Reply 40 of 42, by W.x.
Putas wrote on 2022-12-22, 05:35:Now we are in agreement. I wrote a Rage XL review to put it to rest finally.
Thank you. I've checked Ati Rage Pro 4MB vs 8MB results, and yes, I have same results, which is interesting. Rage Pro 8MB was much faster than 4MB in GLQuake. In Various resolutions.
But from your wide variety of games benchmarks, it seems, that only some of the games are suffering from this issue. It is very interesting, because it seems, lack of memory is not causing this issue probably. Maybe some internal engine flaw, or driver flaw? I would like to find out, if it is driver issue, and can be potentionally solved, or, it is internal engine of architecture problem.
However, in your benchmarks, classic 640x480 and 320x240 resolution in Quake, have same results. Where it was tested? Under Windows 98 and official latest 2002 drivers?
https://vintage3d.org/rage4.php#sthash.ALlSEMw1.dpbs
I've tested it under Windows XP, and even on 640x480, the big differance gap was there.
What is interesting, only under Bigass test, there is a gap between 4MB and 8MB. I've tested it also under Hexen 2 (which is modified GLQuake engine), and same performance gap was there.
