how fast is quake on ipaq

[mike]

hello<br>i own a´e-115 and thinking of buying an ipaq and i´m wonder how fast is quake on ipaq, all levels playable or is it painfully slow.<br><br>regards<br>mike

[Dan East]

Quake is very playable on a base 206 mhz iPaq, even in 320x240 landscape mode. The @migo would yield nearly identical performance as the iPaq. The next fastest device I'm aware of is a Cassiopeia E-125 whose hardware has been modified to run at 200mhz, which is substantially faster than its factory speed. Using a benchmark comparison of the two devices running Pocket Quake with Jacco's 3D optimizations yields:<br><br> 206 mhz iPaq: 4.87 fps<br>200 mhz Casio: 2.5 fps<br><br>  The iPaq can be overclocked via a simple software program, which would result in a higher framerate. I'm not aware of any benchmark fps values for an overclocked iPaq.<br>Note that the Frames Per Second shown above is not the FPS you see when playing.  It is much higher in actual gameplay.  This is true of the other devices, such as the Casio. However the same ratio of performance would be seen (the iPaq would yield 1.95 more FPS than a 200mhz casio in a given scenero, such as during the demo playback).<br><br>Dan East

[CARPEDIEM]

Well when at first tried to make it work on the MIPS, i never intended to be able to play in it, But now on my E-125 @ 200 with Jacco's modifications i think it's very playable. Framerates vary (to my eye) from 4 - 8 fps.<br>But im going to work now to get an accurate the accurate framerate, should be easy enough.<br><br>The reason i enjoy playing pocketquake is mainly that playing with the keys is much much better, i can strafe, fire, turn, walk, look up or down and center the view pretty naturally and easily and without using the stylus.<br><br>Anyway, Dan, if i use the current optimizations for the Ipaq it plays slower so i think we should stick with the older optimizations (no particles etc etc.) for the MIPS release.<br>

[Dr. Phat]

You can also find out for yourself- Hit the console button, then type TIMEREFRESH.  It'll turn around, then give you an FPS reading... on E-125 @ 150mhz, I get about 1.98 FPS in the beinning (there's a lot to render there)  So near the rooms and closed areas I'm sure i get over 3.  An iPAQ is much better at Floatng Point thingys (Dan East says they are important) so it should go a lot faster.

[Moose or Chuck]

HEY! Did someone delete my other post?<br>ARGH!! Just because I recommend and Amigo over an Ipaq my post gets deleted. 999, we'll have to change your name to quick draw or something equally ridiculous. <br><br>Mike, I'd recommend the @migo, it's much better suited for games. The button alignments are perfect and has none of the multi-button pressing or dust problems of the Ipaq. It also comes with a built in modem, a screen the size of a Casio and for near the same price. I have heard of a few problems, such as pressing buttons to hard, but why would you ever press a button to hard in the first place. And, they have already FIXED their button problems before the first shipments were completely sold. The device is bulkier, however. And if you're buying any PocketPC just for games (like I did ), then go for the best (even though I got an E-125).<br>Oh ya, I personally would wait until the end of this year to get the 416MHz Ipaq's with 128MB of RAM.Last modification: Moose Master - 02/25/01 at 05:46:48

[999]

Moose:<br><br>Do you have an @migo?  I've got a few friends who do, and they still prefer the iPAQ for games.<br><br>Namely because you don't have to baby the controls (press too hard on the @migo buttons, and they're not detected).  <br><br>You also might want to take into consideration that the @migo does not detect 8 directions on the control pad, only 4 like the iPAQ, <br><br>Take a look at the @migo forum on Brighthand, there are about 2 happy @migo owners in the entire board, and a handful of "switched back to an iPAQ" threads.  The machine looks to have great potential, but it's lackluster launch has proven quite a few things, 1. Don't go with a company that only ever intended to sell OEM to distributors, 2. Trust only Established Brand Names, 3. Caveat Emptor.<br><br><br><br>

[Moose or Chuck]

Well, As far as I can tell, the Amigo still seems like the better of the two. But no I don't own one and don't plan on buying one since I just got my Casio, and it has proven to me to be the best of all.

[Matt Keys]

999, <br><br>Perhaps im biased, or blinding myself from the truth because I have ordered an @migo and I want it to be right. But, I have heard talk that a developer could make a small program that when it detects to buttons being pushed on the control pad(lets the the right and top) it then makes it go diagonal. Emulating the 8 button set up. Is this possible or just hersay? anyone want to make it?<br>Also, The first shipment was very buggy and urthere is fixing them and giving the poor people from the first shipment a new device. you should let your friends know if they dont already.

[999]

Moose:<br><br>Try out both devices if you can, actually giving them a run can make a huge difference over reading posts.  Sure, I'm no better, only going off of what my friends say about their @migos, but I own an iPAQ, so I'm not that guilty <br><br>Matt:<br>Sakino has decided to keep his @migo (mainly because he can't find an iPAQ) and like everyone else, has gotten the word of a reissued model from Marc at URthere.  I guess we'll all have to hold off passing judgement until these newer models surface.  Regarding the 8 way control issue, it sounds like you could make a driver for it, however it's all based on how the low level code works, and if it's setup to even detect 2 buttons at once.  Oy, the iPAQ all over again <br><br>Last modification: 999 - 02/25/01 at 13:24:24

[Moose or Chuck]

I went to BestBuy before purchasing a PPC to try them out. My first choice was the Ipaq, because I hadn't heard of the problems at that time. My second, the HP 54x, but decided against it due to no control pad. I happened to walk by the same cabinet display the other day and caught a glymps (sp?) of the E-125 and asked if I could play around with it. The screen was huge, it had the nicest D-Pad of all. Those the reasons I bought it when I was first buying PPCs. Since then, I've found out many reasons why I would have wanted the Casio in the first place. The IPAQ became very unpopular in my mind due to the many reported issues, and the HP is apparently the slowest of them all. I'm glad I got my Casio, and not an Ipaq or Amigo. I had tried the IPAQ before hand and actually didn't find it too appealing. The buttons were placed oddly, the display was not as brilliant as I would have liked, and it seemed like it wanted to be stylish over useful. That's why I didn't get an Ipaq.... and they were out of them ;D<br><br>[EDIT] LOL. 999, you and I always seem to change the subject of every thread that we reply too. We should stop doing that.Last modification: Moose Master - 02/25/01 at 13:30:26

[999]

Moose:<br><br>I am one of those people that exploited the Return Policies at Office Depot <br><br>I tried out most of the major PDAs for the entire "satisfaction guarantee" period, roughly 15 days I think it was.  Anyhow, starting from the ground up, I tested a Handspring Visor, then the HP545, and finally the E100 which I kept. A month or so later, I bought an E115 and was pretty happy with it. However, after reading reports on emulation speed for the iPAQ, I couldn't resist the urge, and found one for sale online.<br><br>Of all these devices I've been extremely happy with my iPAQ.  But that can easily be said of any PDA when u think about it.  It's all preference in the end.<br><br>Side-Note<br>You may find this odd, but the iPAQ button arrangement is fabulous for Pocket Quake.  The action button is simply the "depressed" state of the Joypad.  So moving and firing at the same time is very very intuitive, and comfortable.<br><br>

[Moose or Chuck]

Yes, it is a preference, as I said in one of my other posts. It all depends on what factors you like, a big screen, stylish business looks, or performance. I'd take performance any day, but as I said: they were all out of that.

[Dr. Phat]

About your spellinmg Moose, its GLIMPSE, not "GLYMPS"

[Moose or Chuck]

As long as you knew what I was saying it doesn't matter to much.

[Anibal]

Hi ! I have tried the QUAKE on an IPAQ @ 236 and ....<br>Do you think that it is playable... Like an 486 100Mhz with 24 Mb ram or slowest... <br>I think that the IPAQ is not for playing 3D games.