Jump to content

Mwo On An Amd Laptop (Mwo, 1998 Style) (Dev Response)

Started by SPencil, Mar 27 2013 10:41 PM

53 replies to this topic

#1 SPencil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 763 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 27 March 2013 - 10:41 PM



Horribly slaughtered user.cfg, tweaked graphics driver, and waving a dead chicken over my laptop is what lets me play the game in a mostly playable state.

What I find entertaining is that I can run Skyrim and Crysis 2 on decent settings and get moderate FPS (around 30-45), but MW:O absolutely kicks my laptops arse. This makes me think that MW:O isn't quite optimized that well. Tourmaline happens to be the map I get the best FPS on, next comes both Forest Colony & River City maps. Alpine is downright unplayable, with about a 1-2 second lag between when I hit a key and when my mech moves. Caustic and Frozen City runs bad, but not to the degree of Alpine.

So what I'd like to discuss is a slight slowdown in content and tournaments, and place an emphasis on optimization. I know I'm not the only one out there who has to deal with a lackluster FPS. I commend PGI for making the game as good as it is now, but it can be better. I can imagine that there are a few new players with less then ideal computers that stopped, simply because they don't have the patience to tinker and tweak their settings. Of course I don't want them to stop releasing new content, but I'd think that optimizing the game and making it playable on lower specs should be just as high a priority.

Thoughts?

As well, if anyone has recommendations I'd gladly test them.

specs and stuff
Spoiler


edit:

View PostMatthew Craig, on 28 March 2013 - 01:51 AM, said:

There will be another round of client side optimizations coming, attention was cycled round to server side performance and other issues but it will come round again. We're also improving our telemetry tools for generating fps heat maps for our various maps and to gather information from the client about how it's running on various machines to help us look for particular hardware that isn't running as well as it should so we can better focus our efforts.


The devs are aware that there are issues and are working to fix them. Thanks for the response, Matt!

Edited by SPencil, 28 March 2013 - 02:39 AM.

#2 MoonUnitBeta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,560 posts
  • LocationCanada ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ

Posted 27 March 2013 - 10:46 PM

Quote

(Mwo, 1998 Style)
You weren't kidding...

#3 Mike Townsend

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationRedmond

Posted 27 March 2013 - 10:54 PM

Skyrim isn't especially demanding. It runs reasonably well on iGPUs now. MWO runs passably well on my 11" ultraportable and tolerably on such ancient desktop hardware as an 8800GT. Which predates Nvidia's three digit GPU naming scheme. Which happened like five years ago. My GTX 260 ran it very well. Newegg has GTX 560 Ti's for a hundred bucks. Time to upgrade.

Edited by Mike Townsend, 27 March 2013 - 10:54 PM.

#4 GalaxyBluestar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,748 posts
  • Location...

Posted 27 March 2013 - 11:04 PM

i know the game doesn't run as smothly as some of us would like but lets keep it in perspective.... wait a minute he's actually using an laptop that's only a few years old! yet my aspire v3-571g {all standard stuff} runs the game pretty well these days.

still maybe there is something to say for optimising {although some will just say you've done a topgear and ruined your computer with all the tweaks} considering that your aspire performance and graphics is woefull compared to what my laptop manages.

something's strange going on here...

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 27 March 2013 - 11:05 PM.

#5 Capp

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 306 posts

Posted 28 March 2013 - 12:19 AM

You might squeeze out an extra FPS or two by ditching those dice.

Other than that, I don't know, I don't use a laptop.

#6 SPencil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 763 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 28 March 2013 - 12:44 AM

View PostCapp, on 28 March 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

You might squeeze out an extra FPS or two by ditching those dice.

Other than that, I don't know, I don't use a laptop.


There's also a FRR holographic-thingie, but my tweaks to the user.cfg made it not show up ;_;

Either way, I have a feeling the issues are with the AMD processor aggravated by the shoddy graphics performance laptops usually have. So maybe we can petition PGI to make some optimizations for AMD/ATI? ;)

(but since nVidia is in on this I doubt it :blink: )

edit: and no, I have no issues with nVidia. I just think the whole "Intel/nVidia vs. AMD/ATI" is counter-productive. Wouldn't everything be better if we all got along and worked together?

...dammit, I feel like a hippie <_<

Edited by SPencil, 28 March 2013 - 12:47 AM.

#7 Capp

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 306 posts

Posted 28 March 2013 - 01:26 AM

I have an ATI card and an Intel chip, but this is a desktop.

I'd wager it's your graphics chip, a lot of laptops skimp on the graphics.

#8 LegoPirate

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 339 posts
  • LocationSeattle

Posted 28 March 2013 - 01:42 AM

View PostMike Townsend, on 27 March 2013 - 10:54 PM, said:

Skyrim isn't especially demanding. It runs reasonably well on iGPUs now. MWO runs passably well on my 11" ultraportable and tolerably on such ancient desktop hardware as an 8800GT. Which predates Nvidia's three digit GPU naming scheme. Which happened like five years ago. My GTX 260 ran it very well. Newegg has GTX 560 Ti's for a hundred bucks. Time to upgrade.


a refurbished 560 ti is like 200 bucks. a new one is easily 250+. if you see them somewhere for 100 dollars then buy them all and resell them. hell a new 460 costs 150 bucks still.

#9 TexAce

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,861 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 28 March 2013 - 01:42 AM

the problem of low FPS on laptops can even arise on good and new ones with decent GPUs because the cooling system of the laptops is not thought out well.

If your GPU keeps working on 100% for too long (on my actually spec-wise very good laptop "too long" means 3 minutes!) the heat rises too much, which forces the laptop to clock down the CPU and GPU to save the laptop from overheating-> huge FPS drops. If you play long enough you can realy feel the cycles it does from high cpu/gpu clock to slow while cooling down.

This could be a not so well programmed BIOS or a poorly thought-out heat dissipation (and a poorly altered CryEngine3).

I'm having an i7 8Core, 8GB RAM, GT 640M laptop and also have this problem, it's unplayable for me when it starts clocking down (when working on 100% I get around 30-45FPS on low settings, when it starts to cool down I drop to 10-20FPS).

I can play RAGE on maximum settings with over 40FPS for hours but MWO on lowest lowest lowest settings sucks. I didn't tried altered cfg files yet though (and think I shouldn't really have to).

Edited by TexAss, 28 March 2013 - 01:50 AM.

#10 Matthew Craig

    Technical Director

  • 867 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 28 March 2013 - 01:51 AM

There will be another round of client side optimizations coming, attention was cycled round to server side performance and other issues but it will come round again. We're also improving our telemetry tools for generating fps heat maps for our various maps and to gather information from the client about how it's running on various machines to help us look for particular hardware that isn't running as well as it should so we can better focus our efforts.

#11 TexAce

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,861 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:01 AM

View PostMatthew Craig, on 28 March 2013 - 01:51 AM, said:

There will be another round of client side optimizations coming, attention was cycled round to server side performance and other issues but it will come round again. We're also improving our telemetry tools for generating fps heat maps for our various maps and to gather information from the client about how it's running on various machines to help us look for particular hardware that isn't running as well as it should so we can better focus our efforts.


Nice to hear. Thanks.

Can we help somehow? Although my laptop described above is not my primary gaming machine (my desktop is really good) I still would like to have MWO with me when out of house.

By the way: Same specs on a 6 months older machine but with a GT540M (same Acer laptop) is behaving pretty much the same but with drops to 5-12 fps when cooling down

Edited by TexAss, 28 March 2013 - 02:02 AM.

#12 Utilyan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 1,252 posts

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:09 AM

View PostMatthew Craig, on 28 March 2013 - 01:51 AM, said:

There will be another round of client side optimizations coming, attention was cycled round to server side performance and other issues but it will come round again. We're also improving our telemetry tools for generating fps heat maps for our various maps and to gather information from the client about how it's running on various machines to help us look for particular hardware that isn't running as well as it should so we can better focus our efforts.


Its like the dude has his own personal mech.....who woke him up just to get down to make a better game! ;)

You rock

Warning: I have no idea what the hell im doing, I only know enough to be dangerous. <_<
btw i never used spoiler in my post....i figured it out myself ....im so proud of myself.

My system:
Spoiler

I run amd laptop. Its "playable". The user.cfg file i use i back up like fricken treasure. I did the blade patch long ago.

The biggest change I went out of my way myself is on resolutions in the attributes, I suggest not copy and pasting attributes.....Just change the numbers. Viewmode might just make it full screen I forgot. 640x480 makes it hard to read though......(i'm a frames per second junkie)


<Attr value="600" name="OptionCfg.r_Height"/>
<Attr value="800" name="OptionCfg.r_Width"/>
<Attr value="1" name="OptionCfg.ViewMode"/>






user.cfg

Spoiler

#13 Aym

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 3,041 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:13 AM

View PostMatthew Craig, on 28 March 2013 - 01:51 AM, said:

There will be another round of client side optimizations coming, attention was cycled round to server side performance and other issues but it will come round again. We're also improving our telemetry tools for generating fps heat maps for our various maps and to gather information from the client about how it's running on various machines to help us look for particular hardware that isn't running as well as it should so we can better focus our efforts.

Great to hear! I'm on an Asus g74sx since I travel alot and I would love to be able to get good FPS with some settings above "Low." At "Low" everything I get 40-60fps as long as throttle stop is turned on, otherwise I get HORRIBLE chokes on the fps. When I enable V-sync in my nvidia settings my FPS takes a hit, but seems stable and anything above 35-40 is pretty good for me.

#14 Utilyan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 1,252 posts

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:14 AM

I feel like it took me an hour to post this....thread is acting funny ;)

Part of the attributes:
Spoiler

#15 Dremster

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 71 posts
  • LocationSkye Federation

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:14 AM

I recently overclocked my CPU from 2.66 to 3.8 GHZ and saw a huge jump in frame rates. I actually had to enable V sync to keep the game from crashing randomly. So it may very well be that AMD processor of yours.

#16 Utilyan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 1,252 posts

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:20 AM

I just realized I got spoilers inside spoilers...... ;)

Does that mean there is a infinite loop going on in my post above using up terrabytes of memory somewhere in internet land? and could that cause computer self-awareness?

#17 SPencil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 763 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:38 AM

View PostMatthew Craig, on 28 March 2013 - 01:51 AM, said:

There will be another round of client side optimizations coming, attention was cycled round to server side performance and other issues but it will come round again. We're also improving our telemetry tools for generating fps heat maps for our various maps and to gather information from the client about how it's running on various machines to help us look for particular hardware that isn't running as well as it should so we can better focus our efforts.


This is fantastic to hear! It's good to know that the dev team is more focused on optimization then I originally thought. It's my fault for forgetting just how much goes into game development, and for falsely assuming where the dev's focus was. Thank-you for the reply and clarifying this issue, it's much appreciated!

#18 Exoth3rmic

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 434 posts

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:42 AM

Its good to hear more optimisation rounds will be coming. Still, notebooks/laptops date fast and your CPU was bottom of the rung when it was released in Oct 2010.

#19 MERC Mournblade

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Bolt
  • The Bolt
  • 91 posts
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 28 March 2013 - 02:59 AM

I don't want to be sounding like an epeen or anything, but I'm running a Clevo P150em with a hd7970m AMD card, and the game runs fine (anywhere between 50-70fps). The big difference for me is the drivers. The new drivers solve a lot of the prior problems with AMD cards.

To add to my comment, my desktop PC has a Nvidia gtx 570, and my laptop AMD outperforms it. I know Nvidia has an advantage with this game, but some of the newer AMD architecture does just fine.

I know I'm probably a minority in this argument, but I just wanted to give hope where hope is due.

Cheers,
Mournblade

#20 GalaxyBluestar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,748 posts
  • Location...

Posted 28 March 2013 - 03:10 AM

View PostSPencil, on 28 March 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:


This is fantastic to hear! It's good to know that the dev team is more focused on optimization then I originally thought. It's my fault for forgetting just how much goes into game development, and for falsely assuming where the dev's focus was. Thank-you for the reply and clarifying this issue, it's much appreciated!


here here, as i said i have little troubles with mine but it's those players who do that get some dev lovin, nice! attract more players with more hospitable optimisation on the game isn't a bad thing at all.
Back to Archive · Next Unread Topic →


7 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users