44 replies to this topic

[cx5]

Mark Brandhauber, on 01 August 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

In my opinion; the fact PGI do not have a single AMD test rig in their studio is the real factor in their efforts to optimise for AMD chips.

Seriously?

Then I need to peg PGI to use AMD only system, I'm sure they'll be surprised how capable they are when comparing the final mile of $$$ / performance ratio.

As long as we don't buy latest and fansiest, always let the benchmark war finishes and all dust settles, it's always every penny for every performance, today the only non-direct=unaccounted for tech spec is electricity efficiency. It's not unmentioned, it's mentioned a hell lot more now and considered, all the reviews considers them, oh yes.

But pricing by both giants does not include them, do they? right? They just price them as straight forward as $$$/performance without electricity or others.

Edited by cx5, 03 August 2015 - 01:52 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

nehebkau, on 29 July 2015 - 12:30 PM, said:

FPS ranges: 18 – 210 (This is, excluding 0 FPS during loading screens, the variation on my FPS)

This is the only thing I can confidently comment on.

You need to HARDCAP your FPS. Set the FPS limit to 60 or 70, or ANYTHING, really. Letting it fluctuate like that will cause a lot of problems for you.


Otherwise, the rest of the folks here know more. (Also, MWO eats up processing power, it's not that taxing on GPUs.)

[Shamous13]

nehebkau, on 29 July 2015 - 12:30 PM, said:

ALL IN-GAME GRAPHICS SETTINGS WERE SET TO LOW

Average playing FPS: 45 (this was the average of what I usually would see in-game while playing – as shown by pressing F9)

FPS ranges: 18 – 210 (This is, excluding 0 FPS during loading screens, the variation on my FPS)

Your fps shouldn't be dipping that low and 210fps is useless as the human eye cant tell the difference. try putting these lines in your user cfg also make sure that ultra-low power state for your video cards is turned off

r_MultiGPU = 1
sys_budget_fps = 40
sys_MaxFPS = 65

Edited by Shamous13, 06 August 2015 - 07:03 AM.

[Chrithu]

Modo44, on 02 August 2015 - 09:23 PM, said:

FTFY

That's crap. Far Cry 3 and 4 run just fine even on AMD setups. I am not saying that there aren't specific issues with AMD hardware. But there are obviously ways to mitigate them code wise, which haven't found their way into MWO. Heck even Star Citizen in it's alpha state being a heavily modified Cry-Engine runs quite fine on AMD. Oh wait, I forgot. CIG actually cooperates with AMD to get support from their engineers with optimizations.

But since we're in the full on "war between Intel/NVidia and AMD" mode: It's more or less an open secret that if you marry NVidia wanting their support with optimizing your game for their hardware they put straps on you to keep you from also landing in bed with AMD which doesn't happen as badly the other way around. Surely all legal and fair from a business point of view. Still sucks from the view of a customer and just another reason for me to stay away from NVidia in particular.

[BigJimJack]

I used to run a quad phenom II @ 4 ghz. I used to play alot of Planetside 2 and MWO. Both of these games require that you go in and "unpark" the cores. For some reason in default mode some of the cores in the AMD chips just idle along. I can't remember off the top of my head where to go to do that. There are guides for unparking the cores that you can find on google. I feel your pain though. I used to be an AMD fan boi through and through, but I finally gave in to intel and haven't looked back.

[Lugh]

Solution, take out AMD Crap, and replace with proper working Intel and Nvidia stuff.

[Surn]

With an R9 series AMD gpu, you can crank up textures in the video settings. The problem isnt AMD CPU, it is the lack of multithreaded code in the cry engine. AMD are faster at multiple tasks, Intel is faster in a single pipeline.

[Wonderdog]

nehebkau, on 29 July 2015 - 12:30 PM, said:

blah

Try disabling Crossfire, run the game with a single GPU and see how it behaves.

[nehebkau]

Wonderdog, on 13 August 2015 - 12:53 PM, said:

Try disabling Crossfire, run the game with a single GPU and see how it behaves.

slightly slower -- not much difference.

For the other people I have added the config lines, gone in and modified the GPU sleep mode and made sure that my cores aren't parking as well as elevated MWO at runtime to a "real-time" priority. Minimal change -- its still slow as a dog on medium + graphics settings. Faster RAM did nothing (as someone said would be the case)

I bumped up the CPU frequency and added more cooling -- that was the only thing that improved the performance -- but stability is becoming an issue as I jack up the frequency and voltages.

Ill try futzing with Process lasso next.

Edited by nehebkau, 13 August 2015 - 02:00 PM.

[Goose]

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4111620

[Chrithu]

I just decided to cope with the flickering and put my GPUs into AFR friendly Crossfire mode and BOOM quite stable 60 FPS with occassional dips down to 30, with sys_MaxFPS set to 60. Without any frame limit it goes up to 120 but in the range between 60 and 120 FPS there are regions where the flickering gets really bad. At 60 it is bearable.

Any other workaround for crossfire floating in these forums do not yield any worthwhile performance boost. At least not for me. So much for my AMD CPU being the limiting factor.

Goose, on 13 August 2015 - 02:01 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4111620

I also just put these into my user.cfg. Can't say wether they helped. At least they did not hurt.

[cx5]

Have you tried this? I just found out today hope we are one of those lucky ones

and I just saw them air-cooled overclocked to 1100Mhz and above, I'm going to fiddle with that when comes winter ,

[Chrithu]

Mark Brandhauber, on 01 August 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

I run a 9590 @4.7 with 16 gb ram and a single gtx 970, my fps range from 60 to 100 at 1920 by 1080 at a mix of high and medium settings. This I have achieved with a few tweaks provided by kind members of the MechWarrior community.
In my opinion; the fact PGI do not have a single AMD test rig in their studio is the real factor in their efforts to optimise for AMD chips.

Too bad MWO doesn't have a big enough audience to get AMD to have a look. I mean if MWO were as big as say WoW, Lol or COD, AMD would knock down PGI's door throwing PCs and engineers at them to fix CPU and Crossfire Problems to prevent people being driven to buy from the competitors. Games struggling THIS hard with AMD hardware are luckily pretty rare, thus I deal with it or just don't buy a particular game if it doesn't love my AMD stuff.

[Robot Kenshiro]

I have almost the same set up. I replaced my HD7970s with gtx980s.
Cross firing 7970s= 45 fps av. Dropped to 25ish when **** got real.
Cross firing disable. 50ish fps av. Dropped to 25ish when **** got real.

Sli gtx980 solid 60 fps av Would change everywhere from 30fps upwards when **** got real.

Gtx980 sli disabled solid 60 fps av. Would dip to 50s when **** got real. New river city dips it to high 40s. But not often. All settings very high. AA is off. I never use AA while playing unless I wanna take pretty screen shots. But in pug land... there's little time to do such things lol

[nehebkau]

So using process lasso really has no effect. My processor is barely breaking a sweat since it appears that MWO is sticking only to a couple of logical processors with its 70 threads even though its been given complete and sole control over logical cores 0, 2, 4, 6 -- it only uses 0 and 2.

I honesty believe that Nvidia has put some sandbagging code in the game for AMD systems -- it wouldn't be the fist time that they did it and it would probably not be the last.

The whole thing is pissing me off considerably -- I have this fairly decent system just doing nothing and I want it to be my game machine but the game I play most is the only one that has poor performance. Maybe I should just run MWO on my main system (anyone know how the game performs on Xeon processors?)

Edited by nehebkau, 14 August 2015 - 10:50 AM.

[Shamous13]

nehebkau, on 14 August 2015 - 10:03 AM, said:

I honesty believe that Nvidia has put some sandbagging code in the game for AMD systems -- it wouldn't be the fist time that they did it and it would probably not be the last.

and not the first time for intel either they lost one court case due to their codeing

[nehebkau]

Shamous13, on 14 August 2015 - 04:34 PM, said:

and not the first time for intel either they lost one court case due to their codeing

Question is: can PGI do anything about it if that's the case?

Jason Parker, on 14 August 2015 - 06:39 AM, said:

Too bad MWO doesn't have a big enough audience to get AMD to have a look. I mean if MWO were as big as say WoW, Lol or COD, AMD would knock down PGI's door throwing PCs and engineers at them to fix CPU and Crossfire Problems to prevent people being driven to buy from the competitors. Games struggling THIS hard with AMD hardware are luckily pretty rare, thus I deal with it or just don't buy a particular game if it doesn't love my AMD stuff.

Can we start a Twitter shame campaign? Tweets to @AMD?

Edited by nehebkau, 14 August 2015 - 08:11 PM.

[Chrithu]

nehebkau, on 14 August 2015 - 08:10 PM, said:

Can we start a Twitter shame campaign? Tweets to @AMD?

Old farts like me don't use twitter. And then I doubt AMD will do something anyways. They'll see a handful of people tweeting them then look and see that MWO has merely a couple thousand players at the most, laugh it off and be done with it.

Also it's not worth the hassle in my view. It is PGI's job to ping AMD for help if they want it. I vote with my wallet: If PGI does nothing to better support my hardware I will do nothing to support them in return and on top of it cost them money by playing for free.

[nehebkau]

Why doesn't PGI even comment on this issue? Are they bound by something in their Nvidia contract?

[ApolloKaras]

nehebkau, on 15 August 2015 - 06:49 PM, said:

Why doesn't PGI even comment on this issue? Are they bound by something in their Nvidia contract?

I'd take to twitter personally. Although we'd have to see how many other AMD users are having the same issue, and if they aren't what exactly are they doing that everyone in this thread has overlooked.

To your question about how they run on Xeon processors, it should run the same as the consumer chip. There really isn't much difference between the consumer chip and the server chips clock for clock. You'll find the server chips are normally clocked lower than the consumer counterpart however, which could degrade performance.

Edited by Saxie, 15 August 2015 - 09:05 PM.