Nearest_mipmap_nearest is closest to software Quake because software Quake used mipmaps. It's as simple as that.

If I'm in a crunchy pixel mood I use nearest_mipmap_linear which avoids banding between the mip levels. I can post screenshots later on that demonstrate this. It's one of those things that you might not notice, but once you do it drives you nuts.

Nearest on it's own disables mipmapping, which causes distant textures to shimmer and sparkle as you move around. Sometimes people mistake noise for detail, but this is basic sampling theory stuff. There's a weight of mathematical papers on it, including articles in the Mike Abrash Black Book, and I'm not going to get bogged down rehashing what others have said better elsewhere. You don't want to disable mipmaps, that's all.

The last thing is relating to mipmapped water, which Fitz and most derivatives don't have. As the water warps it can subtly shift between different miplevels. Again, drives you nuts once you notice it. Solution is to use ddx/ddy (GLSL dFdx/dFdy) on the unwarped texcoords then a tex2Dgrad lookup. You can't do that without shaders. Not sure if vkQuake or any other publicly released engine does it though. 

https://streamable.com/4an03

This was recorded in 1.00, so it's pretty out of date. I died, rapidly clicked and started the map again like this. That's all I have to say - I haven't tried reproducing it yet. 

Thanks Baker, I just happened to pop on at the right time I guess. Cool to see those options be included in the menu as well!

I found it strange that it crashed after trying to set a mode...then I went to the correct autoexec and saw it ONLY had the texturemode command hah. I really need to conform all of my directories with my master config.

Looking forward to trying when I get home! 

Yeah FWIW I use nearest_mipmap_linear too. And with some anisotropy set (so I really need to go re-read that discussion above about those interactions).

Obviously that's not the pure Winquake look but I likes it. :-) 

Same, nearest and mipmap linear. I like the distant smoothness with the crunchy pixels nearby. 

You two rock as I have said, more beer!

No problems running 1036 from a quick test around!

Love to be able to change the water warp...it is a bit intense at 3440x1440! 

It's been a fucking pleasure working with Baker on this. 

Each of us working on different set of features at the same time in way that allowed asynchronous development which covered quite a bit mileage in short span of time.

A very enjoyable experience, indeed.

Looks like I should have picked gl_nearest_mipmap_linear instead of nearest/nearest for the option.

@bloughsburg - type "find warp" in the console. 

I doubt that gl_nearest is a mode many people will use. My suggestion would be to simply replace it with nearest_mipmap_linear and use that for "Pixellated" mode. 

Any luck on Intel graphics 3x performance? So far DX9 runs stable at 15-40 fps and is definitely better than QS. 

That's your fps on Arcane Dimensions right? 

Mark V has a bug with the rewind feature in demos. when you rewind, the clock go forward instead of backward.
when you pause (down arrow) and unpause, the time is resynced.

this is scr_clock 

@topher - thanks for reporting that. Must have wired up the wrong clock when absorbing some JoeQuake/ProQuake features back a couple of months ago.

/+1 to do in the spring update 

A workaround in the meantime, if you are interested. Add +pq_timer 0 to the command line or throw it in autoexec.cfg 

QuakePone, if you're interested I posted 2 builds in the QS thread here to check for a potential problem that affected some versions of Intel graphics.

Additionally, as MH mentions, try benchmarking "gl_flashblend 0" vs "gl_flashblend 1" (this may be faster; it stops the lava balls from casting dynamic lights and just draws a fake glow instead.) 

I tried this in my own engine, on a nvidia 960gtx, and it really didnt matter. yet as I like you are using gbra uploads, but then in the most classic settings, im getting 2200+fps with playdemo demo2 on Qrack vs 1600 in Mark V using really close effects; no motionblur, no r_novis, classic particles, etc. in DirectQ / RMQ i get 3000-5000fps.

maybe lightmap uploads matter? 

er 5000 in dq not rmq 

bottomline is a stable fps in given map we dont need >200fps in single player maps. 

An NV 960 is irrelevant unless you can get a test case that goes below about 500 fps.

Gimme the Intel benchmarks, that's the interesting stuff.

There's probably things I can do for lightmap updates but I'm not willing to gut the code unless I'm satisfied that there will be payback at the end of it.

I might also make one of my experimental GPU lightmaps engines available, because I'm interested in how that might perform. I'm cautious about not creating expectations in the community though.... 

Map = ad_magna

In console type: "setpos 2496 56 -292" And you'll be at the mirror.

screenshot

/In Mark V, you can type "viewpos" to see your current x, y, z -- which also sets the default setpos. So if you type "viewpos" at a red armor, walk away and then type "setpos" you'll be back at the red armor. 

If it is lightmaps --- and that's an if --- slowing things down.

Type: r_dynamic 0

Then dynamic lighting is simply turned off. 

In Mark V, do the following after starting up Arcane Dimensions.

Type:
temp1 0 // Turn extra ad particles off
r_dynamic 0 // Turn off dynamic lights .. no lightmap updates will happen at all.
sv_cullentities 2 // Strict visibility tests on all entities
map start // Restart the Arcane Dimensions start map

Play

See if your fps improves. 

These commands helped a lot in previously barely playable maps like ad_tfuma and ad_swampy. I might leave temp1 on 1024 and r_shadows on 1, still. 

Cool! Glad it helped out some.

In the Quakespasm thread, mh, ericw and myself and others are discussing performance related issues related to Arcane Dimensions. 

I'm starting to warm to the idea of doing some kind of release of one of my GPU lightmap experiments. ericw has expressed interest in how parts of it work and I'd be fascinated to learn how it performs on QuakePone's machine.

I've basically got 3 engines: Quake/OpenGL/assembly shaders, Quake/Direct3D 11 and Quake II/Direct3D 9. The Quake II engine is probably the most developed but it misses D3D 11 enhancements and draw call overhead does pile up. The Quake/GL engine is very barebones and I'm not sure where the code is. The Quake/D3D 11 is most likely to be let out.