Sonic and Sega Retro Message Board: S2HD Render Engine Test - Sonic and Sega Retro Message Board

Jump to content

Hey there, Guest!  (Log In · Register) Help
  • 5 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last ►
    Locked
    Locked Forum

Choose graphics rendering system for Sonic 2 HD's new engine in development (119 member(s) have cast votes)

1: Which render would you like the S2HD engine to be primary developed with?

  1. You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

2: Do you want Sonic 2 HD to run fast rather than look good?

  1. You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote

S2HD Render Engine Test Test and choose between 5 different renders...

#1 User is offline LOst 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 05:26 PM

  • Posts: 4886
  • Joined: 10-January 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Wiki edits:2
Download:
http://www.logotypes.se/sonic/HD/TechDemoS...leaseRender.rar

Sonic 2 HD is a graphics/music project in first hand, meaning that all art produced here will be displayed ingame. My job is to ensure that the art produced here will be displayed correctly ingame. My choice in Direct3D development was right at the time, but it restricted the project to the Microsoft Windows platform.
The technical demonstration second release (can be downloaded in a sticky thread at this forum) uses an engine that is directly connected to Direct3D and requires 10 MB of DLL files.
This poll release is the same game as the 4X version only that it no longer requires Direct3D! Thus no more DLL files. Also this version has no pixel shader (no water ripple in the background)!

When you start the game, you will be prompted to choose a render from a list R1 to R5. They all use different techniques to draw the game. It is up to you to find the one that is best for you!
Why the R(number) names?
It is so that you can't be bias when you choose an answer based on the technique names. I don't want people to choose (example) Pepsi over Coke or Coke over Pepsi without giving both a try, even subconsciously.

So how do you test RAM usage? in Windows XP/Vista you press Ctrl+Alt+Del and choose "Task Manager". In the first tab "Applications", right click on the game name and choose "Go to process". You will now be in the second tab "Processes", and it will show (high lighted) the current RAM usage for the game's process. The best way to check the RAM usage is during the 16 players on bridge demo. Wait at the title screen for the demo to play. It is important to check the RAM usage for all the renders since they all use different ways to allocate texture data.

Now don't rule out a render because of its heavy RAM usage! The render might just be the fastest of them all!

So how do you check the CPU usage? Well you don't! It is the GPU (the CPU on your graphics card) that does all the hard work. If the game goes slow, it is your graphics card that can't keep up with the quality of the game's graphics. There are different ways to see how good your GPU is depending on what graphics card you have. The easiest way is to keep an eye on the "frames per second" counter.

So does it look good? How do you know if it looks good? Well, first the game's window needs to be scaled up to its max size (1280x960 pixels for the client area of the window). Your desktop needs to be bigger than the max window size to allow just that. Then take a print screen of one render and compare it against a print screen of another render.

But to help me further and prove your case, you can choose to post screen shots of renders in this thread, please! I suggest posting in the PNG format, and Alt+Prt Sc the window when it shows the DISCLAIMER scene (it is the best screen to show and compare basic pixels). Don't forget to name it after the render number and post your graphics card specs! It is a good way for me to see for myself how good the game will look on your hardware.



So you don't want to do all this?
Then post a NULL vote. We beg you not to mislead us!

This poll will end on 1st June. I'm predicting we will see a clear choice in a month or so. It will be perfect for the development of the brand new Sonic 2 HD 1080p HD engine.

Other than that, the development of Sonic 2 HD is progressing nicely.

/LOst

#2 User is offline Chimpo 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 05:31 PM

  • Posts: 7178
  • Joined: 26-July 06
  • Gender:Male
Nice 404 buddy.

#3 User is offline TyrantWave 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 05:38 PM

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: 22-September 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK, Essex
Doesn't run under WINE. Just logs me out (lolwut)

Edit: The log out was caused because the demo killed Xorg. (Window manager)
This post has been edited by TyrantWave: 05 April 2009 - 05:40 PM

#4 User is offline LOst 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 05:46 PM

  • Posts: 4886
  • Joined: 10-January 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Wiki edits:2

View PostTyrantWave, on Apr 6 2009, 02:38 AM, said:

Doesn't run under WINE. Just logs me out (lolwut)
It might not run under Wine because of other issues.
I have had it tested under Wine though, and it gave nice results when it came to rendering graphics with the correct render (which I am not allowed to tell)

EDIT: Shall work in Wine now.
This post has been edited by LOst: 07 April 2009 - 07:06 AM

#5 User is offline Chimpo 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 05:53 PM

  • Posts: 7178
  • Joined: 26-July 06
  • Gender:Male
Only one I got 60fps was R5.

All other versions were shit and below 30fps.

#6 User is offline Vincent 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:01 PM

  • Sonic 2HD - Project Leader & Character Artist
  • Posts: 1253
  • Joined: 03-May 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Project:Sonic 2 HD
  • Wiki edits:6
Thanks for your testing & voting everyone! ^^

This step has a very great meaning for S2HD dev.
As LOst already outlined it perfectly, I will invite you all to elaborate your numbers by presenting your preference, as much detailed as you can (preferably with your PC specs and performances):

Example:

PC OS:(WinXP)
DualCore 6300 @ 1,86 /,87
RAM 2GB
VIDEO CARD: Ati Radeon X1550 512MB


R1: 58/60fps CPU 24 RAM 203.952
R2: 59/60fps CPU 16 RAM 108.436
R3: 58/60fps CPU 11 RAM 108.328
R4: 58/60fps CPU 14 RAM 108.360
R5: 59/60fps CPU 50 RAM 175.676


The best looking one is R5, the fastest is R3.

From R1 to R2 I get a slight blurred pixel edges
Posted Image

R5 is pixel perfect
Posted Image


Thanks again everyone! ^^
This post has been edited by Vincent: 05 April 2009 - 06:29 PM

#7 User is offline TyrantWave 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:04 PM

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: 22-September 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK, Essex
1.6GHz 1GB RAM laptop, Ubuntu running the game under WINE.

R1 and R3 killed Xorg and logged me out.

R2 and R4 had a flickering screen, then completely killed my laptop. Had to hard reboot it.

R5 just said pixel error and didn't do anything.

Therefore: null vote from me.

I can watch HD movies fine, but nothing here.

#8 User is offline muteKi 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:15 PM

  • Fuck it
  • Posts: 7500
  • Joined: 03-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Wiki edits:91
#5 actually seems to hold at 60 fps but there seems to be an issue:
Posted Image
:)

#9 User is offline evilhamwizard 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:16 PM

  • Posts: 1262
  • Joined: 16-June 04
  • Gender:Male
  • Wiki edits:109
I get 60fps constantly using R5, no decrease in performance from what I saw. And this is coming from a PC that's running MSN, OpenOffice, Newsleecher, Winamp, and Firefox all at the same time on a two year old rig:

C2D 2.13GHz @ 2.90 GHz
2gb DDR RAM
1400x900 LCD
GeForce 8600 GTS 256MB (Overclocked to something)
Windows XP Pro x64

I could go with R5, but I chose R1 because that ran smoothly no matter what I did in the background.

#10 User is offline LOst 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:17 PM

  • Posts: 4886
  • Joined: 10-January 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Wiki edits:2
QUOTE (muteKi @ Apr 6 2009, 03:15 AM) [post="297800"]Posted Image
:)[/quote]

XD

Yea, it is a little extreme, but thanks to that, you get 60fps. No window scaling = less CPU. Smaller rendering area = less GPU.

#11 User is offline Guess Who 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:18 PM

  • It's a miracle!
  • Posts: 4258
  • Joined: 22-December 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico
  • Project:lol
  • Wiki edits:2
System specs:
Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit
Core 2 Duo T8400 @ 2.26Ghz
4GB DDR2 RAM
256MB ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 overclocked to 700mhz

Tested by running around/jumping/spindashing in the main demo level as Sonic.

R1: 60/60 FPS, 49% CPU, 490,224K mem (what the fuck)
R2: 60/60 FPS, from 15-50% CPU, 201,348K mem
R3: 60/60 FPS, 50% CPU, 201,088K mem
R4: 60/60 FPS, 30-50% CPU, 203,652K mem
R5: 60/60 FPS, 50% CPU, 198,584K mem

The RAM usage is pretty damn ridiculous on all of them, but R1 is particularly bad.

R5 doesn't seem to scale down to smaller resolutions like the other four.

Performance isn't an issue on my machine, and I can't really see a marked difference between them, so I don't have a preference. I would avoid R5 so that people with lower resolutions can play the game, though. (case in point: I only run at 1440x900 due to lol laptop)
This post has been edited by Guess Who: 05 April 2009 - 06:25 PM

#12 User is offline GerbilSoft 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:25 PM

  • RickRotate'd.
  • Posts: 2744
  • Joined: 11-January 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
  • Project:Gens/GS
  • Wiki edits:5,000 + one spin
CPU: Intel Core Duo T2500 (2.00 GHz)

Memory usage:

R1 with 64 MB VRAM:
- Open Stage: 2917 MB virtual; 230 MB allocated; 18 MB shared
- Multi Bridge: 2924 MB virtual; 219 MB allocated; 17 MB shared

R2 with 64 MB VRAM:
- Open Stage: 2916 MB virtual; 185 MB allocated; 19 MB shared [swinging bridge is missing]
- Multi Bridge: 2911 MB virtual; 179 MB allocated; 18 MB shared [waterfall is missing]

R2 with 256 MB VRAM:
- Open Stage: 2917 MB virtual; 230 MB allocated; 18 MB shared
- Multi Bridge: 2924 MB virtual; 220 MB allocated; 17 MB shared

R3 with 256 MB VRAM:
- Open Stage: 2917 MB virtual; 230 MB allocated; 18 MB shared
- Multi Bridge: 2924 MB virtual; 218 MB allocated; 16 MB shared

R4 with 256 MB VRAM:
- Open Stage: 2917 MB virtual; 230 MB allocated; 18 MB shared
- Multi Bridge: 2926 MB virtual; 220 MB allocated; 16 MB shared

R5: Doesn't start: "No compatible pixel format descriptor!"

Other notes:

With R2 and R3, wine needed more than 64 MB video memory. (OpenGL doesn't have any way to tell the program how much VRAM is present, so the user has to set a registry key in WINE to tell it how much VRAM it should report to D3D apps.)

With 64 MB VRAM, the following artifacts were noticed: (I increased wine's VRAM setting to 256 MB after testing R3/open.)
- R2: no swinging bridge in open demo; no waterfall in multi-bridge demo.
- R3: swinging bridge only had the blue sphere in the open demo.

EDIT: Incidentally, I attempted to run it in Valgrind to look for memory leaks, but the program wouldn't start. It shows an error message: "Failed to initialize object heap." I'm guessing this is a bug in the way Valgrind interacts with Wine, but it could be a memory allocation bug in S2HD.
This post has been edited by GerbilSoft: 05 April 2009 - 06:46 PM

#13 User is offline LOst 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:29 PM

  • Posts: 4886
  • Joined: 10-January 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Wiki edits:2

View PostGerbilSoft, on Apr 6 2009, 03:25 AM, said:

With R2 and R3, wine needed more than 64 MB video memory.

Thanks, that is very useful info! Noted :)

#14 User is offline Lostgame 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 06:57 PM

  • 'There are feathers everywhere, but it's fine...'
  • Posts: 3996
  • Joined: 02-December 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON
  • Project:the love orchestra
  • Wiki edits:2
R5 performs and looks best on my machine.

#15 User is offline T.Q. 

Posted 05 April 2009 - 08:08 PM

  • The Sims 2, Dr. Julian Ivo Robotnik
  • Posts: 440
  • Joined: 28-August 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth, Milky Way Galaxy
  • Project:The company is now bankrupt. No more lego game show creations will occur
  • Wiki edits:5
System:
Microsoft Windows XP
Home Edition
Version 2002
Service Pack 3

Computer:
IntelĀ®Core™2 Duo CPU
E7200 @ 2.53GHz
2.53 GHz, 2.00 GB of RAM
Physical Address Extension

Video Card/Screen Resolution:
ATI Radeon HD 3600 Series
1920 by 1200 pixels, Highest (32-bit)
---------------------------------------
Open Stage Stage Results
R1: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 470,816 K, Max CPU Usage 50%
R2: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 114,940 K, Max CPU Usage 50%
R3: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 114,812 K, Max CPU Usage 50%
R4: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 114,846 K, Max CPU Usage 44%
R5: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 205,768 K, Max CPU Usage 50%+ (constantly)

Multi-Bridge Stage Results
R1: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 448,108 K, Max CPU Usage 50%+ (occasionally)
R2: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 109,932 K, Max CPU Usage 47%
R3: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 101,344 K, Max CPU Usage 50%
R4: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 109,989 K, Max CPU Usage 50%
R5: 60/60fps, Memory Usage 185,292 K, Max CPU Usage 50%+ (constantly)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average testing time per R#: Between 40 to 80 seconds

Comments:
All picture quality from R1 to R5 look fine to me, with no noticeable deterioration. The game was played in windowed mode. Sometimes, when switching from one application to another (e.g. from the game to Notepad, then back to the game), the pictures would stop moving, but the game continued on (e.g. audio would played, sfx would occur when Sonic jumps). Only by nudging the windowed application would the pictures move again. R5 would remain at 50% CPU levels constantly, with frequent occurances of 51-52% CPU, due to other applications opened.
This post has been edited by T.Q.: 05 April 2009 - 10:09 PM

  • 5 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last ►
    Locked
    Locked Forum

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users