1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking Benchmarking Platform
Phoromatic Test Orchestration

Doom 3 v. Quake 4 Performance

Michael Larabel

Published on 22 October 2005
Written by Michael Larabel
Page 3 of 3 - Comment On This Article

In many respects, the Quake 4 game-play is incredibly similar to that of Doom 3; however, its frame-rate is evidently different. When performing the weakest of the strenuous benchmarks, 1024 x 768 - Low Quality, there was a mere 6.8 frame per second difference, but once we began enabling AA and AF, the results began to slide together. Whilst the settings were at 1280 x 1024 - High Quality - 8xS AA/8x AF, there was merely a 1.4 frame difference between the two games. Although no results can be decisively concluded due to the slight difference in testing demos, in general we've found Quake 4 to be more GPU demanding than CPU bound. More or less, the performance between Quake 4 and Doom 3 is similar but Quake 4 is using a tweaked/updated version of the Doom 3 engine and its technologies. Keep in mind, our testing of course was all under Linux, and the Windows version of Quake 4 is likely to share a different fate. It's also note worthy that upon the much-anticipated release of the NVIDIA Linux 1.0-8XXX (Rel80) drivers, these results are likely to change even more and at that time, we'll deliver some updated numbers.

About The Author
Michael Larabel is the principal author of Phoronix.com and founded the web-site in 2004 with a focus on enriching the Linux hardware experience and being the largest web-site devoted to Linux hardware reviews, particularly for products relevant to Linux gamers and enthusiasts but also commonly reviewing servers/workstations and embedded Linux devices. Michael has written more than 10,000 articles covering the state of Linux hardware support, Linux performance, graphics hardware drivers, and other topics. Michael is also the lead developer of the Phoronix Test Suite, Phoromatic, and OpenBenchmarking.org automated testing software. He can be followed via and or contacted via .
Latest Articles & Reviews
  1. Trying Out The Modern Linux Desktops With 4 Monitors + AMD/NVIDIA Graphics
  2. Turning A Basement Into A Big Linux Server Room
  3. NVIDIA's $1000+ GeForce GTX TITAN X Delivers Maximum Linux Performance
  4. OS X 10.10 vs. Ubuntu 15.04 vs. Fedora 21 Tests: Linux Sweeps The Board
  5. The New Place Where Linux Code Is Constantly Being Benchmarked
  6. 18-GPU NVIDIA/AMD Linux Comparison Of BioShock: Infinite
Latest Linux News
  1. Fedora 22 Alpha Now Available For AArch64 & PowerPC64
  2. Systemd Developers Did NOT Fork The Linux Kernel
  3. PulseAudio 7.0 To Enable LFE Remixing By Default
  4. Features & Changes Coming For Mir 0.13
  5. How Far Valve Has Come: Three Years Ago They Needed OpenGL Linux Help
  6. Audacity 2.1 Improves Noise Reduction, Adds Real-Time Effects Preview
  7. Linux 4.0-rc6 Kernel Released
  8. Automatically Managing The Linux Benchmarks Firing Constantly
  9. The Big Features Of The Linux 4.0 Kernel
  10. Mesa's Android Support Is Currently In Bad Shape
Most Viewed News This Week
  1. Introducing The Library Operating System For Linux
  2. Improved OpenCL Support For Blender's Cycles Renderer
  3. Allwinner Continues Jerking Around The Open-Source Community
  4. Open-Source Driver Fans Will Love NVIDIA's New OpenGL Demo
  5. GNOME 3.16 Released: It's Their Best Release Yet
  6. Systemd Change Allows For Stateless Systems With Tmpfs
  7. GNOME Shell & Mutter 3.16.0 Released
  8. GNU Nano 2.4.0 Brings Complete Undo System, Linter Support & More