Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
lutorm

1.31 FPS tests and CPU vs GPU

103 posts in this topic

Very interesting. I wonder if this is what has been killing me. I bought a new computer about 6-9 months ago and was expecting a huge improvement over my last rig which was pretty old. Nope low frames. Even lower than my last comp. I get 50-60 at the high end and drop down to 20's in towns. Teens in camped depots. And when I am flying forget getting anywhere near a town. I have followed all the recommmendations about turning off aa, mitmap, vsync, and so on. Even dropped my vis player limits. So many changes that it makes playing infantry terrible because I can no longer detect inf from brush. Pissing me off...and these changes haven't done crap for my frames per sec except it now allows me to fly with my track ir without lagging. Absolutely disheartening since I paid a pretty penny for this computer.

All along it turns out it might be my Quad core processor. I need help finding a way to remedy this since I will not be changing anything on my computer in the forseeable future. How do I dedicate cores to tasks? How do I do so without affecting my graphics extensive design work for my actual work when I am not playing? What should I know that can help fix my fps problems since it seems I can turn back up my gpu settings since it doesn't seem to be the issue?

Windows Vista professional 64 SP2

AMD Phenom II x4 black edition 3ghz

ATI radeon 4850HD 1024 10.2driver

8 gigs DDR2 (I can't remember what the front side bus speed is.)

Soundblaster X-FI

Help!

I've got a Phenom II X4 BE 955 @ 3.6Ghz, and its exceedingly fast in v1.30.

Are you missing any system drivers? like for the chipset? or windows provided audio drivers?

4850 is a pretty good video card. So is your processor. 8GB of ram is alot to

How much "junk" do you have running in the background?

bCxuHvxNd0A

That's how it runs for me + im recording with fraps.

If you want to start your own thread, and post your DXDIAG, i'm sure somebody can look through it and see if you need to update your drivers, or if your missing something somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've got a Phenom II X4 BE 955 @ 3.6Ghz, and its exceedingly fast in v1.30.

Are you missing any system drivers? like for the chipset? or windows provided audio drivers?

4850 is a pretty good video card. So is your processor. 8GB of ram is alot to

How much "junk" do you have running in the background?

bCxuHvxNd0A

That's how it runs for me + im recording with fraps.

If you want to start your own thread, and post your DXDIAG, i'm sure somebody can look through it and see if you need to update your drivers, or if your missing something somewhere.

Great thank you. I really don't think I'm missing anything but Im not sure. Its possible. I don't have that much running in the background. Some typical apps and such but for the most part I keep my startup menu pretty clean. There are probably a few things in there that I don't know what to do with so I have left them alone. But I am sure there are a bunch of processes that could probably be shut down if I wasn't so afraid to do so.

For example just sitting here typing this with itunes running and few windows none of my 4 cores are running over 2%...actually 1 if them is at 0 and the other is at 1. I am running at 1.9gigs memory right now but I am not sure if that is a vista issue or not. From what I've seen while working (running autocad, sketchup, kerkethea, photoshop, and internet explorer at the same time) I don't ever recall going over 6.5gigs of memory usage. So I don't think that is the issue with the game either.

Regardless I will set up my own thread. Thank you.

P.S. how do I do a DXDIAG anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was starting to get nervous that I've done some config to my computer which might have created some bottleneck some where in the system....

So I reinstalled 3DMark Vantage with the latest patch 1.0.2 and ran some benchmarking on my system.

I can say that I'm relieved that my computer is working as intended. Getting consistent good scores on CPU/GPU, cant see any bottlenecks.

3DMark Score(Preset:Performance)

P16596

GPU Score

16363

CPU Score

17338

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

3DMark Score(Preset:High)

H11767

GPU Score

11138

CPU Score

17312

So it's back to 'troubleshoot' BGE vs ATI/Windows7(64bit)........

------------------

System Information

------------------

Operating System: Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600) (7600.win7_rtm.090713-1255)

Language: Swedish (Regional Setting: Swedish)

System Manufacturer: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.

System Model: EX58-UD4P

BIOS: Award Modular BIOS v6.00PG

Processor: Intel® Core i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.8GHz

Memory: 6144MB RAM

Available OS Memory: 6142MB RAM

Page File: 2270MB used, 10269MB available

Windows Dir: C:\Windows

DirectX Version: DirectX 11

DX Setup Parameters: Not found

User DPI Setting: Using System DPI

System DPI Setting: 96 DPI (100 percent)

DWM DPI Scaling: Disabled

DxDiag Version: 6.01.7600.16385 32bit Unicode

---------------

Display Devices

---------------

Card name: ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2

Manufacturer: ATI Technologies Inc.

Chip type: ATI display adapter (0x9441)

DAC type: Internal DAC(400MHz)

Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9441&SUBSYS_25421002&REV_00

Display Memory: 3826 MB

Dedicated Memory: 1014 MB

Shared Memory: 2811 MB

Current Mode: 1680 x 1050 (32 bit) (59Hz)

Monitor Name: Generic PnP Monitor

Monitor Model: PL2201W

Monitor Id: IVM5602

Native Mode: 1680 x 1050(p) (59.954Hz)

Output Type: DVI

Driver Name: atiu9p64 aticfx64 aticfx64 atiu9pag aticfx32 aticfx32 atiumd64 atidxx64 atidxx64 atiumdag atidxx32 atidxx32 atiumdva atiumd6a atitmm64

Driver File Version: ()

Driver Version: 8.702.0.0

DDI Version: 10.1

Driver Model: WDDM 1.1

Driver Attributes: Final Retail

Driver Date/Size: , 0 bytes

WHQL Logo'd: n/a

WHQL Date Stamp: n/a

Device Identifier: {D7B71EE2-D701-11CF-7D64-4305A1C2C535}

Vendor ID: 0x1002

Device ID: 0x9441

SubSys ID: 0x25421002

Revision ID: 0x0000

Driver Strong Name: oem1.inf:ATI.Mfg.NTamd64.6.1:ati2mtag_RV7X:8.702.0.0:pci\ven_1002&dev_9441

Rank Of Driver: 00E62001

Video Accel: ModeMPEG2_A ModeMPEG2_C

Deinterlace Caps: {6E8329FF-B642-418B-BCF0-BCB6591E255F}: Format(In/Out)=(YUY2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive

{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(YUY2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(YUY2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY

{6E8329FF-B642-418B-BCF0-BCB6591E255F}: Format(In/Out)=(UYVY,UYVY) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive

{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(UYVY,UYVY) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(UYVY,UYVY) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(YV12,0x32315659) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=

{3C5323C1-6FB7-44F5-9081-056BF2EE449D}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,2) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive

{552C0DAD-CCBC-420B-83C8-74943CF9F1A6}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,2) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive

{6E8329FF-B642-418B-BCF0-BCB6591E255F}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,1) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive

{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalStretch

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC1,UNKNOWN) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC2,UNKNOWN) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC3,UNKNOWN) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(IMC4,UNKNOWN) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(S340,UNKNOWN) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=

{5A54A0C9-C7EC-4BD9-8EDE-F3C75DC4393B}: Format(In/Out)=(S342,UNKNOWN) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=

D3D9 Overlay: Not Supported

DXVA-HD: Not Supported

DDraw Status: Enabled

D3D Status: Enabled

AGP Status: Enabled

Edited by chimaera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made a new benchmark run with BGE 1.31.26, everything set to low settings like the instructions says. Also set my settings for my ATI card to lowest possible(Optimal performance).

Got the following results.

.benchremagen

57fps

.benchvehicles

29fps

.benchantwerp

27fps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd - Ive got the same CPU as you and simlar motherboard (EX58 UD3R rev1.6)

(Also running W7 64 bit)

Getting 46 now on Antwerp bench

You got any old Nvidia cards knocking around :) may be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Odd - Ive got the same CPU as you and simlar motherboard (EX58 UD3R rev1.6)

(Also running W7 64 bit)

Getting 46 now on Antwerp bench

You got any old Nvidia cards knocking around :) may be interesting.

If you are running a similar system as mine but the differing factor is that you have a nVidia GFX card in your system then thats one more indication that something is off with ATI cards.

And no I don't have any nVidia card, would have been interesting to test.

Edited by chimaera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for comparison chimaera. My i7 920 on stock (asus p6t deluxe v2, 6gb 1600 Ram), radeon 4830, W7 64, game version 1.31.25, catalyst 10.1, 1280x1024 resolution:

remagen - 70fps

antwerp - 34fps

vehicles - 28fps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great thank you. I really don't think I'm missing anything but Im not sure. Its possible. I don't have that much running in the background. Some typical apps and such but for the most part I keep my startup menu pretty clean. There are probably a few things in there that I don't know what to do with so I have left them alone. But I am sure there are a bunch of processes that could probably be shut down if I wasn't so afraid to do so.

For example just sitting here typing this with itunes running and few windows none of my 4 cores are running over 2%...actually 1 if them is at 0 and the other is at 1. I am running at 1.9gigs memory right now but I am not sure if that is a vista issue or not. From what I've seen while working (running autocad, sketchup, kerkethea, photoshop, and internet explorer at the same time) I don't ever recall going over 6.5gigs of memory usage. So I don't think that is the issue with the game either.

Regardless I will set up my own thread. Thank you.

P.S. how do I do a DXDIAG anyway?

In your start bar.. type dxdiag.

should bring up your direct x diagnostic menu. click the "save all information" and post the first couple parts of the .txt file it spits out.

I'm on Windows XP, Currently using 8% of my 3328MB (4096MB installed.3328MB "seen")

Edited by indo420

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running E6600 2.40 GHZ and a 8800GTX on a P5n32-E SLI (socket 775) do you think upgrading it to E8500 3.16 GHZ @ $189.99 and a 260 gtx @ $214.99 is worth it and will it be much of a upgrade I dont think I could do much else with the socket 775 motherboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Running E6600 2.40 GHZ and a 8800GTX on a P5n32-E SLI (socket 775) do you think upgrading it to E8500 3.16 GHZ @ $189.99 and a 260 gtx @ $214.99 is worth it and will it be much of a upgrade I dont think I could do much else with the socket 775 motherboard.

Ofcourse it is going to be worth it, not so much the graphics as the cpu. Thats the point of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just for comparison chimaera. My i7 920 on stock (asus p6t deluxe v2, 6gb 1600 Ram), radeon 4830, W7 64, game version 1.31.25, catalyst 10.1, 1280x1024 resolution:

remagen - 70fps

antwerp - 34fps

vehicles - 28fps

Interesting antwerp and vehicles doesnt show that much difference but your remagen bench gives you 13 fps more.

I went and set my resolution to 1280x1024x32 didnt do anything, getting the same benchmarking results as before. I even set it lower 1024x768x32, still the same results, changing resolution doesnt seem to change performance.

Strange...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So maybe I should just upgrade the CPU and go for the E8600 3.33 GHZ @ $269.00 instead of the E8500 3.166 GHZ @ $189.99

Forget the GPU GTX260 and stick with the GTX8800 for the time being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In your start bar.. type dxdiag.

should bring up your direct x diagnostic menu. click the "save all information" and post the first couple parts of the .txt file it spits out.

I'm on Windows XP, Currently using 8% of my 3328MB (4096MB installed.3328MB "seen")

Thank you...will do later today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So maybe I should just upgrade the CPU and go for the E8600 3.33 GHZ @ $269.00 instead of the E8500 3.166 GHZ @ $189.99

Forget the GPU GTX260 and stick with the GTX8800 for the time being.

Would probably just go with the 3.16. Difference in FPS will be 5% more so 30fps turn into 31.5.

Those processors can easily be overclocked using motherboard tools to give a boost.

My last processor was the E8500 3.16 and it was very good. I would go for that first then see about card once you can compare to other people who have similar processors and better card.

***Just saw you said E8600 - Well I know they overclock very well also to 4ghz and beyond - So both good choices but I've never used the E8600, just the E8500.*****

Edited by badger77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would probably just go with the 3.16. Difference in FPS will be 5% more so 30fps turn into 31.5.

Those processors can easily be overclocked using motherboard tools to give a boost.

My last processor was the E8500 3.16 and it was very good. I would go for that first then see about card once you can compare to other people who have similar processors and better card.

***Just saw you said E8600 - Well I know they overclock very well also to 4ghz and beyond - So both good choices but I've never used the E8600, just the E8500.*****

good advise.

Get a bad to da' bone cpu cooler and take your processor to meet 4.0 Mega Hurts

I'd look and see what the fastest possible memory you can install in your mainboard is as well... if you wanted to spend that extra cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
good advise.

Get a bad to da' bone cpu cooler and take your processor to meet 4.0 Mega Hurts

I'd look and see what the fastest possible memory you can install in your mainboard is as well... if you wanted to spend that extra cash.

What CPU coolers you thinking about. I've always used the Artic Cooler range since I tested it against stock and got about 10 - 12 degrees less with it.

Combined with a the Antec 900 case or similar with couple of good fans I'm running pretty cold all the time.

My I7 right now is running 33 - 38 (diff temps on cores) Of course it will be higher in summer but in the 30's is pretty decent starting point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What CPU coolers you thinking about. I've always used the Artic Cooler range since I tested it against stock and got about 10 - 12 degrees less with it.

Combined with a the Antec 900 case or similar with couple of good fans I'm running pretty cold all the time.

My I7 right now is running 33 - 38 (diff temps on cores) Of course it will be higher in summer but in the 30's is pretty decent starting point.

Yea unclocked the freezer 7 will run a 920 below 40c.

Clocked to 3.5 I'm runnin mid 40s. I've run wwiiol for a hour with a 4.3 OC and temps got up to 78c which still ain't bad for a 30 buck cpu cooler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea unclocked the freezer 7 will run a 920 below 40c.

Clocked to 3.5 I'm runnin mid 40s. I've run wwiiol for a hour with a 4.3 OC and temps got up to 78c which still ain't bad for a 30 buck cpu cooler.

When I bought mine I wanted to overclock it to 4Ghz straight away. But then I tried the game on stock and I was like lol why even bother!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I never overclock really. If you've got a good processor don't really need to - Well havent had to yet with the stuff I play.

I mean if I'm getting 60fps whats the point of getting 80 :)

Generally I'm of the opinion that once over 40 - 50 fps not much more is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Copying this from another thread.

Doing some other 'tweaking'(disabling some background services, disabling prefetch and making the Page File smaller, disabling minimap and other HUD elements) got me a few more fps.

Windows7 Enterprise(64bit)

i7-920 (stock, no O/C)

ATI 4870 X2

6 GB DDR3 RAM

1680x1050x32

.benchremagen

62fps

.benchvehicles

31fps

.benchantwerp

29fps

I mean it's not bad for a system that hasn't been O/C'ed... it's just frustrating to know that the GFX card doesnt seem to be the biggest factor when it comes to performance. I'm not prepared to O/C my computer to get more fps.

But this is what I get when O/C'ing to 3.5GHz.... Looks like there is a bigger gain with a faster CPU than a expensive GFX(ATI) card :-).... (or a combination of a fast CPU and nVidia card seems to be the magic formula).

.benchremagen

78fps

.benchvehicles

40fps

.benchantwerp

37fps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Copying this from another thread.

Doing some other 'tweaking'(disabling some background services, disabling prefetch and making the Page File smaller, disabling minimap and other HUD elements) got me a few more fps.

Windows7 Enterprise(64bit)

i7-920 (stock, no O/C)

ATI 4870 X2

6 GB DDR3 RAM

1680x1050x32

.benchremagen

62fps

.benchvehicles

31fps

.benchantwerp

29fps

I mean it's not bad for a system that hasn't been O/C'ed... it's just frustrating to know that the GFX card doesnt seem to be the biggest factor when it comes to performance. I'm not prepared to O/C my computer to get more fps.

But this is what I get when O/C'ing to 3.5GHz.... Looks like there is a bigger gain with a faster CPU than a expensive GFX(ATI) card :-).... (or a combination of a fast CPU and nVidia card seems to be the magic formula).

.benchremagen

78fps

.benchvehicles

40fps

.benchantwerp

37fps

Well in a way the ATI card is having an effect on your low FPS here.

I've got same setup with W7 64bit but with a GTX 260 (Old 192 model from about 18 months ago)

So at the moment your right the Nvidias seem to give much much better performance. Hopefully they will fix that soon

With no tweeking and just launching Antwerp bench I'm getting 46 FPS off stock 2.66ghz I7 920 on same screen res.

Edited by badger77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need a signal boost.

Is the issue here that ATi cards are still not performing up to snuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's definitely weak compared to the NVIDIA cards.

Mcketten's rig from here

3.0ghz Athlon X2, GTS250 1gb, 4gb ram, 500gb 7200 rpm HD. Uncapped I get 80-120 fps outside of town, 60-80 in town, 40 when looking over antwerp in the benchmark test.

Swap out the GTS250 for a 4850, and the 3.0 Ghz for a 2.8 Ghz and thats identical to my rig.

I'm struggling to get 20FPS looking at the Antwerp benchmark, and showing little to no activity on the GPU with ATI Tray tools or the Catalyst control center.

He doesn't mention his OS, but I'm using Windows 7, 64 bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, it's definitely weak compared to the NVIDIA cards.

Mcketten's rig from here

Swap out the GTS250 for a 4850, and the 3.0 Ghz for a 2.8 Ghz and thats identical to my rig.

I'm struggling to get 20FPS looking at the Antwerp benchmark, and showing little to no activity on the GPU with ATI Tray tools or the Catalyst control center.

He doesn't mention his OS, but I'm using Windows 7, 64 bit.

Your Processor will also be causing you lower framerates. How much lower I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's most of your loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.