55 replies to this topic

[auniqueid]

OK-- finally got around to running mwo, on my shinny new 5960x w/ 2x 980s.
I ran four or five pugs, and a few testing lab sims of new mech configs. All running on in surround on three monitors, with a resolution of 5760x1200. All settings are maxxed out.

Here's the funny thing --- the frame rate as reported in MWO hardly ever dipped below 60 fps (when it did, it dropped maybe a few tenths of a point), and never got higher than 60 fps... not even a tenth higher. I thought this was a an issue with how MWO was reporting, but this was confirmed by afterburner... frame rate capped at 60fps, but never dropped more than a few tenths below.

Anyway, I don't know what good fps are on mwo.. doesn't seem to me that this is correct, seems odd that it's so locked in between 59-60. And, throughout the matches, none of the 8 physical or 8 logical cores went over 75%.

[auniqueid]

ok-- correction... still the same fps, but was reading the wrong graph for cpu usage. overall cpu usage never went over 18%.

Also, I ran this again without NVidia surround, on one monitor, at 1920x1200 resolution. Exact same result -- never a tenth more than 60fps.

Last-- to anyone that is interested -- with stock auto fan engaged, temps never went over 82 degrees *Fahrenheit* .

BTW, using all max settings, directx11.

Edited by Jimbobbob, 27 September 2014 - 08:51 PM.

[Lordred]

If you want to contribute to the science, logging your data would help.

Grats on the stellar rig however.

[Flapdrol]

Nice beast rig.

20MB cache and ludicrous memory speed might help alleviate the cpu bottleneck a bit. The lots of cores might help a bit too, even though the returns will be minor.

Still sceptical though, afterburner graphs of multiple big brawly games would be nice.

[Reno Blade]

You can disable V-Sync in the options, as this forces the game to only use 60 fps (sync with the monitor refresh rate that is usually 60Hz).
I'm using an I5 and a GTX770 oc with 2GB vram and my fps is fluctiating between 50 and 80 depending on the load (one screen for now).
Going to try the surround setting when my 3rd screen arrives next week and see how the fps will do then.

[auniqueid]

I'll take screen shots of afterburner ... and try disabling v synch when I get a chance. That makes sense whey everything is capped at 60fps.

[auniqueid]

Quote

Nice beast rig.

20MB cache and ludicrous memory speed might help alleviate the cpu bottleneck a bit. The lots of cores might help a bit too, even though the returns will be minor.

Still sceptical though, afterburner graphs of multiple big brawly games would be nice.

skeptical of what? that the fps are so low?

Quote

If you want to contribute to the science, logging your data would help.

Grats on the stellar rig however.

how do you log?

[Odins Fist]

V-Sync off

[Flapdrol]

Jimbobbob, on 28 September 2014 - 07:03 AM, said:

skeptical of what? that the fps are so low?



how do you log?

sceptical of the minimum fps of 60, which is quite high. You don't go over 60 because vsync is on.

if you install the program msi afterburner you'll see it makes a graph on the right side of the window, make that part as big as possible, then play a round, and make a screen of the graph.

Edited by Flapdrol, 28 September 2014 - 10:07 AM.

[auniqueid]

Quote

sceptical of the minimum fps of 60, which is quite high. You don't go over 60 because vsync is on.

if you install the program msi afterburner you'll see it makes a graph on the right side of the window, make that part as big as possible, then play a round, and make a screen of the graph.

See my original post -- I confirmed the FPS using afterburner... one of the the first programs I installed :-)

AB ramped up to 60fps and flatlined at that number the entire time.

This shouldn't be too surprising ... MWO is cpu bound, and I'm running 8 physical cores; throughout gameplay I never once went over 20% total cpu load; none of the cores individually topped 30% (again, this was through AB). I don't think mwo has the capability of maxxing this processor out :-)

Edited by Jimbobbob, 28 September 2014 - 01:27 PM.

[ninjitsu]

While MWO is cpu bound, it is poorly optimized and can't make use of all your cores. It has a hard time utilizing all the cores on my i5.

[Flapdrol]

Yeah, mwo (and most other games) don't scale well over 3 cores.

[auniqueid]

Quote

Yeah, mwo (and most other games) don't scale well over 3 cores.

I figured that and also tracked per-core utilization . none of the core topped 30%. Haswell-E dominates this game!

[xWiredx]

Flapdrol, on 28 September 2014 - 02:05 PM, said:

Yeah, mwo (and most other games) don't scale well over 3 cores.

As far as I'm aware, MWO can assign up to 6 threads, which is best-dispersed to 6 cores. SLI will create another thread, so 7 fast cores is the "best case scenario".

I've seen nothing above 44% on any core with my 5820K while playing MWO, but I also have a few things running in the background so I'm not bored to death waiting to find a match.

Vsync is almost assuredly the "problem" for OP.

[Flapdrol]

Yeah, but not all the threads have an equal amount of work to do, so most of the time the cores will be waiting for 1 core to finish something.

This game only uses 50%-60% of a quadcore cpu, and a haswell quad will drop well under 60, so that's why I'm sceptical, especially with the low stock clocks.

[auniqueid]

Quote

Yeah, but not all the threads have an equal amount of work to do, so most of the time the cores will be waiting for 1 core to finish something.

This game only uses 50%-60% of a quadcore cpu, and a haswell quad will drop well under 60, so that's why I'm sceptical, especially with the low stock clocks.

Not following what you're skeptical of... that somehow the FPS I'm getting are incorrect? Unless there's some weirdness in some of the hardware I'm using, both Afterburner and MWO agree on 60fps, with barely a nudge throughout gameplay. I'll try a PUG later, maybe it wasn't active enough... but this architecture really seems to me to rock MWO.

Edited by Jimbobbob, 28 September 2014 - 03:45 PM.

[ninjitsu]

On my i5, mwo hits one core harder than the others, most of my cores hardly do anything.

[auniqueid]

Quote

On my i5, mwo hits one core harder than the others, most of my cores hardly do anything

Yeah, the first two cores on my haswell-E were hit harder than the other six.

[Flapdrol]

Jimbobbob, on 28 September 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:

I'll try a PUG later, maybe it wasn't active enough...

You were in the testing grounds? ...

[Brixx]

Flapdrol, on 29 September 2014 - 12:03 AM, said:

You were in the testing grounds? ...

My frame rate in testing grounds is like three times of what I get in an actual match. Sucks as a benchmark.