PDA

View Full Version : ok i am REALLY getting tired of this low FPS crap


Hemi-Cuda
05-01-2002, 04:55 AM
here are my system specs:

ASUS A7V-E
AMD Athlon 1ghz
ATI Radeon 64mb DDR
256mb SDRAM
Windows XP Pro

now my system is no slouch, and i can run Quake 3 and Return to Castle Wolfenstein awesome with details maxed, but when it comes to JK2, it bogs down to no end. i run the game with low geometric details, and medium texture details, but if there's more than 5 people on the screen at once or someone uses lightning or drain, my FPS can go to single digits

what bothers me is that JK2 isn't all that graphically advanced. hell Wolfenstein looks better, and i can run that with all settings maxed and still pull 100 fps

and dont say "just get more ram" cause ram has little to do with FPS compared to the processor and vid card, and 256 is deffinetly enough for JK2

Pedantic
05-01-2002, 05:02 AM
The same sort of thing happened to me in the swamp areas. However, after playing part of it and coming back, everything was fine again with high settings. I dunno what was up with it; I just attributed it to my computer getting too hot.

NerfYoda
05-01-2002, 05:04 AM
Get more RAM!!!

Seriously though. :) Does this happen on any and all MP maps? in SP? I assume you have the latest drivers for your vid, sound card, OS patches, etc...

NerfYoda
05-01-2002, 05:05 AM
Originally posted by Pedantic
The same sort of thing happened to me in the swamp areas. However, after playing part of it and coming back, everything was fine again with high settings. I dunno what was up with it; I just attributed it to my computer getting too hot.

The swamp map has a LOT of stuff going on at once & can really degrade your performance. But AFAIK thats only for the 1st swamp map.

power_ed
05-01-2002, 05:06 AM
well.. i use

800mhz Pentium III

348mb SD PC133 Ram

Riva TNT2 pro 32mb

i have all details maxed up

with a 1024x screen resolution

and i get about 40-60 FPS

in rtCW though i get aprx 80 FPS

Try turning off all other applications.. ESP: virus programs as they tend to grab quite allot of your RAM..

also, you might consider using the "high performance" window setting etc it turns off shadows 'n stuff..

::/Ed

NewBJedi
05-01-2002, 05:23 AM
http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49099

Hemi-Cuda
05-02-2002, 05:26 AM
should have said that i'm by no means a comp newb when i posted. of course i went through all the basics (latest drivers, BIOS tweaks, tweaking game settings, etc), and i run my system with the most minimal amount of programs running i can

what pisses me off the most is that people with lower system specs than me are getting better performance out of this game. its obvious Raven did a poor job of performance management with JK2, as Wolfenstein looks better and also runs MUCH faster. ATI cards take the biggest hit, no matter what set of drivers you use (and trust me, i've tried em all)

i really hope this upcoming patch will fix some of these issues, cause this 30 fps and below bull**** is really starting to irritate me. hell even with low geo detail and texture detail, and 16-bit colors, in some places i still drop below 30 fps

and for those that asked, i only worry about FPS in multiplayer games. in single player it's not a concern (and yes, this is on every map except the duel arenas)

RiverWalker
05-02-2002, 07:05 AM
have you tried higher settings?

seriously... I know at least with some GF2's, it preforms BETTER with high settings, rather than lower ones...

and a certain degree of that ATI video cards suck.

"ATI cards take the biggest hit, no matter what set of drivers you use (and trust me, i've tried em all) " wouldnt' it be pretty obvious that this is a fault of the hardware, not the program?

NerfYoda
05-02-2002, 07:11 AM
Yeah it seems like most games made nowadays are "optimized" for the NVidia line of cards. Thats why you get for not following the crowd I guess. :) But still you cant beat TV output on an ATI card...

Zante
05-02-2002, 07:33 AM
I used to have the same prob but got some new drivers for my geforce 2 mx and now everything is running at around 40fps

The_Mormegil
05-02-2002, 08:28 AM
Mate i have the same sort of thing as u,

900 mhz athlon

256mb (cheap) SDRAM

Radeon 64mb ddr with latest omega drivers ( but ive tried all drivers that i know are available)

SB live 5.1

2 dodgy old hard drives 8 gb & 2 gb (don't know the speeds)

Win me (eurgh)

All other games rock on my comp and **** anyone that says buy an nvidia + i just saw Halo on my mates Xbox and that I'm sure is alot less powerful than our computers so why does halo really really really really really really look like the mutts nuts and this game jump and slow down and basically **** about.

Why oh why?

Is UT 2003 our only salvation? Well if it is I'd like to say **** all lame game devs that make a ****e game and basically sell us a pack of lies (reflections removed, u bastards I hate u).

And i know its not my comp so forum trolls don't even come here saying get this, get that. If u actually had the comps u say u do then u wouldn't even be in these forums.

End of rant ~~~~

k3po
05-02-2002, 02:42 PM
it's your video card ati sucks when it comes to OpenGL, that's why i got a new Nvidia.

i do need new ram only got 128. and cd-rom, 6x, my old creative 52x craped out a couple weeks ago.

Reverse
05-02-2002, 03:05 PM
I use a hercules prophit 3d 4000xt and JK2 works awesome for me

Swifty
05-02-2002, 03:40 PM
I have roughly the same system as you

Asus A7V
AMD XP 1700+
512 DDR
ATI 8500 64meg
Windows XP

And I get typically 100-150 fps, after I removed the cap. Settings are maxed at 1024x768 except for shadows, which I read was buggy.

I upgraded to ATI from a GF2 GTI, and I'll never buy an overpriced Nvidia card again. Sure, 4x AA is great, but so is food on the table.

For the record, I'm running the 6043 drivers for XP on my ATI. 3dmark scores are around 8500-9000 is memory serves. Fast writes are enabled, AGP is at 4x in the BIOS, and I'm running VIA 4.38.

nasa
05-02-2002, 04:20 PM
Don't get bogged down with this FPS crap. OK, it does help but it wont make you a better player. Concentrate on your game play.

Trust me don't worriy about your FPS. With a FPS of 120 what's your problem?(25 or above is, OK)

With Q3 the only advantage you have with a high FPS is the "Rocket jump"

You could have the best system available with the best "Ping" and "FPS" It wont make you a better player.

Game play. Game play.Game play.Game play.Game play.

[D12]SirBanshee
05-02-2002, 07:13 PM
AMD Althon 2000+ (1.66ghz)
Windows XP
Geforce 3 Ti-200 64meg AGP
512 DDR Ram

Even with all that, I can only hit 45-50ish FPS with a game of 8 people on Normal settigns at 1024x768. Definetly a weak FPS when you consider the system.

NewBJedi
05-02-2002, 07:21 PM
"Performance Issues:

1. Why is the game running slowly for me? How do I make it run faster?

The most likely cause of this is the tendency of people to crank things up as high as they will go just because they can. Don't worry, I do this too... My recommendations for improving performance in Jedi Outcast:

a) Update all of your video, sound and directX drivers to make sure you have the latest, greatest versions. There's a list of all supported hardware as well as the tested drivers in

C:\Program Files\LucasArts\Star Wars JK II Jedi Outcast\Install\trouble.rtf

b) Turn off all background applications including e-mail, ICQ, and especially virus scanners. Some virus scanners really do check everything and this can kill load times and performance.

c) Don't play in resolutions higher than 800X600 on anything short of "uber hardware." JK2 is a hardware intensive game and if you crank everything as high as it will go, you can overheat our video card and/or your processor. That will cause lock-ups and performance problems. Taking the side of the case off for extra ventilation is another option to avoid this. Be careful with AMD machines, though. Sometimes taking the case off makes matters worse depending on how ventilation is set up.

For an in-depth performance tweaking guide, visit http://www.3dspotlight.com/tweaks/jedioutcast/index.shtml "

http://www2.ravensoft.com/jedioutcast/faq.htm

NewBJedi
05-02-2002, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by Swifty
[B]I have roughly the same system as you

And I get typically 100-150 fps, after I removed the cap. Settings are maxed at 1024x768 except for shadows, which I read was buggy.

I upgraded to ATI from a GF2 GTI, and I'll never buy an overpriced

Staring closely at the wall textures doesn't count. :p

ed1371
05-02-2002, 09:59 PM
Originally posted by NewBJedi
[B Taking the side of the case off for extra ventilation is another option to avoid this. Be careful with AMD machines, though. Sometimes taking the case off makes matters worse depending on how ventilation is set up.
[/B]

Actually, you should NOT take off the side of you case regardless of proc you are running. Cases are designed for air to flow a certain way. If you want to cool it down in there, look at other options (cleaning up ribbon cables, keeping your fans and heat sinks clean, adding additional fans correctly, getting the liquid cooling systems that are out now)

:atat:

Desslock
05-02-2002, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by ed1371


Actually, you should NOT take off the side of you case regardless of proc you are running. Cases are designed for air to flow a certain way. If you want to cool it down in there, look at other options (cleaning up ribbon cables, keeping your fans and heat sinks clean, adding additional fans correctly, getting the liquid cooling systems that are out now)

:atat:

It depends on the ambient room temperature. If your like me, and coldnatured, you keep your room at a comfy 50-65. It does help my temp a little to take the case off in a room that cold.. but most people wouldn't like playing that cold, as most people are not cold-natured. And yes, the money needed to run the AC at that level is more than someone else's bill.

Most all of the complains I've read.. in this thread at least.. are boxes running an AMD chip.. think this may be a problem? JKII runs fine for me until someone with absorb gets drained... I actually crashed my system when 3 Lights put up absorb and were drained by 2 darks.. ack.

All other games rock on my comp and **** anyone that says buy an nvidia + i just saw Halo on my mates Xbox and that I'm sure is alot less powerful than our computers so why does halo really really really really really really look like the mutts nuts and this game jump and slow down and basically **** about.

Heh.. lol.. Ok, the Xbox was designed to run games. PCs, well most of them, are designed to run a wide variety of programs. The Xbox has a lot more power than a PC because it isn't running Windows 2K.. Second, in the PC world, the PC is the central hub of all the games, apps, and stuff you do on your PC. Everything else is a user, so to speak.. that means, there has to be a lot of compatibility, and to have that, you need less available system resources. Instead, games are built around the Xbox's specifics. All Xboxs are the same... except for manufacturing flaws... therefore, the compatibility lies at the game developers to make their game tailored for a specific setup, and a lot less resources are used.

Wardy
05-02-2002, 10:22 PM
I play the game with all detail settings maxed out - resolution at 1600x1200 with no problems. Framerate is 70-90 fps.

BUT. That's my new laptop, a PIV 1.7 GHz w/ GeForce4 440 GO. I play JKII mostly on my desktop; Athlon 1 GHz, GeForce2 Pro, 256Mb DDR RAM at 1024x768 and still get roughly the same framerate.

I know from experience that ATI card have a poor implementation of any games using the Quake engine. Hell, I had some ATI branded card with my first system back in '96/97 and I couldn't get Quake to even run.

ed1371
05-02-2002, 10:39 PM
50 deg?? lol that is cold!
Every computer/situation is different but...
Even at burn-in and test stations that are kept cold, the computers are still kept buttoned up because the case is designed to continually bring fresh air in an push air out (kinda like a pump). When you pop it open, it disrupts the airflow from flowing over the components correctly. This is a very basic topic in computer maintenance and use. (I remember it was even on the lowly A+ exam) anyhoo....digressing a bit

AMD's new(er) chips do run warmer, but as long as you have an AMD approved case and heat sink the proc should run cool. I have seen others though that have OC'ed thiers and ran way too hot, solution was a better heatsink+fan.



:atat:

Hemi-Cuda
05-02-2002, 10:54 PM
where is everyone getting this notion that ATI is bad? the ATI Radeon 8500 is proven to outperform any geforce 3, and will also outperform the geforce 4 mx. the only advantage nvidia users had over ATI were drivers, but now that is a moot point, since ATI has stepped up their driver performance

like i said before, i run Wolfenstein at max details and i pull off 50-100 fps depending on the environment (the game also looks much better than JK2 does). i also run every other game i own at max settings and dont notice a problem. it is only JK2 that i see a very noticable slowdown, no matter what kind of game settings i use. so, in fact, it is JK2's fault, or rather Raven's for poor coding

people should learn that there ARE alternatives to nvidia. personally i wont pay $100 more for an equally powerful video card

waazzuupp
05-02-2002, 10:55 PM
ihave a radeon 8500 OEM and a 1.6 ghz processer and my game runs great. i runs 90 fps most of the time and it doesn't go below 30

Jedi-Bert
05-03-2002, 12:10 PM
Back on topic with cuda's problem, what settings do you have under more video?

Sartis
05-03-2002, 12:54 PM
Well my cpu and graphics card are AMD Athlon 1800XP, 512MB DDR RAM, and Geforce3 Ti 200.

I have all graphic setting set up to absolute highest, and I have 2 things I'm wondering.

1. Read in the FAQ that cpu and card could overheat if put higher than 800x600 resolution unless you have 'uber' hardware does mine constitute as uber enough.

2. I seem to be losing FPS on servers on map change, I have to rejoin the server sometimes to get my FPS back up. I lose about 40fps each time this happens. Once went right down to 25fps. Any suggestions. This happened on 1024x768 reso, full setting. Also happened with 800x600. I use the 23.11 drivers from Nvidia.

Please help, want to know if I 'over heated' my card playing in 1024x768 thats why I'm having these problems or what...I swear before I was getting full FPS even after map changes.. I know FPS isn't a huge big deal, just very wierd on the FPS loss. I can easily get 90 FPS with a map full of people swinging and stuff at full, but as soon as a map change bam FPS goes down to 25 or a little higher, then I restart JK2 and it's back up to 90 most of the time.

NewBJedi
05-03-2002, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by ed1371


Actually, you should NOT take off the side of you case regardless of proc you are running. Cases are designed for air to flow a certain way. If you want to cool it down in there, look at other options (cleaning up ribbon cables, keeping your fans and heat sinks clean, adding additional fans correctly, getting the liquid cooling systems that are out now)

:atat:

Most cases aren't designed 'either way'. It's up to the person building the PC to decide on the air-flow route with fans and where the cables are placed.

toolboi
05-03-2002, 06:16 PM
ATI Radeon 64mb DDR
Ahem, theres your problem. That card is... 5 years old?
And before we start talking about wolfenstein and Quake 3... Q3 is how old, and wolfenstien... well... the graphics are not up to par with JK2.

ATI Radeon 8500 is proven to outperform any geforce 3
Not to sound like a fan boy or anything but...

ahem (http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q4/011211/aiw8500dv-09.html)

ahem (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1558&p=4)

and let us not forget that ATI has specific "optimizations" that make Q3 run faster (not to mention 3dmark :rolleyes: )

Hemi-Cuda
05-04-2002, 09:03 AM
the Radeon 64mb DDR is NOT 5 years old. it came out quite a bit after Q3, and Q3 came out in '99. it runs every other game i own great (and yes, wolfenstein DOES have better graphics. did you not SEE the cutscenes in JK2? they look horrible). it only stutters on JK2 because of a problem the game has with Radeon based cards (many people with Radeons can atest to this)

as for my graphics settings in game, i run at 800x600, low geo detail, medium texture detail, detailed shaders off, shadows off, dynamic lights and vsync off. the only little extra thing i have on is wall marks (its pretty much needed to get a realistic saber =P)

actually though i can run the game at high geo detail and high texture detail and not notice a bit of difference in FPS. this tells me there is something going wrong, as it should make a BIG difference

oh and as well i run the SOF2 mptest with full blown detail and still achieve respectable FPS. this game is newer (not actually even released yet) has very obviously better graphics, but none of the stutter problems JK2 has (made by the same company too)

NewBJedi
05-04-2002, 09:12 AM
SOF 2 test uses a tiny little map with almost nothing going on.

Of course the performance is fast.

Let's see you claim high performance with the full version SOF 2 with lots of grass and outdoors.

toolboi
05-04-2002, 09:23 AM
this tells me there is something going wrong, as it should make a BIG difference

Naw, not necissarily (I can never spell that). I find that in many games these days, esecialy with high end hardware, that changing settings does jack squat for FPS. eg. Max Payne: That game ran EXACTLY the same on ALL modes of detail.

As for the Radeon, are you sure its that new? It registers as ancient in my mind... oh well, so do most things ;)

BoyInAWhelchair
05-04-2002, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by power_ed
well.. i use

800mhz Pentium III

348mb SD PC133 Ram

Riva TNT2 pro 32mb

i have all details maxed up

with a 1024x screen resolution

and i get about 40-60 FPS

in rtCW though i get aprx 80 FPS

Try turning off all other applications.. ESP: virus programs as they tend to grab quite allot of your RAM..

also, you might consider using the "high performance" window setting etc it turns off shadows 'n stuff..

::/Ed

I really find it hard to believe you get 80 fps in RTCW with this setup. Actually I donty believe it at all.

A Boy In A Wheelchair

Vorlagen
05-04-2002, 05:52 PM
First of all, The_Mormegil, you're a moron. This is the guy who is bitching because the XBOX runs games smoothly. Wake up, the XBOX is a highly optimized system solely for the purposes of gaming, running games in 640x480 resolution. HOW COULD YOU NOT GET SMOOTH FRAMES?

Secondly, I think it was Hemi- Cuda who just bitched about how horrible the cutscenes look in JKII, and how this is proof that Wolf has better graphics than Outcast.

MORON.

The cut scenes are made to look like that, it was an artistic decision, albeit a mistake in the world of aesthetically pleasing things. How can you even believe for a second those cutscenes are high quality and rendered, when it looks worse than the normal game?

Stop complaining about your frames. JKII has WAY more going on than Wolf, and is going to use up more resources. You've got an ATI card, and it's not even a 8500 or a top of the line one. Your card is roughly equivilent to a GF2 Ultra, or maybe a GF3 Ti200. People with these cards on 1 gig machines (like you have, not top of the line, already machines out there with TWICE as much hertz) shouldn't expect to get uppity fps in new age games. Have fun trying to run WarIII, or UT2003 when they come out.

But for now, stop complaining.

Vorlagen
05-04-2002, 05:59 PM
I stand proven. The ATI Radeon 64MB DDR came out midway through 2000. 2 years ago. How does UT run? Great? GOOD!

http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/review/79062.html

In that review the ATI Radeon 64MB DDR, the card YOU have, is compared to a GeForce2 GTS and a GeForce 1 DDR. It ties with the GF2 GTS and does little to destroy the GF1.

When using a card with such dated ability, it's pathetic to come here and complain, especially when using a cpu years old as well.