this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)
RetroGaming
19544 readers
153 users here now
Vintage gaming community.
Rules:
- Be kind.
- No spam or soliciting for money.
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To be fair, I always test to see if a new computer can run doom 3
lol what year is it?
I was so lucky. I didn’t think I would be able to play it, still rocking a Pentium 3 700 mhz pre built pc with a ATI Rage 128 Pro. Then suddenly, just a few days before the release, my dad comes with a new pc: Pentium 4 3000 mhz, GeForce FX 5600 GT and a brand new 19 inch CRT Ilyama monitor. It played the shit out of Doom 3. Those were the days hehe.
Doom3 is one of the landmark games for GPU-based shading - it made a lot of use of GPU stencilling, multiple texture targets, computation in shaders; it massively advanced the state-of-the art in forward rendering. So much so that any modern GPU is very well optimised for 'the things that Doom 3 wants to do', because that's what every game that wants advanced lighting wants to do. The problem then for using it for any kind of benchmarking is that basically any modern card will output Doom3 at 200fps at 4k and still be in power saving mode. It would be like trying to stress-test a CPU with Wolfenstein 3D - the state of the art has long moved past that, you can't use the results of that to tell anything apart any more.
Trying to get Doom3 to render in 16:9 resolutions tho, rather than 4:3? Now that's stressful...
I believe the real issue with Doom3 is rending more frames than 60 (per second). It results in game breaking bugs.
For anyone looking for a modern Doom 3 experience, use "dhewm3".