v3dmmFPS Framerate Checker

v3dmmFPS Framerate Checker · 05:35 PM

So far, I got something like 6.25 while Destra got closer to 6.55. We'll see what the community gets. Reply with your scores. Theoretically, XP should expect, what, 6.25, 6.33? and others should expect, what, 6.00? 5.85? I should, uh, go look up what the previous results were.

Digital Taco · 10-31-2006, 09:45 AM

i got something around 5.90

Destra · 10:15 AM

My computer beats all yours.

EDIT: DAMN YOU, POGO! YOU SHALL DIE BY MY HANDS!

Pogo · 10-31-2006, 10:07 AM

6.66
The framerate of the beast

Pizza The Hut · 10-31-2006, 11:02 AM

around 6.49

HMC · 10-31-2006, 06:41 PM

I got around 6.60.

bl0ppin · 06:34 PM

Movie of the year

EDIT: 6.16

Denny Betterman · 10-31-2006, 08:16 PM

other than taco's, framerates so far sure have been faster than expected...

Adam, what'd you get.

Bown · 10-31-2006, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pizza The Hut

around 6.49

Dash · 10-31-2006, 08:39 PM

Aaron Haynes · 10-31-2006, 08:43 PM

This seems like kind of an inaccurate way to test this.

HMC · 10-31-2006, 08:46 PM

In my experience, scenes never play at the same speed they do the first time through. If you play a scene a second time there is usually less slowdown.

Gorosaurus · 10-31-2006, 08:56 PM

6.06 on 2nd and 3rd tries

Denny Betterman · 10-31-2006, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron Haynes

This seems like kind of an inaccurate way to test this.

well well well uhhhh hooowwww about a midi that waits 1000 seconds and makes a beep, and like you know how 3dmm will continue a midi started earlier from whatever frame and it continues at the right point in the midi? you could just like go to frame 6000 or whatever and look around for the little beep and then it'd be frame accurate AND more accurate to the decimal point

'cept it'll probably end up being just as inaccurate if not more

I had other ideas. Make a scene that just alternates green red or something every 20 frames and then spider it at several different framerates and then you would watch this movie (that's at least a thousand frames so you have time to judge different gifs without having to constantly restart) and then you can just check for whever is closest I dunno. I also thought of asking someone to make a java applet that would do the exact same thing as the spidered gifs but allow for dynamic framerate measurements, I DUNNO.

Stefan · 11-01-2006, 01:21 AM

About 5.9.

Travis Wells · 11-03-2006, 10:28 AM

And now we see why 3dmmFPS is a bad idea;
It'll only make an already inconsistent framerate even more inconsistent.

(Besides the obvious problem of how the fuck do you integrate it?)

(This comment took 17 minutes to post. Yay for 3dmm.com)

Anyway, I get (XPSP2) 6.5 normal, 6.67 play-trick (WTF?)
I'm too lazy too boot up the 98 box, I don't think it has 3dmm on it anyway.

Aaron: This is about as accurate as it gets with 3dmm. (This is how I did the "3dmm framerates" thread that's over in 3dmm Modifications from a few years back)
Although we're ignoring the fact that 3dmm doesn't really have frames in the FPS sense. It only updates parts of the screen that change, sorta. It uses a dirty-rectangles method based on the bounding boxes of active models. So if you wanted a real FPS, you'd have to change the entire screen every frame. I'm pretty sure you'll get less than 6.6/6.6 then.

Destra · 11-03-2006, 11:20 AM

Actually if you check the 3dmm Chat forum there's a stickied thread where Denny and Taco discovered how to get v3dmm to work with 3dmmFPS. However as Denny and I found out, the frame rate becomes extremely erratic when you multiply it.

So this thread's pretty much useless now. Nifty though.

Travis Wells · 11-03-2006, 05:13 PM

... That was my point. The frame rate becomes extremely erratic when you multiply it, so I never added FPS-changing to v3dmm.

Demented Ferret · 11-03-2006, 05:42 PM

In what ways is it 'extremely erratic'? Do you mean that the frame-rate can change DURING a single session on a single machine, between sessions on the same machine or just vary between machines?

I ask this because I'm quite sure the next age of v3dmm/3dmm is to broadcast movies in streamable format, rather than distribute anything in v3dmm/3dmm's native format.

Travis Wells · 11-08-2006, 06:17 AM

It varies with the environment on the machine. Which means it's different between different sessions, and different in one session if you do anything but just play the movie. Although I've seen times where if it's high enough you get constant FPS changes as different system processes fight with 3dmm for control of the CPU... so it can change even in one session.

(Your plans for the next generation are why it will be the last generation. Good luck with that, sirs.)

Michael Sandford · 11-08-2006, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demented Ferret

I ask this because I'm quite sure the next age of v3dmm/3dmm is to broadcast movies in streamable format, rather than distribute anything in v3dmm/3dmm's native format.

I really hope this doesn't happen,
the reason why I really like watching 3dmm movies is because you can dissect them and find out 'how' they made the movie

Gorosaurus · 11-08-2006, 05:02 PM

I agree. streaming should be a side release

Aaron Haynes · 11-08-2006, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis Wells

(Your plans for the next generation are why it will be the last generation. Good luck with that, sirs.)

I think it will/would be the last generation anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Sandford

I really hope this doesn't happen,
the reason why I really like watching 3dmm movies is because you can dissect them and find out 'how' they made the movie

This is still possible, directors can always release the .3mm or .vmm file.

Demented Ferret · 11-08-2006, 06:35 PM

Agreed. If streaming movies is the way forward, it'll be the last step into the development of 3dmm, if anything. After that, you'll be looking at the whole 3dmm+ stuff, with trying to build a fanbase on top of it (which isn't going to happen, APPARENTLY).

07-04-2007, 12:32 AM

Hahaha, the "How to Ignore People" would make a funny movie.

Anyway, on my first attempt, I got 6.55. Then, on 2 repeated tries afterwards, I got 6.57. After exiting XP and rebooting, I tried it again, and got 6.52 2 times in a row, and then I got 6.49. It's like Gorosaurus said, 3dmm is just inconsistent on Windows XP.

10-31-2006, 09:57 AM	#3
Destra Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 3,594	My computer beats all yours. EDIT: DAMN YOU, POGO! YOU SHALL DIE BY MY HANDS!
Destra Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 3,594	Last edited by Destra : 10-31-2006 at 10:15 AM.

10-31-2006, 10:07 AM	#4
Pogo Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,228	6.66 The framerate of the beast
Pogo Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,228

10-31-2006, 06:41 PM	#6
HMC Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 8,715	I got around 6.60.
HMC Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 8,715

10-31-2006, 07:22 PM	#7
bl0ppin Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 4,644	Movie of the year EDIT: 6.16
bl0ppin Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 4,644	Last edited by bl0ppin : 11-01-2006 at 06:34 PM. Reason: Score

10-31-2006, 08:39 PM	#10
Dash Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 2,358	6.50
Dash Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 2,358

10-31-2006, 09:45 AM	#2
Digital Taco Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 12,216	i got something around 5.90

10-31-2006, 11:02 AM	#5
Pizza The Hut Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 10,633	around 6.49

10-31-2006, 08:16 PM	#8
Denny Betterman Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,531	other than taco's, framerates so far sure have been faster than expected... Adam, what'd you get.

10-31-2006, 08:43 PM	#11
Aaron Haynes Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 15,125	This seems like kind of an inaccurate way to test this.

10-31-2006, 08:46 PM	#12
HMC Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 8,715	In my experience, scenes never play at the same speed they do the first time through. If you play a scene a second time there is usually less slowdown.
HMC Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 8,715

10-31-2006, 08:56 PM	#13
Gorosaurus Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 16,146	6.06 on 2nd and 3rd tries

11-01-2006, 01:21 AM	#15
Stefan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,190	About 5.9.
Stefan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,190

11-03-2006, 10:28 AM	#16
Travis Wells Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 11,147	And now we see why 3dmmFPS is a bad idea; It'll only make an already inconsistent framerate even more inconsistent. (Besides the obvious problem of how the fuck do you integrate it?) (This comment took 17 minutes to post. Yay for 3dmm.com) Anyway, I get (XPSP2) 6.5 normal, 6.67 play-trick (WTF?) I'm too lazy too boot up the 98 box, I don't think it has 3dmm on it anyway. Aaron: This is about as accurate as it gets with 3dmm. (This is how I did the "3dmm framerates" thread that's over in 3dmm Modifications from a few years back) Although we're ignoring the fact that 3dmm doesn't really have frames in the FPS sense. It only updates parts of the screen that change, sorta. It uses a dirty-rectangles method based on the bounding boxes of active models. So if you wanted a real FPS, you'd have to change the entire screen every frame. I'm pretty sure you'll get less than 6.6/6.6 then.

11-03-2006, 11:20 AM	#17
Destra Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 3,594	Actually if you check the 3dmm Chat forum there's a stickied thread where Denny and Taco discovered how to get v3dmm to work with 3dmmFPS. However as Denny and I found out, the frame rate becomes extremely erratic when you multiply it. So this thread's pretty much useless now. Nifty though.
Destra Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 3,594

11-03-2006, 05:13 PM	#18
Travis Wells Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 11,147	... That was my point. The frame rate becomes extremely erratic when you multiply it, so I never added FPS-changing to v3dmm.

11-03-2006, 05:42 PM	#19
Demented Ferret Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 16,248	In what ways is it 'extremely erratic'? Do you mean that the frame-rate can change DURING a single session on a single machine, between sessions on the same machine or just vary between machines? I ask this because I'm quite sure the next age of v3dmm/3dmm is to broadcast movies in streamable format, rather than distribute anything in v3dmm/3dmm's native format.

11-08-2006, 06:17 AM	#20
Travis Wells Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 11,147	It varies with the environment on the machine. Which means it's different between different sessions, and different in one session if you do anything but just play the movie. Although I've seen times where if it's high enough you get constant FPS changes as different system processes fight with 3dmm for control of the CPU... so it can change even in one session. (Your plans for the next generation are why it will be the last generation. Good luck with that, sirs.)

11-08-2006, 05:02 PM	#22
Gorosaurus Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 16,146	I agree. streaming should be a side release

11-08-2006, 06:35 PM	#24
Demented Ferret Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 16,248	Agreed. If streaming movies is the way forward, it'll be the last step into the development of 3dmm, if anything. After that, you'll be looking at the whole 3dmm+ stuff, with trying to build a fanbase on top of it (which isn't going to happen, APPARENTLY).

07-04-2007, 12:32 AM	#25
Manny Cav Posts: n/a	Hahaha, the "How to Ignore People" would make a funny movie. Anyway, on my first attempt, I got 6.55. Then, on 2 repeated tries afterwards, I got 6.57. After exiting XP and rebooting, I tried it again, and got 6.52 2 times in a row, and then I got 6.49. It's like Gorosaurus said, 3dmm is just inconsistent on Windows XP.
Manny Cav Posts: n/a