Never seen more than 3400 :-)

12000-14000 is maximum i've seen.

Thatsis in 320x240 with ezquake 3.5 and the new renderer :-)

Raket's h4xo'rs

Evgeniy Vaganovich??)) perelogintes'

Raket, I don't really know are you joking or not.. After a few experiments with old phenom 2 955 (year 2009 or arrival) I improve qw perfomance from 1500 fps to 2500 on the top of dm6 center teleporter, and 5549 fps in the darkest corner. And i know that q1 render draws too much polygons that are far off the corners (it usually draws full next room, while you see few polygons) so results over 10000 fps is totally possible..
Where can i see a new render if it exists?
Can i talk to someone about its code or it's top secret?
I tried and I'm trying now to think about visibility problem, have some soughts about memory-over-calculation approach to improve perfomance..

Guys, FPS values are non-linear!
The speed difference between 1000 and 4000 FPS is exactly the same as between 800 and 1000.

Here is a nice article about it:
https://www.mvps.org/directx/articles/fps_versus_frame_time.htm

TLDR: "Frame Times in ms" is what we should compare, not FPS.

It's not trolling. It was on a Geforce GTX 970 with crt connected, fps was stable at 10000-15000 in 320x240.

However i switched to another gfx now, which, sadly makes no difference from the difference renders :-)

Might be drivers, might be the card. I can't tell.

Yes and no. That article draws some pretty stupid conclusions too, depending on how you look at it. Comparing a drop from 900fps to 450fps being the same as dropping from 60fps to 56.25fps; sure frame time wise it’s the same time. From another perspective the change adds 100% penalty on the total frametime whereas the second adds ~6% of total frame time. From that perspective it might be a pretty crappy addition if it costs 100% added total frame time.

If ezQuake can render a complete frame (_many_ calls) in 1ms, adding a single extra call that costs 1ms then that call is expensive in reference to total frame time.
If ezQuake on the other hand were to render a frame in 20ms, that extra millisecond is not as bad.

This doesn't seem ridiculous at all to me....
I get over 7000fps in 1920x1080 using the new renderer in the ezquake 3.5 alpha.

Guys where to get this 3.5 alpha - i'm dying to test it.. send exe on email plz
vanoz@tut.by

It's here, but very buggy and pretty unusable at the moment, you might get your HUD images corrupted after map load, or "out of memory" errors or any number of other weird issues.

Have been changing it up quite a bit to tidy it up and make it more stable, hopefully newer version by end of month.

thanks..

whats up dooooogs.... raket what up? i got a full platnum membership for mcdonalds u hamburger eating fat ass
ps. the pictures are to tiny i cant see shit

Low gfx, 1600x900, i5, GTX 1060 6GB:
1100 in 3.1
2600 in 3.5 alpha