Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Poor performance in dogfight mode


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 PP_Nobody96

PP_Nobody96
  • Posts: 180

Posted 04 May 2010 - 09:30

Hello

I'm posting this thread in the CPU section because i guess my old mighty E8400 is the problem, not my GeForce GTX 260. Nevertheless i am in the dark about the reason for my machines poor performance in 5+ furballs.

Is there a way to measure which component is lagging my game? And just for a try, which settings affect mostly the CPU, which are more demanding on video card power?

so long, and thanks in advance
Mathias
  • 0

#2 kirock7

kirock7
  • Posts: 1138

Posted 04 May 2010 - 12:47

Hi Nobody!
Have you tried overclocking your CPU?
Right now I have the same CPU as you (I have a new Q9550 on the way though) and when I did some slight overclocking the game's performance went up exponentially; graphics quality and frame rates really jumped.
Just be careful, do your research and only OC in small increments on your way up… don't want to break anything.
  • 0

#3 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 04 May 2010 - 13:02

I have the same processor too and only a 9800 GT card (1gig).

I get FPS in the 50's with everything set to high in MP.

The only post effects I use are HDR and rain drops. Bloom is a FPS killer.

What OS are you using and how much system ram do you have?
  • 0

#4 PP_Nobody96

PP_Nobody96
  • Posts: 180

Posted 04 May 2010 - 18:45

@Kirock: I'm using my PC for my work as freelance programmer and it has to compile a whole linux distry over night sometimes. Therefore i would rather not like to overclock it because it might get loud, hot or instable.

@squid: I am using Windows7 (for gaming only) and have 4g ram installed. I am using a 1900x1080 (guessing) resolution atm because my monitor is rather big.

so long
Mathias
  • 0

#5 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 04 May 2010 - 18:51

I would hazard an educated guess that its the combination of your dual core and win7 thats causing the slowdown. If you can afford it upgrade to a quad core.
  • 0

#6 TX-Thunderbolt

TX-Thunderbolt
  • Posts: 1436

Posted 05 May 2010 - 01:43

…If you can afford it upgrade to a quad core.


+1

As bad is it sounds, I can tell you without question that dropping a mobo-compatible quad in will allow you to enjoy an entirely new game. I'd look seriously at a Q9550 or even better a Q9650. Problem solved.
  • 0

#7 RAF74_Winger

RAF74_Winger
  • Posts: 245

Posted 05 May 2010 - 05:15

Will help with the compilation too.

W.
  • 0

#8 PP_Nobody96

PP_Nobody96
  • Posts: 180

Posted 06 May 2010 - 10:21

Well, i was worried that this would be the case. Well then, time for a new contract so that i can afford a i7 + board + maybe new ram

so long
Mathias
  • 0

#9 PP_Nobody96

PP_Nobody96
  • Posts: 180

Posted 06 May 2010 - 10:40

Grmml… i just had a look. ~ Euro 500 is a bit to much right now. Maybe in a couple of month. Until then i have to fly with not so perfect graphic settings…

so long
Mathias
  • 0

#10 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 06 May 2010 - 13:04

You may not need a new board, but could just buy the processor.
  • 0

#11 TX-Thunderbolt

TX-Thunderbolt
  • Posts: 1436

Posted 06 May 2010 - 13:36

YOU DO NOT NEED TO GO i7 ROUTE!

You can spend <100 Euro and get a Q9400 (likely, depending on motherboard compatibility) and get the results you're wanting.

Really, look into it as an option.
  • 0

#12 ImPeRaToR

ImPeRaToR
  • Posts: 7902

Posted 06 May 2010 - 13:53

Q9400 sells for 160€ actually.

http://geizhals.at/e...&xf=25_4&sort=p">http://geizhals.at/e...&xf=25_4&sort=p

That listing focuses primarily on german and austrian shops mind you but the prices in europe are probably not that different from that. The UK shops it lists have basically the same prices.


You could try ebay for a used Core2Quad though.
  • 0

#13 TX-Thunderbolt

TX-Thunderbolt
  • Posts: 1436

Posted 08 May 2010 - 16:48

I guess my USD - Euro conversion is a little suspect, but in this thread: http://riseofflight....t=9242&start=20">viewtopic.php?f=264&t=9242&start=20 Voxman just bought a Q9400 for $90 USD. While that's here in the US, I would think a little smart shopping should give similar results.

Maybe I'm wrong though.
  • 0

#14 ImPeRaToR

ImPeRaToR
  • Posts: 7902

Posted 08 May 2010 - 16:56

Hardware is always some 20-30% more expensive over here, regardless of conversion I am afraid :(

Voxman might have gotten a really cheap offer there, maybe you can get them this cheap as well if you go retail but online shops are pretty much all the same if not more expensive. Though online shops are usually way cheaper than retail shops ;)
  • 0

#15 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 08 May 2010 - 18:25

I concur that quad core made a huge improvement in RoF for me.

Suggest you take a look at AMD. I think you get a lot more bang for lots fewer bucks.

In January I upgraded my dual core to a 125 watt AMD Black Edition Deneb Phenom Processor 965 quad core (there was an earlier 140 watt version of the same CPU but the 125 watt new version got much better performance). The reviews I read rated it right up with the top end Intel CPUs (costing around $1,000).

Cost? $200 US.

Of course, that was five months ago so it probably is completely obsolete by now :lol:

But, seriously, shop AMD (no, I have no business connection with them) and compare to Intel.

Good luck!

HT
  • 0

#16 TX-Gunslinger

TX-Gunslinger
  • Posts: 751

Posted 08 May 2010 - 19:08

Q9550 is the winner.

Low cost, no board changes.

I have both Q9650/Q9550, identical except for clocks. Both have been pushed past 4.0 GHz. Easy - no risk clocks to 3.4 - 3.6 with minimal power and almost no heat.

Software Engineers, in my experience have little patience for hardware :) Understand.

See what you can get Q9550 for. Biggest band for the buck and no other changes …

This comes with the caveat: Please check to see that you Motherboard will accept Core2Duo Quad. I don't know of any that won't, but you never know.

S!

Gunny
  • 0

#17 TX-Gunslinger

TX-Gunslinger
  • Posts: 751

Posted 08 May 2010 - 19:11

Tom - I agree with AMD value - but your suggestion requires a new MB. More money.

Pretty sure my next system will be AMD too. Only one thing to check with dev's on:

1. Do the high CPU load calcualtions in ROF use a significant amount of Floating Point math?

Vox just picked up a Q9550 for about $100.00

S!

Gunny
  • 0

#18 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 08 May 2010 - 19:49

Tom - I agree with AMD value - but your suggestion requires a new MB. More money.

Pretty sure my next system will be AMD too. Only one thing to check with dev's on:

1. Do the high CPU load calcualtions in ROF use a significant amount of Floating Point math?

Vox just picked up a Q9550 for about $100.00

S!

Gunny

Wow!

He got a good deal!

Yes, I did have to put in a new motherboard, too.

It is worth shopping different brands for both CPUs and GPUs.

If you know a good web site for comparative reviews (that is kept current), it would be appreciated! If I do a Google search for any components, there is a load of out-dated info that comes up. In this area, the shelf live of any review is very, very short, as I'm sure you know :lol:

I pretty much rely on Rage3D for AMD/ATI stuff. What's a comparable site for Intel and NVidea?

Thx, Gunny!

S!

HT
  • 0

#19 SaureKraut92

SaureKraut92
  • Posts: 104

Posted 10 June 2010 - 16:59

Hi i am running ROF on all low settings and kind of is a killer when playing the game but i absolutely love it. This is what i am running, its from 2006 btw.

CPU: Intel® Pentium® Dual CPU E2160 @ 1.80GHz
RAM: 2 GB
Video: GeForce 8500 GT
attributes of your Video Card
Required I Have
Video RAM 256 MB 504.5 MB
Hardware T&L Yes Yes
Pixel Shader version 3.0 4.0
Vertex Shader version 3.0 4.0

i just want to be able to fly with good graphics and nice features for the game without it lagging in dogfights.
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users