Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzcarraldo
But did you try using the ingame AA only? Also I had problems using external AA, etc. The ingame AA, maximized, is very good for me and obtain more than 40-50 in ports with traffic, I fixed it at 30 FPS with Inspector.
Regards.
Fitzcarraldo  |
Yes, I did tried it.- I'm using SH5 on this very machine since a very long time-
MSAA what is a built in real time antialias in most games, like in SH5, are
-very- heavy on the graphics card, if someone has a cool gear, it is not a problem, someone with a strong card sees no drawback, yes. No surprise there.
But this is the first thing that is get rid of by anyone who experiences FPS drops. Stock MSAA is like a luxury.
Instead the
Post process Reshade for
SMAA is used with tons of games by me, and I used it with stock SH5 and then 1.05 a week ago without any problem, also the FPS drop price for
SMAA is 1-2 frames maximum. (yep, tried without it, I gain 1 or 2 fps.) compared to the built in MSAA in SH5 what is usually costs 10 or even 20 frames on mediocre cards.
But the whole topic is not around what config we use, BUT around the fact that I use
the same graphics config, same antialias, same machine, same video chip in 2.2.16 as I used in 1.05 a week ago, and the results are:
1.05: unstable as hell, many regular CTDs, but:
-around 20 fps in ports on TC 1
-around 16 fps in ports on TC 64.
-around 60 fps in open sea battles.
2.2.16:
had no CTDS whatsoever, seems very stable
-around
1 (!) to 8 total fps in ports on tc1 (feels like stop motion...)
-stable
1... fps in ports on TC 64
-around 40-45 fps in open sea battles. (so definitely using the Nvidia...)
So there IS a huge difference between 1.05 and 2.2.16- I like to find what to get rid of /tailor to my gear- most probably the 32454367568 more unit spawns in ports, maybe the widened render distance, (40km instead of 20) some heavy graphic additions, idunno' yet what is changed.
Also I remember -something- we used to modify to represent your max ram / video ram...? Etc. that SH5 can use.
Of course all of this are totally irrelevant to someone with more than 4gigs of ram on a video card, barely noticeable- yes, I understand.
but on a mediocre machine a drop from 20 fps to 1 XD is quite khm... noticeable. I just need to find out what is changed in 2.2.16 that can cause this, and also somehow remember WHAT we optimized in the cfg files... As the machine is clearly not using the GPU / CPU to the extent it should. (no heat..)
What Kapuhy wrote is interesting though, if he has a 2 gig video card as well- I believe the shadows are a HUGE difference in our case.
Second most FPS pricey stuff next to built in AA are shadows.
(my SMAA costs 1-2 fps, so we can say it is the same as I would only playing withssimply turned off built in AA)
Shadows ARE a difference, as I always play with max shadows. The problem is that I would like to find what is changed in 2.2.16 that causes this difference first, rather than lowering the graphics config first.
But before I would pinpoint a mod /feature in 2.2.16 or feature that we can may document as "yep simpleton, you can switch this off / change in TWOS to increase your performance on low/mediocre machines", I'm going to find out what optimization we
used to do to specify max ram? or Vram- CPU threads... Etc. in SH5. As maybe I can achieve near-the-same results as in 1.05. If after all the optimization there are still huge FPS difference -then- I aim to find the mod /new feature that costs this much more in 2.2.16