well, i got myself a pc, but its shite, a p3 450Mhz running win 98. (tnt2 ultra gpu)

I have always played in software 320x200, but with this pc i only get around 50-60 fps in sw-ezquake, and not much more in gl. So i went back to mqwcl 0.96, and it runs much more smother, usaly around 70-77 fps.
This is with the about the lowest quality sw settings..
Also, qw just looks up for 0.5 a sec every 25 sec or so, anyone have experienced this and fixed it??

Now i use mqwcl.exe, becouse its runs much more smother than ezquake. Why is ezquake so more demanding on the cpu, even the graphics is almost the same?

try out sys_highpriority and sys_yieldcpu

some variables and options that affect fps aren't all that obvious, i'd experiment a bit more if i were you. i got very similar fps on mqwcl and ez on my old comp. sorry i can't remember anything specific though

HM... I still get only 50 fps when i try timedemo fps, with sys_highpriority and sys_yieldcpu in ezqw with the fastest fps mode.
I realy like ezquake. Some of the commands, like Cl_gameclock is a big advantage over mqwcl witch dont have any gameclock.

And one thing i never got to work in ezquake, is my pak2.pak with my gfx.wad and conchars, even i have the pak in the id1 folder.

You could try fuhquake-gl, I use it on a pentium III 500 with a TNT-1. I get a solid 77fps at 640x480 except for on a few crazy levels nobody plays. I do have the graphic settings all changed, picmip, particle effect settings, etc etc. Lemme know if you wanna see my cfg to give it a try with fuh.

you should be able to get more than enough fps, maybe try reinstallg win98 and install the win98se sp2 unoficial pack.