458 replies to this topic

[FerretGR]

No worries! I for one didn't take your post as complaining, and was simply trying to offer you condolences for your issues! I feel your pain!

[p4r4g0n]

Performance update from Matthew Craig - http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1587423

[SerpentrasD]

so where is the intel fix ?

[Desert Panther]

My specs:

E8400 Dual Core Intel CPU 3.6Ghz OCed
RAM 10GB
GTX 680 GPU

I have problems with performance when I turn my mech lower body. I dont have problems when I look around ONLY when turn my lower body either left or right.

[EternalCore]

SerpentrasD, on 12 December 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

so where is the intel fix ?

Intel video chips are at the very low-end spectrum which is why there's no fix for them. But your welcome to search for one.

[fxrsniper]

Desert Panther, on 12 December 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

My specs:

E8400 Dual Core Intel CPU 3.6Ghz OCed
RAM 10GB
GTX 680 GPU

I have problems with performance when I turn my mech lower body. I dont have problems when I look around ONLY when turn my lower body either left or right.

Could be a number of things you have a great GPU but that Dual core even though its at 3.6 could be bottle necking GPU between the rendering and and the cpu processing what the game is doing

[Loctar]

First of all, thank all participants in this post for putting all of this together, awesome job. Thank you.

Thou 1st post reccommendation didn't do me any good. Same FPS with and without threaded optimization.

Here is my spec:

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3Ghz (Overclocked for 3.6Ghz)
 
4Gb DDR2 6400 800Mhz  (5-5-5-12)
 
NVIDIA GeForce GTZ 560 Ti 1024Mb
 
I also have my system installed on WD Green HDD. (Yeah, poor me). But swap file is on the other fast Seagate drive. And no swap on Green. 
 

All graphics are lowes in game settings and in nvidia control panel. But didn't do too much difference. With medium or even high I have near the same performance. FPS is fine untill I start turning my head, this makes it's drops some times to 6FPS, and in some close range brawling game is uplayable, escpecially when I do my XL engine Commando. I also used custom settings file, no luck.


As many of us here, I have system which used to be good, but now is old. But I don't had any issues with my performance before MWO. I also didn't have any issues with MWO few patches away.

Also here is my few tips, after some patch when the first performance loss appears I used to make game playable switching to window mode. Atm I do not use it, because some how my performance Fullscreen and Window mode are the same, and game playable with slow mechs now. But some time before it was completely uplayable and only window mode helped. May be this time will helps somebody else.

[EternalCore]

Loctar, on 13 December 2012 - 12:00 AM, said:

First of all, thank all participants in this post for putting all of this together, awesome job. Thank you.

Thou 1st post reccommendation didn't do me any good. Same FPS with and without threaded optimization.

Here is my spec:

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3Ghz (Overclocked for 3.6Ghz)
 
4Gb DDR2 6400 800Mhz  (5-5-5-12)
 
NVIDIA GeForce GTZ 560 Ti 1024Mb
 
I also have my system installed on WD Green HDD. (Yeah, poor me). But swap file is on the other fast Seagate drive. And no swap on Green.
 

All graphics are lowes in game settings and in nvidia control panel. But didn't do too much difference. With medium or even high I have near the same performance. FPS is fine untill I start turning my head, this makes it's drops some times to 6FPS, and in some close range brawling game is uplayable, escpecially when I do my XL engine Commando. I also used custom settings file, no luck.


As many of us here, I have system which used to be good, but now is old. But I don't had any issues with my performance before MWO. I also didn't have any issues with MWO few patches away.

Also here is my few tips, after some patch when the first performance loss appears I used to make game playable switching to window mode. Atm I do not use it, because some how my performance Fullscreen and Window mode are the same, and game playable with slow mechs now. But some time before it was completely uplayable and only window mode helped. May be this time will helps somebody else.

Your CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 doesn't support Hyper-Threading(So it uses a FSB) which is why this fix isn't working for your system; also your CPU is a duel core and your still using DDR2 RAM...

On the note about your WD Green HD, Yes it is quite slow for a gaming rig; so it is also a big bottle-neck.

The only thing worth salvaging is your video-card as its being under-clocked and chocked by the current setup you have going...

[Loctar]

EternalCore, on 13 December 2012 - 01:35 AM, said:

Your CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 doesn't support Hyper-Threading(So it uses a FSB) which is why this fix isn't working for your system; also your CPU is a duel core and your still using DDR2 RAM...

On the note about your WD Green HD, Yes it is quite slow for a gaming rig; so it is also a big bottle-neck.

The only thing worth salvaging is your video-card as its being under-clocked and chocked by the current setup you have going...

Thanks for clarification! And sorry for offtopic, but which upgrade you suggest around my video card which would take most out of it but not my wallet? I have decent case, with great zalman power supply, so I think I only have to change MB, CPU and RAM? What's would be good option nowaday?

[EternalCore]

Loctar, on 13 December 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

Thanks for clarification! And sorry for offtopic, but which upgrade you suggest around my video card which would take most out of it but not my wallet? I have decent case, with great zalman power supply, so I think I only have to change MB, CPU and RAM? What's would be good option nowaday?

Well it all depends on what you can afford; But I recommend an Intel i5 or i7 CPU with 8-16gb of corsair ram on a gigabyte motherboard with a Corsair PSU. The reason why I'm not going to narrow it down is because there's way too many choices and prices. So it all depends on how much your willing to pay and or can afford.

JudgeDeathCZ, on 13 December 2012 - 10:36 AM, said:

I've just read Far Cry 3 have same problem with lowering fps at some points ingame
some vid
and smthing about it on forums
http://forums.guru3d...ad.php?t=371724
http://forums.ubi.co...uttering-Forums

hope it help ya guys since they use same engine

You can't compare MWO with Far cry 3 because it runs no where near what MWO does.
See the requirements here:
Far cry 3: http://gameinfocente.../Far-Cry-3.html
MWO: http://mwomercs.com/...re-requirments/

Edited by EternalCore, 13 December 2012 - 02:06 PM.

[fxrsniper]

JudgeDeathCZ, on 13 December 2012 - 10:36 AM, said:

I've just read Far Cry 3 have same problem with lowering fps at some points ingame
some vid

and smthing about it on forums
http://forums.guru3d...ad.php?t=371724
http://forums.ubi.co...uttering-Forums

hope it help ya guys since they use same engine

Judge FarCry 3 is on Dunia 2 not CryEngine 3 it's made by some Crytek Employees its similar but its finished unfortunately for MechWarrior CryEngine is not

[GvM]

Oh gawd... I double that Click guy who said everything right. Is he's the only one adequate person in here?
Lets just face that the game has no heavy graphic features (and note that we don't even need the ultra settings to lag @ 10fps),
it doesn't have much polygons (it's a damn mechs with normalmaps),
the tree models are lower quality than cryengine1 had, it's not even the speedtree engine spamming random trees up to the horizon,
the landscapes are static and rocky it's just cant affect the performance of our gpu/cpus - stop discussing about fsb and ddr clocks that **** can be statically held in gpu memory including the robots and trees... did you ever heard about geometry instancing?
moreover it still runs the same cryengine, even more - it runs the third cryengine which is highly optimized, even the ****** ps3\360's hardware can handle that easily having 8800gt/2900hd gpus inside and the mwo lags even when the cryengine sdk's sandbox doesn't.

all those discussions about cores, ht, htt, fsb are stupid and have nothing to do with the lags (except that it gives you a chance to outperform lags by your mighty dollars)
moreover it's definitly threading/syncing issue between cpu/gpu and it's totally an engine's or dev's bug/messed code/wrong usage

If the devs can't see the problem and you, guys, will keep 'helping' everybody with upgrades... then I'm just out of here...

[Kiblams]

GvM, on 14 December 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

Oh gawd... I double that Click guy who said everything right. Is he's the only one adequate person in here?
Lets just face that the game has no heavy graphic features (and note that we don't even need the ultra settings to lag @ 10fps),
it doesn't have much polygons (it's a damn mechs with normalmaps),
the tree models are lower quality than cryengine1 had, it's not even the speedtree engine spamming random trees up to the horizon,
the landscapes are static and rocky it's just cant affect the performance of our gpu/cpus - stop discussing about fsb and ddr clocks that **** can be statically held in gpu memory including the robots and trees... did you ever heard about geometry instancing?
moreover it still runs the same cryengine, even more - it runs the third cryengine which is highly optimized, even the ****** ps3\360's hardware can handle that easily having 8800gt/2900hd gpus inside and the mwo lags even when the cryengine sdk's sandbox doesn't.

all those discussions about cores, ht, htt, fsb are stupid and have nothing to do with the lags (except that it gives you a chance to outperform lags by your mighty dollars)
moreover it's definitly threading/syncing issue between cpu/gpu and it's totally an engine's or dev's bug/messed code/wrong usage

If the devs can't see the problem and you, guys, will keep 'helping' everybody with upgrades... then I'm just out of here...

This is pretty much the case, there is nothing in this game that should be challenging my system (sandybridge dual core without HT) when BF3 and Crysis 1&2 run fine.

The devs have openly admitted that they are struggling to optimise for dual core CPUs and that for me should be one of their top priorities (as allot of gamers still use Intel dual cores of some form) so in my opinion we should be patient and at least wait for that to happen before shelling out loads of money for a single game to run.

I have every confidence that the devs are looking to fix this, and judging by the customer service I have had in contacting them, it does seem important to them . Just remember, the more the optimise it for the lower end, the more advanced features they can put in (destructible environments anyone?) for those of you with monster rigs down the line

Edited by Kiblams, 14 December 2012 - 10:43 AM.

[FerretGR]

GvM, on 14 December 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

all those discussions about cores, ht, htt, fsb are stupid and have nothing to do with the lags (except that it gives you a chance to outperform lags by your mighty dollars)

So... given that improving the system "by mighty dollars," "outperforms lags", they do have something to do with the "lags", then? As an aside, is English your first language?

It's been clearly stated that the optimization is the issue at this point by pretty much everyone. That doesn't mean that there aren't worthwhile conversations to be had about what can be done to improve things for now. I hate to keep reiterating this, but I gained valuable information about my CPU in this thread, went and did some testing and some reading, and it's led me to learn and to improve my system. I'm personally glad that I learned what I did because it led me to improved gaming performance in all my games, not just this one.

I hate that every couple of pages someone comes in here to prove themselves "computer superior." Yes, you know lots of stuff about computers; I bet you've got a big one in yr pants too.

[GvM]

Kiblams, on 14 December 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

I have every confidence that the devs are looking to fix this, and judging by the customer service I have had in contacting them, it does seem important to them .

Well, that's a relief.

FerretGR, on 14 December 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

I hate that every couple of pages someone comes in here to prove themselves "computer superior." Yes, you know lots of stuff about computers; I bet you've got a big one in yr pants too.

yep, my johnson is okay.

FerretGR, on 14 December 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

As an aside, is English your first language?

No, it's not.

[EternalCore]

GvM, on 14 December 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

Oh gawd... I double that Click guy who said everything right. Is he's the only one adequate person in here?
Lets just face that the game has no heavy graphic features (and note that we don't even need the ultra settings to lag @ 10fps),
it doesn't have much polygons (it's a damn mechs with normalmaps),
the tree models are lower quality than cryengine1 had, it's not even the speedtree engine spamming random trees up to the horizon,
the landscapes are static and rocky it's just cant affect the performance of our gpu/cpus - stop discussing about fsb and ddr clocks that **** can be statically held in gpu memory including the robots and trees... did you ever heard about geometry instancing?
moreover it still runs the same cryengine, even more - it runs the third cryengine which is highly optimized, even the ****** ps3\360's hardware can handle that easily having 8800gt/2900hd gpus inside and the mwo lags even when the cryengine sdk's sandbox doesn't.

all those discussions about cores, ht, htt, fsb are stupid and have nothing to do with the lags (except that it gives you a chance to outperform lags by your mighty dollars)
moreover it's definitly threading/syncing issue between cpu/gpu and it's totally an engine's or dev's bug/messed code/wrong usage

If the devs can't see the problem and you, guys, will keep 'helping' everybody with upgrades... then I'm just out of here...

TL;DR! But did you bother to read the entire thread or did you just read the posts by Click, To which he has absolutely no idea what he is and or was talking about!......

[T0TALCHA0S]

yashmack, on 27 November 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

I just installed Planetside 2 and so far havent had any problems running the game
Medium is probably best setting but it can play on my PC on high settings at around 19 fps
no lag spikes, nothing stupid running nice and smooth

Playing planetside my CPU usuage is usually less than 100%, stays aright around 98% on both cores and 97% on the GPU

in MWO both cores on the CPU are pegged 100% and the GPU at 50%
my card is not the problem on lowest settings
something int he game is overusing the CPU, at least when compared to games like Skyrim, STO, and now Planetside 2

i found that setting Maximum pre-rendered frames to 1 on nvidia cards for people with dual core cpu's will help with rates . this way the vid card is not waitting for the cpu to produce more than one frame

[ArmandTulsen]

Will downloading and running that AMD program that's linked overheat my GPU? I don't want to fry my laptop...

Also, how do you know how many cores you're running?

Btw, using AMD Radeon HD 6620g on board card.

[EternalCore]

ArmandTulsen, on 14 December 2012 - 09:00 PM, said:

Will downloading and running that AMD program that's linked overheat my GPU? I don't want to fry my laptop...

Also, how do you know how many cores you're running?

Btw, using AMD Radeon HD 6620g on board card.

No, What's your laptop make and model?

[ArmandTulsen]

EternalCore, on 14 December 2012 - 09:03 PM, said:

No, What's your laptop make and model?

It's a crappy stock Dell.

AMD 1.6 GHZ quad core (I think, not sure).
6 GB RAM
Win 7 64 bit.
Radeon HD 6620g.

P.S. After installing that ATI tweaker I can't even run the game after the suggested option changes.