2D graphics benchmark

Discussion about old graphics cards, monitors and video related things.

2D graphics benchmark

Postby xjas » 2017-11-28 @ 10:14

Is there a good DOS benchmark for testing "2D" features that were common in games? Stuff like hardware scrolling, writing to video memory, filling (2D) polygons, page flipping, changing palettes, etc.

A game or (demoscene) demo with an FPS counter would also be fine. You try searching and all you find are instructions on how to timedemo in Doom & Quake. I just want to compare some things while I tweak my video card (Trident 8900cl.)

I could write something in QuickBasic but I don't know how much that would depend on video speed vs. CPU speed. QB's draw routines are pretty CPU-based and slow.
selected (probably) unfinished build threads { In a Lunchbox / Has It All / Hot Damn! / IT IS THE NINETIES / 20 Years of Junk }
User avatar
xjas
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1397
Joined: 2015-9-07 @ 02:29

Re: 2D graphics benchmark

Postby clueless1 » 2017-11-28 @ 11:16

The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.
Let's benchmark our systems with cache disabled
DOS PCI Graphics Card Benchmarks
User avatar
clueless1
l33t
 
Posts: 3619
Joined: 2015-12-22 @ 17:43
Location: Midwest US

Re: 2D graphics benchmark

Postby xjas » 2017-11-28 @ 12:17

^^ Yeah I know about that, but look what's in it - Superscape (3D), PC Player (3D), Chris's 3D Benchmark, Doom, Quake, and some CPU benchmarks. Not what I'm after. I want something that can specifically benchmark "2D" features of the video card, like scrolling, blitting, palette rotation, and page flipping.

...and yes, I *know* those features are used in 3D stuff, but 3D is heavily CPU dependent and in this case (386/25) the CPU would likely be a bottleneck.
selected (probably) unfinished build threads { In a Lunchbox / Has It All / Hot Damn! / IT IS THE NINETIES / 20 Years of Junk }
User avatar
xjas
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1397
Joined: 2015-9-07 @ 02:29

Re: 2D graphics benchmark

Postby clueless1 » 2017-11-28 @ 13:26

Off the top of my head the only ones I can think of are for Windows, not DOS. Like Tom's 2D. It seems like there's some older DOS benchmarks that might have what you're looking for? I can't remember, Topbench or Speedtst?
The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.
Let's benchmark our systems with cache disabled
DOS PCI Graphics Card Benchmarks
User avatar
clueless1
l33t
 
Posts: 3619
Joined: 2015-12-22 @ 17:43
Location: Midwest US

Re: 2D graphics benchmark

Postby leileilol » 2017-11-28 @ 13:37

Diag? Scitech Display Doctor?
Voodoo2s aren't 100mhz stock
Geforce256 isn't released as a beta on New Years '99 under the Quadro brand
386DX vs SX isn't about a missing FPU
DOS gaming isn't a bilinear 320x200 16:10
DOS PCs aren't better than the Macintosh
Old PCs aren't 'aesthetic'
User avatar
leileilol
l33t++
 
Posts: 9195
Joined: 2006-12-16 @ 18:03

Re: 2D graphics benchmark

Postby xjas » 2017-11-28 @ 22:04

^^ Thanks, DIAG looks useful. Didn't know SDD had a benchmark, will look into it.

I also found VideoSpd which is kinda what I want. It seems to rely on the Watcom C built-in graphics functions though.

videodos_000.png
videodos_000.png (8.53 KiB) Viewed 265 times
dosbox_006.png
dosbox_006.png (3.54 KiB) Viewed 265 times


I guess what I'm really after is something like DoWhackaDo or Copper with an FPS counter. ;)

(I'm trying to tweak the settings & config on my Trident card to see how much performance I can push out of it. I'll make a thread about it.)
selected (probably) unfinished build threads { In a Lunchbox / Has It All / Hot Damn! / IT IS THE NINETIES / 20 Years of Junk }
User avatar
xjas
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1397
Joined: 2015-9-07 @ 02:29

Re: 2D graphics benchmark

Postby idspispopd » 2017-11-29 @ 14:11

xjas wrote:Is there a good DOS benchmark for testing "2D" features that were common in games? Stuff like hardware scrolling, writing to video memory, filling (2D) polygons, page flipping, changing palettes, etc.

Well, DOS games usually don't use any acceleration features since those are different between chips. In Windows (even 3.x) you have a video driver which will use the acceleration, but this is not feasible for a single DOS game.
To address your points:
  • hardware scrolling, page flipping, changing palettes: These features are used by DOS games since they are already available on standard VGA. I doubt that performance will matter a lot here. Scrolling and page flipping only take a few register writes and should have an immediate result. Changing the whole palette may take a short time, but games will probably be written in a way that this works properly even on a slow VGA card. It is possible that scrolling and page flipping were also used in SVGA modes, probably over VBE (1.2?), but that still shouldn't be performance critical.
  • writing to video memory: This is the single most important criterion. Judging from http://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php/benchmarks DIAG seems to do the trick, but I think there are more tools to do this. I think I even wrote a program for this myself since it is quite trivial.
  • filling (2D) polygons: This is probably not done through acceleration. I'm not sure when games stopped fillings polygons on screen, at least with 3D games the scene was rendered into system memory and then transferred to video RAM.
idspispopd
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: 2012-2-15 @ 21:08
Location: Hamburg / Germany

Re: 2D graphics benchmark

Postby xjas » 2017-11-29 @ 21:16

Just for fun I wrote a quick & dirty palette rotation benchmark. The screen filling is done using QuickBasic's FILL statement, so that part of the benchmark is probably rubbish, but the palette rotation is all assembly. Source code included.

Warning: ugly as hell. Results MIGHT be more accurate with EMM386, etc. disabled.
Attachments
PALBENCH.ZIP
(30.81 KiB) Downloaded 9 times
selected (probably) unfinished build threads { In a Lunchbox / Has It All / Hot Damn! / IT IS THE NINETIES / 20 Years of Junk }
User avatar
xjas
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1397
Joined: 2015-9-07 @ 02:29

Re: 2D graphics benchmark

Postby amadeus777999 » 2017-12-08 @ 18:11

Seems unlikely that there would exist a benchmark that measures how efficiently the VGA's functionality had been implemented by a vendor - maybe somewhere in a dungeon of a gfx card-maker such info exists?
As "idspispopd" pointed out for "DOS related" drawing of primitives... it's bus & memory speed that counts - "filling 2D polygons" was done by the cpu(excluding specialized dos-executables which took advantage of some "obscure" hardware).

I attached a little bench-program I found on the net featuring a simple, neat chart for the results - it also has a slightly customized .exe that makes use of Pentium features which should result in a marginal speedup("cbenchp.exe").
Attachments
bench18.rar
(22.67 KiB) Downloaded 8 times
User avatar
amadeus777999
Member
 
Posts: 416
Joined: 2013-7-04 @ 17:04


Return to Video

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests