No matter what I do, I can't get any fps improvement

[uniquemind]

I can't get any fps improvement when turning down/off any or indeed all the options listed in the options menu :cry: now don't tell me......that this requires a restart each time? :lol:

I am finding that the further out to sea I go the better the fps........but when it comes to the options nothing affects it at all........which beggars the question "why are they there at all?"........ok for some people it might work but for me none of it makes a blind bit of difference :-?

Now am I missing something here?

I've tried as I've said many times before 10 or more different driver sets and they did'nt help either! :lol: if I don't laugh I'll cry :cry:

Please someone tell me what the hell I am to do to get better fps? I get 190 on the menu screen........40+ in the Command Room and at present 23 or so on the bridge.

I know my PC is not a top high end mother of all PC's but come on its not that bad either......and please don't suggest an upgrade as:

1 I cannot afford it yet.....another year and a half to go

2 The current system is at the end of the line......ok I could go to an AMD Athlon 3200 (currently have a 3000+XP) but my motherboard can upgrade no further than it is now.........I am no expert and my PC was built to spec by a local chap and a guy who knows his stuff........I don't want to get into a debate about this as its a no no as far as upgrading or a new PC.

The main thing I want to do is get a better fps as do many of you no doubt........but if the options in game do nothing except appear on screen for you to change and yet do nothing to improve matters......then I am at a loss as to what to do.

For now I am out of ideas or things to say........I guess I will have to just "live with it", "like it or lump it"............ say what you will.


Footnote: I thought that this was going to be fixed (I'm sure I read several people saying this, and that is that when I load a game after having plotted my course, the guy says "All stop" I mean for crying out loud, this is starting to take the.......:down: only way to continue is to go into the nav map and then click the button for continue course or whatever..........I am getting so dis-illusioned :-?:cry:

[Cakewalk]

Your FPS ranges are about the same as mine (~25 outside, ~40 inside), and I've found that switching off all options on the graphics chart helps very little.

With the 1.2 patch, the only restart needed to change graphics is when you switch resolutions.

I would have thought my GeForce 7900 GS would perform better, but apparently not. Hm... makes me jealous of those 8800 owners...:hmm:

But I doubt the majority of people who play SH4 here have uber-PCs. Most have similar performance ranges to you and I, I would think.

[SteamWake]

Please someone tell me what the hell I am to do to get better fps? I get 190 on the menu screen........40+ in the Command Room and at present 23 or so on the bridge.

That doesent seem so bad.

[uniquemind]

Oh well thats a nice consolation for me to know that I am not alone, I just wish that things would slow down a bit......I mean technology......I know that comment won't go down well but it makes me mad that its rush rush rush ahead and we all have to keep spending money like it grows on trees!

I don't mean to whine, but I am just one of those people that can't take the fast pace of life in general and this makes things alot worse. yes I know I could have gone down the console lane, but I was done with that with the PS2.......I wanted to get into gaming that required brains......but I guess I made the wrong choice again :cry:......then again why the hell can't I have a PC......its my life afterall.......I can here the comments already "Shut up then" ok I will but first........

These days life caters for millionaires and people that are well off, but the ones that are'nt its a case of "If you can't keep up then sod you"

Sorry for the small rant, you would'nt want to know me as this is not a rant really at all....more a case of a quiet opinion......with a hint of annoyance :damn:

[uniquemind]

No that is not too bad, but try coming out of the harbour, I can barely move :cry:

[Cakewalk]

Oh well thats a nice consolation for me to know that I am not alone, I just wish that things would slow down a bit......I mean technology......I know that comment won't go down well but it makes me mad that its rush rush rush ahead and we all have to keep spending money like it grows on trees!

I don't mean to whine, but I am just one of those people that can't take the fast pace of life in general and this makes things alot worse. yes I know I could have gone down the console lane, but I was done with that with the PS2.......I wanted to get into gaming that required brains......but I guess I made the wrong choice again :cry:......then again why the hell can't I have a PC......its my life afterall.......I can here the comments already "Shut up then" ok I will but first........

These days life caters for millionaires and people that are well off, but the ones that are'nt its a case of "If you can't keep up then sod you"

Sorry for the small rant, you would'nt want to know me as this is not a rant really at all....more a case of a quiet opinion......with a hint of annoyance :damn:

Naw, I agree, it seems like unless you're willing to spend 1600+ dollars on a computer, your games won't run well unless you sacrifice a few graphics, and even then its not the same. Compared to 600 or so dollars for a console nowadays.

Of course, computers can do more than consoles, but its hard to keep up with PC gaming if you're on a tight budget.

No that is not too bad, but try coming out of the harbour, I can barely move :cry:

Same deal here, I usually just go to the map screen and chug out until the harbour "unloads" from memory, then I can go at a decent FPS rate. :)

[AVGWarhawk]

I told myself this is the last computer for gaming I'm going to mess with. I will keep it and upgrade to the fullest it can handle. I'm not starting with Vista until absolutely neccessary. Once I have to do that, the gaming on computer is over for me. It is that simple. I'm tired of paying large amount of dollars only to have the new item outdated in a week. There is no need for Vista. It has no value over XP that I can see. The US Federal Gov't is buying into Vista either...no economic gain in doing so. DirectX 10....seems a little contrived to me and the need to keep dollars in the pockets of the computer making world. Furthermore, most genre have been covered with previous games. Nothing really new happening.

Then again, if the game looks really good I could be persuaded to get a new computer for it:roll:;)

[uniquemind]

Yeah and my budget is virtually nothing.......I'm in the UK and the price i'd have to pay for a new PC and this is with all the whistles and bells........if bought now would be close to £1000 maybe more, and that is simply asking way too much for me anyway......half that would be too much for me :cry::lol:

Infact £100 would be pushing it and these days in Computer hardware you could'nt buy anything new for that I doubt, ok second hand maybe but who wants that? only for it to pack up in a couple of months and then back to square one :-?

The guy that built mine is a great guy and knows my situation well and understands that I can't go mental with spending.......and recommends I wait until end of next summer and then things will be about right for me, but only if I start saving like now......for me easier said than done! :)

My gaming appetite is huge and he's barred me in a friendly way from buying anymore games from his store.......does that stop me? no not when there are other stores all around.......so so hard but I'll have to learn to save and thats the boring part :lol:

[uniquemind]

I told myself this is the last computer for gaming I'm going to mess with. I will keep it and upgrade to the fullest it can handle. I'm not starting with Vista until absolutely neccessary. Once I have to do that, the gaming on computer is over for me. It is that simple. I'm tired of paying large amount of dollars only to have the new item outdated in a week. There is no need for Vista. It has no value over XP that I can see. The US Federal Gov't is buying into Vista either...no economic gain in doing so. DirectX 10....seems a little contrived to me and the need to keep dollars in the pockets of the computer making world. Furthermore, most genre have been covered with previous games. Nothing really new happening.

Then again, if the game looks really good I could be persuaded to get a new computer for it:roll:;)

Yes this Vista thing is worrying me for later.........as when eventually I upgrade I was told that I'll have to go with Vista......not sure I want that, like be forced into it? I mean won't XP work with DX10? I don't know much about this but it is a concern.......as at present alot of games I have I have been to the forums and there are countless posts about Vista not performing with their games etc and many other niggles with it........ok so alot of bugs will get ironed out but dear o dear not sure I like this

I remember buying my ATI X800 Pro getting the PC brought back to me that night and going online for the latest drivers and what was I greeted with? yes an advert for ATI's new 512MB card :o......coming out the very next day :roll:

[AVGWarhawk]

Vista is currently bug ridden. I heard a voice command completely erased the hard drive on one machine. We will have Vista forced down our necks. That part is easy....MS stops supporting XP. I did hear that XP will be supported to something like 2012. Like I stated, the Federal Dept of Transportation is not buying into Vista. They see no economic value in doing so. Just the way it is mate. 98 was supported for a long time. XP will be also.

[uniquemind]

So when XP is not supported anymore can it still be used and function ok......or is that then definately the end of the road for XP.......I find it the best to get along with, never got the hang of 98 infact I hated it but we all have things that we either get on with or we don't :-?

I know at least for now that the chap who built my PC won't force Vista on me, and he will only sell it to me when he feels its safe enough, thank god for him, not sure what I would do otherwise :)

[scalelokt]

Yeah computer gaming is not a cheap hobby. My video card alone cost as much as an XBox 360 and its already showing its age, and I sure dont have the money to upgrade it right now. Truth be told, PC gaming is a big pain in the butt, and I wish I were satisfied with just a console. The problem is sims like Silent Hunter are not, and probably never will be, on a console system. And if they are they are almost always dumbed down sims that have a much more arcade feel. I'll probably get a 360 sometime soon, I'm impressed with it and the games I have played are really fun. But I'll always be trying to upgrade my PC whenever I can, games like SH3 and SH4 make it all worth it.

In response to the original post in this thread. It doesnt sound to me like your FPS is that bad, probably about the same as mine. SH4 is a graphically beautiful game, as much as any game out there as far as I'm concerned. I dont think its surprising you arent getting huge FPS values, so long as it is smooth and playable it sounds fine to me. You said you get 20+ FPS when outside the sub, that seems perfectly playable to me. I guess if you have a top of the line Alienware that cost you 5 grand it would be disappointing, but I'm assuming you computer is probably similar to mine, so I dont think you are doing anything wrong.

[SgtWalt65]

Your FPS ranges are about the same as mine (~25 outside, ~40 inside), and I've found that switching off all options on the graphics chart helps very little.

With the 1.2 patch, the only restart needed to change graphics is when you switch resolutions.

I would have thought my GeForce 7900 GS would perform better, but apparently not. Hm... makes me jealous of those 8800 owners...:hmm:

But I doubt the majority of people who play SH4 here have uber-PCs. Most have similar performance ranges to you and I, I would think.

I am running a 7800GS card with an old Athalon 2800 and I am not having any issues with fps at all. Guess I am lucky....Oh and just about max video settings with 8x AA.

[akdavis]

With the 1.2 patch, the only restart needed to change graphics is when you switch resolutions.

Also "Synchronization" which is now a menu option. Maybe high quality textures, as well.

All the features in the "FX" column (i.e. post-process, glare, light shafts, etc.) cause a noticable change in FPS that can even be seen while selecting and unselecting them in menu if you have the framerate display on. Nothing else I change seems to have any effect, but with synchronization on, my FPS are capped at 28, so nothing is going to make them go higher.

[MikeJW]

I told myself this is the last computer for gaming I'm going to mess with. I will keep it and upgrade to the fullest it can handle.
Then again, if the game looks really good I could be persuaded to get a new computer for it:roll:;)


Same here. It just takes too much to keep up and the rewards for doing so are getting slimmer and slimmer. Just not as many wow! PC exclusives anymore. So, unless I get a lot richer my new PC will be my last gaming PC. It's fairly high end, except the vid card is a 7900 because I'm waiting to get an 8800 and I'm still not getting performance I think I should. Requirements are getting ridicolous.

[Fearless]

Please someone tell me what the hell I am to do to get better fps? I get 190 on the menu screen........40+ in the Command Room and at present 23 or so on the bridge.

That doesent seem so bad.

Beats my 12 in Command Station, 20+ on the map and 9 on the bridge.

Your FPS would be a blessing in disguise for me :D

[uniquemind]

Yeah computer gaming is not a cheap hobby. My video card alone cost as much as an XBox 360 and its already showing its age, and I sure dont have the money to upgrade it right now. Truth be told, PC gaming is a big pain in the butt, and I wish I were satisfied with just a console. The problem is sims like Silent Hunter are not, and probably never will be, on a console system. And if they are they are almost always dumbed down sims that have a much more arcade feel. I'll probably get a 360 sometime soon, I'm impressed with it and the games I have played are really fun. But I'll always be trying to upgrade my PC whenever I can, games like SH3 and SH4 make it all worth it.

In response to the original post in this thread. It doesnt sound to me like your FPS is that bad, probably about the same as mine. SH4 is a graphically beautiful game, as much as any game out there as far as I'm concerned. I dont think its surprising you arent getting huge FPS values, so long as it is smooth and playable it sounds fine to me. You said you get 20+ FPS when outside the sub, that seems perfectly playable to me. I guess if you have a top of the line Alienware that cost you 5 grand it would be disappointing, but I'm assuming you computer is probably similar to mine, so I dont think you are doing anything wrong.

Yes the Silent Hunter games would'nt be suited at all to consoles, the only game with a Submarine and other naval and air units I can think of on a console is "Battle for Midway" I have that game too, but it is far too short and too arcadey for me, this game is more my cup of tea anyday :D

Maybe its the same old story with me, expecting too much from a system thats ageing sadly..........I know you're quite right in what you and others have said and that my fps are pretty good, I guess I just got fed up with the graphical glitches I have and wanted everything to be fine and therefore blasted out my feelings.

I do however suffer pauses when say an aircraft is shot down in the artillery practice......as the planes hit the water a get a pause, also when a ship starts to blow again little pauses......and of course crawling out of the harbours is awful to watch, but from now on I'll go into the nav map and stay there until my fps rise a bit nothing severe I know but it does spoil the effect a bit.......but I won't complain so much........afterall others have it far worse and I feel for them........

[minsc_tdp]

For NVidia users, NVTray has some neat performance options that turn on and off various options that are pretty obscure and well hidden. It does this via profiles where you have 4 options, from High Quality to High Performance. The performance options will reduce texture details and boost FPS. Since you're at ~25-30 you really just need 5-10 more to really smooth the game out (though personally I can't stand less than 60 FPS on anything, and spend fortunes trying to solve it. Which is why I'm on an OC'd Core 2 E6600 at 3 GHz, and trying to get 3.6 GHz stable again...) A few hard disks in RAID-0 configuration really helps to cut load times on all games as well. Even two in RAID-0 will generally double your hard disk performance and is extremely noticable. You can get two 80 GB drives for less than $60 each if you look around (they should be identical drives for raid-0.)

[pocatellodave]

Try disabling your onboard sound.See if that helps your fps.
Pocatellodave

[skullman86]

AMD64x2 3800+ @ 2.11 GHz
7800gt @ 381/1208 MHz
2 gb of ram

........and it runs like crap, the patch didn't improve my performance and pre patch I could turn all the settings down to their lowest and I would only gain 10FPS at best :shifty:.Outside it's like 24 most of the time with the occasional 36 if I'm looking in the right direction but then it drops to 18 on other occasions and inside is about 70 most of the time.I even tried reinstalling from scratch but still no improvement at all.It probably has something to do with the fact that it's a dual core, I really hate it when developers get lazy and don't code it for the group of people who want to move on and use something new for a change (same goes for companies that still put games on cd when dvd drives are only $40 :nope:)


Hopefully the new PC I'm building will run this game better :-?

[Cakewalk]

Your FPS ranges are about the same as mine (~25 outside, ~40 inside), and I've found that switching off all options on the graphics chart helps very little.

With the 1.2 patch, the only restart needed to change graphics is when you switch resolutions.

I would have thought my GeForce 7900 GS would perform better, but apparently not. Hm... makes me jealous of those 8800 owners...:hmm:

But I doubt the majority of people who play SH4 here have uber-PCs. Most have similar performance ranges to you and I, I would think.

I am running a 7800GS card with an old Athalon 2800 and I am not having any issues with fps at all. Guess I am lucky....Oh and just about max video settings with 8x AA.

Hm, what are your actual FPS values?

[Hazelwood]

I can't get any fps improvement when turning down/off any or indeed all the options listed in the options menu :cry: now don't tell me......that this requires a restart each time? :lol:

:

You are not alone. I still play Janes F/A 18 which many years ago was marketed for Win98 and supposed to run just great at 500 MHz. Well, I still get major "Jerko-vision" on a 3GHz P4 with all the latests graphics.

I am using P4 3GHz with 2 Gb fast RAM and ATI X1650 graphics. I have no idea what the frame-rate is but it is acceptable in any event. This sim is very demanding. I doubt there is anyone out there getting a really smooth performance, especially when the action gets tough. I certainly notice some slow-down when the action closes in.

Hang in there with the developers. This is a superb sim and we know they are going to make it even better.

best wishes,
Cpt J. Hazelwood

[SgtWalt65]

Your FPS ranges are about the same as mine (~25 outside, ~40 inside), and I've found that switching off all options on the graphics chart helps very little.

With the 1.2 patch, the only restart needed to change graphics is when you switch resolutions.

I would have thought my GeForce 7900 GS would perform better, but apparently not. Hm... makes me jealous of those 8800 owners...:hmm:

But I doubt the majority of people who play SH4 here have uber-PCs. Most have similar performance ranges to you and I, I would think.

I am running a 7800GS card with an old Athalon 2800 and I am not having any issues with fps at all. Guess I am lucky....Oh and just about max video settings with 8x AA.

Hm, what are your actual FPS values?


35 fps +/- 5. Plenty smooth and this is while in a convoy.

[SgtWalt65]

For NVidia users, NVTray has some neat performance options that turn on and off various options that are pretty obscure and well hidden. It does this via profiles where you have 4 options, from High Quality to High Performance. The performance options will reduce texture details and boost FPS. Since you're at ~25-30 you really just need 5-10 more to really smooth the game out (though personally I can't stand less than 60 FPS on anything, and spend fortunes trying to solve it. Which is why I'm on an OC'd Core 2 E6600 at 3 GHz, and trying to get 3.6 GHz stable again...) A few hard disks in RAID-0 configuration really helps to cut load times on all games as well. Even two in RAID-0 will generally double your hard disk performance and is extremely noticable. You can get two 80 GB drives for less than $60 each if you look around (they should be identical drives for raid-0.)


You do understand that your human eye can hardly notice any changes above 40 fps ( in certain conditions you can see as high as 200 fps according to some research I did on the net, but very rare. ) don't you? Lot of people say thats crap, but its scentifically proven.:up: In fact look up what the fps on movies are, most you will see are from 24 - 35 fps max. Some where I saw a blind study where they would put up the fps on screen for some PC game and ask people if they see the difference and everyone said they did. LOL, but the fps never changed, just the fps counter on the screen did. The subliminal suggestion and the imagination is a wonderful thing isnt it? But as long as the video card manfactures and CPU manfactures can make money off you, they are not going to tell you this. Why would they want to? Go for that uber 60 fps, spend that cash. Very few people will be able to see the difference
The only reason to really upgrade, is for the graphics engine to see new eye candy and the cpu to process it.

[uniquemind]

I can't get any fps improvement when turning down/off any or indeed all the options listed in the options menu :cry: now don't tell me......that this requires a restart each time? :lol:

:
You are not alone. I still play Janes F/A 18 which many years ago was marketed for Win98 and supposed to run just great at 500 MHz. Well, I still get major "Jerko-vision" on a 3GHz P4 with all the latests graphics.

I am using P4 3GHz with 2 Gb fast RAM and ATI X1650 graphics. I have no idea what the frame-rate is but it is acceptable in any event. This sim is very demanding. I doubt there is anyone out there getting a really smooth performance, especially when the action gets tough. I certainly notice some slow-down when the action closes in.

Hang in there with the developers. This is a superb sim and we know they are going to make it even better.

best wishes,
Cpt J. Hazelwood

Thanks mate,

I'll stick with it, I love the Sim too much to let it go..........I've let games go in the past because of poor performance and then seen several months later people saying how great the game has become since the days of such awful performance.........I bought Test Drive Unlimited (I know, a glutton for punishment! :lol:) and now it sits in a draw waiting for a much needed patch to put it right, not sure if the patch wil ever come, at least the devs for this Sim have got two patches out while the TDU guys have yet to produce one!

Another one I have trouble with is Supreme Commander, that is terrible performance wise and the patches up to now have not helped performance for me.......but admittedly it is an extremely demanding game, and so again it sits in my drawer waiting for a new system..........that said the likes of Company of Heroes is fine for me..........so as someone else said it comes down to coding.

If the devs where given more time by the publishers (I could wait, and would rather wait for a near perfect game ) then there would'nt be half as much disappointment going around.........just my thoughts and feelings on it.

Of course Publishers have their reasons for wanting the game out as quick as is possible, and therefore we are left having to wait for after sales patches to come along

[Bilge_Rat]

I did some FPS test last night using the built in fps counter (ctrl + f8).

-in game settings: high graphics, did not touch the sliders, all options turned on except Environment & fog;

-my system: opteron 170 (2 gigs), 7900 GTX, asrock dual sata mb, 2 gigs ddr 500 ram, audigy 2 ZS, 2 x Raptors HD 36 Gigs in RAID 0, win XP; latest drivers, nothing overclocked;

-card settings: 1280x960 @ 100 hz, AA at 2xQ, 4x AF,

-test setup, sunny day, in the middle of the ocean, no other ships around;

in the command room - locked at 50 fps, turning on or off vsync and/or EE has no impact;

on the bridge - without EE - locked on 50 fps;
- with EE - locked on 33 FPS; turning on or off vsync has no effect;

- considering the amount of eye candy in the game, I am happy with these results. When posting FPS results, it is important to also post all the variables so others can compare apples with apples.

[uniquemind]

Please forgive the ignorance here, but what is EE? I bet I'll know it when you tell me but for now I am fumbling for the answer :lol:

I agree about posting all the variables so others can compare, I tend to rush through things and not put the effort in to write down everything before posting my findings :oops:

I did a complete reinstall today and just installed patch 1.2 and my flashing problem on the bridge seems to have gone......at least I am hoping it has, did'nt get to play for long so need to try it out later for longer.

[Bilge_Rat]

sorry, EE is Environment Effects

[uniquemind]

Thats ok Bilge_Rat

Now why the hell was I so daft.......Environmental Effects! of course :lol:

I'll switch my brain on shortly :oops:

Thanks

[Bilge_Rat]

I'll switch my brain on shortly :oops:



no problem, takes me 2-3 mugs of coffee in the morning to clear out the cobwebs.

:arrgh!:

[uniquemind]

I'll switch my brain on shortly :oops:


no problem, takes me 2-3 mugs of coffee in the morning to clear out the cobwebs.

:arrgh!:

Ah but you have your brain clear in the morning, for me I'm still not with it at 5:00pm :rotfl:

[supposedtobeworking]

for the life of me I am trying to find a thread that indicated a performance boost can be gained by using this program called gamexp i think...but not sure...anyone use this or remember that thread...I searched to no avail.

[EnsignCrow]

Core2 Duo T7700 2.40GHz CPU (Performance Rated at 5.93 GHz).
2GB DDR2 RAM
Win XP Pro SP2
GeForce 8600M GT 512MB
HDD 160GB 7200 RPM
----------------------
Mediocre vidcard, little RAM, and small (but fast) HDD on this laptop, but Duo Core2 saves the day!

27-34 fps on deck, 40-80 inside (all sliders maxxed, but no AA nor AF).

FlightSim9 (40fps) ;)
FSX (15 f.p.s.) :down:
I've never seen stutters in SH4. :smug:

'Performance Rated at 5.93 GHz' comes from the online test at _system requirements lab/Can you run it?_.

http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/referrer/srtest

[TDK1044]

I've found that you can run this game very smoothly on a mid range system.

I have XP, a Geforce 7600GT video card, a P4 3.0 processor and 2 GIGs of RAM. I run the TMO mod with all graphics set at maximum, and I get about 37 to 45fps on the exterior shots ( about 24fps in harbor) and higher fps on the interior shots. My AA and AF are only set to 4X, but I find the setting to be fine. The game runs very smoothly and looks great.

My criteria is that I need the game to run at least the same fps that movies run at and that's 24fps. To me, everything higher than that is frosting on the cake. :D

[danlisa]

My criteria is that I need the game to run at least the same fps that movies run at and that's 24fps.

Psst, you've been misinformed, videos/movies/dvds all run at 29.97fps.:lol:

Though, my experience is the same as yours on a mid range PC.

[TDK1044]

My criteria is that I need the game to run at least the same fps that movies run at and that's 24fps.

Psst, you've been misinformed, videos/movies/dvds all run at 29.97fps.:lol:

Though, my experience is the same as yours on a mid range PC.


29.97 is the NTSC television frame rate. Movies viewed in a movie theatre play at 24fps.

[danlisa]

Ahh, I see. Don't go to the movies/theatre much.:)

[TDK1044]

Ahh, I see. Don't go to the movies/theatre much.:)

Me either these days. Who wants to pay $4 for a coke? :D

[piersyf]

Hey. I have to admit that I am a little jealous of some of the fps rates you guys are getting, but seeing as I'm running on an unsupported card I guess I'm doing OK. I get about 15fps with the eye candy turned off, and about 9 with it on. ( is way too jerky for me, 15 is playable.

BTW, PAL video is 25fps, so close to the movies. Visual persistence makes it smooth from around 19 depending on the person, hence 24fps being the marker for film (covers everyone).

I tried Gamexp but it wrecked my system. Fortunately it automatically sets a restore point so I went back then deleted the program. I still have glitches, but for some reason I now occasionally get screamer dowload rates on the net...so a little hesitant to redo the who thing.

I also use an extended desktop which I have been told is not supported by Vista, so I'm staying with XP for as long as I can.

system: Intel Celeron 336 2.8Ghz, 1.5Gb DDR RAM, ATI Radeon 9550/X1050 256Mb, WinXP SP2

[TDK1044]

A decent video card and 2 GIGs of RAM are essential in order to run this game smoothly in my view. After that, a decent processor, closing unnecessary background programs, defragging often, monitor resolution settings and AA and AF settings all play a part. But you can certainly get very decent results with a mid range system.

[basilio]

for the life of me I am trying to find a thread that indicated a performance boost can be gained by using this program called gamexp i think...but not sure...anyone use this or remember that thread...I searched to no avail.
Found the thread :up: :up: :up: :up:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=133525&highlight=theorica

[walrusbomb]

I find it very hard to believe you lowered all settings: Resolution, Rendering (software and hardware), and Audio to their lowest possible settings and didn't get a huge bump in FPS...

I just tried and it more than doubled my FPS.

Sounds like your cutting more than one corner here.

[supposedtobeworking]

thank you basilio!

[longam]

I use to believe in a set number of FPS the eye can see but it appears to be more complicated then that.

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

[TDK1044]

The real issue for me here is each individual's enjoyment of the game. As I've stated, my line in ths sand is 24fps. I want to be at or above that setting in order for me to enjoy a smooth game. It may be more psychological than real, but if I'm getting above 24fps then this game feels great to me.

I think each player should asses the game based on what he or she is getting out of it, and not be obsessed with making radical system changes in order to get an extra 3fps out of Silent Hunter 1V.

Think of it this way; if you walked into a room with three computers running this game, and one was running at 24fps, one at 26fps, and one at 30fps, do you really think you could identify which was which? I've seen this game running on a system generating 86fps, and I swear it looked just like mine, which typically runs at about 37 to 45fps

Under 18fps, I would agree that you'll lose immersion due to the jerky nature of the images, but anything over 24fps is perfectly acceptable in my view.

[AVGWarhawk]

Another trick I found on this forum and it does help ...start the game and then minimize to desktop. I use the Windows key on my keyboard to do this. Once there, bring up your Task Manager. On the processes tab look for SH4.exe and right click it. Set you processor to Above Normal. A message will pop up and say this might make you computer unstable. Click ok. Bring up the game and begin play. Doing this adds abotu 5-6 FPS for me. However, I do loose some FPS in ports. No big deal there as I do not spend time in port. Thankfully the devs gave us the option to start outside the ports. So, you do not have to deal with the ports if you do not want to.

[piersyf]

I read through the 100fps site data, and most is accurate. I totally agree with the notions that blurred images in movies contribute to the smoothness. Even in the old Starwars movies the stop motion animations were laboriously hand blurred to make them smoother.

I am curious about something though. If your monitor scans 72 cycles per second (mine is 72Hz), what's the point in having a higher FPS? Surely that would be outside the physical capability of the monitor to reproduce? In other words, your FPS may be 200, but the monitor only changes 'frames' 72 times per second...

Also, anti-aliasing adds the blur factor to pixels, reducing the visual appearance of jerkiness. I can't run it on my system (FPS drops to 9), so I have nice sharp images at 15FPS. I definitely see the little jerky motions, but the game is still playable. Considering the choice for me is deal or stop playing SH4, I deal with it...;)

[banjo]

AVG, good tip! I didn't know about that one.

[AVGWarhawk]

AVG, good tip! I didn't know about that one.

This was brought up by one of the devs and confirmed by RDP that it does help in some cases. I was one of them. I suspect most this will help as you are telling the CPU to spend more time running the game than anything else. This is probably the most productive trick I have used yet.......with exception of buying a whole new set up. :o

[THE_MASK]

A better graphics card is the only way my friend :yep:

[tomoose]

I can honestly say I have not checked the FPS once since getting SH4.

Specs:
AMD 64 3400 (2.8Ghz)
Nvidia GeForce 7800 (AGP x8)
2 Gigs RAM
22" flat screen, game resolution running at 1680 x 1050

The game works just fine. I haven't fine tuned anything. The only decrease in performance I've noted is when I turn on "volumetric fog" so I don't turn it on!! LOL and I haven't missed it at all!! LOL.
Apart from that the only other thing that I can't do which I could with SH3 is use FRAPS to make a movie (with FRAPS on the game literally grinds to a halt).

Not sure why FPS would be an issue with supposedly 'better' systems, strange.:-?

[AVGWarhawk]

I can honestly say I have not checked the FPS once since getting SH4.

Specs:
AMD 64 3400 (2.8Ghz)
Nvidia GeForce 7800 (AGP x8)
2 Gigs RAM
22" flat screen, game resolution running at 1680 x 1050

The game works just fine. I haven't fine tuned anything. The only decrease in performance I've noted is when I turn on "volumetric fog" so I don't turn it on!! LOL and I haven't missed it at all!! LOL.
Apart from that the only other thing that I can't do which I could with SH3 is use FRAPS to make a movie (with FRAPS on the game literally grinds to a halt).

Not sure why FPS would be an issue with supposedly 'better' systems, strange.:-?


I have the same with exception of the CPU. I have a 3200+ that runs a 2.1Ghz. The game runs just fine. Only ports make the FPS drop and is noticable.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Not sure why FPS would be an issue with supposedly 'better' systems, strange.:-?
This seems to be the case for some newer systems. But eventually those newer rigs will have a leg up as more games are made to take advantage of sytems with multiple CPUs, etc.

When I built my current rig over a year ago I wasn't to sad to scale it back somewhat after ( mainly due to cost :oops: ) seeing some of the stories here of folks with higher end systems. I have a mid-range system that runs the game fine.


RDP

[walrusbomb]

Not sure why FPS would be an issue with supposedly 'better' systems, strange.:-?

if the hardware is adaquate or superior, one must carefully examine the Operating System.

Most people run trashed OS's.

[Dutch]

Sounds about like mine, I have a Dell Inspiron 1750 with a NVIDIA Gefore Go 7900 256 mg and 2 gigs or ram.

I get 60 inside and around 30ish depending on the weather, heavy storm have hit 20 but mostly at 30. You sound on par for normal FPS. Nothing to worry about from what I see.

[Spruence M]

Windows XP
4 Gigs of Ram OCZ Plat
250 gig SATA 2
Deul Layer DVD Burner
AMD Duel Core 4200+ 64x
Nvidia 9800gtx

1x Time Compression 50-60 FPS
64x Time Compression 10-15 FPS

What in the heck am I doing wrong?

[ancient46]

I have the same CPU (4200 x2) with 1GB Ram and a Leadtek 8800GT 512 graphics card factory overclocked with the Zalman cooler. I usually get 180FPS at TC 1 and 7 FPS at TC 8192 until I start sinking ships Then 7FPS drops to TC 4096. I also get between 40 and 60 with the free camera or Periscope and 110 on the sub's interior. I run somewhere between high and medium graphics settings (I set Character detail to low) and all the boxes checked except EE. My game resolution is 1440 x 900 at 75 HZ.

Your system should be able to top the numbers I get with all that RAM. There must be a problem somewhere. Have you tried the Nvidia tweaks on the forum and setting the core affinity to core 1? I run the bare minimum of XP services and usually have 800MB of free RAM. Check and see if you have some memory hogs running on your system.

[Go4It]

If you wanna set the Priority of the game B4 it starts, try this.....

Create a .bat file in the Silent Hunter Wolves of the Pacific folder were the SH4.exe is.

In the .bat file write this: START /HIGH SH4.EXE

Create a shortcut to this file an place it were you want.

Use the new shortcut to start Silent Hunter in the High Priority Mode...

SINK'M'ALL

[Nickel12]

Don,t bet that having an 8000 series GPU will help Frame Rate. I have an EVGA 8000GT Super Clocked w 1900mb bandwidth across the card and 512mb of onboard ram and the frame rate drops to a crawl and crashes from time to time. I have all settings for the card set to application control and still can,t stop the crashes. I have the EVGA drivers as well ( as opposed to Nvidia) This is the first game in recent memory where I have not been able to force the graphics. It is also the only game that crashes on my system. AMD 4200+ ,Asus A8N-SLI Premium mobo. 2 gig of Mushkin DDR ram and the above GPU. I have the AMD driver tweak installed and my whole system is clocked up. I realize that I am a little short on the cpu. This is my first try at sub sims... a little disappointing. BTW all my game settings are on medium. :cry:

[Go4It]

You might wanna try different Vid Drivers, any drivers other then 169.21 with my 8800GTS 512mb I get choppy game play. The MidWay Quick mission is a slide show with any drivers above 169.21 an unplayable. With the 169.21 I get as high as 180 FPS an no lower then 50 FPS in the heavy combat in the MidWay Quick mission.

8800 GTS G92 512mg
AMD DualCore 4400
2 SeaGate 80 gig HD in raid0
HANNS-G Wide Screen Monitor @ 1440x900 75 HZ NATIVE RES... ( 60 hz for some reason sucks )
Running minimun service
NO OC

Here's a good site to slim down XP: http://www.bold-fortune.com/forums/index.php?showforum=13

[DaSloth]

Another good site for tweaking, not just for SH4 but the system as a whole is Black Viper (saw a review of this on G4TV the other week), very user friendly....

http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm

or the home page or more useful info...

http://www.blackviper.com/index.html