Very disappointing FPS on Sandy Bridge

[binkster 0]

In an earlier post you wrote that most settings are on normal for you. I checked and if I out everything on normal my fps is between 30 and 40 as well. The image quality is crap though.

Well then I guess your asking for too much with a new game on a 3 year old card.

[PuFu 4600]

Well then I guess your asking for too much with a new game on a 3 year old card.

yet another example of the lack of knowledge about PC components. A gtx285 should handle the game just fine.

axelb9 - have you tried the latests beta drivers fron nvidia?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=127363

[Axelb9 10]

I would but it seems that they do not provide drivers yet for xp for this particular beta.

Thanks, anyways. Somehow I think that my card especially coupled with my strong cpu should handle this game without issues. I made a test turning off AA and reducing the 3d resolution to 50% and it was similarly bad - at some higher altitudes with multiple objects showing fps went below 20. Only when I reduce objects detail to normal do I go up above 50. Would that hint at a gpu limitation or something totally different?

What benchmark would you suggest to test my system's overall performance against similar builds.

Thanks,

Alex

[jumpinghubert 49]

Ok i have to make again Captain obvious: 6000m object view distance....too much?

[Axelb9 10]

Ok i have to make again Captain obvious: 6000m object view distance....too much?

Care to share your settings? 6000 m object view distance was recommended as a very reasonable setting in the sticky about video performance. Otherwise if the game is not able to show even 6000 meters object view on a 4,5 Ghz CPU with a GPU that is above the recommended settings then something is really wrong.

So what do you recommend then as reasonable?

Thanks,

Alex

[jumpinghubert 49]

in combination with very high object detail and terrain detail it´s not recommended i think. Some settings multiplicate their effect. Official recommended settings are often wrong or inaccurate especially with a disharmonic system (strong cpu, not as strong gpu).

My system is in an inverse way disharmonic (strong gpu, crap cpu) so my settings are lower than yours. Only AA and such things I can push.

Edited November 14, 2011 by JumpingHubert

[Axelb9 10]

Clear. So what object view distance are you using?

[jumpinghubert 49]

3000 and a little bit higher view distance. My gpu-load is max 60%. I need your sandy b. :p

[Axelb9 10]

Ah I see. How do you measure GPU load if I may ask?

[bobocz 10]

I made tests what is limiting in Take On Helicopters when you are using SandyBridge CPU overclocked to 4,5 Ghz.

I was wondering why Axelb9 have so bad result, I've lived in idea that TKOH/Arma engine is in most situation CPU limited, but Axelb9 says opposite, that his graphic card limit him.

We had some discussions via PM and I was curious what so decreases his performance. He is using Nvidia GTX285, that is only different between our rigs and also he has Windows XP. I saw his settings and for me there was nothing that shows me that he is using too high settings, maybe only object distance visibility. This settings gives him 14-15 fps.

I made test with Scene 1, which is mostly covered with buildings. Scene 2 is mostly covered with trees. These are two locations where I had lowest fps (I'm sure there are even more demanding locations)

Here is table of theoretical performance comparison of my Nvidia 560Ti(880Mhz) and Axelb9's GFX285, I also included my down-clocked 560Ti to 600Mhz and 405Mhz, I simulated weaker GPU. Theoretically these card doesn't looks so different (real tests shows 560Ti is 30-50% faster), so I think that his card doesn't limit him. Hopefully all data are right.

So to confirm my idea I made tests with 10/10km, 20/20km visibility/object view distance. These settings are absolutely not playable for me. I exaggerated it on purpose to get my PC on the knee (here I'm limited with everything I guess). When I'm turning my helicopter huge amount of data have to be loaded and even SSD disk doesn't help me. Normally I use combination 7km/5.5km (you can see my TKOH's settings in my signature). I hoover 100m above terrain and measure FPS with Fraps.

Fps test Scene 1

Fps test Scene 2

I know that it was only static test and I was not flying, but I think there are some patterns in results and I can say that in most situation my graphic card doesn't limit me (I know there are situation where my cards limit me ,e.g. when I see many particle effect, or some combination of needle leafs trees give me for second worse fps (overdraw I think). Until I down-clocked 560Ti to 405Mhz my fps is quite consistent (of course with normal distance view), during Scene 2 test (1080p 7000m/5500m) when I set my GFX to 600MHz I see lower fps (these trees probably steal my fps).

So conclusion is that I don't think that with his settings he should get so low fps. Even with very down-clocked card I get better fps :confused: (notes: I use different settings) and even with much longer view distance to 10km I get better fps?? Perhaps it can be so because he has only Windows XP, or Nvidia doesn't optimize driver anymore, or architecture of 560Ti is so different and TKOH can benefit it, or maybe it is something wrong with his PC ??

I made this test if what Axelb9 says is in generally valid and also what if I for example buy better graphic card, if it is worth for me and what can help you increase performance. Maybe I made some mistake and also I don't know how exactly engine works, but these results are interesting. Honestly after these tests I'm not quite sure what limits him.

I still think that TKOH engine is mostly CPU limited.

Edited November 15, 2011 by BoboCZ

[kotov12345 10]

I still think that TKOH engine is mostly CPU limited.

ok

I didnt understand what tests show you.

To see what limit fps you need to change CPU to faster and see if you will get any more fps and second test change graphic card with same CPU and see difference.

I'm sure that you will get more fps when you will upgrade graphic card like all 3D games now :)

[bobocz 10]

ok

I didnt understand what tests show you.

To see what limit fps you need to change CPU to faster and see if you will get any more fps and second test change graphic card with same CPU and see difference.

I'm sure that you will get more fps when you will upgrade graphic card like all 3D games now :)

I tested why he had so low fps. You can see that even when I down-clocked my gfx card to 600MHz and resolution is 1080p, it mostly doesn't limit me.

(I reedited my text, so maybe now it is more clear what/why I tested it :o :p).

test scene 2 shows some limit (1080p, 7000m/5500m)

Edited November 14, 2011 by BoboCZ

[jumpinghubert 49]

@BoboCZ

thanks for the effort! Very interesting.

@AxelB

I use afterburner.

[binkster 0]

yet another example of the lack of knowledge about PC components. A gtx285 should handle the game just fine.

axelb9 - have you tried the latests beta drivers fron nvidia?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=127363

It should which I have same card and runs great with some settings on high. Which that was my point. He seems to stubborn to accept the fact that even though a gtx 285 is a high end card... you still cannot have everything on high and very high.

I would say my PC knowledge outweighs my patience for stubborn people.

Also here is a little expierence with the Arma2 and peoples systems . OS had a huge impact on FPS/Scores.

Maybe a benchmark for TOH would be a good idea like my old thread.

Edited November 15, 2011 by binkster

[haltux 1]

One easy way to check whether a game on a given configuration is CPU or GPU bounded is changing parameters which are purely depending on GPU. If you set resolution to 800x600, texture to low and post-processing effect to none, and if your fps is not massively increasing, it means that you are CPU bounded. If it is increasing a lot, it means that you are GPU/video memory bounded.

This is not a perfect rule, because GPUs are involved in geometry as well, but it often works. In particular in FSX, which is typically a CPU bounded game, and where decreasing resolution does not help at all.

EDIT: However, in your case, I tend to think that you have another problem, because you should be able to run ToH smoothly. I have a Q9300 and HD 4850 (far away from your config), and it runs great with low settings and still alright with medium settings.

Edited November 15, 2011 by haltux

[Axelb9 10]

I would say my PC knowledge outweighs my patience for stubborn people.

Also here is a little expierence with the Arma2 and peoples systems . OS had a huge impact on FPS/Scores.

Maybe a benchmark for TOH would be a good idea like my old thread.

Sorry mate I have no idea why you are getting yourself so worked up on this. Read back on your posts and my responses: I believe I was quite clear when I said that using your settings I get the same performance as you do. There is one single setting namely object detail on very high that kills my fps for one reason or another. If I keep most on normal and a few here and there on high I also get 30+ fps. It just looks crap. All in all I have finished dealing with this. When I get a new vga card I check again and until then I use Xplane and FSX, both giving terrific framerates with a way better flight model.

Be happy,

Alex

---------- Post added at 06:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:15 PM ----------

I tested why he had so low fps. You can see that even when I down-clocked my gfx card to 600MHz and resolution is 1080p, it mostly doesn't limit me.

[/img]

Thanks a lot for this effort I appreciate it. Honestly I also do not know the reason could be XP or something maybe. Running the game my CPU temps never go above 52 C so I am not thermal throttled or anything like that. FSX and XP are giving me 100+ fps and still 25+ in built in areas with loads of autogen so thus far no other indication that my CPU would not work up to specification. Would be willing to benchmark the system though I just do not know any good comparison benches that could gauge my system against the performance of a similar.

Thanks again,

Alex

[lsp 10]

Gtx 285 4gbs of ram windows xp 32bit old drivers theres your problems.

[Jacky60 10]

Gtx 285 4gbs of ram windows xp 32bit old drivers theres your problems.

+1 You have a great modern cpu with an old os, not enough ram (as xp 32 can only use 3.2gb) and ancient drivers plus a graphics card that is nearly 3 years old. The system is unbalanced and while you may well be able to get better performance from a few tweaks you need a new and much much better card to take advantage of that cpu. You have a Porsche 911 cpu that has been coupled with a Hyundai lantra gearbox gpu hence crap performance.

---------- Post added at 02:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:27 PM ----------

yet another example of the lack of knowledge about PC components. A gtx285 should handle the game just fine.

axelb9 - have you tried the latests beta drivers fron nvidia?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=127363

Thats nonesense any card will handle the game but I suspect the op wants playable frame rates and the game to look good which it won't on a 285gtx. I went from one 4890 to 4890xfire to 5970/5870 trifire and then two 6990's and from a E8400 at 4ghz to i7 920 at 4ghz. Until I upgraded the cpu it was not much fun to play(either low fps or poor image quality) and until I got 2 6990's it was still sluggish with fps regularly dropping to 20's in cities during firefights.

You need a top end CPU AND a top end graphics card or two to get the game running well with a decent amount of eye candy. Then it starts looking beautiful.

[4 IN 1 0]

I am using older hw and win XP but I can still run the game with >25 FPS and much less crash, so OS is not the problem.

[Demonic Spoon 10]

I am using older hw and win XP but I can still run the game with >25 FPS and much less crash, so OS is not the problem.

Bullshit. OP is running on "Very high" textures, which means he's going to need a lot of video memory for textures. Given that XP 32 bit sharply limits your address space (e.g. your usable memory), that's going to cause major problems.

Read this

[4 IN 1 0]

Did I fuckin ever said that I am using the same setting?