Ofp's overall performance

[Injecteer 0]

Yo!

I've got a question here...

Recently I Installed a watercooling system in my PC, slightly overclocked the CPU, now it's P4 2,53@2,66 (will go on with it ), bought a new Radeon9700Pro instead of my ol' Rad9600TX.

And as a relsut I see almost NO performance gain!

The OFP still hangs for a second sometimes. I'm playing on 1280*1024@32bit, hi-res textures, and have the latest drivers.

What can be a reason for such a lack? I can imagine several bottlenecks:

- CPU speed

- Memory size (I have 512 MB RDRAMM)

- Memory bandwidth

- some graphic card options

...

P.S. I tried to scan through the topics here, but found only partial glues. That's why created a new thread.

[norsu 180]

Do you use 'high' or 'very high' terrain detail? That's one thing that makes OFP sluggish even on most high-end systems. I use 'normal' and the game runs smooth and terrain looks still very nice .

[Gollum1 0]

Replace your 9600 XT with a 9700 Pro? I'm not surprised that you're not getting a lot of performance gain, and IMO you didn't get value for your money 9600 XT-9700 Pro, the gain is so small for the money.

OFP is more dependent on CPU and RAM than most games (3Dmark and FPSes), anyway, I don't think you would have noticed much of an improvement even with a 9800 XT.

[Injecteer 0]

Replace your 9600 XT with a 9700 Pro?  I'm not surprised that you're not getting a lot of performance gain, and IMO you didn't get value for your money 9600 XT-9700 Pro, the gain is so small for the money.

actually, I've got 9600TX, not 9600XT. 8-)

OFP is more dependent on CPU and RAM than most games (3Dmark and FPSes), anyway, I don't think you would have noticed much of an improvement even with a 9800 XT.

yeah, I think so too, the OFP is more CPU oriented.

Another question: where can I find the detailed info on "Advanced" options within the preferences?

[svendejong 0]

edit :oops, i was reading wrong, sorry

[mr burns 132]

Another question: where can I find the detailed info on "Advanced" options within the preferences?

here you go: Link

i noticed a fair performance increase when i oc´ed my barton from 1500 mhz (which i had to run due to heat problems) to 2200 mhz. now it runs just well, warm and fuzzy

[bmgarcangel 0]

I have a 2.7 ghz pro and a 560 mb ram/memory card, I have landscape detail bassically at full and it still works fine

[Gollum1 0]

A 9600 TX? I thought you had spelled it wrong, I have never heard of a TX. Maybe you could educate a noob?

[Lucretius 0]

I have:

Athlon 3000XP

1024mb DDR333

N-force2 mobo

ge-force 4 ti-4200 64mb

240gb (2x 120gb sata HDD's in raid 0)

To be honest I noticed a big performance boost when I setup my raid array... much less stuttering

As i stands I have everything in the initial preferences maxed out.

I am running in 1280x1024 with 8XAF enabled and view distance set to 2200 with terrain details @ normal and everything runs smoothish.

I should have my Radeon 9800 pro by tommorow so i'll let you all know what the difference is

I'm assuming the 128mb ram over my current 64mb will help out a fair bit in this particular game

[bn880 5]

More video ram does not help performance so much.... sorry to dissapoint you, but it's speed might.

EDIT: IT just means you may be able to run at higher resolutions/BPP and use up less conventional ram for textures.

[Lucretius 0]

figures

but at least I can run AA and AF without much of a performance hit with all that bandwidth

At least that an extra 64mb of ram... meaning I have a little extra virtual memory... so the game won't crash as much

(I only have about 500mb virtual, and I can't be bothered to increase it)

[thirtyg 0]

I should have my Radeon 9800 pro by tommorow so i'll let you all know what the difference is

Basically had the same system, except with a geforce 3.

When i upgraded i didnt notice much of an improvement up front in terms of performance since the game is so RAM and CPU intensive and was quite disappointed

Then after tinkering a little i noticed the 9800 pro will allow you to run everything in the best quality and highest res. You should be able to jack up your view distance about 50% as well. So in the end i was happy.

Plus now i can take good quality OFP combat photos which is the important thing

[Lucretius 0]

thanks for the info man

/me clicks up the rez and AA+AF

[toadlife 3]

Performance in OFP is all about memory bandwidth/AKA "bus speed". The faster data can travel between your processor/CPU/Video Card,the faster your OFP will run.

If you hop on over the the OFPMark thread, you will see that systems with GeForce4s and 200Mhz (DDR400 memory) system buses will beat out systems with Radeon 9800pros with 166mhz (DDR333 memory) buses.

[bn880 5]

Depends, it's all about CPU speed actually, especially if you already have high amounts of memory on your vid card.

[toadlife 3]

I base my assumption that bus speed is the most important thing by the fact that people with AthlonXP 2500+/200mhz FSB completely trouce my machines which has an AthlonXP2800/166mhz FSB. An Xp2500 machine with the newer generation chipset scored a 1600 while my 2800 system with an older chipset scored only 1100 - even though my cpu was running 100mhz faster than his.

Of course, my assumption relies on the particular person I'm talking about following the benchmark instructions correctly. I asked him if he was and he said he was, so hopefully he was being honest.

[thirtyg 0]

Performance in OFP is all about memory bandwidth/AKA "bus speed". The faster data can travel between your processor/CPU/Video Card,the faster your OFP will run.

ceteris paribus the increase in video card memory bandwith will result in a performance increase, especially from his old card to the new one, whether this is measurable by a program i don't know, from experience it is a fact, albeit only really noticable when you tweak the OFP seetings correctly

Plus the card is better able to handle AA and AF and shit like that which helps the look.

From my own testing with your OFPMark program it seems that memory bandwith plays an important part in OFP. If you can't get info into the CPU fast enough not much point having a fast CPU. I had similar results with FSB running at 166 compared to 200

[lee_h._oswald 0]

Good PC is one thing.

A good config (flashpoint and Userinfo) is another, very important thing!

If all the time, trees, houses, whatever change their LODs in your viewdistance, cause of a crappy config, you will get "lag" even on a high end computer.

"It´s better to have constantly 'low' fps, than sometimes high and lag caused of bad LOD settings!"

My 2 cents (Euro)

MfG Lee

[bn880 5]

I base my assumption that bus speed is the most important thing by the fact that people with AthlonXP 2500+/200mhz FSB completely trouce my machines which has an AthlonXP2800/166mhz FSB. An Xp2500 machine with the newer generation chipset scored a 1600 while my 2800 system with an older chipset scored only 1100 - even though my cpu was running 100mhz faster than his.

Of course, my assumption relies on the particular person I'm talking about following the benchmark instructions correctly. I asked him if he was and he said he was, so hopefully he was being honest.

Depends on what you bench by, I would bench according to some major battle going on with many AI. If your primary tests are done at high framerates it's hard to tell. And yes one flich of a slide bar or graphic settings and your bench results could be changed dramatically.

The only real test you can do is to modify a control machine and compare benefits. Other than understanding the way OFP works and how the devices themselvs operate/communicate.

[Injecteer 0]

A 9600 TX? I thought you had spelled it wrong, I have never heard of a TX.  Maybe you could educate a noob?

OK, the Rad9600TX is a special edition, "built" by Medion company to use in their bundled PCs. Basically it's not sold alone. Only in eBay, where I bought mine.

on performance it maps to Rad9500Pro or even better. On my PC I scored ~3000 3D2003 marks.

[Acecombat 0]

Good PC is one thing.

A good config (flashpoint and Userinfo) is another, very important thing!

If all the time, trees, houses, whatever change their LODs in your viewdistance, cause of a crappy config, you will get "lag" even on a high end computer.

"It´s better to have constantly 'low' fps, than sometimes high and lag caused of bad LOD settings!"

My 2 cents (Euro)

MfG Lee

Ok then show me your LOD settings for OFP Lee

[lee_h._oswald 0]

Ok then show me your LOD settings for OFP Lee  

Lets do it this way:

Let us analyse the ofp configs!

I have changed every LOD entry to 0.000005 so I will never see a "popup" tree again.

Popup tree = A tree is changing his model if you come close to it.

flashpoint.cfg:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">

LOD=0.000005;

Limit_LOD=0.000005;

Shadows_LOD=0.000005;

Textures_Drop_Down=0;

Texture_Heap="0";

File_Heap="0";

---

Userinfo.cfg:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">

frameRate=10.000000;

visualQuality=0.000005;

The framerate=X entry means this:

When the OFP engine comes to the point it can "only" render <10FPS, it changes the models to a lower detailed one.

If this happen, you see trees(e.g.) changing their model in your viewdistance.

This looks bad and make your ofp laggy, cause all the time models are changing.

I don´t now if 0.000005 is the "best" number to choose or what the OFP engine can do.

So with this config entries I can see "high detailed" trees, vehicles, ... in my whole viewdistance and no model made a ugly popup "in front of me".

0.000005 is only a test, normal I have all at 0.005000.

With 0.005000 you can get smoother gameplay even on slower PC´s. <- This is reported to me from many players, I made a config for.

---

Two entries in the flashpoint.cfg I don´t understand for 100%.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">

Frame_Rate_Pref=500;

Quality_Pref=500;

What exact are those for?

MfG Lee

[Lucretius 0]

thanks lee... those settings really helped make the game look a lot better.

I recommend them to everyone

[Acecombat 0]

Hmm my LOD settings from the config are as:

Quote[/b] ]Shadows_LOD="0.047362";

LOD="7.500000";

Limit_LOD="0.005289";

Do i change all to 0.00005?

And why have the texture heap and all to 0?

Wont that decrease performance ? As youre lowering your VRAM to the texture or whatever?

Heres my userconfig

Quote[/b] ]frameRate=10.126825;

visualQuality=0.005000;

So which number is better 0.005000 or 0.000005 ?

You didnt tell which exactly is good?

I've left mine at the default but yuor right the models keep changing for ugly shapes sometimes when i'm on high rs settings

Thanks for sharing this info with us though

[lee_h._oswald 0]

7.500000 = bad

0.005000 = good

0.000005 = better? <- Don´t know exactly.

---

I remember having higher file/texture heap settings, I get those little "lag" every second, so I set this to "0".

Also I write protected both, flashpoint and userinfo.cfg

Otherwise, OFP sometimes brings all settings to "normal".

MfG Lee