Greetings all.Good to be back ...well good to be here anyway. Well to be brief i made a fresh install of fc5 ....at first i found the proprietary nvidia issue a bit annoying but i installed the x11 nvidia drv and the kmod-nvidia packages and i found I could see that i had 3d acceleration avaliable...later on i uninstaleld the proprietary driver and repacked the repackaged the system just in case. meaning i removed and isntalled the two nvidia packages with yum. just recently i downloaded an open source gamae, nexuiz. i'm sure at least some of you have come across that project. well the bear deal is that i'm getting very poor performance out of it ...while i'm ran return to castle wolfenstein with max video settings with very acceptable performance. i realise there's a huge time gap between the two games but in the end i doubt a performance that weak is only de to hardware issues. if i lower the res and bitdepth to say 640x480 and 16bit it's a better fps count of course but still not as i'd expect. i'm posting this thread becasue i think this might be a fedora driver issue ..... so if i have to put it all in a question ... could this be a driver issue or is the game jsut too much for my machine. i'd apreciate any information and oppinions. sorry for the massive thread and thanks in advance.

PS: I'm currently running on 1.8 GHz Ahtlon 64, 1gb of ddr400 ram, a geforce fx5500 256 mb and a 120 gb segate, on an nforce3 epox motherboard/agp 8x/

from my understanding the new drivers from nvidia and ati is done yet with3d acc. I'm using a ATI card and can't even get 3d acc going so i have to wait for .25 release. if you google newsgroup people talk about it becuase cards are too new :-/

It could just be that your hardware isn't up to it. Sad to say I know but nexuiz struggled on my old 5200FX, I upgraded that to a 6600GT and it ran considerably better. Nexuiz is based off the Quake 1 engine but they have made some monster changes to it and it does require some grunt behind it and I'd guess a 5500FX would be pusshing the bottom limit.

As I said, if you aren't a big gamer then an upgrade to a 6600GT would be more than enough and pretty cheap these days as well but if you do want to be able to try some of the newer games then a 7600GS would be fantastic value. Pretty reasonable performance and not too expensive.

...I see.Thank you, I guess that amkes me feel better ....we all know how tedious something that works but doesn't actually work gets :P. i used to be pretty big on gaming ...I don't know, If i manage to get my hnads on some money I might consider an upgrade ...but frankly I'll live without playing doom3 at 60 fps. So they used the quake1 engine eh ...that's gadda be real tuff on the hardware then, yeah. Just to be sure I'll take the game to a friend with simila hardware and windows ...to compare the results. Thank you, you've been very helpfull.

Yeah, it is a bit rough. When I first tried it on my 5200FX I was pretty disappointed and then when I read it was built from Quake 1 I thought I'd done something wrong but no amount of messing with the config made it run any better. It was playable but only just at about 10fps.

Yeah ..same here. about 10 fps I gather at 1024x768x32bpp. I noticed something tho. When i run the game the menu speeds's ok. But when I start a game and there's rendering in the background the cursor slows down to the same fps as well. I gather that's ...well because there's renderng in the background. And If memmory serves that's a quake1 engine issue.Here's my glxgears readout just if It might help.

12203 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2440.482 FPS
12402 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2480.395 FPS
11652 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2330.377 FPS
12411 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2482.141 FPS
12242 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2448.255 FPS
12437 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2487.334 FPS
10845 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2168.876 FPS
12086 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2417.141 FPS
12393 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2478.553 FPS
12265 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2452.889 FPS
12422 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2484.353 FPS