Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ralpher1

Ok, got a new Rig, nothing special...but the framerate is still awful as infantry.

68 posts in this topic

ok 7275 on 3dmark03

but thats the demo tho :\

arent you supposed to tweak the potions ot raise that score?

Or...is that score not make sense no matter what with a dual core 4600+, x1600 512 ram, 3 gig ram.

:\?

7275 it teh suxxors and reenforces my first opinion that it is NOT the game but something on your end, be it hardware, connection or drivers.

Here is a link to a similar setup just running a 4400X2 so you should outperform this. Score is 9487

http://service.futuremark.com/orb/multicompare_view.jsp?p0=4649614&n0=Project+02&t=MultiCompare&k=10&s=1&l=1&c=465587177

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm haveing all kinds of issues with FPS also with my new rig and WWIIOL.

E6700 Duo Core, 2 gig 444-12 800 ram, EVGA 680i MB, X-FI Extremegamer Pro (XRAM) sound card, with a EVGA 8800 GTX on a Dell 24" Widescreen monitor.

Crap FPS in zoomed mode with trees.

I play at 1920x1200x32 x16 ansio x8 AA and get same FPS as 12x7 with no Ansio or AA. I play with vsync on.

Things that made a big difference in FPS and stopped lock ups (total system freeze requiring reboot) that I was getting running WWIIOL.

All shaders off. No grass, water, or post render.

Dithering off.

Specular off.

Video drivers:

Nforce 98.96 the 97.02 seemed to cause lockup problems.

Triple buffering off.

Threaded Optimization off.

Vsync forced on.

EXE:

x86 exe not the SSE. SSE caused lockups.

NT Compatibility on removed stutters.

Still in big combat my FPS dips to 25 FPS and sometimes lower like 17 FPS when in binos looking at trees / big sceens at field of view 5 degrees.

When running others games at 1920x1200 x16 ansio, x16qx AA, & vsync on;

Using FRAPS that displays on my G15 keyboard LCD display:

Advanced Warfighter everything on max and locked at 60 FPS.

Medieval II everything on max with Huge formations 30-50 FPS; when 2 armies on both sides FPS much lower at 17 but using normal size formations I'm still in the 20s for FPS with 4 armies on the field.

Neverwinter Nights 2 everything on max and 30 FPS.

BF 2142 everything on and locked at max FPS 60.

ILS max settings locked at 60 FPS.

Falcon 4 AF and Open Falocn locked at 60 FPS.

The list goes on and on.

Locked at 60 means that the FPS stays at 60 my max with vsync on ie doesn't dip below it.

WWIIOL seems to need new shaders besides the obvious new gfx engine. My AMD 3400 6800GT with 1 gig 400mhz ram faired the same FPS. All I got really updating to this uber system is the abilitly to use 19x12 with x16 ansio and x8 AA which is due to the 8800GTX.

Only game that has required extensive fiddeling around to make it run becuase it was locking up my systme or running horried FPS like 5 FPS at times before I figured out the formula to run ok is WWIIOL. Sad isn't it?

I'm like you guys. The only real game I was hoping to run awesome is WWIIOL and it runs crappy with my new rig compared to the huge gains I've got across the board in all other games. Here i mostly got headaches......

Let me add this also. For the life of me I can't get rid of a layered sky in WWIIOL. All other fligth sims no gfx problems. But WWIIOL all I get is a layered sky color. Very annoying. Anyone have a fix for that?

bro, 99% of your zoom problem is your high AF and AA settings. Tone them down even half that and your frames will double. Guaranteed. And you probably won't even be able to see the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no what im saying, is look at scores, of the x1600

they are all in the range of 10ksih.

period :\

so, do ATI high end cards, not work with older opengl games :\

this the case? :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no what im saying, is look at scores, of the x1600

they are all in the range of 10ksih.

period :\

so, do ATI high end cards, not work with older opengl games :\

this the case? :(

Yes and a 2k difference is ALOT!!!!

And ATI cards are fine even with yours not being top of the line. Your issue is in your hardware I will bet. Something not installed correctly, drivers, heat etc. etc. And running 3g's of RAM is not a good idea IMO. I would run 2 sticks of 1g or 2 sticks of 512mb etc. etc. I would not run 3 sticks of RAM, not saying it wont work just that I personally wouldn't run it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know i should out perform him, but, what im sayingm is 7k, or 10k, it doesnt matters...its not 20k+

and I should be getting that on mark03.

:\

ahh well, clearly, ati products cant work well with this game or odler stuff....for now.

hopefully wwiiol will fix this.

not sure.

My 9800 pro had this problem, my x600, and my x1600.

:|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what I'm saying, is I didnt even bother twaeking...to get that score..just tried it out...

Im certain if I turned off a few things, and turned on a few more, I could tweak it

not my concern at the moment tho :\

lol,

what im saying, is a score of 10k, in mark03..wont play this game, clearly, well enough :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

guess i feel a little better now...but actually a lot worst tho lol

my old system with a 9800 pro, and a 2.4 ghz processor, score 11k on mark03.

ROFL.

i mean, something is definantly up with the x1600, and older software :\

ah well

sigh..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bro' date=' 99% of your zoom problem is your high AF and AA settings. Tone them down even half that and your frames will double. Guaranteed. And you probably won't even be able to see the difference.[/quote']

No difference in frames with x16 ansio and x16a AA on or off. No difference at 19x12 or 10x7.

The 8800GTX was made to do that and it does.

BTW the grass shaders cause full system lock up. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what I'm saying, is I didnt even bother twaeking...to get that score..just tried it out...

Im certain if I turned off a few things, and turned on a few more, I could tweak it

not my concern at the moment tho :\

lol,

what im saying, is a score of 10k, in mark03..wont play this game, clearly, well enough :(

You shouldn't be getting anywhere near 20k with your rig. You should be getting 9-10k @ stock settings with your rig IMO. And even if you OC'd you would NEVER see anything near 20k.

And 2k difference in score is immense I tell you. If I OC my CPU to 2.9g my score will go up 100 points or so from 2.8g's with everything else performing the same, just to give you a reference. Now you think about that 2k difference.

Again no matter if you want to accept this or not it is in YOUR system and not ATI's or WWIIOL's.

Here is a chart for GPU reference and the blue is highlighting your 1600's performance compared to a 7900's. Mind you the 7900's is MUCH newer.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=519&model2=558&chart=228

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not that I doubt ya, but do you have any documentation about any motherboards made after 1990 that had problems with odd numbers of sticks of ram? :\

doesnt make sense.

but if its any consolation....I put the extra stick in earlier today...after having installed wwiiol last night and played.

not much of a difference that I can tell, but definantly not a 'cause' of any slowdowns, or problems what so ever that I can tell.

im lost :\

lol, all I know, is its clearly an issue with certain, ati cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can I t be my sytem? when I have tried 3 brand new systems in the last 2 days?

and all 3 have had two thigns in common..

ati cards, and ww2ol?

ive been playing this game since day 1, like I said, on a 32 mb video card, lol...

there is clearly an issue between these old shader drivers used in these trees or whatever, and certain ati cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not that I care, just so I have a comparison

whats yer system, to have gotten a 24k score in mark03?

watcha runnin? (Obviously a $500ish video card) but what else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but yea, how could I have score over 10k with a 9800 pro, and less with this new card? and a faster PC,

lol :\

maybe 3dmark03 has actually gotten, better or something over the years..

im sure it was mark03 I used years ago to bench my PC bak then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how can I t be my sytem? when I have tried 3 brand new systems in the last 2 days?

and all 3 have had two thigns in common..

ati cards, and ww2ol?

ive been playing this game since day 1, like I said, on a 32 mb video card, lol...

there is clearly an issue between these old shader drivers used in these trees or whatever, and certain ati cards.

Find your card on the scale and you will see it is not ATI but probably the age of your card. And the fact that your 3dmark score is so vastly different than a comperable system is the reason for my belief that it is in your hardware or drivers.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=519&model2=558&chart=228

Your GPU is old and probably could use a replacement. BUT the difference in the COMPARABLE scores of your system shows a problem on the hardware side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so bak to the moral.....how could a system that is clearly as good as other peoples systems..not perform even remotely as well...but only in this game...and only in certain situations involving trees.....in this game.

I score closer to 200 FPS in my other games with similar settings (AA and AF off and such)

I know wwiiol is a WHOLE nother cup of tea, believe you me, I know..but its wierd that my system can perform better in some games..mainly directx 9 games...and i guess not well in others...

opengl

:\

ah well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its a problem on the wwiiol

tree side.

lol, every other game ive installed today, is so fricken blazing.

even fear, which they claim is super intensive on the graphics.

but, the point is, I know, wwiiol requires different resources than, fear.

but, I just dont believe its hardware when the games been played on now 3 rigs, 3 differentt processors, and 3 different video cards....all win xp....

from scratch.

(Been buying and retunring PC's lately....its the best time of year to do so without too much hassle)

not one has worked well, around trees..in wwiiol

like I said, maybe im just unlucky, and everytime I get a PC...its dropped on the corner where the special wwiiol diode is installed in every mother board ever made..and im just getin thwarted by the hardware fairy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your right though

couldnt scqueeze out 2k

got it just over the 8100ish mark

(everything off, no overclocking)

so..im off from where I should be...probably my Harddrive or whatever.

point is...even if im only 15% off speed wise, from my peers....my peers, arent good enough, lol...for this game either I guess..

maybe nvidia cards work a little better :\

but 15% better than 15 fps, isnt gonna do it....

24kish, lol, yea, that would be better...

hmm, like 300% better, lol

your seeing 45ish fps where im seeing 15 apparently

lol, so yes, your where I want to be...

apparently, I cant get there....unless I BIG TIME upgrade hardrive/videocard...

no big deal

Ill deal with what I can get

just figured wwiiol would offer more,

Good luck all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
your right though

couldnt scqueeze out 2k

got it just over the 8100ish mark

(everything off, no overclocking)

so..im off from where I should be...probably my Harddrive or whatever.

point is...even if im only 15% off speed wise, from my peers....my peers, arent good enough, lol...for this game either I guess..

maybe nvidia cards work a little better :\

but 15% better than 15 fps, isnt gonna do it....

24kish, lol, yea, that would be better...

hmm, like 300% better, lol

your seeing 45ish fps where im seeing 15 apparently

lol, so yes, your where I want to be...

apparently, I cant get there....unless I BIG TIME upgrade hardrive/videocard...

no big deal

Ill deal with what I can get

just figured wwiiol would offer more,

Good luck all.

It is not a problem with the game on the tree side. It is a performance issue with your computers inability to render the trees due to hardware issues, i.e. your GPU most likely.

Computers are like building fast cars, "Speed costs money so how fast do you want to go".

If I were you I would drop a few bucks on a GPU upgrade and go from there. Socket 939 CPU's are good and a decent PCIx card is pretty cheap now. I paid $250 for my 7900GTO awhile back. Your chip is fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing you might want to try which helped me alot is to make sure you have the most up to date driver for your motherboard

i have an msi motherboard and when i updated the drivers for it 6 months ago it made a huge differance on my puters speed overall

with that said though i get some of the same problems as you do in ww2 and have a much slower computer with as well an ATI card

most likley though id say it has a little to do with ATI but double checking your motherboard drivers for updates can only do you good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm haveing all kinds of issues with FPS also with my new rig and WWIIOL.

E6700 Duo Core, 2 gig 444-12 800 ram, EVGA 680i MB, X-FI Extremegamer Pro (XRAM) sound card, with a EVGA 8800 GTX on a Dell 24" Widescreen monitor.

Crap FPS in zoomed mode with trees.

I play at 1920x1200x32 x16 ansio x8 AA and get same FPS as 12x7 with no Ansio or AA. I play with vsync on.

Things that made a big difference in FPS and stopped lock ups (total system freeze requiring reboot) that I was getting running WWIIOL.

All shaders off. No grass, water, or post render.

Dithering off.

Specular off.

Video drivers:

Nforce 98.96 the 97.02 seemed to cause lockup problems.

Triple buffering off.

Threaded Optimization off.

Vsync forced on.

EXE:

x86 exe not the SSE. SSE caused lockups.

NT Compatibility on removed stutters.

Still in big combat my FPS dips to 25 FPS and sometimes lower like 17 FPS when in binos looking at trees / big sceens at field of view 5 degrees.

When running others games at 1920x1200 x16 ansio, x16qx AA, & vsync on;

Using FRAPS that displays on my G15 keyboard LCD display:

Advanced Warfighter everything on max and locked at 60 FPS.

Medieval II everything on max with Huge formations 30-50 FPS; when 2 armies on both sides FPS much lower at 17 but using normal size formations I'm still in the 20s for FPS with 4 armies on the field.

Neverwinter Nights 2 everything on max and 30 FPS.

BF 2142 everything on and locked at max FPS 60.

ILS max settings locked at 60 FPS.

Falcon 4 AF and Open Falocn locked at 60 FPS.

The list goes on and on.

Locked at 60 means that the FPS stays at 60 my max with vsync on ie doesn't dip below it.

WWIIOL seems to need new shaders besides the obvious new gfx engine. My AMD 3400 6800GT with 1 gig 400mhz ram faired the same FPS. All I got really updating to this uber system is the abilitly to use 19x12 with x16 ansio and x8 AA which is due to the 8800GTX.

Only game that has required extensive fiddeling around to make it run becuase it was locking up my systme or running horried FPS like 5 FPS at times before I figured out the formula to run ok is WWIIOL. Sad isn't it?

I'm like you guys. The only real game I was hoping to run awesome is WWIIOL and it runs crappy with my new rig compared to the huge gains I've got across the board in all other games. Here i mostly got headaches......

Let me add this also. For the life of me I can't get rid of a layered sky in WWIIOL. All other fligth sims no gfx problems. But WWIIOL all I get is a layered sky color. Very annoying. Anyone have a fix for that?

That sounds like a really, really, REALLY bad joke.

My specs;

E6400 Core 2 Duo, 1gb DDR2-533, Intel D975XBX, Soundblaster Audigy 2 (many years old), and a 7900GT.

I play at 1280x1024, ALL SETTINGS MAX, 4xAA, 16xAF, gamma-correct AA and transparency (superampling) AA enabled, v-sync off.

I get 90-120 FPS at FBs and in quiet towns, I get about 40-50 FPS during battles, and my FPS ***NEVER*** goes below ~30 even in the most camped AB.

I get some stutters due to my low amount of RAM (1gb) and my old SATA-I hard drive.

When I use binocs, my FPS actually GOES UP. At *NO POINT* do I *EVER* get "unplayable" framerate in this game.

Your PC is FAR SUPERIOR TO MINE, for your graphics card alone if nothing else, and if you're seriously getting unplayable frames with no AA or AF, it absolutely boggles my mind.

Only thing I can think of is the V-SYNC.

V-SYNC can actually cut your FPS in half (has nothing to do with how powerful your system is)....it CAN be a nice feature, but I *strongly* urge you to turn it off. You *will* gain FPS.

http://www.tweakguides.com/Graphics_9.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ok 7275 on 3dmark03

but thats the demo tho :\

arent you supposed to tweak the potions ot raise that score?

Or...is that score not make sense no matter what with a dual core 4600+, x1600 512 ram, 3 gig ram.

:\?

First off, to put it bluntly, that's a really bad score.

I get ~21,000 and my system is by NO MEANS "high end"; it's "mid range" at best.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=5014533

On my old comp with a processor far inferior to yours (Pentium 4 3ghz) and a cheap 6600GT (also inferior to your video card) I got a high score of 9,102.

One thing off the bat I can say is that your RAM is pretty bad.

512mb does NOT cut it these days; you need at LEAST 1gb for all modern gaming despite whatever CRS says the minimum system requirements are.

EDIT: doh nevermind, you have 3gigs of system RAM??

Well.....that's actually the wrong thing to do. If you have three gigs of system RAM, it probably means you have an odd number of RAM sticks in your motherboard. This means that your dual-channel capability will not work correctly.

2 sticks of 1gb each will actually have superior performance than 3 sticks of the same RAM because of the dual channel advantages.

You should always have an even number of RAM sticks in your system; either 2 or 4.

oh and for the 3 gig question

it came with 2,

i bought an extra gig stik in the store, im hopin its the same speed ddr2 pc4200 ram,

lol :\

would suck if the ones in the PC were slower lol :\

anyways im drunk, off to fly

and possibly get into a little infatry comabt when it seems approptirate, lol

ill post some 3dmark fiugureios when I can.

I'm really sorry, but that was a mistake. You just lowered the performance of your computer by buying that 3rd stick.

BTW:

There's a very easy way to find out what RAM you have in your system.

http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

Download that program and just unzip it anywhere. It tells you everything you need to know about your processor, motherboard, and RAM; it has a section where you can go slot by slot and find out what RAM is in each slot of your motherboard, what type it is, and what manufacturer it is.

We're talking, A NEW COMPUTER

bought yesterday, on black friday

Brand new video card, brand new ram.

brand new PC.

No offense but it's actually not really "brand new". It's old technology that just wasn't sold before. They don't make new X1600s anymore, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bro' date=' 99% of your zoom problem is your high AF and AA settings. Tone them down even half that and your frames will double. Guaranteed. And you probably won't even be able to see the difference.[/quote']

Nah, the 8800GTX has a special engine that makes it able to do AA and AF without breaking a sweat.

Besides, he said that he got the exact same FPS with them on or off.

Actually, 99% of his problem is that he has v-sync on.

I am 100% absolutely positive his average framerate will significantly increase if he turns it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no what im saying, is look at scores, of the x1600

they are all in the range of 10ksih.

period :\

so, do ATI high end cards, not work with older opengl games :\

this the case? :(

Hate to seem harsh here, but the X1600 is definitely *not* a "high-end" card. I'd say it's probably low-end.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6156859/p-16.html

In the four categories "High-End", "Performance", "Mainstream", and "Budget", Gamespot has the X1650 Pro (which is superior to your card) listed in the "Budget" category.

guess i feel a little better now...but actually a lot worst tho lol

my old system with a 9800 pro, and a 2.4 ghz processor, score 11k on mark03.

ROFL.

Hmmmmmmmmmm you sure about that?

I owned a 9800 Pro that I actually took apart and volt-modded and I scored 6,140 in 3dmark03 with a 3ghz P4 processor.

I *strongly* doubt you scored 11k in 3DMARK03 with a 9800Pro... I don't think anyone has *ever* scored that high with a 9800pro. You might be thinking of 3dmark01.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VSYNC

has always been off

never had it on

no option is on,

none.

framrate, is usually, 15ish in battles, on foot

basically, it, is the ati card.

I know the 1600 isnt great..but it should do...

I mean, compared to some of these cards people are claiming to get so much better reslts with

Im talking, NO AA, NO AF, no vsync

nothing.

this system should do better :\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yea, 01

the one with max payne yer right on that

now as for everything else

clearly, it must be my ati card.

its the biggest differencfe between the two systems.

:\

I got some performances here and there ...but I guess Ati does not like the trees :\

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.