Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: assasing123 on November 15, 2011, 08:47:02 pm
-
so after spending sometime on irc and reading some documents around i find that using an intel compiler wouldn't be the most efficient way to get a proper build if i use an AMD procesor also i m currently using a phenom procesor so the best compiler would be open64 which dosn't works on windows, only on linux an OS i don't really handle well. so is there any chance someone running linux could get me an exe for windows compiled with the latest SVN and using all the instruction sets supported by phenom procesors?
SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, 3Dnow and 3Dnow+? i want to get the best perfomance possible and i feel that by using only SSE2 i m wasting procesor power.
this is the url for my procesor validation as to check which instruction sets it supports:
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2100115
-
ummm... are you saying you want someone running Linux to create a Windows exec for you? :confused: Like, getting gcc to cross-compile, which I *guess* is possible for a mingw target, but seriously, I doubt that the performance of such an executable would be as good as what is produced by the MSVC compiler used for the Windows builds.
And you want it compiled with Open64 instead of gcc, I don't think Open64 can cross-compile anyway, so you're completely out of luck. If you want all those Phenom features, you'll need to run Linux :p (at least until AMD release Open64 for Windows, or something similar)
-
wouldnt your cpu be mostly idle anyway even without any cpu optimizations
iirc fs2 doesnt even use more than 1 core
according to perfmon my average cpu usage while playing a mission was 15%
-
wouldnt your cpu be mostly idle anyway even without any cpu optimizations
iirc fs2 doesnt even use more than 1 core
according to perfmon my average cpu usage while playing a mission was 15%
If you have a six-core machine, yes, you will only ever use 15% of the available power for FSO.
However, these optimizations allow FSO to use those 15% even more efficiently.
-
CPU improvements, in general, let you squeeze only a few more FPS out of the game. The jump from non-SSE to SSE2 might be around 10 FPS at most.
What really matters is your graphics card. Changing your OS just to have a few FPS more may not be worth the effort.
-
CPU improvements, in general, let you squeeze only a few more FPS out of the game. The jump from non-SSE to SSE2 might be around 10 FPS at most.
I don't think we have the same definition of "only a few". I wish I even had 10 fps on my crapbook, ya know.
-
Its the graphics that are slowing you down
you need to start disabling effects or not use the media vps
as for assasing123 he must have at least 80+ % of his cpu sitting idle why he wants to go through a load of effort just so even more of it can be doing bugger all
I dont understand unless he too has a poor gfx card and he mistakenly thinks cpu optimizations will improve his frame rate
-
Its the graphics that are slowing you down
you need to start disabling effects or not use the media vps
as for assasing123 he must have at least 80+ % of his cpu sitting idle why he wants to go through a load of effort just so even more of it can be doing bugger all
I dont understand unless he too has a poor gfx card and he mistakenly thinks cpu optimizations will improve his frame rate
Not everyone has a quad, sexa, or octo-core CPU. For those of us using dualcores, FSO will happily use half your available cores.
-
FSO will always take up a single core. No more, no less. It's not multithreaded, so it doesn't exactly have a choice. So, 50% on dual core, 25% on quad, 15% on six core, 12% on octocore and so on. Single-cores will get 100% usage.
-
An slow dual core takes advantages on allowing the S.O. to assign threads, a few months ago posted about running FSO on a E-350 apu.
-
Its the graphics that are slowing you down
you need to start disabling effects or not use the media vps
as for assasing123 he must have at least 80+ % of his cpu sitting idle why he wants to go through a load of effort just so even more of it can be doing bugger all
I dont understand unless he too has a poor gfx card and he mistakenly thinks cpu optimizations will improve his frame rate
i don't have a top of the line GPU but i m pretty sure it can handle whatever FSO throws at it, most of time what i notice is my CPU is dying at full 100% load on one core when running FSO and it basically lags the whole system, as i increase overclock on it, the game works faster, but the temperature rises, that's why i m pretty sure my pc is having a problem with the CPU and not the GPU.
just for info:
my GPU is a BG GTS 250 1GB overclocked by 35% so far, so running at around 1900mhz and 1100mhz the memory clock (2200mhz data rate) or so it says the control panel, i know is not a good or moderm card, but i m sure is more than enought to deal with FSO.
-
are the dev team working on multithreading ?
ps: you are using opengl ?
pps: found this
"Ah, yes, after some testing, I can see that you are both right and wrong. Right, in that setting afinity to both cores may grant you a bit of a performance increase. This is because FSO spawns a total of 9 threads during gameplay, 3 of which actually use significant processor time. Setting processor affinity to both cores allows the OS to offload some of those worker threads to other CPUs."
ppps: using a fps limiter may lighten the cpu load (or may not)
-
are the dev team working on multithreading ?
Not at the moment. It's something that will be investigated for 3.7, but it's not on our "needed for 3.7" list.
ps: you are using opengl ?
You do not have a choice when using FS2_Open. We are using OpenGL exclusively.
-
CPU improvements, in general, let you squeeze only a few more FPS out of the game. The jump from non-SSE to SSE2 might be around 10 FPS at most.
What really matters is your graphics card. Changing your OS just to have a few FPS more may not be worth the effort.
WiH intro with a:
Phenom II 970BE @ stock, ATI 5570 @ stock: 30fps
Phenom II 970BE @ 4.0, ATI 5570 @ stock: 35fps
Phenom II 970BE @ stock, ATI 5770 @ stock: 30fps
Phenom II 970BE @ 4.0, ATI 5770 @ stock: 35fps
Phenom II 970BE @ 4.0, ATI 5770 @ 950/1435: 35fps
All tested when the karuna gets gutted, and with the same nightly build, with everything I could find turned on and at max, yes including FXAA and Post Processing.
No, the GPU does -not- effect FSO untill you get into shadows (at least on a AMD comp), in which case both upgrading to a 5770 and overclocking said 5770 both showed major improvements. I was astounded to see a .5 OC bump the fps and my new 5770 to not effect them at all. Also, that 5570 is capable of running MVPs at 120fps solid (how DO I unlock it further anyway?)
Also, back with BPmulti Bigchunk and I did a 'how bad do apoco missles hurt fps' test, his 5770 was giving him the same fps my 5570 was at the time.
EDIT: I've been called nuts for thinking this has any preformance increase what-so-ever, but it is an AMD compiled EXE. Have fun (http://www.mediafire.com/?r6bw4goz2nc0z75) and please tell me your results in some way so I know if I'm insane or not.
-
Shadows, being an experimental feature, are likely do strain the CPU much more than necessary, and the final version should be more efficient in that regard.
-
Shadows, being an experimental feature, are likely do strain the CPU much more than necessary, and the final version should be more efficient in that regard.
Except shadows hurt the GPU, not the CPU...
Did you do any testing for FSO reguarding what gets hurt more under each scenario? Because your claims are flipped from what actualy happens.
FSO: WAY more strain on the CPU
FSO w/ shadows: WAY more strain on the GPU
WiH intro, tested with Shadow build #3:
Phenom II 970BE @ 4.0, ATI 5570 @ stock: 7fps
Phenom II 970BE @ 4.0, ATI 5770 @ stock: 17fps
Phenom II 970BE @ 4.0, ATI 5770 @ 950/1435: 21fps
otherwise same settings as before, everything maxed, while karuna gets gutted, etc.
-
I know a hell of a lot of stuff has been added to fs2, but the recommend cpu for retail was a p2 266
really the cpu requirements have gone up something like 20x ?
gpu requirements increased 20 fold I could understand
-
I know a hell of a lot of stuff has been added to fs2, but the recommend cpu for retail was a p2 266
really the cpu requirements have gone up something like 20x ?
gpu requirements increased 20 fold I could understand
In fairness, I had everything on and maxed, res was 1080, and it was with unoptimized BP ships in the WiH intro of all things (and the work-in-progress shadows on the 2nd set of tests). Just MVPs with everything on and maxed I can get 120+ with my CPU at stock and the 5570 at stock with ease on almost all missions, never dropping below 90.
-
I know a hell of a lot of stuff has been added to fs2, but the recommend cpu for retail was a p2 266
really the cpu requirements have gone up something like 20x ?
gpu requirements increased 20 fold I could understand
When using all the new features, and new models that have a higher polycount, and textures that are way more massive than anything used in retail, and scripts, then yes.
-
From what I know, if you play with no mods and all new features disabled, since FSO is actually more optimized than retail, you should get a better performance.