Really low FPS

Post » Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:49 am

Heh..20 fps is low to people? I bench my fps around 20-25 outdoors with everything graphical feature maxed out on a 1024mb graphics card. I wonder...where do people getting getting these so called "super alien computers" at? They surely don't fall from the sky.

I build mine, and I am building the machine I hope to last for the next five years in a couple weeks. This stuff is not cheap... :(
User avatar
Dale Johnson
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:24 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:17 pm

That card is the re-released 9800GTX...or a close relative...


Which is not that much better than the 8800GT, and I certainly can't run RAEVWD with any decent performance. And that's just with vanilla textures. My resolution is similar to the OP's, 1920 X 1200, so that card probably isn't powerful enough to handle all that he's throwing at it. Though RAEVWD doesn't really explain why he's getting such low rate indoors. I'm quite often maxing out at 60 FPS in those areas. Though again, I'm not running any high end texture mods.
User avatar
ZzZz
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 9:56 pm

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:50 pm

Heh..20 fps is low to people? I bench my fps around 20-25 outdoors with everything graphical feature maxed out on a 1024mb graphics card. I wonder...where do people getting getting these so called "super alien computers" at? They surely don't fall from the sky.


:o I freak out at anything less than 35. I guess that's what a background in online shooters does to you though!

I have a GTS 250 and can run RAEVWD's Ruins & Forts modules above 30 fps. I don't use a texture overhaul though, I think vanilla with 8x anisotropic filtering is good enough. :shrug:
User avatar
Rebecca Clare Smith
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:13 pm

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:21 am

Doesn't anyone read the readme files anymore? ever? Ya'll are acting like RAEVWD kills computers regardless of how it's installed and that's just not the case. If you install the entire thing blind and then wonder why your FPS took a dump, well..... but if you install it with the parts that aren't so demanding (forts, ruins, wayshrines, etc) then you'll hardly notice the difference. I don't really get how anyone has any cause to complain when this is explicitly laid out and solutions to FPS problems are mentioned.

That said, this ridiculous notion that Oblivion is unplayable below 60fps really needs to die and die quickly because it's a completely unrealistic goal with a modded game. This isn't a military shooter sim, you don't need split second reactions and faster-than-perceptible changes in images. The game runs perfectly smooth and fine as low as 15. The human eye is generally incapable of perceiving the difference above 24-30. It's an RPG, not a combat game. Slow down and enjoy it :)

Also, if anyone is seriously trying to play at 1920x1200 on a card that can't hack it with AA+AF enabled, I don't even know what to say about that. You should know better.
User avatar
ijohnnny
 
Posts: 3412
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 12:15 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 3:43 pm

:o I freak out at anything less than 35. I guess that's what a background in online shooters does to you though!

I have a GTS 250 and can run RAEVWD's Ruins & Forts modules above 30 fps. I don't use a texture overhaul though, I think vanilla with 8x anisotropic filtering is good enough. :shrug:

Of course, i'm running heavy stuff with Oblivion. high-res textures, 16x anisotropic, 8x AA, SSAO, etc etc.
User avatar
Chantel Hopkin
 
Posts: 3533
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:41 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:52 am


Also, if anyone is seriously trying to play at 1920x1200 on a card that can't hack it with AA+AF enabled, I don't even know what to say about that. You should know better.


Boo to Bethesda for unoptimized engines and no futureproofing! ;)
User avatar
Matt Gammond
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:38 pm

Post » Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:20 am

Boo to Bethesda for unoptimized engines and no futureproofing! ;)

Oh, sure...for a game released (not produced) in 2006... How many people were running quad-cores, even dual cores, then?
User avatar
Crystal Clear
 
Posts: 3552
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:42 am

Post » Fri Nov 05, 2010 3:21 am

2006 was long enough ago I don't even remember what I had, but I do remember at some point upgrading to an 8800GTX because whatever video card I had before that wasn't up to the task. We're playing on a game with 5+ year old technology. Be glad it still survives and is able to handle what we're all doing to it :)
User avatar
Maria Garcia
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 6:59 am

Post » Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:50 am

It really is amazing indeed what the community has done to squeeze better performance out of the game. Stuff like pyffi and OSR are amazing. Everyone should try them. It's just a shame nothing else can be done really.
User avatar
Lyndsey Bird
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 2:57 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 8:20 pm

Well PyFFI is supposed to get the ability to safely optimize collision meshes soon. When that comes along, count on it being the next big thing because trimming unused faces from those saves huge amounts of CPU processing on physics. Even if it's only a 10% reduction in faces, that's major.
User avatar
maya papps
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:44 pm

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:45 pm

Bloody well should be able to run RAEVWD!

...not with great FPS. I would not call running with 20FPS outside and that mod installed with FCOM and a 250GT "really low FPS." That card is the re-released 9800GTX...or a close relative...

I thought RAEVWD was CPU intensive. I upgraded my graphics card and installed and it made no difference. I'd love an i7, but then it's probably only using 1 of it's 4 cores for oblivion.
uGridToLoad reduced to 15 will also save alot of power. Again, all explained in the readme...

Well PyFFI is supposed to get the ability to safely optimize collision meshes soon. When that comes along, count on it being the next big thing because trimming unused faces from those saves huge amounts of CPU processing on physics. Even if it's only a 10% reduction in faces, that's major.

Looking forward to that one :hubbahubba:
User avatar
Ella Loapaga
 
Posts: 3376
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:45 pm

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 7:57 pm

The game runs perfectly smooth and fine as low as 15.


I disagree, I can definitely notice when my framerate gets that low. Anything below about 20 FPS in fact. My optimum would be about 25-30 or above.

Also, if anyone is seriously trying to play at 1920x1200 on a card that can't hack it with AA+AF enabled, I don't even know what to say about that. You should know better.


Well I have no choice in the matter, that's the only wide screen resolution my monitor will support. And there's no way I'm going to switch to a 4:3 aspect ratio to play the game. The game runs just fine for me at that resolution, an average of about 30 FPS outdoors, as long as I don't clog up my 8800GT with extra goodies like your RAEVWD or high res textures. While I don't have any AA on, at that resolution I don't really need it anyway. And my AF is cranked to 16X. I even have things like the grass and object fade etc turned up so there's nothing at all wrong with the card I'm using. But I still wouldn't consider tossing in any VWD objects other than what's already there. That would mean compromises in other areas and I'm not willing to do that.
User avatar
Anthony Santillan
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:42 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 6:51 pm

Well I have no choice in the matter, that's the only wide screen resolution my monitor will support. And there's no way I'm going to switch to a 4:3 aspect ratio to play the game. The game runs just fine for me at that resolution, an average of about 30 FPS outdoors, as long as I don't clog up my 8800GT with extra goodies like your RAEVWD or high res textures. While I don't have any AA on, at that resolution I don't really need it anyway. And my AF is cranked to 16X. I even have things like the grass and object fade etc turned up so there's nothing at all wrong with the card I'm using. But I still wouldn't consider tossing in any VWD objects other than what's already there. That would mean compromises in other areas and I'm not willing to do that.


My compromise (using an old dual core, LCD with 1280x1024 and Radeon HD 3850) was no Bloom neither HDR, Streamsight with settings 8,8 or 10,10, and RAEVWD - Core+Ayleid Ruins+Forts) - that settings of RAEVWD make realy BIGEST difference when comming from vanilla. I cannot go without RAEVWD+Unique Landscapes, it's just too immersive for me...
User avatar
Mel E
 
Posts: 3354
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 11:23 pm

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 10:03 pm

The game runs just fine for me at that resolution, an average of about 30 FPS outdoors, as long as I don't clog up my 8800GT with extra goodies like your RAEVWD or high res textures. While I don't have any AA on, at that resolution I don't really need it anyway. And my AF is cranked to 16X. I even have things like the grass and object fade etc turned up so there's nothing at all wrong with the card I'm using. But I still wouldn't consider tossing in any VWD objects other than what's already there. That would mean compromises in other areas and I'm not willing to do that.


I'm the same but in an inverted way. RAEVWD is a must for me so I compromise in other areas - mainly view distance - so I can have it running.
User avatar
Mandi Norton
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:43 pm

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 10:44 pm

Whereas I... I must eschew AA (not sure about AF, but that is nowhere near as important anyway, IMO) - reason being, I *must* have SSAO (along with a couple of other OBGE goodies). The visual difference is simply jaw-dropping.

But anyhow, I do also insist on the full RAEVWD experience. It makes a beautiful game... that much more so. :thumbsup:
User avatar
Lily Evans
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:10 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 10:28 pm

My compromise (using an old dual core, LCD with 1280x1024 and Radeon HD 3850) was no Bloom neither HDR, Streamsight with settings 8,8 or 10,10, and RAEVWD - Core+Ayleid Ruins+Forts) - that settings of RAEVWD make realy BIGEST difference when comming from vanilla. I cannot go without RAEVWD+Unique Landscapes, it's just too immersive for me...


I don't use Bloom or HDR either, but that's mainly because I don't like the look of either one. They're both too bright for my liking. And I don't like Streamsight at all, I don't care for that fog it creates so that's out. I also like being able to see a long ways away, so I don't want to reduce my uGrids at all. I like them just the way they are. Same goes with my extended grass and object distance. So I really have nothing left to compromise with in order to get any sort of decent performance out of RAEVWD.
User avatar
hannaH
 
Posts: 3513
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 4:50 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 2:28 pm

Actually you could still benefit, even though it would be sort of silly. Install just the core, because all that does is replace the vanilla VWD meshes with optimized versions that don't create visual anomalies.
User avatar
Danii Brown
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:13 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 5:00 pm

Actually you could still benefit, even though it would be sort of silly. Install just the core, because all that does is replace the vanilla VWD meshes with optimized versions that don't create visual anomalies.

Really? I guess I'll finally have to try this project of yours then...
User avatar
Daniel Brown
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 11:21 am

Post » Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:18 pm

Install just the core, because all that does is replace the vanilla VWD meshes with optimized versions that don't create visual anomalies.


I don't have that problem with just the core VWDs, it only starts happening when I add more of them to my game. Though I suppose I might be able to gain a FPS or two by using your versions. That hardly seems worth the effort though.
User avatar
Danielle Brown
 
Posts: 3380
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:03 am

Previous

Return to IV - Oblivion