not into temptation; I can find it myself.
chance...@empire-east.com
-> The fact of the matter is, Quake _will_ run well on a DX2/66
-> computer. Here's why. American McGee told me that Quake will
-> I'm still waiting for his reply on whether support for any
-> others is plannes at this time.
JD> Excuse me for asking, but who's American McGee?
JD> Anyways, I've heard a tiny bit about Yamaha's YGV611 chip. If you
JD> can point me anywhere as to where I can find any info on it(or
JD> any other 3D chip) or info on planned support for it, I'd REALLY
JD> appreciate it(and I'm interested in that reply you're expecting also).
JD> Believe it or not, I've been hoping for over 3 years for a better
JD> PC video standard in games, and I sure hope it happens soon. Thanks!
What is all of this Quake thing I have been hearing about? Is it an
RPG, ACTION, a part 2 or something...can you tell me please? :)
Thanks
... Another casualty of the seduction of Insanity.
chance...@empire-east.com
JK> In article <3nvetn$l...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
> In <3ntgod$m...@crow.cybercom.com> moe...@raven.cybercom.com
> writes: > >ch...@ibm.net (Chris Hash) wrote: >> >> In article
> <D7MIx...@scu.edu.au>, pfle...@scu.edu.au (Nightfox) says:
> heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except
> >> >: perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution. >> > >> >I'd
> believe it. Since Bitmapped graphics aren't being used and
> characters in Doom and the full 3d texture mapped polygons in
> Virtua Fighter. They will be like 4d boxing with textures on
> the polygons. There will be flat planed representing the body
> parts, ie upper arm, lower arm, and those will have the
> textures on them. > Brad
JK> Alone in the dark 3D ?
JK> -jk
So Quake is sorta like playing doom, but the animation is more like
Virtual Fighter or Alone in the Dark?
... What do you mean? You actually read this Tagline?!?
chance...@empire-east.com
>> Sparky (SA...@getty.onu.edu) wrote: : I have heard that
> Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except : perhaps
> on a DX4-100 with low resulution. > I'd believe it. Since
> Bitmapped graphics aren't being used and the
> a going to be made up of texture mapped polygons, with any
> more than two monsters, the game is going to stop on a 486.
> Unless there is some new
> card capapble of handling that stuff that I haven't heard about.
JS> I think id has mentioned that there will seldom be more than two
JS> opponents at a time (except netgames). I wouldn't worry too much
JS> about low performance on a 486DX2/66 with local bus, just don't
JS> try it on that old SX25 "multimedia machine." |-P
JS> --
JS> Jason C. Spears -- jsp...@freenet.fsu.edu
JS> "...back
JS> and to the left...back and to the left...back and to the left"
Do you think that it would run on a 486 50 with 8mb RAM?
... Lead me not into temptation; I can find it myself.
chance...@empire-east.com
-> The fact of the matter is, Quake _will_ run well on a DX2/66
-> computer. Here's why. American McGee told me that Quake will
-> support the new Yamaha polygon rendering acceleration chip.
-> I'm still waiting for his reply on whether support for any
-> others is plannes at this time.
JD> Excuse me for asking, but who's American McGee?
JD> Anyways, I've heard a tiny bit about Yamaha's YGV611 chip. If you
JD> can point me anywhere as to where I can find any info on it(or
JD> any other 3D chip) or info on planned support for it, I'd REALLY
JD> appreciate it(and I'm interested in that reply you're expecting also).
JD> Believe it or not, I've been hoping for over 3 years for a better
JD> PC video standard in games, and I sure hope it happens soon. Thanks!
What is all of this Quake thing I have been hearing about? Is it an
RPG, ACTION, a part 2 or something...can you tell me please? :)
Thanks
... Another casualty of the seduction of Insanity.
chance...@empire-east.com
JK> In article <3nvetn$l...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
JK> br...@ix.netcom.com (Brad Grace) writes:
> In <3ntgod$m...@crow.cybercom.com> moe...@raven.cybercom.com
> writes: > >ch...@ibm.net (Chris Hash) wrote: >> >> In article
> <D7MIx...@scu.edu.au>, pfle...@scu.edu.au (Nightfox) says:
> heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems, except
> >> >: perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution. >> > >> >I'd
> believe it. Since Bitmapped graphics aren't being used and
> technique for the characters that is in between the bitmapped
> characters in Doom and the full 3d texture mapped polygons in
> Virtua Fighter. They will be like 4d boxing with textures on
> the polygons. There will be flat planed representing the body
> parts, ie upper arm, lower arm, and those will have the
> textures on them. > Brad
JK> Alone in the dark 3D ?
JK> -jk
So Quake is sorta like playing doom, but the animation is more like
Virtual Fighter or Alone in the Dark?
... What do you mean? You actually read this Tagline?!?
moe...@raven.cybercom.com
>
>
> -> The fact of the matter is, Quake _will_ run well on a DX2/66
> -> the new Yamaha polygon rendering acceleration chip. I'm still waiting
> -> time.
>
> Excuse me for asking, but who's American McGee?
>
> point me anywhere as to where I can find any info on it(or any other 3D
> chip) or info on planned support for it, I'd REALLY appreciate it(and
> I'm interested in that reply you're expecting also).
>
> video standard in games, and I sure hope it happens soon. Thanks!
American McGee is a tech support/level designer/email guy at id.
Mail him at amer...@idsoftware.com with any questions. For reasonable
inquiries, he usually gets back to you real quick.
For more info on the Yamaha chip, buy the current issue of Computer
Game Review (that's Review, -not- World).
Moebius
Mark S. Wyman
>In <3ntgod$m...@crow.cybercom.com> moe...@raven.cybercom.com writes:
>>
>>ch...@ibm.net (Chris Hash) wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <D7MIx...@scu.edu.au>, pfle...@scu.edu.au (Nightfox)
>says:
>>> >
>>> >Sparky (SA...@getty.onu.edu) wrote:
>>> >: I have heard that Quake will not even run on most 486 systems,
>except
>>> >: perhaps on a DX4-100 with low resulution.
>>> >
>>> >I'd believe it. Since Bitmapped graphics aren't being used and the
>monsters
>>> >a going to be made up of texture mapped polygons, with any more
>than two
>>> >monsters, the game is going to stop on a 486. Unless there is some
>new video
>>> >card capapble of handling that stuff that I haven't heard about.
>>>
>Actually I heard that Quake will employ a technique for the characters
>that is in between the bitmapped characters in Doom and the full 3d
>texture mapped polygons in Virtua Fighter. They will be like 4d boxing
>with textures on the polygons. There will be flat planed representing
>the body parts, ie upper arm, lower arm, and those will have the
>textures on them.
What's the difference between this and Origin's BioForge characters
which appear to be texture mapped polygon characters?
Mark
Brad Grace
>
>
>In article <3nvetn$l...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>, br...@ix.netcom.com (Brad Grace)
>
>Alone in the dark 3D ?
Actually Alone in the Dark has non-textured 3d characters, Quake will
be different. Those characters will be flat planes with the texures on
them, actually, it is kind of hard to explain. Check out 4d boxing.
Brad
Brad Grace
>>that is in between the bitmapped characters in Doom and the full 3d
>>texture mapped polygons in Virtua Fighter. They will be like 4d
boxing
>>with textures on the polygons. There will be flat planed
representing
>>the body parts, ie upper arm, lower arm, and those will have the
>>textures on them.
>
>which appear to be texture mapped polygon characters?
>
>Mark
Imagine the upper arm, in bioforge that upper arm would be a cylinder
made up with about ten to twelve polygons around to make it look
circular. From what I have heard, QUake will just have one plane in
the shape that that cylindar would make in 3d, and the texture would
then morph with it. Check out 4d boxing and I think you will sort of
see my point. To me this is good news because then the game will much
more managable in the frame rate department.
Brad
Hordur Kvaran
>Alone in the dark 3D ?
> -jk
How many polygons make up the characters in Alone in the dark? Does anyone
know? Hardly anything close to the 200 polygons they are using now to make
the quake-character and Alone was pretty slow (perhaps on purpose).
Hordur Kvaran
hor...@rhi.hi.is
*****************************************************
This tag line conTains exactly threee errors.
*****************************************************
Frans P. de Vries
} Excuse me for asking, but who's American McGee?
He's one of id Software's tech support people (Shawn Green being the other).
He also designed a special DeathMatch level that was separately released.
In the RGCD FAQ, posted weekly to r.g.c.d.announce, you'll find:
4E. Where is that new deathmatch PWAD by id?
ftp://{INS site/path HERE}/levels/doom2/g-i/idmap01.zip [DOOM II MAP01]
Heretic registered includes the same level (with monsters) as E4M1.
where {INS site/path HERE} is a DOOM ftp site, eg. ftp.cdrom.com/pub/idgames
--
Frans P. de Vries | f...@xymph.iaf.nl | Rec.Games.Computer.Doom FAQ maintainer
--
Looking for more DOOM, DOOM ][, Heretic help and info? Visit the newsgroups
rec.games.computer.doom.{announce,editing,help,misc,playing} & read the FAQ!
Loke Teng Yan
>: I would doubt this would happen. Many people (in fact, the majority
>: of the market still) have at tops 486/66 with 8 Meg. This will
>: probably be the minimum for the game.. but yes, I could see a
>: slow down.. but a Pentium only game? Haven't seen it yet..it is
The more gripping thing about Quake is that if you run it on a network, it
becomes even faster than a single game on your machine! That I've heard from
somewhere, go find out.
--
Teng Yan, Loke aka Cow | finger for info | Electronic & Computer Engineering
Internet: 9320...@np.ac.sg | Ngee Ann Polytechnic, Republic of Singapore
http://www-bprc.mps.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/hpp?yan_page.html | Quake in Cow!
____________________________________________________________________________
Brian Hillegass
>>Chryalisis (tms...@ksu.ksu.edu) wrote:
>
>>: I would doubt this would happen. Many people (in fact, the majority
>>: of the market still) have at tops 486/66 with 8 Meg. This will
>>: probably be the minimum for the game.. but yes, I could see a
>>: slow down.. but a Pentium only game? Haven't seen it yet..it is
>The more gripping thing about Quake is that if you run it on a network, it
>becomes even faster than a single game on your machine! That I've heard from
>somewhere, go find out.
>
programs. It would make sense that a network game would be quicker since your
machine only has to run the client s/ware. When running solo, we'll probably
have to knock down some of the settings to make it more enjoyable.
'Tis amazing how Quake has had a life of it's own, and it's still 6-10 months
away!! Were we *this* anxious for Doom before it's release? :)
--
Brian (bri...@fast.net) "As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of
----Let's Go Flyers!!---- human existence is to kindle a light of meaning
1995 Atl. Div. Champions! in the darkness of mere being." - C.G. Jung
Frans P. de Vries
} 'Tis amazing how Quake has had a life of it's own, and it's still 6-10 months
} away!!
Yeah :)
} Were we *this* anxious for Doom before it's release? :)
Guess not, the very first pre-release DOOM FAQ appeared only one and a half
month before the game's release. But back then, 6-10 (or whatever) months
before its release, nobody knew how much of a leap DOOM would be over Wolf3D.
Now, imagining how much a leap Quake could be over DOOM already seems to
carry its own momentum.
Adam Williamson
> >
> > Excuse me for asking, but who's American McGee?
Doom 2 level creator. 'Nuff said.
--
---
_________________________________________
|Adam Williamson |Maintainer of the |
|ad...@scss.demon.co.uk|Wolfenstein 3D FAQ,|
|"The views expressed |and total computer |
|here do not represent|nut. "Computers |
|those of my pet |forever! Pass me |
|lemming." |those pills! |
|_____________________|___________________|
Luc Duguay
Dave Morris <dmo...@globalx.net> wrote:
>WIN95 will be able to help handle the graphics load, so 486 machines can
>run the program.
Keep dreamin...
Luc Duguay
------------------
Le groupe CGI Inc.
ldu...@cam.org
Dan Ehrig
: The more gripping thing about Quake is that if you run it on a network, it
: becomes even faster than a single game on your machine! That I've heard from
: somewhere, go find out.
Before you wonder how that is possible, let me clarify: Quake network
games will be run on a client-server basis, usually with a workstation or
mini playing the server role. Clients will connect to it, ala netrek.
And, as far as the subject line goes, no announcement has yet been made
as to the hardware requirements (except that the server should be
somewhere in the Pentium 90/16 meg range)
-Dan
--
My inner child is a mean little fucker.
Martin Hay
> : computer by better than 10 times. It will allow the rendering of
> : 500,000 50-pixel polygons per second. Note: It's important to
> : remember that a polygons/second rating is useless without the
> : polygon pixel count. So when you're reading about competing
> : chips, look for that number also. I hope id will support others as
> : well. As was written above, Matrox does have 3d-acceleration on
> : their MGA Impression boards. In conclusion, the Yamaha chip will give
> : a lowly DX2/66 computer the speed of at least a p5-100 when playing
> : games that take advantage of the chip.
>
> to play every thing that I want without too many worries, but if this chip
> was able to run on my DX-50 that could lengthen the life of my computer by a
> few years.
>
> Anyway looking forward to hearing more about this chip.
It'll only be useful for games that actually USE it.
If you're interested in the performance of Quake, have a look at the
alt.games.quake group. I posted a long explanation of how the game
could run on a 486 (DX2/66) at 15fps, and still look good. This was
using 200-polygon characters, although the number of characters was
limited to 8 to maintain this refresh rate. 100-polygon characters
would be recognisable and let you go further to about 16 figures on
screen.
This is WITHOUT hardware acceleration.
If you want to know more on this, read my posting on alt.games.quake.
But bear in mind that it's all estimation and educated guesswork.
Bye,
Martin.
Martin Hay
> WIN95 will be able to help handle the graphics load, so 486 machines can
> run the program.
Not Entirely true. It'll handle the load if the machine has a 3D hardware
accelerator installed, AND the game is written to use the Win95 graphics
routines. So for most of us, Win95'll make it slower than dedicated graphics
routines, optimized for the specific application.
Bye,
Martin.
Frederick Y Mah
>Bye,
>Martin.
Considering that the game won't be out for probably another year, I don't
think we really need to worry about whether the computer will have enough
power to run it. Most people will probably have Pentiums by then.
--
Fred Mah --- fm...@widget.ecn.purdue.edu
Martin Hay
> cee...@cee.hw.ac.uk (Martin Hay) writes:
>
> >In article <3o363k$2...@news.globalx.net>, Dave Morris <dmo...@globalx.net> writes:
> >> WIN95 will be able to help handle the graphics load, so 486 machines can
> >> run the program.
>
>
> >Not Entirely true. It'll handle the load if the machine has a 3D hardware
> >accelerator installed, AND the game is written to use the Win95 graphics
> >routines. So for most of us, Win95'll make it slower than dedicated graphics
> >routines, optimized for the specific application.
>
> think we really need to worry about whether the computer will have enough
> power to run it. Most people will probably have Pentiums by then.
>
Rendering a good 3D environment takes a lot of polygons, thus a lot of
processor. A FAST Pentium might just handle a busy 3D world.
Most people WON'T have Pentiums. Most people buying computers will be
getting Pentiums, but those who have bought machines in the last couple of
years won't want to change.
In that case, a 3D accelerator is the best way to get >P5 speed on <=486.
Bye,
Martin.
Frederick Y Mah
>Bye,
>Martin.
Let me restate that. By then, most people will have computers with
the power of a Pentium. They will not necessarily need to have a Pentium.
I myself will probably wait to P6 for a new system. In the meantime I
think I can get by with an EDRAM mb for better than P90 performance.
I would guess that by the end of this year the 3D processors will begin
to take hold too. This means Win95 for Quake? I know it will be using
3D sound technology which has an API for Win95.
Tero Paananen
>Let me restate that. By then, most people will have computers with
>the power of a Pentium. They will not necessarily need to have a Pentium.
You have any data to back your assumptions up? Most people...personally I
believe you are way off.
-TPP
Marshall Ward
: -TPP
I don't know about that. Taking a quick poll of my work area (12 engineers with PC's
at home) All of them are 486's of various speeds. Not one is planning the purchase
of a Pentium system in the near future. The Pentium Overdrive chip will keep these
systems going for some time to come. Think about it. A Pentium upgrade is a
serious hardware investment, for what? Improvement of game performance. Windows
applications (spreadsheet, word processor, Quicken, etc.) run just fine on a 486
machine. Just upgrading with a Pentium motherboard is not really an option. When I
upgraded from my 286 to a 486 it was a motherboard and memory, my other hardware
plugged right in. Then over time I replaced video card, IDE controller, etc.
If I bought a Pentium motherboard, I would also need new memory (my 8 meg are on
30 pin SIMMS, Pentium mbds need 72 pin) add $300. New video card. Most Pentiums are
PCI. My VLB 2Meg Hercules card won't work. add $200+. New HD controller. (also VLB)
add <$100. Pentium motherboards , (my guess) $300-400. Total upgrade price is at
least $800-$1000. Just to play faster games? I don't think so. I'll wait until
the Pentium overdrive is $200 or so and spring for that. I'm sure that will hold
me over until the P6 or P7 come down in price.
I don't think I am alone either. I agree with the original poster that "most people"
will be unwilling to throw another $1000-$2000 at a Pentium system when they have
a perfectly good 486 system running. New systems? Sure, buy the Pentium. Still own
a 386? Sure, upgrade to Pentium if you want although many people are still happily
running thier 386 systems. Upgrade a 486? Nah. In most cases the price for the
performance increase is much too high.
Marshall
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Marshall G. Ward, III Phone: 707-577-3415 |
| Hewlett-Packard Company FAX: 707-577-5433 |
| Microwave Instruments Division UNIX: ma...@sr.hp.com |
| 1400 Fountaingrove Parkway, 4UST TELNET: 1-577-3415 |
| Santa Rosa, California, USA |
| 95403 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|-"And if I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I don't know"------|
|-------------------------------------------------------------KANSAS--------|
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CPuryear
else's).
Quake will be compiled on a pentium system, obviously making a pentium the
system of choice to play it on, but runable on a 486. Likewise, doom was
compiled on a 486, but runable on a 386.
How do I know this? This is straight out of Romero's mouth
Christian Puryear
Grady N Drew
<snip>
: You mean Quake's gonna be compiled in 586-specific instructions and still
: runs on 486? I don't think so...please explain.
: --
: --------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
: http://www.paranoia.com/~mugen/ tera...@gold.tc.umn.edu
:
: --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since when did a Pentium become a 586?
JEFF DALLACQUA
-> still runs on 486? I don't think so...please explain.
There's no such thing as Pentium-specific instructions anyway. Well,
actually there are. The P5-only instructions I know of are to read and
write to a set of MSR's that are helpful for development(they give you
cycle count, cache hits, and other useful stuff like that) but probably
would not be included in the final piece of release code.
If you "optimize" for a Pentium you order your code specially and try to
use instructions together that can be processed in parallel by the
dual-pipeline. And perhaps use the Pentium's FP unit since it's much
better than the 486's and try to get some FP operations done in parallel
also.
nrmou...@vms4.sci.csupomona.edu
> You mean Quake's gonna be compiled in 586-specific instructions and still
Just because it's compiled on a Pentium doesn't mean the instruction codes are
pentium specific. More likely that it will take advantage of Pentium's features
-- Compiling it on a Pentium means that since the Pentium is the test bed,
that's their target computer to build for - since that
is where they'll decide if something is too slow or too fast.
Therefore if you want Quake to run on your machine like it does on their's
, get their machine(!)
BTW - this was NOT intended as a flame
Dave Pfrommer
Ed McCreary
>In article <3r4vff$s...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, cpur...@aol.com says...
>You mean Quake's gonna be compiled in 586-specific instructions and still
>runs on 486? I don't think so...please explain.
There are several optimization techniques you can use that will
benefit code running on Pentiums but not affect performance on
486 or lower processors. Knowing which instructions the Pentium
can perfrom in parallel and ordering your instructions accordingly
can give a nice boost.
Guillaume Schmid
: In article <3r4vff$s...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, cpur...@aol.com says...
: >
: >I saw this thread and thought I'd add my own two cents (or rather someone
: >else's).
: >Quake will be compiled on a pentium system, obviously making a pentium
: the
: >system of choice to play it on, but runable on a 486. Likewise, doom was
: >compiled on a 486, but runable on a 386.
: >How do I know this? This is straight out of Romero's mouth
: >
: >Christian Puryear
: You mean Quake's gonna be compiled in 586-specific instructions and still
: runs on 486? I don't think so...please explain.
The 486 and the pentium have the same instruction set. The difference between
the two is the internal architecture. It means that there is some optimizing
tricks you can use to speed things a little ( pipes, internal cache etc...).
The pentium doesnt handle some instruction the same way as the 486. So you can
design your code to be extremely efficient for the pentium. But those tricks
wont speed things for the 486 (well, for most of cases, those optimisation
doesnt hurt).
Well, hope I was clear...
See ya !
-*- Seul le Calme d'un Lac peut endiguer la Fureur du Torrent -*- Toki -
-*- Once more, Spaceman Cliff Beats All Odds to Save the Day ! -*- Moi -
Adam Williamson
dr...@cps.msu.edu "Grady N Drew" writes:
>
> Since when did a Pentium become a 586?
>
>
Since noone could be arsed writing Pentium any more.
Dennis O'Connor -FT-~
pfro...@scus1.ctstateu.edu (Dave Pfrommer) writes:
] In article <3r73j0$1f...@msunews.cl.msu.edu>,] >
] >Since when did a Pentium become a 586?
] >
]
] The Pentium IS a 586 processor...
No, it is not. A Pentium(R) processor is a Pentium(R) processor.
It is not a "586", and a "586" is not it.
--
Dennis O'Connor doco...@sedona.intel.com
i960(R) Microprocessor Division Not an Intel spokesman.
TIP#518 Fear is the enemy.
Dave Glue
>You mean Quake's gonna be compiled in 586-specific instructions and still
>runs on 486? I don't think so...please explain.
There are virtually no Pentium-specific instructions that add a great
deal, or any, to program speed. What they mean by "Pentium optimized"
is by using a Pentium compiler that orders instructions so that the
Pentium's architecture can be used to its fullest.
However, not only is this method of optimization compatible with the
486, it also is _faster_ on the 486 than 486-optimized code! The same
optimizations for branch prediction on the Pentium also apply for the
486. It doesn't give the boost that 486-optimized code on the Pentium
as compared to Pentium-optimized code on the same Pentium does, but
Pentium code on a 486 does give a minor percentage speed boost over
486 code on a 486.
I have to lie down now, gave myself a headache.
Black_Burton
You are correct, 586 does not exist. However, Intel used the name Pentium for copyright protection as 586 is not copyright protected because it is numberic. Also, Penta means 5, correct? This would have been the step from 486 to 586. Great marketing tool, huh.
Dana Taylor
writes:
Who cares if it requires a Pentium to run. In Southern California, you
can get a Pentium 100 with 8 MB RAM, 2MB PCI Video Card, 15" Monitor,
and a 850 MB HD for only $1400. Prices keep dropping fast. I paid $1600
for a 486DX2 66 last year with no monitor and 420 MB HD. I'm real upset
that I didn't wait. Oh well, in 2 months I'll have a great Pentium
system for less than what I paid for my already ancient 486 system.
See ya,
Dana
Andy Stiff
doco...@sedona.intel.com (Dennis O'Connor -FT-~) wrote:
>
>pfro...@scus1.ctstateu.edu (Dave Pfrommer) writes:
>] In article <3r73j0$1f...@msunews.cl.msu.edu>,
>] dr...@cps.msu.edu (Grady N Drew) wrote:
>>>Since when did a Pentium become a 586?
>>The Pentium IS a 586 processor...
>No, it is not. A Pentium(R) processor is a Pentium(R) processor.
>It is not a "586", and a "586" is not it.
I think most people would agree that by virtue of being the successor to the
486 the Pentium is a '586'. Most people that I know, both computer
professionals and otherwise would agree with this. Technically the Intel guy
is correct and you can argue the details all day but you're only confussing
new users by making a distinction.
Andy
PS. Nice '(R)'s for the trade mark by the way, Intel guy through and through
(grin).
Email : ast...@cmutual.com.au
Co-Cam, Melbourne, OZ (Phone : (613) 9200 3777)
Llama's are bigger than frogs
Persiville
Is this true?
*******************************************************************
Percivile | Famous Last Words:
The Pure | "We can take them, they're only kobalds!"
Soon to be Amish Dragon!
********************************************************************
Haber Gaul
: A 586 is the next faster chip after the pentium I was told.
Twit!
--
|---------------------------------------------|
| G. Haber | s271...@techst02.technion.ac.il |
| DON'T PANIC! it's only me |
|---------------------------------------------|
Haber Gaul
: You are correct, 586 does not exist.
: However, Intel used the name Pentium for copyright protection as 586 is
: not copyright protect
Wrong. Intel added 100 to the 486 and the sum they came up with was:
585.999998 which was to long and weird to use so they named it Pentium
instead.
Lon Seidman
persi...@aol.com (Persiville) wrote:
>A 586 is the next faster chip after the pentium I was told.
>Is this true?
There is a generic (non-intel) "586" chip out on the market I beleive.
Needless to say, Pentiums are probably the best ones out there at the moment.
They're very fast, and not very expensive. Pretty soon the P6 will be coming.
It's a combination risc/cisc chip and will be the fastest thing out there for
person computing.
---------
Lon Seidman
l...@pcnet.com
sei...@uhavax.hartford.edu
http://www.pcnet.com/~lon
----------
Public keyring available on my web page.
-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: 2.6
owHrZJjKxMqo/+RLZfZzU1YVx6K1jIzOr1kYGqJ3q5t3R/GIflK/sV41fY+1l/m5
bzX3XpjeUvX79bB336ublbkb8xWSmuMmsN16e2W9ldv7tc3BLD3HlujntUmu0ctm
Ze862eh3T6p03qGX2ar6XqEdB700D3UHN3x/u219wvXg9NyeN+8r/GemF8zrXrbk
u0LE4erkAl/XN5XJBQIH97KvaS+RSLbSz8wrSS3KSy3RL85Mz0ssKS3SK0hOZQAC
XRjg5fLJz1MITs1MyU3M4+XKyc9zKEgG6tBLzs/l5SqGiDuUZiSWJVboZSQWlaTl
F6XopaaU8nJllJQUWOnrl5eX68G16NcBTeDlghuvCwA=
=RHly
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
Alexandre Petrenko
Ted Petrenko
--
======================================================================
Alexandre Petrenko petr...@iro.umontreal.ca
Universite de Montreal, Dept. IRO. S-234, C.P. 6128, succursale A
Montreal (Quebec) H3C 3J7, CANADA (514) 343-7535
Scorpion
Yes, you can consider the P6 to be a 686.
Scorpion
J Simon Mellor
In article <3sg2p6$m...@ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>, Dana Taylor (da...@ix.netcom.com) writes:
>In <3sf4e5$c...@maverick.tad.eds.com> bur...@tpd.eds.com (Black_Burton)
>writes:
>>
>>
>because it is numberic. Also, Penta means 5, correct? This would have
>been the step from 486 to 586. Great marketing tool, huh.
>>
>
>Who cares if it requires a Pentium to run. In Southern California, you
>can get a Pentium 100 with 8 MB RAM, 2MB PCI Video Card, 15" Monitor,
>and a 850 MB HD for only $1400. Prices keep dropping fast. I paid $1600
>for a 486DX2 66 last year with no monitor and 420 MB HD. I'm real upset
>that I didn't wait. Oh well, in 2 months I'll have a great Pentium
>system for less than what I paid for my already ancient 486 system.
>
> See ya,
> Dana
>
>
pay here - we struggle to save up for 486 machines!