PDA

View Full Version : FPS increase for DX IW



Ksevrinus
9th Dec 2003, 06:03
Like everyone else, I've spent hours tweaking my DXIW.
I just ran across something that added a few FPS (2-3) without much change. I've not seen it said anywhere so I'll say it.

With the DXIW tweaker Here for Retail Tweaker (http://www.deusexzone.info/downloads.php?file_id=454) under Default.ini set MaxAnisotropy to "0" and switch use Trilinear to "True". Remember that you must also set Anisotropy to Application Preference under your video card settings also (or your video card will force Aniso on, IE under display props, advanced, 3d from desktop). This will cause floors and walls to not be as sharp 15 feet and beyond, but only slightly, you shouldn't notice without compairing screen shots. And most of the maps in this game are more close quaters anyway.

Also in game options that helped a bit was to turn off Vsync and Bloom, combined that netted me another 2-3fps.

Hope this helps some. With a game this complex, every few FPS help.


(3200 amd, 9700 pro o/c core 380 mem 680, 1gb pc444 o/c)

deluxxe
9th Dec 2003, 07:55
i'll take a 2-3 frame hit in order to have vsync on any day of the week.
first person shooters without vsync = blech!

KR_Dragon
9th Dec 2003, 08:48
Originally posted by deluxxe
i'll take a 2-3 frame hit in order to have vsync on any day of the week.
first person shooters without vsync = blech!

Obviously the phrase refresh rate rings no bell to you.
You must be running windows 2000/XP at a refrash rate of 60Hz which can cause massive screen tearing.

I have vsync off at all times, get up to 240FPS on some games, and still have no screen tearing... My Refresh Rates go from 70-110Hz and I strongly suggest you download ReForce from http://www.guru3d.com

NOTE: Before you run the program, make sure you have the highest Refresh Rate set for your monitor and make sure you have your monitor drivers installed ("Plug and Play Monitor"/"Default Monitor" drivers dont count!). If you dont have drivers installed, and your monitor is somewhat old (3+ years), then you could be in for a very serious problem, like premanently destroying it.

KR_Dragon
9th Dec 2003, 09:01
Also, turning off vsync will do nothing for you unless:

1. Your Framerate is equal to or (could be) higher than the monitors refresh rate. Probably 60Hz in your case... Which means you would have to be getting 60 Frames Per Second in order to see any change.... That is if the card is capable at rendering the current scene at a framerate over 60.

2. You have a really old ATi video card. Like old enough to be before Hardware T&L and such.

Vsync will not improve performance in any way.

Even if Anisotropic/Bilinear/Trilinear texture filtering were part of the problem in the game itself, a 2-3 FPS increase is insignificant... Especially considering the fact that the game looks much worse without it. It is Eidos's lack of effort to use system resources efficiently, or lack of IQ... One of those.

McErono
9th Dec 2003, 15:18
Originally posted by KR_Dragon

Vsync will not improve performance in any way.



this is just wrong:

use ur fraps and test some games. u will see that u gain about 5fps with vsynch turned off... of course thats not much but for dx2 it can be the difference between unplayable and almost playable ;)

Ksevrinus
9th Dec 2003, 15:18
Yes I agree that VSYNC shouldn't change your FPS when your framerate is below your monitors refresh rate (85 for me at 1024). But it does in this game none the less (for me). On a static shot (not moving around) and running down the first hall in the game (your APT) with fraps running, I'll jump from 28 fps with it on to 31 fps with it off.

As far as ansio versus triliniar, yes it looks better with aniso, and they should code it better. But the difference between Aniso 16x and triliner in the game you won't really notice. I mean it looks nearly as good, because the game is very dark. Now if you are playing with the gama way up, then yes you'll see a little difference. But I get 24fps with 16x ansio and 31fps with triliner.

I'll take the long distance quality hit to have a 30% boost in FPS! (atleast on a game like this where 30fps at 1024 is something to be happy about, doh.)

I've not seen anyone making the compairason, except PC Gamer indirectly, but isn't this the first game in the next generaltion of games. I mean the Doom3, HL2, UnrealWarfare engine wars? Isn't this the first game to use ALL real time lighting? Aren't these numbers(fps) just about the same as the HL2 numbers (at ATI shader days). HL2 was getting 20-40fps with a 3ghz, 9800.

take care

McErono
9th Dec 2003, 15:31
A so called alpha version (u know what im talking about) was running at 50fps here in 1280x960 all at max (AA4 AF8) so...

TheDragonReborn_kr_
9th Dec 2003, 16:07
Maybe the game has some sort of crappy frame limiter or something.... Because thats just wierd. Not like were playing on TV's lol.

deluxxe
10th Dec 2003, 07:34
Originally posted by KR_Dragon
Obviously the phrase refresh rate rings no bell to you.
You must be running windows 2000/XP at a refrash rate of 60Hz which can cause massive screen tearing.

I have vsync off at all times, get up to 240FPS on some games, and still have no screen tearing... My Refresh Rates go from 70-110Hz and I strongly suggest you download ReForce from http://www.guru3d.com

I never, ever play games without vsync.
i run win2k, with an 85hz refresh rate.
I don't know where you learned about vsync, but in my world (reality), even at 240 fps without vsync, i get tearing. vsync "synchronizes" each frame with a screen refresh. Even at 240, not every frame is going to sync, but obviously won't be as noticable as in a game like DX:IW. But when frames don't sync with a moniter flick, you get a split in the screen. It's actually quite a simple concept. Even at 240fps, not every single frame is going to sync unless you tell it to.
if i can run a game at 240fps, i'll still put vsync on because i absolutely cannot stand it when my frames aren't sync'd. And what's the point of a video card pushing 240fps if your monitor is only showing you 85 (or whatever your refresh rate is set to) screen refreshes? they may as well be sync'd right? because you only see what your monitor shows you, not what your system is reporting. That number in the upper left corner might be saying 240, but that text is displaying 240 unsync'd frames at 85 screen refreshes.

go ahead and leave it off, i really don't care. it makes no difference to me.


Originally posted by KR_Dragon
Also, turning off vsync will do nothing for you unless:

1. Your Framerate is equal to or (could be) higher than the monitors refresh rate. Probably 60Hz in your case... Which means you would have to be getting 60 Frames Per Second in order to see any change.... That is if the card is capable at rendering the current scene at a framerate over 60.

you couldn't be more wrong.
If there isn't enough frames to match exactly the amount of flicks on your monitor, it'll simply wait for one to display the frame. That's why you drop a few frames if your framerate is less than the refresh rate of your monitor.
But in the case of DX:IW, you're not going to get more than 85 fps anyways... so... it's either screen tearing, or 2-4 less fps. It's your choice. pretty obvious to me which one i'd go for.


Originally posted by KR_Dragon
[B]2. You have a really old ATi video card. Like old enough to be before Hardware T&L and such.

i'd really like you to explain to me how having a card that doesn't support Hardware T&L has anything to do with vsnyc. I'd be intersted to hear it. Whatever your explanation is, it's probably quite comical.

have fun

Zoma
11th Dec 2003, 03:07
Turning vsync on when your framerate is below your monitor refresh still causes a negative effect. Here's my explanation:

Say you are averaging 50 fps on a monitor was 100hz refresh rate with vsync on. Say the framerate drops by 1 fps. With vsync off, you get 49 fps. With vsync on, the framerate drops to 33.3 fps. It is always a multiple of the refresh rate. Picture what is going on. You render a frame in video memory, and it waits for the screen to finish drawing. Now you draw a second frame, but it just misses the opportunity to draw to the screen again. Now it has to wait almost a full cycle (1/100th of a second) before it can draw that frame. Example:

1. Screen starts drawn.
2. Begin to draw frame, it takes 2.1/100th of a second. Now you have to wait until 3/100th of a second.
3. Draw the second frame, it takes 2.1/100th of a second. Now you have to wait until a total of 6/100th of a second has passed before you can draw another frame.
4. Draw the third frame. It takes 2.1/100th of a second. Now you have to wait untial a total of 9/100th of a second has passed.
5. Draw the fourth frame. Now you are at 12/100th of a second.

You just drew 4 frames in 12/100 seconds, instead of in 8.4/100 seconds. Your framerate dropped from 47.6 fps to 33.3 just by turning on vsync!

If you can't understand this and don't believe me, this can be verified in most any college level graphics programming/engineering textbook (see the OpenGL red book, for instance) or by playing a game with vsync on (I've done it in counter-strike).

deluxxe
11th Dec 2003, 04:32
that's a pretty good mathematical description.
but my reasoning is basically just because "it looks better with vsync on". It's that simple.
sure, your framerate takes a hit. But with todays gaming rigs, people can have that trade off, and still be able to get a nice, smooth framerate.
I never said it improves performance. Visually, it's just nicer.
the only time i ever turn vsync off is when i'm running benchmarks.

thegrommit
11th Dec 2003, 04:43
Originally posted by KR_Dragon
I have vsync off at all times, get up to 240FPS on some games, and still have no screen tearing...

I assume you have UT. Get on Deck-16, go to the flak cannon corridor with the flickering light. With vsync OFF, you'll get tearing. With vsync ON you won't. Of course, you may not be as sensitive to it, but it is there for many people.

As for the trilinear suggestion - setting it ON will slow things down depending on your video card and drivers.

thegrommit
11th Dec 2003, 04:46
Originally posted by Zoma

Your framerate dropped from 47.6 fps to 33.3 just by turning on vsync!



Which is almost irrelevant in a slower paced game like DX. I'd argue that a reasonably consistent minimum framerate is more important to smooth gameplay.

Zoma
11th Dec 2003, 04:56
As a sidenote, triple buffering helps to fix the problems caused by vsync. DX:IW enables it by default (it uses 1 - 8 MB more video RAM based on resolution, so turn it off if you don't use it).

Here's the deal:
Let's say we have a computer with a 100hz refresh rate (once every 10 ms). Let's say we live in an ideal world where every frame takes 12 ms to render. You need to wait to finish drawing the last frame before you can draw the next. Here's what happens with double buffering:

Without vsync:
Time = 0
Render first frame. Done at 12 ms, drawn at 12 ms.
Render second frame. Done at 24 ms, drawn at 24 ms.
Render third frame. Done at 36 ms, drawn at 36 ms.

We are getting one frame every 12 ms, or 83.3 fps. This is our "real" framerate.

With vsnyc:
Time = 0
Render first frame. Done at 12 ms, drawn on screen at 20 ms.
Render second frame. Done at 32 ms. Drawn on screen at 40 ms.
Third frame. Done at 52, drawn at 60 ms.

As you can see, we are only getting one frame every 20 ms, or 50 fps.

Now, let's say we use triple buffering. Now we have three buffers. Without vsync, this works out to be the same (I think). With vsync, we get an improvement. When we finish drawing the next frame, we immediately start to draw the third frame in our extra buffer. This eliminates the 8ms of doing nothing in the above exmaple. The results:

Time = 0:
Render first frame. Done at 12 ms, drawn on screen at 20 ms.
Second frame began rendering at 12 ms. Done at 24 ms. Drawn on screen at 30 ms.
Third frame began rendering at 24 ms. Done at 36 ms. Drawn on screen at 40 ms.
Fourth frame began rendering at 36 ms. Finished at 48, drawn at 50 ms.
Fifth began at 48, finished and drawn at 60 ms.
We got 5 frame in 60ms, which is still about 83.3 fps! The timings will be a little off, but our framerate will be very close and we will get no tearing! The trade off is up to 8 MB of RAM (1600x1200x32bpp = almost 8 MB), but this isn't a big deal for cards with cards with 128 or 256 MB of memory.

Zoma
11th Dec 2003, 05:04
Which is almost irrelevant in a slower paced game like DX. I'd argue that a reasonably consistent minimum framerate is more important to smooth gameplay.

Fair enough. A somewhat playable "real" framerate of 24 fps will result in an actual framerate of 12.5 fps with vsync on :)


Seriously, though, I agree that if tearing bothers you, vsync is the way to go. It's main drawback is not the minor fps loss that sometimes occurs, but the sudden, dramatic drop that can occur due to a minor framerate loss. This is noticeable to many people, including myself.

For example, when I bought my current rig it was state-of-the-art (Athlon XP 1900+, GF3 64 MB, 512 MB RAM). I played Counter-strike on it, which had a weird graphical glitch. Putting on vsync fixed this glitch for some reason. That computer was obviously powerful enough to have the framerate locked at 100 fps (my refresh rate for 1024x768). But on some maps when a lot was going on (especially when the bomb went off), my framerate would suddenly drop to 50fps or even 33.3 or 25 fps for short periods of time. This "stutter" was very noticeable. I still had to keep vsync on because of the glitch, but I leave it off in most games.

mrmetal_53
11th Dec 2003, 06:49
so can someone (nicely, and a short answer) please tell me if trilinear should be left on or off? also, what other 3d things can i turn on for better graphics without too much of a fps hit? i get 30-60 fps, usually staying in the 40s.

radeon 9700 (not oc/ced), 768 mb ram, p4 2.0 ghz, sb audigy gamer

booker
11th Dec 2003, 06:57
for better graphics, on..for better performance off.

Stengah
11th Dec 2003, 09:03
Originally posted by Ksevrinus
Like everyone else, I've spent hours tweaking my DXIW.
I just ran across something that added a few FPS (2-3) without much change. I've not seen it said anywhere so I'll say it.

With the DXIW tweaker Here for Retail Tweaker (http://www.deusexzone.info/downloads.php?file_id=454) under Default.ini set MaxAnisotropy to "0" and switch use Trilinear to "True". Remember that you must also set Anisotropy to Application Preference under your video card settings also (or your video card will force Aniso on, IE under display props, advanced, 3d from desktop). This will cause floors and walls to not be as sharp 15 feet and beyond, but only slightly, you shouldn't notice without compairing screen shots. And most of the maps in this game are more close quaters anyway.

Also in game options that helped a bit was to turn off Vsync and Bloom, combined that netted me another 2-3fps.

Hope this helps some. With a game this complex, every few FPS help.


(3200 amd, 9700 pro o/c core 380 mem 680, 1gb pc444 o/c)

same with me... i tried about all the possible tweaks, it did nothing. even bloom didn't really affect the whole performance.


btw, ive noticed something strange, when i turn the mouse really fast, there is some kind of motion blur, all gets blurred exept menus on the screen.

this kind of effects might slow the game a lot

Papers
11th Dec 2003, 21:57
Originally posted by Ksevrinus
Like everyone else, I've spent hours tweaking my DXIW.
I just ran across something that added a few FPS (2-3) without much change. I've not seen it said anywhere so I'll say it.

With the DXIW tweaker Here for Retail Tweaker (http://www.deusexzone.info/downloads.php?file_id=454) under Default.ini set MaxAnisotropy to "0" and switch use Trilinear to "True". Remember that you must also set Anisotropy to Application Preference under your video card settings also (or your video card will force Aniso on, IE under display props, advanced, 3d from desktop). This will cause floors and walls to not be as sharp 15 feet and beyond, but only slightly, you shouldn't notice without compairing screen shots. And most of the maps in this game are more close quaters anyway.

Also in game options that helped a bit was to turn off Vsync and Bloom, combined that netted me another 2-3fps.

Hope this helps some. With a game this complex, every few FPS help.


(3200 amd, 9700 pro o/c core 380 mem 680, 1gb pc444 o/c)

Wow, thanks! These changes have made a big difference for me.

Cheers. :D

sfumato
20th Dec 2003, 10:10
Originally posted by KR_Dragon
Obviously the phrase refresh rate rings no bell to you.
You must be running windows 2000/XP at a refrash rate of 60Hz which can cause massive screen tearing.

I have vsync off at all times, get up to 240FPS on some games, and still have no screen tearing... My Refresh Rates go from 70-110Hz and I strongly suggest you download ReForce from http://www.guru3d.com

NOTE: Before you run the program, make sure you have the highest Refresh Rate set for your monitor and make sure you have your monitor drivers installed ("Plug and Play Monitor"/"Default Monitor" drivers dont count!). If you dont have drivers installed, and your monitor is somewhat old (3+ years), then you could be in for a very serious problem, like premanently destroying it.

Wow, this is classic. You're telling folks they NEED drivers, thanks for the big tip.


I cant believe you people are putting the responsibility on the user.

Classic topsy turvy.

oh yeah, the answer.

25Hz = 25 frames per second
30Hz = 30 frames per second
50Hz = 50 frames per second
60Hz = 60 frames per second
100Hz = 100 frames per second
120Hz = 120 frames per second
and so on...

For a slightly more technical version, Hz = the number of times the monitor/TV refreshes (updates) per second, and frames-per-second = the number of frames (screens) displayed per second.

50Hz refreshes the screen less often than 60Hz, so it's possible to use a higher resolution per frame with 50Hz, without requiring a higher display bandwidth.

K^2
20th Dec 2003, 10:25
Not at all necessary. The FPS is how often the Display Buffer is updated, which is not necessaraly the same as the Screen refresh rate which is often measured in Hz. I can have programs running at 200 FPS, while my screen does not physicaly (as in no way in hell) support more than 60 Hz on 1024x768.

thegrommit
20th Dec 2003, 15:56
Originally posted by sfumato


oh yeah, the answer.

25Hz = 25 frames per second
30Hz = 30 frames per second
50Hz = 50 frames per second
60Hz = 60 frames per second
100Hz = 100 frames per second
120Hz = 120 frames per second
and so on...

For a slightly more technical version, Hz = the number of times the monitor/TV refreshes (updates) per second, and frames-per-second = the number of frames (screens) displayed per second.

50Hz refreshes the screen less often than 60Hz, so it's possible to use a higher resolution per frame with 50Hz, without requiring a higher display bandwidth.

As K^2 noted, this is only true if vsync is switched on and the game is capable of running those framerates.