Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
How is anybody supposed to even attempt to answer that question without knowing what distribution, what videocard, what drivers, what color depth, what game config (is it the same under both Windows and Linux), or pretty much any information about any of the factors that might be affecting the issue that you seem to be experiencing (whatever it may in fact be-- "not as colorful and nice" is not going to win any awards for a clearly-stated problem)?
We are not psychic, and since busloads of people are not rushing in to confirm that this is also their experience with Q3, it looks rather like something local to your system. In which case we would need to know something about said system to help you.
Hmm, maybe it's not a known problem, here's the specs:
intel 3.2 Ghz CPU
1 GB ram
Radeon 9800 pro
Tried Red Hat 9, Mandrake 10, and Slackware on same machine.
Intel 600 Mhz CPU
256 MB ram
Geforce 2 MX With these drivers from Nvidia: NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-6106-pkg1.run I also tried these drivers as well: NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-5336-pkg1.run
Used 16/or 32 bit color depth on both Windows and Linux.
Now you would think that the cpu/ram would not make a difference, but maybe the video card, but the Geforce 2 MX should allow all the video capabilities that quake3 has. Right?
* Eight parallel rendering pipelines
* Four parallel geometry engines
* 256-bit DDR memory interface
* AGP 8X support
* SMARTSHADER™ 2.1
o Full support for Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0 programmable vertex and pixel shaders in hardware
o 2.0 Vertex Shaders support vertex programs up to 65,280 instructions with flow control o 2.0 Pixel Shaders support up to 16 textures per rendering pass
o New F-buffer technology supports pixel shader programs with unlimited instructions o 128-bit, 64-bit & 32-bit per pixel floating point color formats
o Multiple Render Target (MRT) support
o Shadow volume rendering acceleration
o Complete feature set also supported in OpenGL® via extensions
* SMOOTHVISION™ 2.1 o 2x/4x/6x full scene anti-aliasing modes
o Adaptive algorithm with programmable sample patterns
o 2x/4x/8x/16x anisotropic filtering modes
+ Adaptive algorithm with bi-linear (performance) and tri-linear (quality) options
* HYPER Z™ III+
o 3-level Hierarchical Z-Buffer with early Z test
o Lossless Z-Buffer compression (up to 24:1)
o Fast Z-Buffer Clear
o Z cache optimized for real-time shadow rendering
* TRUFORM™ 2.0 o 2nd generation N-Patch higher order surface support
o Discrete and continuous tessellation levels per polygon
o Displacement mapping
o Seamless integration of pixel shaders with video
o FULLSTREAM™ video de-blocking technology
o Noise removal filtering for captured video
* MPEG-2 decoding with motion compensation, iDCT and color space conversion
* All-format DTV/HDTV decoding
* YPrPb component output*
* Adaptive de-interlacing and frame rate conversion
* Dual integrated display controllers
* Dual integrated 10-bit per channel 400 MHz DACs
* Integrated 165 MHz TMDS transmitter (DVI 1.0 compliant and HDCP ready)
* Integrated TV Output support up to 1024x768 resolution
* Windows® Logo Program compliant
The GeForceMX (you don't say which one, but I'll pretend it's the 440):
* GPU Features
o TwinView architecture
o Digital Vibrance Control
o Second generation transform and lighting (T&L) engine
o Integrated Dual-Link TMDS transmitters
o nVidia Shading Rasterizer (NSR)
o High-Definition Video Processor (HDVP)
o AGP 4X with Fast Writes
o Double Data Rate (DDR) memory
o 32-bit color, 32-bit Z / stencil buffer
o 4 texels per clock
o 256-bit graphics architecture
o Cube environment mapping
o DirectX and S3 texture compression
* 3D Performance
o 700 million texels per second fill rate
o 20 million triangles/sec through Hardware T&L setup
o 2.7 GB/sec memory bandwidth (166MHz SDR SD-RAM)
o 8-64MB frame buffer size
o 350MHz RAMDAC
o Maximum 3D/2D resolution of 2048x1536 @ 75 Hz
o Complete DirectX 7, DirectX 6 and DirectX 5 (!!!) support
o Complete Professional OpenGL 1.2 support
o Single pass multitexturing
* 2D Performance
o Optimized for multiple color depths including 32, 24, 16, 15, and 8-bits per pixel
o True-color hardware cursor
o Multibuffering (double, triple, quad) for smooth animation and video playback
o Full Windows Graphical Device Interface (GDI) Hardware Acceleration
And the features of Quake 3:
From an interview with John Carmack, pre-release, posted on Blue's News:
All source artwork is being created and delivered in 24 bit color. An accelerator that can perform all 3D work in 24 bit color will look substantially better than a 16 bit card. You will pay a speed cost for it, though.
Most of the textures are going to be higher resolution. Larger amounts of texture memory will make a bigger difference than it does on Quake 2.
Some key rendering effects require blending modes that some cards don't support.
The fill rate requirements will be about 50% more than Quake 2, on average. Cards that are fill rate limited will slow down unless you go to a lower resolution.
The triangle rate requirements will be at least double Quake 2, and scalable to much higher levels of detail on appropriate hardware.
So, while both these cards would be clearly able to render the game adequately (keep in mind that the cards available at the time were the Voodoo 1, the Voodoo 2, the Permedia 2, the ATI Rage Pro, the Intel I740, the Rendition 2100/2200, the PVR PCX2, and the RIVA 128; I think the TNT was pre-release), clearly the 9800 Pro has a lot more horsepower in a lot of areas that would make it look much better. Not to mention that with a much lower-spec CPU and much less memory, as well as the lower specs of the video card itself (heck, how much memory does the MX have onboard in comparison to the 9800 Pro?) I can hardly believe that you wouldn't have to turn some of the features off to get acceptable performance in the first place, much less expecting it to perform at the same level as a much higher-spec machine. If you want a real test, switch the 9800 Pro into the Linux box and see what it looks like then.
Myself I think you're lucky to get off with just some washed-out colors. But then, I haven't tested my copy of Q3A on this box yet (and I never played it under Windows anyway, so I don't even know what it looks like there). Then again, I'd be running it on my 9800SE, so I won't be much of a gauge to say how it looks in comparison to an MX (or any nVidia card).
Yeah the Radeon 9800 is more advanced, but that has little to do with the quake3 engine, the Geforce 2 MX should handle all the graphic capabilities the quake3 engine has to offer, their should be no visual difference between the 9800 and the GF2 mx with the quake3 engine.
It would be nice if somebody could give me some pointers or tips as to what im doing wrong or how to fix this.
I have no pointers or tips, but perhaps my point wasn't clear.
I can accept that the GF2MX should be able to "handle all the graphics capablilities the Quake 3 engine has to offer", but the advanced capabilities of the 9800 means that it has the capability to enhance those capabilities so they look better to you.
Stick a FX card (even a 5200) in that box and tell me that Quake 3 doesn't look better than it does with the MX. Even a full GeForce 3 Ti would probably look better. I'd certainly be willing to bet that my old Matrox G400 would look better.
The point is that the MX is a very cut down version of the GeForce line, and the idea was that it retained the capacity to render (most) current (at the time) things reasonably well, at reasonable speeds, at the expense of some of the graphic "prettiness" that full-featured cards were/are capable of.
I can't believe you would say "their should be no visual difference between the 9800 and the GF2 mx with the quake3 engine," when the 9800 "knows" exactly what the capabilities of that engine are, and can certainly use its advanced features to tweak the way you percieve the rendering of that engine, whereas the MX cannot, because it simply does not have the capacity in terms of memory, or pipelines, or shaders, etc.
In other words, of course there should be a visual difference!! What the h-e-double-hockey-sticks did you spend 500 - 600 USD for, if not?