[Samus]

Hi all,

I have this pc : System Specs :
CM 830 Stacker evo silver,
Corsair HX 1000 watt psu,
ASUS P6X58D Premium 3X SLi/SATA3/USB3,
intel core i7 920 @ 3.0 GHz,
Noctua NH-14D cpu cooler,
12 GB Corsair 1600 DDR3 Triple Channel,
MSI GTX 580 1.5GB GDDR3,
Soundblaster X-Fi Titanium Champion soundcard with front panel,
1X OCZ Vertex 2 60GB SSD,
1X OCZ Vertex 4 128GB SATA3,
1X 500 GB WD 16 mb cache HD,
LG 22X Sata DVD burner,
LG 8X Blueray Reader
Windows 7 Ultimate x64.

I have the latest RC6 build with latest media vp's. My question is, can I get better graphics out of freespace? these are my custom flags : D:\Games\Freespace SCP\fs2_open_3_6_14_RC6_SSE.exe -mod fsport-mediavps,fsport,mediavps_3612 -spec -glow -env -missile_lighting -normal -3dshockwave -post_process -soft_particles -fxaa -cache_bitmaps -dualscanlines -orbradar -rearm_timer -ship_choice_3d -weapon_choice_3d -3dwarp -warp_flash -snd_preload -fb_explosions  -ambient_factor 20 -spec_exp 7.0 -spec_point 8.6 -spec_static 12.8 -spec_tube 5.0 -bloom_intensity 90 -height

Currently playing freespace port 3.3

[X3N0-Life-Form]

Not sure about better graphics, but I'd be curious to see how your spec handles Blue Planet 2's "massive battle" mission .

[headdie]

For FSO the key elements are the GTX 580 and the 3.0 Ghz cpu.

FSO is old enough to be written for single core CPUs so cant take advantage of multiple core CPUs making raw speed the most important thing there. 

I suspect you have little to fear playing most mods though a FPS score on Massive Battle might be interesting to see.

[JCDNWarrior]

There's various other experimental or basic benchmark like missions out there, including BP2's Massive Battle, which is probably the most intensive of all. I definitely am curious if you can push even better framerates out with your set up than my own 560ti and i5 2500. For general gameplay your specs are obviously quite above the required or minimum recommended so enjoy all the eye candy that SCP has to offer.

[TwentyPercentCooler]

If my rig can run BP2 Massive Battle at 30+, I know the OP's can. I've only got an i5 (granted, the i7s have little to no advantage over the i5s in gaming) and a Radeon 6850.

Doesn't the FXAA have several different preset levels? I've been busy and it's hard to keep up with all the rapid-fire changes in the code these days, but I swear I remember different presets and the -fxaa tag without a modifier only enables the mid-level setting. If it still has the different levels, forcing it to the highest is the only thing I can think of to improve the visuals.

[The E]

Indeed. There's a commandline flag called -fxaa_preset, which takes arguments from 0 to 9 inclusive; by default, it uses setting 6. The higher the setting, the more aggressive (and expensive) fxaa gets.

[Crybertrance]

If my rig can run BP2 Massive Battle at 30+, I know the OP's can. I've only got an i5 (granted, the i7s have little to no advantage over the i5s in gaming) and a Radeon 6850.

Wait, what?

30+ FPS on Massive Battle?? How?? I got an AMD Phenom II X4 @3.0Ghz and an HD 5770. and I get about 4~6 FPS. Ive got the -fxaa_preset at 9, but will it reduce fps that much?

[MatthTheGeek]

He probably has 30 fps mid-mission, after half the ships are space debris. I'm around 60fps at that point too. It's only the first, what, 30 seconds, that are below 15 fps.

[mjn.mixael]

Wait, what's this thread about? Looks like Samus is just boasting specs and not really asking for help on anything.

[TwentyPercentCooler]

If my rig can run BP2 Massive Battle at 30+, I know the OP's can. I've only got an i5 (granted, the i7s have little to no advantage over the i5s in gaming) and a Radeon 6850.

Wait, what?

30+ FPS on Massive Battle?? How?? I got an AMD Phenom II X4 @3.0Ghz and an HD 5770. and I get about 4~6 FPS. Ive got the -fxaa_preset at 9, but will it reduce fps that much?

I have an i5-2500K that I've bumped up to 4.6 GHz (the wonders of inexpensive water coolers...) and a 6850 that's running 15% above stock. Yeah, it's still not a powerhouse or anything, but it does well enough for what I paid. Massive Battle only might dip below 30 for me in the first couple of seconds when everything starts firing and spawning particles; other than that, it's smooth sailing. I should clarify that I have the FXAA option on the default 6, mostly because I'd forgotten the specific tag until a few posts ago, when TheE reminded me.

Wait, what's this thread about? Looks like Samus is just boasting specs and not really asking for help on anything.

I think the OP was asking if there were any command line flags that he'd missed that would make things look better. I could only think of changing the -fxaa to whatever the highest setting was; I only vaguely remembered that it had different presets.

[Rampage]

May I interject and say that I think this thread should be moved elsewhere?

R

[pecenipicek]

Wait, what's this thread about? Looks like Samus is just boasting specs and not really asking for help on anything.

it is. when i saw i was half tempted to flame his ass off

[Kobrar44]

MSI GTX 580 1.5GB GDDR3

GTX 580 had version with GDDR3 memory? 

[Kolgena]

Hack your registry to run the game at 2^n times your native resolution. If it doesn't crash outright, you've just given yourself some full screen SSAA.

Also, the -height flag is deprecated and does nothing, IIRC.

[Samus]

Ok thanks for all your input! For the blue planet mission I'll give it a try (please note I play freespace open with 32X AA and 16 X af forced in my gpu control panel). Wasnt there a version with volumetric lighting and shadows for this game?

[Kolgena]

Forced AA does nothing from the GPU control panel, as far as I know. It's not a supported feature.

[TwentyPercentCooler]

Forced AA does nothing from the GPU control panel, as far as I know. It's not a supported feature.

Yeah, Nvidia Control Panel and Catalyst Control Center both won't force AA, not even their proprietary post-processing forms that usually work in games that don't support AA.

[MatthTheGeek]

Wasnt there a version with volumetric lighting and shadows for this game?

The shadow builds were slow and are now kind of unsupported. We have deferred lighting builds however, which are pretty awesome and give negligible performance drops if at all.

[Crybertrance]

Forced AA does nothing from the GPU control panel, as far as I know. It's not a supported feature.

Yeah, Nvidia Control Panel and Catalyst Control Center both won't force AA, not even their proprietary post-processing forms that usually work in games that don't support AA.

I always wanted to know why neither CCC nor NCP cant force AA (even SSAA) in FS. A while back I heard that it was because of Post-processing or something? But don't recent games have PP and still have forced AA?

Anywho, I tried BP's Massive Battle "stress test" again, and, no luck, still getting that crappy 4~8 (sometimes 10) FPS throughout the mission. All my drivers are updated, my HD 5770 is also running at about 960/1380 (core/mem) Mhz (which is probably the limit without third-party coolers). Disabled FXAA (just to be sure), and running RC6. Any idea whats wrong?

[MatthTheGeek]

Nothing's wrong at all. That mission is just THAT busy.