6/20/2026 at 2:45:42 PM
This is an awesome achievement, but I can't help but notice that Quake ran smoother on my Pentium-133 PC in the 90s than it runs on my Mac M1 Pro...by jedberg
6/20/2026 at 2:59:08 PM
This engine is not optimised for performance. It's using CSS, after all.by poisonfountain
6/20/2026 at 3:11:35 PM
Yeah this is a case of “not the right tool for the job”.It is awesome though.
by Insanity
6/20/2026 at 4:01:11 PM
Of course, but you'd think after 30 years the compute power should be enough to overcome any lack of optimization. It's a testament to the engineering that went into the original Quake engine.by jedberg
6/20/2026 at 4:32:18 PM
Decades of optimizing a toaster to make better toast will not make the toaster any better at making meatloafby culi
6/21/2026 at 1:37:37 AM
We haven't had a toaster that makes better toast since 1997 (Sunbeam radiant control).by billfor
6/21/2026 at 6:23:53 PM
Is this you? https://www.timstoasters.com/by culi
6/21/2026 at 1:37:40 AM
Toaster you say?https://philip.greenspun.com/humor/eecs-difference-explained
by qmr
6/20/2026 at 6:23:31 PM
Is this the right analogy? The product is the same, the appliance is different.It should be "Decades of inventions from toasters to IOT AI Smart Air Fryers will not make better toast than the original"
But I'd argue the IOT AI Smart Air Fryer should make really good toast. Which is what GP is saying.
by libria
6/20/2026 at 8:29:04 PM
It'd be like if the IOT AI Smart Air Fryer had a constraint of only being allowed to use friction to create heat.CSSQuake uses an intentionally-absurd rendering pipeline. It's not surprising that the result is sub-optimal.
(Though I agree that the meatloaf analogy is not very good.)
by matt_kantor
6/21/2026 at 12:36:48 AM
I stand by my analogy.Both a toaster and an oven might benefit from improved electronics but in the end—whether its a toaster from the 60s or a toaster from 3008—you are still using a toaster to make a meatloaf.
CSS is not remotely comparable to a game engine. It's not even a programming language.
by culi
6/20/2026 at 5:10:51 PM
I am on the ground. This is great.Still, why css is as slow as it is given what tech like imgui can do is a little wild.
by rustystump
6/20/2026 at 5:30:17 PM
CSS is a general rendering solution, not something built for rendering 3D games.And no one has spent any time optimizing 3D transforms to make a game workable because no one would be able to justify the use of their time like that. It wouldn’t even give you brownie points ‘cause most people would just ask “why?”
by harrall
6/20/2026 at 6:06:52 PM
Id assume "a fun challenge" could be enough of a reasonby Akronymus
6/21/2026 at 12:57:45 AM
Err, strange, what browser? I'm using Firefox on a ThinkPad from 2018 running Linux, and cssquake was running at a smooth 60fps just now (and at 1080p resolution vs the 320x240 or 320x200 someone would likely be running on a P133)by amatecha
6/20/2026 at 5:09:25 PM
For what it's worth it works like smooth butter under Chrome on an M2, on Safari it's clunky and seems to clip alotby jamal-kumar
6/20/2026 at 7:55:08 PM
Zero issues on Firefox + Linux. Gnome Web is stuttery and weird, though. Must be a WebKit/Safari thing.by jeroenhd
6/20/2026 at 8:02:43 PM
Possibly, I did it on Safari. Trying it now on Chrome and it's fine.by jedberg
6/21/2026 at 6:33:44 PM
Maybe try Firefox.Most of the time, things seem to be optimized for Chrome, but with this, I actually had the impression that Firefox ran a bit smoother, but I tested it on Linux.
by arendtio
6/20/2026 at 10:01:38 PM
Quake compiled in C will run insanely fast at 8K full resolution on an M1.by api
6/20/2026 at 11:24:42 PM
You wouldn’t happen to have a pointer on where to get this version would you?by jedberg
6/21/2026 at 7:59:43 AM
Runs perfectly fine at over 60fps on my Intel Core 358H at roughly 2560x1600.Perhaps there's something wrong with your web browser. Try Firefox - it works beautifully there.
by itvision
6/20/2026 at 3:53:20 PM
Wait, did Quack run on Pentium-133? I had a Pentium MMX 233mhz and I always assumed it didn't ran well so I never bother to get it.by DanielHB
6/20/2026 at 4:03:35 PM
If you had a 3dfx card it would run silky smooth on a Pentium-120 (what I had at the time)! Quake 2 ran pretty well too if I recall.by iamphilrae
6/21/2026 at 12:16:28 AM
Yep 3dfx was a game changer. Was night and day on my 486 DX4 100 with and withoutby jklp
6/21/2026 at 9:31:51 AM
Yeah I didn't have a 3dfx so I assumed the software renderer required a more powerful CPUby DanielHB
6/20/2026 at 3:59:35 PM
Quake ran on a P75 with 8MB RAM in DOS mode. Not the best but it worked at 320x200.by lightedman
6/20/2026 at 5:05:53 PM
Bare minimum for it being playable was a 486DX4 100MHz or similar, but with the floating point Quake really wanted a Pentiumby bluedino
6/20/2026 at 5:27:19 PM
I played it on a Pentium with 60mhz - it was allrightby Garlef
6/20/2026 at 8:10:40 PM
I played quake in 486dx100.by MrFurious
6/21/2026 at 12:48:19 AM
I ran it on a Pentium 60. If you stuck to 320x200 it ran fine.by bitwize
6/20/2026 at 4:01:34 PM
It must have, because that's what I had in 1996 and I played it.by jedberg
6/20/2026 at 7:02:34 PM
Ran fine on my Pentium 90 with 16MB RAMby lizknope
6/20/2026 at 4:14:08 PM
Quake ran well on my 100Mhz Pentium.by UltraSane
6/20/2026 at 4:53:10 PM
Either you had a Voodoo on your P133 or whatever the M1 is doing is having a bad time...On my 7945HX this is plenty fast.
by to11mtm
6/20/2026 at 4:04:44 PM
I think you’re missing the pointby jonplackett