14 replies to this topic

[Oplix]

Hi All,

I recently built a new gaming machine with some decent components. Right now I am running everything stock with no tweaks or OC at all and am getting 37 - 40 FPS in MWO with all settings set to very high running at 1440P (2560 x 1440) 60Hz resolution.

Here are my system specs:
CPU: Intel Core i5 4690k
Cooler: Corsair H100i GTX AIO Water Cooler (Dual 120mm Rad)
Motherboard: MSI Z97S SLI Krait Edition
RAM: 16GB HyperX Fury DDR3 1866
GPU: Zotac GTX 970
PSU: EVGA 600B
SSD: OCZ ARC 100 240GB SATA III
Mass Storage: 2x 3 TB Seagate Baracuda 7200 RPM

now with that done with AIO water cooler I plan to push the CPU to about 4.5 GHZ which I know is a kinda "magic number" for MWO by reading other threads and I am sure that will help my frame rate a bit.

Was also thinking of these user.cfg any advice there?

My goal is 60 FPS so as a last resort I will drop particles down to medium as I know that is a huge setting here but I see no reason I shouden't be able to get 60 FPS in MWO with my system specs at 1440P.

Edited by Oplix, 08 April 2015 - 09:27 AM.

[Finkledbody]

Getting a stable 60 fps with a 1440p monitor, using a single gtx 970, on max settings is going to be tough. If not down right impossible imo. Sadly, that video card is not nearly as powerful as people think it is. With some tweaking, you'll be looking at a peak of 50fps in 1440p using the 970. But you'll still be averaging out between 40-50fps. 1440p is a lot for the 970. Might want to lower your expectations a bit

In your boat, I would drop down to 1080p, max everything out, particles medium, vsync off, motion blur off. Overclock your i5 to 4.5ghz using the least amount of voltage to keep the system stable. Then you'll be looking at a stable 60-70fps.

By the looks of the cfg.file. that would be for a amd user. don't quote me on that one.

[xWiredx]

Realistically, OCing both the CPU and the videocard (esp. the VRAM) should net you a playable experience. 60fps? Sometimes. Your mins will definitely be below that, but your averages might be around that mark, maybe even in the 70s. Bill Lumbar went 1440p with a 4790K and a 7970 so your numbers will probably be similar to his.

One tip: I would start with particles set to high instead of very high.

[Goose]

I think the tread-sorting for an Intel quad looks like this:

r_WaterUpdateThread = 2
sys_TaskThread1_CPU = 0
sys_streaming_CPU = 2
sys_physics_CPU = 3
sys_TaskThread5_CPU = 3

and you're gon'a want a sys_MaxFPS of 60 or 58; A sys_budget_videomem of 4096 or 3584 seems appropriate.

Forgive my Bauhaus "need," but no one needs Post Precessing and/ or Environment above High; Particles at about Medium is also a SoP …

Turn off Screen Shake, and turn off Damage Glow (fallowed by "r_Beams = 2" in your user.cfg.)

d3d10_TripleBuffering = 1
d3d11_TripleBuffering = 1
d3d9_TripleBuffering = 1
r_silhouettePOM = 0
r_UsePOM = 0
q_ShaderWater = 0
r_FogShadows = 0
sys_budget_soundCPU = 0

all seem useful to all people …

[xWiredx]

I honestly don't think he needs to do much of anything. Bill and I both have mins in the 50s using the very high preset with very minimal tweaks and manage smooth gameplay. Haswell at 4.5GhZ and a strong GPU makes a very capable system for MWO.

There are a couple of tweaks to the particles that may or may not help a tiny bit. I actually haven't seen any issues since PGI lowered the amount of particles being generated by high mech heat levels. I will attempt to benchmark tonight to see how things are now.

Also, lowering particles to medium does change how some things look. Even PPCs look different when fired. I'm not a fan of medium, and I don't believe OP will need to go that low with them.

[Lord Letto]

Goose, on 08 April 2015 - 11:04 AM, said:

I think the tread-sorting for an Intel quad looks like this:

r_WaterUpdateThread = 2
sys_TaskThread1_CPU = 0
sys_streaming_CPU = 2
sys_physics_CPU = 3
sys_TaskThread5_CPU = 3

and you're gon'a want a sys_MaxFPS of 60 or 58; A sys_budget_videomem of 4096 or 3584 seems appropriate.

Forgive my Bauhaus "need," but no one needs Post Precessing and/ or Environment above High; Particles at about Medium is also a SoP …

Turn off Screen Shake, and turn off Damage Glow (fallowed by "r_Beams = 2" in your user.cfg.)

d3d10_TripleBuffering = 1
d3d11_TripleBuffering = 1
d3d9_TripleBuffering = 1
r_silhouettePOM = 0
r_UsePOM = 0
q_ShaderWater = 0
r_FogShadows = 0
sys_budget_soundCPU = 0

all seem useful to all people …

so Basicly:
r_WaterUpdateThread = 2
sys_TaskThread1_CPU = 0
sys_streaming_CPU = 2
sys_physics_CPU = 3
sys_TaskThread5_CPU = 3
sys_MaxFPS = 60
sys_budget_videomem = 3584
d3d10_TripleBuffering = 1
d3d11_TripleBuffering = 1
d3d9_TripleBuffering = 1
r_silhouettePOM = 0
r_UsePOM = 0
q_ShaderWater = 0
r_FogShadows = 0
sys_budget_soundCPU = 0
r_Beams = 2

Edited by Lord Letto, 08 April 2015 - 11:33 AM.

[Goose]

xWiredx, on 08 April 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

I honestly don't think he needs to do much of anything.

So what's this guy telling us about stock-clocked post-Nehalems?

Lord Letto, on 08 April 2015 - 11:31 AM, said:

so Basicly:

sys_physics_CPU is missing …

Edited by Goose, 08 April 2015 - 11:35 AM.

[xWiredx]

OP did mention he'd be shooting for an OC of 4.5GhZ. At the stock clocks his performance would suffer more, sure, but at 4.5GhZ or higher I don't think he will be suffering much.

Overall, between SB and IB there was a 2-10% performance increase depending on the work load, and another 2-10% increase between IB and HW depending on the workload. Even if we only end up with a 5% and 5%, that would be pretty decent (that would end up being like 12.5% from SB to HW right?). Between Nehalem and SB was another 5-15%, so we're looking at 20-30% between Haswell and Nehalem (Anandtech actually showed a 17-35% difference I believe). Then OP is going to add more speed. Pretty big boost when you think about it.

Since OP will have a similar level of horsepower being through at MWO as Bill and myself, and it seems like our performance is about where we want it without having to make these tweaks to thread assignments and the like, it just seems unnecessary. It may help, definitely not going to knock it (especially after managing the core parking gave me a small boost), but probably not needed.

[Bill Lumbar]

I would agree with Wired on this topic. All the work some of you have done to figure out modding the config. files is great, and appreciated for sure. I still haven't touched mine yet or modded them and haven't even messed with the core park yet. My rig is running great, and plays this game pretty much butter smooth, even in CW. Always room for improvement for sure, but not really sure if its needed for smooth game play with what the OP listed for a setup.

I am curious however if the OP will have issues with the 970 and his choice of going 1440P with the issues brought to light with the 970's. Not claiming he will... OP, just let us know if you end up with any problems... stutters... anything. If I am not mistaken, I think my 7970 3gb performs FPS wise the same or very close to the 970's. - the issues some experienced with the 970's. All in all, I would say that he will be enjoying the performance of his new system with this game, and new cards are coming soon, right? Drop a newer more powerful card in that system and he may be able to hit his target for min FPS/avg. I know that is what I am gonna do once the new line up of cards come out from Amd, and still considering Nvidia.

BTW... I have turned my power settings in windows 7 to balanced, and have the I7 ramping down the volts when not in heavy use and have had no ill effects from doing so in game. Everything is running as it should, and each patch things seem to get a little better when they have addressed optimization in them. I am not a fan of turning down the settings either, and have turned down particles to medium only when I run my Locust PB because of the MG flash. Otherwise I run them on High.

Edited by Bill Lumbar, 08 April 2015 - 08:34 PM.

[Summon3r]

runnin my 3930k at 4ghz and all settings to very high except particles on high and FXAA, the odd time ill see a dip to the 40's.

it seems to me the last few patches have improved FPS somewhat?

i have no user.config settings going, is there i7 specific settings i could use to stabilize my fps a little more?

[Raidflex]

Bill Lumbar, on 08 April 2015 - 08:27 PM, said:

I would agree with Wired on this topic. All the work some of you have done to figure out modding the config. files is great, and appreciated for sure. I still haven't touched mine yet or modded them and haven't even messed with the core park yet. My rig is running great, and plays this game pretty much butter smooth, even in CW. Always room for improvement for sure, but not really sure if its needed for smooth game play with what the OP listed for a setup.

I am curious however if the OP will have issues with the 970 and his choice of going 1440P with the issues brought to light with the 970's. Not claiming he will... OP, just let us know if you end up with any problems... stutters... anything. If I am not mistaken, I think my 7970 3gb performs FPS wise the same or very close to the 970's. - the issues some experienced with the 970's. All in all, I would say that he will be enjoying the performance of his new system with this game, and new cards are coming soon, right? Drop a newer more powerful card in that system and he may be able to hit his target for min FPS/avg. I know that is what I am gonna do once the new line up of cards come out from Amd, and still considering Nvidia.

BTW... I have turned my power settings in windows 7 to balanced, and have the I7 ramping down the volts when not in heavy use and have had no ill effects from doing so in game. Everything is running as it should, and each patch things seem to get a little better when they have addressed optimization in them. I am not a fan of turning down the settings either, and have turned down particles to medium only when I run my Locust PB because of the MG flash. Otherwise I run them on High.

I have no issues with vRam on my 780 Ti and running at 3440x1440 which is a good deal higher then 1440p. This is with all settings at very high and I still average 80-90 FPS, with a 4.5GHz 5820k and a heavily overclocked 780 Ti. If the OP clocks his CPU to 4.5GHz and overclocks his 970 I would say he should be able to average 60 FPS.

[WashRinseRepeat]

Hi, just read this post since I was wondering why my framerate wasn't that great and I must say: Holy crap this game is CPU bound!
I have a i5 2500k and had it running pretty much at stock along with a 7950 at 1440p. I barely got over 40fps but after increasing the cpu clock to 4.1GHz I get consistent 60...
Someone really needs to create a sticky post with performance tips...

[xWiredx]

WashRinceRepeat, on 15 April 2015 - 11:31 AM, said:

Hi, just read this post since I was wondering why my framerate wasn't that great and I must say: Holy crap this game is CPU bound!
I have a i5 2500k and had it running pretty much at stock along with a 7950 at 1440p. I barely got over 40fps but after increasing the cpu clock to 4.1GHz I get consistent 60...
Someone really needs to create a sticky post with performance tips...

If we did that, we wouldn't have to answer the same questions repeatedly. I don't think it'll happen, though, because PGI probably wouldn't be happy with a sticky telling all of their users that the hardware requirements are a lot more ridiculous than their "minimum requirements" post makes it appear. That, and I'm pretty sure PGI is actually trying to fix the performance issues so things that are relevant now hopefully won't be relevant 3-4 months from now.

[Joseph Mallan]

All this geek speak is making my head hurt. It makes me sad!

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 May 2015 - 07:59 AM, said:

All this geek speak is making my head hurt. It makes me sad!

Then get out of the geek basement