112 replies to this topic

[Summon3r]

Jin Ma, on 04 March 2014 - 04:07 PM, said:

I'd rather see DX9 fully optimized than see them split resources into fixing DX11 to be honest. An optimized DX9 is what is going to broaden the pool of potential players/rigs.

has PGI at all focussed on anything what so ever. why UI joke.fail and now dx11 that is no good at all, not to mention we still cant even create our own units.... functionality is on a decreasing decline.

[Sprouticus]

Dx11 performance went from 30 fps on low up to 40-50 with almost everything on very high.. Some dips into the 30's, but still way better.


so for all you folks asking why they implemented an non-optimized dx11, it was for folks like me.

Edited by Sprouticus, 04 March 2014 - 04:36 PM.

[HELLBRINGER666]

Sprouticus, on 04 March 2014 - 04:35 PM, said:

Dx11 performance went from 30 fps on low up to 40-50 with almost everything on very high.. Some dips into the 30's, but still way better.


so for all you folks asking why they implemented an non-optimized dx11, it was for folks like me.

OK... so what are your specs so the people that are having issues can compare to what you have?

[Chronojam]

Sprouticus, on 04 March 2014 - 04:35 PM, said:

Dx11 performance went from 30 fps on low up to 40-50 with almost everything on very high.. Some dips into the 30's, but still way better.


so for all you folks asking why they implemented an non-optimized dx11, it was for folks like me.

When you say this, are you taking into account the earlier bug UI 2.0 had where setting your graphics to "Low" actually meant setting your graphics to the highest setting and thus decreasing performance?

e: The bug I refer to was introduced with UI 2.0 on Feb 4th. This was not addressed by the Feb 5th hotfix, and I cannot see mention of a fix for it in the Mar 4th patch notes.
e2: Or actually maybe the last patch did fix it? Can somebody confirm the Feb 18 patch fixed it?

Edited by Chronojam, 04 March 2014 - 04:50 PM.

[CMetz]

My average performance hit is about 7-9 FPS in actuality. Running FX-8320 3.5Ghz with ASUS GTX 770.

Also, anyone that actually knows anything about DX 11 should have known that there was going to be a performance hit coming from DX9. (For people with higher end GPU's, at least).

This happens in every game. Its not the devs fault or anything like that. You all wanted DX11 so badly, cried and whined, and you have it now. And now you cry because your machine isn't stout enough to run the game with DX11? Cut me a break.

Would I love to see more optimization? Yes. But I knew what I was getting into with DX11.

[Chronojam]

CMetz, on 04 March 2014 - 04:47 PM, said:

My average performance hit is about 7-9 FPS in actuality. Running FX-8320 3.5Ghz with ASUS GTX 770.

Also, anyone that actually knows anything about DX 11 should have known that there was going to be a performance hit coming from DX9. (For people with higher end GPU's, at least).

This happens in every game. Its not the devs fault or anything like that. You all wanted DX11 so badly, cried and whined, and you have it now. And now you cry because your machine isn't stout enough to run the game with DX11? Cut me a break.

Would I love to see more optimization? Yes. But I knew what I was getting into with DX11.

There is so much wrong with this post, I don't even know where to begin.

[Matthew Craig]

Theoretically yes a solid implementation of DX11 should out perform a similar DX9 implementation; however, initial ports of DX9 functionality to DX11 often perform worse than the original DX9 path. DX11 is not a magic bullet it's a platform like any other and needs to be used well to get good results, as mentioned this is an earlier implementation of DX11 support (as there is an understandable delay while we integrate it into the game).

Over time though this provides us a much better platform to make performance and visual enhancements to the game, where making similar improvements to DX9 technology would be advancing a dead end.

[Sudden Reversal]

So everyone, switch back to DX9 until there's an improvement to at least equilibrium at an unspecified date.

[El Rizzo]

Quote

Over time though this provides us a much better platform to make performance and visual enhancements to the game, where making similar improvements to DX9 technology would be advancing a dead end.

I think nobody is saying that you shouldn't have implemented dx11, you just should have waited until you really had any visual and/or performance enhancements before releasing it on the public servers, because the way its right now its no use to the players, since it doesn't improve performance (at least not for everyone) and has no visual improvements.

Regarding performance feedback, when using dx11 i noticed that my gpu was now at 80-90% load, while running at full clockrate, while using dx9 had my card only utilizing about 50-60% at lower clockrates. The funny thing is though, i have my fps limited to 58 and both in dx9 as well as in dx11 mode i usually have a constant framerate of 58, so dx11 mode is using far more gpu power to render the same amount of fps.

My System:
Core I5 3570k @ 4.4 Ghz
8GB DDR 3 1866 Cl9 Ram
GTX 780 @1150 Mhz core clock

[Deathlike]

Chronojam, on 04 March 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

When you say this, are you taking into account the earlier bug UI 2.0 had where setting your graphics to "Low" actually meant setting your graphics to the highest setting and thus decreasing performance?

e: The bug I refer to was introduced with UI 2.0 on Feb 4th. This was not addressed by the Feb 5th hotfix, and I cannot see mention of a fix for it in the Mar 4th patch notes.
e2: Or actually maybe the last patch did fix it? Can somebody confirm the Feb 18 patch fixed it?

It was fortunately fixed last patch (the custom graphics options).

[Pugnax]

I was around 40 fps on medium settings pre-patch. Now on DX9 I am less than 10 fps on low settings, I can no longer play.

EDIT: Seems to drop when I see other mechs, still hangs around 30-40 in testing grounds.

Edited by Pugnax, 04 March 2014 - 06:30 PM.

[MercJ]

I'm having some DX11 frame rate issues too compared to DX9, but at least now there's a choice - can always switch between the two to best fit your own machine. Tried to get it playable for me, will have to switch back to DX9 for now. Looking forward to improvements with DX11.

For reference, if it helps anyone:
i5-2500K @ 4.6, 8GB 1600 CL8
R9 290, running on 1920x1200 monitor
WD Black 1TB w/50GB SSD cache (SRT)

Edited by MercJ, 04 March 2014 - 06:33 PM.

[Deathlike]

I would like to point out there are a massive # of errors in the omicron.log with respect to MWO's DX11 shader files (and other stuff).

[Chronojam]

Matthew Craig, on 04 March 2014 - 05:06 PM, said:

Theoretically yes a solid implementation of DX11 should out perform a similar DX9 implementation; however, initial ports of DX9 functionality to DX11 often perform worse than the original DX9 path. DX11 is not a magic bullet it's a platform like any other and needs to be used well to get good results, as mentioned this is an earlier implementation of DX11 support (as there is an understandable delay while we integrate it into the game).

Over time though this provides us a much better platform to make performance and visual enhancements to the game, where making similar improvements to DX9 technology would be advancing a dead end.

Totally. I know the pains of trying to move a Dx8 project up to Dx9/10 to take advantage of better GPU tech and updating old codebases to make use of SSE and multi-threading to take advantage of better CPU tech, it's not fun and will probably hit some rough spots on your way there.

It's definitely the right path forward. But, I still have to question the wisdom of releasing a bad implementation that you know is bad. It won't sell users on the time/effort you've invested in the feature, and if you're only doing it to hit a deadline you'll look really foolish.

I've been there before, with pushing out a suboptimal DirectX upgrade to production before, so I'm feeling empathy here but that's also why I'm screaming "don't do it!" in my mind. Don't do it if you're just trying to prove you're working on it, especially if you have a test server people can go see. Use the test server!

Seriously, use the test server!

[JDH4mm3r]

I tried Dx11 with problems of stuttering more so ...... i only see some stuttering at the start of game in DX9 then the rest of it is smooth. DX 11 however, the entire match stutters here and there making it unplayable.

[Jetfire]

IqfishLP, on 04 March 2014 - 03:40 PM, said:

I'm at the same framerate as before.


BUUUUT


I'm experiencing gigantic, random Framedrops. They occur mostly during the start of the match (in Testing grounds too) and bring my FPS down to 10-20 from pre-patch.

Really annoying in combat.
Disabling MSAA does NOT help.

Nothing like that with DX9.

System:
i5 2500K @ 4,6GHz
Sapphire R9 280X @ latest stable drivers
12GB 1600mhz RAM
MWO installed on a SATA3 7200rpm HDD.

Getting the same thing, runs ok at about a 10-15 FPS hit from dx9 with MSAA on but random stutters down to 5-10 fps total. Seems like it is pausing to cache new data. I have a 2 gb card and it is installed on an SSD so not sure what the issue is.

I mean it looks amazing but everytime I come into visual range of textures it seems like it has to stop and recache.

System:
AMD 8350 Vishera
AMD HD7970 XFX Ghz
Samsung 840 pro 256 SSD
16 GB 2400 mhz ram Gskill DDR3
1920x1080 display on high setting with MSAA

EDTI: It also appears that even on DX9 I am getting the same stutter but the machine seems to be powering through it, from 100+ DPS dropping to 40 then back up again, but it is such a drastic drop you completely notice it. DX9 used to run 50-60 fps... so I am confused.

Edited by Jetfire, 04 March 2014 - 07:21 PM.

[Emperorcleon]

Chronojam as a fellow Elite founder both of us have seen strange developments in this game. I believe you are correct they should have used the test server and left things alone.

[Kenyon Burguess]

click the reset button. then make the changes to the settings u want. that helped me get a lot of performance back after switching to dx11

[Bors Mistral]

So, what I've seen of DX11 from the drops I had today:

• Not really noticeable but the visuals feel softer, in a good way
  
• Slightly higher overall framerate, when there's little or nothing going on
  
• Slightly lower framrate in battle
  
• Most weapon-heat vapour-effect seem to bring the game to it's knees, causing ridiculously severe framerate drops. E.g.: everything maxed (no AA, blur or v-sync) on an Rad 7950, plunging from high 50-ies to mid 20-ies.

Overall, it's nice that we have it, but it needs more work as there seems to be no real benefits of it at the moment.

P.S: Freaking do an art pass on the Firestarter cockpit, it looks like it's stuck at medium settings.

[amenophis]

I also had a drop from 60 to 30 in mechlab. Went right back to dx9. My video card does support dx11.