16 replies to this topic

[Bracchus]

Hello lads

Bought a new shiny graphics card, Nvidia Geforce 680, and to my supreme surprise I see no gain in FPS over my old Geforce 570. The game is still dropping from 100ish down to 20ish all the time. Surprised and slightly annoyed I start checking if the game actually utilize the CPU as it should, and seems only to be drawing on about 50% of my Core i5 3.6Ghz. Anyone els having the same problems? Fixes? Feels kind of silly with this kind of FPS instability.

CPU: Intel i5 750 @ 3.6Ghz
GPU: Asus Nvidia Geforce 680 2GB
RAM: 8GB DDR3 1440Mhz
PSU: Corsair 650w 80+ Bronze certified

Res 1920x1080 @ 144hz
Settings: All at very high (getting the same FPS drops even with everything at low)

For mead, women and freedom! FRR!

[Narcissistic Martyr]

I haven't heard of this phenomena on the older intel chips. On AMD fx series chips the problem is that mwo doesn't appear to deal with half cores particularly well and turning my fx8320 into a true 4 core chip improved fps by 5-10 fps. However my logs show that CPU utilization in 4 core mode is ~85-90% during minimum fps.

[Bracchus]

So, just checked how much of my new shiny GPU the game utilizes... between 45-60% until the game ends when it uses all 100% for the end screen..

[Bracchus]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 22 August 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

I haven't heard of this phenomena on the older intel chips. On AMD fx series chips the problem is that mwo doesn't appear to deal with half cores particularly well and turning my fx8320 into a true 4 core chip improved fps by 5-10 fps. However my logs show that CPU utilization in 4 core mode is ~85-90% during minimum fps.

Had hoped that AMD would hit a homerun with the bulldozer family, well we got a nice set of CPUs when "bang for the buck" is priority 1. For true performance Intel kept the lead. Heard a lot of weird stuff when it comes to their bulldozer units and how it seems not to work all that well in many applications. Sadly it seems to have put AMD off the performance race

[EyeDie I]

from what i have read dx9 uses the cpu for many operations so you wont get the video card benefit till dx11.

[Bracchus]

EyeDie I, on 22 August 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

from what i have read dx9 uses the cpu for many operations so you wont get the video card benefit till dx11.

Ok, seems reasonable, lets hope that its Dx9 thats the problem, and not something much worse, bad programing

[Kaptain]

The game still feels VERY cpu limited for some reason. Even on my old system changing the video settings does not do much for min FPS numbers... Overclocking the CPU has had the largest impact on performance for me so far. I think its interesting my minimum FPS and your min sound about the same and I'm running much older hardware.

Q6700 @ 3.5ghz
4gb 1066 5-5-5-15
GTX280

[Gremlich Johns]

FX-4100 oc'd to 4.2GHz, 16 GB 12800, GTX760 4GB, limited to 60 fps on purpose. Game runs just fine on very high.

[Bracchus]

Gremlich Johns, on 22 August 2013 - 02:10 PM, said:

FX-4100 oc'd to 4.2GHz, 16 GB 12800, GTX760 4GB, limited to 60 fps on purpose. Game runs just fine on very high.

You got twice the amount of RAM, slower graphics card and I believe slightly worse CPU. And its stable at 60FPS all the time? Would love stable 60FPS, its the insane drops that really makes me annoyed.

I have been putting off getting more RAM since they doubled the price in the last year, but maybe I have to just stop thinking with my wallet and order another 8GB.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Bracchus, on 22 August 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

You got twice the amount of RAM, slower graphics card and I believe slightly worse CPU. And its stable at 60FPS all the time? Would love stable 60FPS, its the insane drops that really makes me annoyed.

I have been putting off getting more RAM since they doubled the price in the last year, but maybe I have to just stop thinking with my wallet and order another 8GB.

More than 8GB won't matter unless you want to run mwo or something else on a RAM disk or you like to do CAD work.

[Flying Judgement]

well actually MWO uses a lot of ram and its one of the main reason for crashes. (but yeah 8 ram should be enough) lowering the textures can resolve the main crash issue particle effect i believe is belong to video card so if u have a good one just sett it to ultra high i may be mistaken with the particles but experiment with a lot of ram set the textures to max u shouldn't have any fps drop.

Edited by Flying Judgement, 22 August 2013 - 04:05 PM.

[Parduke]

Also with Nvidia drivers you can force thread optimization to increase the number of cpu cores used while in the game. AMD gets no joy

[Pitufo]

Just wondering... have you tried disabling the vsync and AA??? Your monitor at 144 hz, could be a real killer. You could also try li miting your monitor to 60 hz, or a combination of the above. I play on an I5 2500K with 8 GB Ram and a GTX 570 and the game runs very smooth on my rig. an

Edited by Pitufo, 22 August 2013 - 04:59 PM.

[Kaptain]

Parduke, on 22 August 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

Also with Nvidia drivers you can force thread optimization to increase the number of cpu cores used while in the game. AMD gets no joy

That helped! Thank you! Going to do some testing to see just how much.

[Jabilo]

The game is CPU limited but in spikes (not consistently) due to the multi threading.

If you leave task manager running on the performance tab during the game and switch back after a FPS drop you will see what I mean.

You will see the CPU usage is not very even but spikes heavily up and down.

Remember if just ONE core reaches 100% even for a split second then your fps will drop in to the toilet momentarily (even if the other cores are hardly touched).

Also on the performance tab the top of the graph is not 100% you have to go down a couple of little green boxes.

My experience is that the game is primarily GPU limited until certain sections where one core gets overloaded and tanks my FPS.

This means that a GPU upgrade will raise your AVERAGE fps but not your MINIMUM fps.

I pray that DX11 resolves this and also improves multi threading. If it does I will treat myself to a new graphics card.

Other than that this game will run like a bag of cr*p for ever as I can not afford a whole new rig.

I5 2500K
GTX570
8 GB DD3
SSD

Edited by Jabilo, 26 August 2013 - 01:29 PM.

[Gremlich Johns]

Bracchus, on 22 August 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

You got twice the amount of RAM, slower graphics card and I believe slightly worse CPU. And its stable at 60FPS all the time? Would love stable 60FPS, its the insane drops that really makes me annoyed.

I have been putting off getting more RAM since they doubled the price in the last year, but maybe I have to just stop thinking with my wallet and order another 8GB.

More RAM won't help you and I take umbrage at the accusation of having a "worse" CPU, "less capable" perhaps, but not "worse".

You'd only need more than 6GB of RAM if you were rendering stuff like video or pictures.

BTW, with my previous OC'd GTX560 Superclocked, I was getting a consistent 45-60 FPS.

My personal confuser:

ASUS M5A97 mobo w/current BIOS
16 GB GSkil 1600/12800 RAM
FX-4100 OC'd to 4.2 GHz with an Antec 620 closed loop liquid cooler
GTX760 (GK104) w/4GB w/Arctic Cooling Excellero extreme III (320.49 drivers)
750W Antec Bronze 80
Win OS7 64-bit

Edited by Gremlich Johns, 26 August 2013 - 02:52 PM.

[Smokeyjedi]

Jabilo, on 26 August 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

The game is CPU limited but in spikes (not consistently) due to the multi threading.

If you leave task manager running on the performance tab during the game and switch back after a FPS drop you will see what I mean.

You will see the CPU usage is not very even but spikes heavily up and down.

Remember if just ONE core reaches 100% even for a split second then your fps will drop in to the toilet momentarily (even if the other cores are hardly touched).

Also on the performance tab the top of the graph is not 100% you have to go down a couple of little green boxes.

My experience is that the game is primarily GPU limited until certain sections where one core gets overloaded and tanks my FPS.

This means that a GPU upgrade will raise your AVERAGE fps but not your MINIMUM fps.

I pray that DX11 resolves this and also improves multi threading. If it does I will treat myself to a new graphics card.

Other than that this game will run like a bag of cr*p for ever as I can not afford a whole new rig.

I5 2500K
GTX570
8 GB DD3
SSD

The fact that the 2500-2600K are arguably the best gaming chips (LOL) ever made and they struggle to run MWO is Blasphemy and cannot be justified, there is no excuse why this rig can run every other game out there.........except for PGI 100 tonnes of LARD! Im starting the think that NVIDIA has signed a deal to sell more cards before PGI optimizes this game.....They after all lead the world in shiesty money grab tactics and could easily teach a few larger less greedy companies how to exel @ it.

Edited by Smokeyjedi, 26 August 2013 - 02:45 PM.