Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Mac Guru
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a 366 MHz G3 (with a 16 MB Rage 128 soon) and 544 MB SDRAM, and was wondernig what I should expect for performance.

Running OS X 10.2.3, latest UT OS X patch (game is at v436.)

My 266 MHz G3 with 288 RAM ran UT at 20 FPS under OS 9.2.2 - should I expect about the same or a tad more? (16-bit, medium graphics, 640x480)
 

·
Vorlon Ambassador
Joined
·
5,295 Posts
Probably worse... UT X is only a beta and hasn't really been optimized for speed, and probably won't be since UT2003 is coming out soon.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,069 Posts
UT X sucks ROYALLY compared to UT in 9. It is a beta, and they are only working on it in their spare time, so if I were you, if you still have OS 9, play UT in OS 9, it runs faster and looks much nicer.
 

·
Mac Guru
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chealion:
UT X sucks ROYALLY compared to UT in 9. It is a beta, and they are only working on it in their spare time, so if I were you, if you still have OS 9, play UT in OS 9, it runs faster and looks much nicer.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I'll take your advice on that. I'm just attempting to as much as possible stay in OS X and stay away from OS 9 (Classic Mode I can live with). I just want the frigging final version!
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top