Well, i guess performance DID improve

[Dragonfire43560]

Yep i get like 5 fps better this patch


So instead of playing with a 15 fps average i get to play with a 20 fps average lol


No offense, but im confused as to how you expected changing JUST the draw distance would change anything? Its clearly not just the draw distance (if thats even a problem at all). You have to think of all things you changed from .87 that could effect performance. Kit geometry was brought up in another topic.

Instead of messing with the draw distance, why didnt you just revert kit geometry back to how it was in .87? Im sure the majority of players would gladly take having a playable game over some new kit geometries that are barely noticable. Hell, no one even complained about the graphics in .87, literally NO ONE! IMHO, the best thing you can possibity do now is just revert whatever graphical changes you made in .9 back to how it was in .87.

Generally speaking, this is a more mature community and no one praised or even noticed PRs graphics. Thats because its pretty much a non factor. Even vanilla BF2s graphics are satisfactory for the amazing experience we are (were) getting. Dont get too gung ho on trying to upgrade the graphics, at the expense of excluding a large number of players.


Appreciate the effort you guys are putting in this awesome game, but i just think your looking at this issue the wrong way.


Gonna have to sit this version out again unfortunetly. See ya next patch hopefully!


BTW specs are


Athlon 64 3000+
2 gigs ram
8800 GTS 328


Theres no reason i shouldnt be able to play this technically speaking.

[Zi8]

Man, your CPU is 5-6 years old, I'm struggling to play some maps with E6600, 2GB and HD4850.

Though you didn't tell what kind of settings you are running, but my guess is low.

Older maps worked generally well in the "old" 0.909 version, so I can't really tell the difference on all maps yet because the patch is still very fresh.

Update that old dinosaur and enjoy the game!

[Dragonfire43560]

Man, your CPU is 5-6 years old, I'm struggling to play some maps with E6600, 2GB and HD4850.

Though you didn't tell what kind of settings you are running, but my guess is low.

Older maps worked generally well in the "old" 0.909 version, so I can't really tell the difference on all maps yet because the patch is still very fresh.

Update that old dinosaur and enjoy the game!

Na its not worth updating since PR is literally the only game i play on my PC.



Yeah, the CPU is 5 years old but you gotta remember, so is the game! And it had no problem with PR on ALL HIGH up until .9.


The fact that your struggling with those specs should also be a wake up call!

[Rykane]

I still seem to be getting some fps issues and im running on a reasonably high end system.
My specs are:

AMD Phenom II X4 955 3.2GHz, 3072mb RAM, ASUS Radeon HD 4890 1gb. With the 09.17 patch and i still seem to be getting around 15-25 fps when on maps like fallujah west, gaza beach, lashkagar valley. It seems to still be around in the centers of the maps. Im running on these settings:
Terrain=High
Effects=High
Textures=Medium
Lighting=Medium
Dynamic Shadows= Medium
Dynamic Light= Medium
AA= 4X
View Distance= 100%

[Rhino]

Draw distance is a very quick and simple way of improving performance. Lower draw distance = less things drawing at the same time = better performance. We also did many other performance tweaks for this build as well.

You also need to understand its not just one specific thing that is having an impact on performance its lots of little things so just fixing one thing isn't going to suddenly mean your performance is "fixed" and back to 100fps or w/e it was "before".

[Tannhauser]

Draw distance is a very quick and simple way of improving performance. Lower draw distance = less things drawing at the same time = better performance. We also did many other performance tweaks for this build as well.

You also need to understand its not just one specific thing that is having an impact on performance its lots of little things so just fixing one thing isn't going to suddenly mean your performance is "fixed" and back to 100fps or w/e it was "before".

Well, I believe that your grass is the main thing that lags me on Qwai Rhino, no offense.

And I got to agree partly with OP, there are a lot of things that need optimizations it seems. I heard that what lagged Fallujah were the sidewalks being too detailed or something. Well if it's that, then I guess that's what should be worked on.

And it's not like I'm whining for a little lag there and there. I used to play on high with no lag, and now I get constant stuttering even on lowest settings! That had to be some serious change for it to force me to go from high-to-low so brutaly.
What I'm worried about is why couldn't testers see the immediate change in graphics? Are there no ''low-end'' testers to represent PR players with less pennies to be spent on ub0r grapheex?

Just my two cents.

[Rhino]

Well, I believe that your grass is the main thing that lags me on Qwai Rhino, no offense.

We have done loads of tests on them and if you remove my overgrowth fields on any of the maps, Qwai etc, you will have little to no performance difference from when they where there.

If you think your system is for some reason different to why they lag, try backing up the map, then remove the fields from the map and load up the map and see if you have a performance increase. Quite simple to delete them from the map just delete the Fields.con file from the server.zip, but make sure you restore your backup again before you go playing online again.

[Zi8]

And I got to agree partly with OP, there are a lot of things that need optimizations it seems. I heard that what lagged Fallujah were the sidewalks being too detailed or something. Well if it's that, then I guess that's what should be worked on.

Fallujah has some other strange things going on since 0.909.

I did some testing and facing NORTH causes huge fps drop anywhere around the map, but facing the other directions improve it right away. Sucky for Blufor eh?

[Dragonfire43560]

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Rhino;1317999']Draw distance is a very quick and simple way of improving performance. Lower draw distance = less things drawing at the same time = better performance. We also did many other performance tweaks for this build as well.

You also need to understand its not just one specific thing that is having an impact on performance its lots of little things so just fixing one thing isn't going to suddenly mean your performance is "fixed" and back to 100fps or w/e it was "before".[/quote]

Dont get me wrong, it definetly helped but its also evident that it wasnt the main culprit. Its just "covering the symptoms, not treating the infection" so to speak.

I think the only surefire way of fixing this universally for ALL systems, is to roll back any graphical innovations/changes that were made for .9

People most likely woudlnt even notice as graphics were never an issue in the first place.

Ask anyone why they play PR, i guarantee you noone will say "graphics"

Then again, im no dev so i dont know how hard that would be. Im just telling you what it looks like from my opinion

[quote="Tannhauser""]Well, I believe that your grass is the main thing that lags me on Qwai Rhino, no offense.

And I got to agree partly with OP, there are a lot of things that need optimizations it seems. I heard that what lagged Fallujah were the sidewalks being too detailed or something. Well if it's that, then I guess that's what should be worked on.

And it's not like I'm whining for a little lag there and there. I used to play on high with no lag, and now I get constant stuttering even on lowest settings! That had to be some serious change for it to force me to go from high-to-low so brutaly.
What I'm worried about is why couldn't testers see the immediate change in graphics? Are there no ''low-end'' testers to represent PR players with less pennies to be spent on ub0r grapheex?

Just my two cents.[/quote]


I think fallujah is just a lost cause honestly. That map has never ran well EVER for me. In .87 it was playable but still garbage. I just tried it now, and its a powerpoint presentation.

[SnipeHunt]

We have done loads of tests on them and if you remove my overgrowth fields on any of the maps, Qwai etc, you will have little to no performance difference from when they where there.

Those fields are amazing compared to the old stuff (with the nice rendering etc etc) I 'm shocked it didn't have a large impact to the lagging maps.

NICE job on the fields!

[Jigsaw]

I think fallujah is just a lost cause honestly. That map has never ran well EVER for me. In .87 it was playable but still garbage. I just tried it now, and its a powerpoint presentation.

Sorry, but thats because you are playing on a five year old PC. I run Fallujah just fine and always have done. I have a medium spec PC that I bought last year and can run all high with about 30-40fps.

Yes the base engine of PR is 5 years old but PR has made tremendous strides forward. Try comparing PR and vanilla BF2 and you will see vast improvements in every area from map size to asset detailing/models. With all of that in the game you simply cannot expect to play the game well on a frankly ancient system.

[Dragonfire43560]

Sorry, but thats because you are playing on a five year old PC. I run Fallujah just fine and always have done. I have a medium spec PC that I bought last year and can run all high with about 30-40fps.

Yes the base engine of PR is 5 years old but PR has made tremendous strides forward. Try comparing PR and vanilla BF2 and you will see vast improvements in every area from map size to asset detailing/models. With all of that in the game you simply cannot expect to play the game well on a frankly ancient system.

I got ~40 fps on fallujah in .87

Thats "garbage" relative to the other maps, but it was still playable as I said.

Right now im barely pushing 30 on medium graphics for most of the maps . Fallujah is like 15-20 average.

If my pc is "too old" to play PR, then you guys are gonna have problem networking and expanding the community because i would say my pc is about average and on paper it should run it fine.

[Rhino]

Dont get me wrong, it definetly helped but its also evident that it wasnt the main culprit. Its just "covering the symptoms, not treating the infection" so to speak.

I think the only surefire way of fixing this universally for ALL systems, is to roll back any graphical innovations/changes that were made for .9

People most likely woudlnt even notice as graphics were never an issue in the first place.

Ask anyone why they play PR, i guarantee you noone will say "graphics"

Then again, im no dev so i dont know how hard that would be. Im just telling you what it looks like from my opinion

You dont really understand that "graphics" haven't been increased, in fact AM went though all the textures etc and lowered all the unnecessary large textures and deleted all the unneeded textures which I can tell you saved a hell of a lot of space/memory.

The only things that have added onto the load are just new additions, like new vehicles such as the Chinook, VN3 etc. Do you really want thous new vehicles to go so it "might" increase performance (which I can tell you now its not down to just getting new vehicles etc in).

[CodeRedFox]

Alright enough of the bickering.

Dragonfire43560 we had allot of idea of what could be lagging the game, and only so many tester to find it. We thought we had gotten rid of most the lag but like always you kill one bug another on come out.

Each and every PR's computer is different: ram, HD, CPU's, cooling. Its really hard to track problems when for example two testers with almost the same specs experience totally different problems.

Anyways I would suggest everyone that plays PR to have OVER 2 gig of RAM. In fact this same issue came up years before when 1 gig of RAM was the norm. Once most upgraded the issues went away.

[$$JOSE$$]

I agree with CodeRedFox it is most likely a RAM issue. Reasons I think so is because my computer has 8 gigs of RAM and I have not experience a single fps drop at all on any map.

[AdrwIvrsn]

Anybody (like me) who has a 5 year old PC probably has ddrm1, which is extremely difficult to keep up with other players with relativity new PCs, even with 4gb. It's just in PR's nature that it is going to suck memory, regardless of high graphics or bugs.

I live with ddrm1 2gb of memory; I try to get used to it. I'm not going to silently rage and pout about lower FPS and extreme choppiness, just play.

[Stoic Sentinel]

BF2 was a very RAM-heavy game as well, iirc.

[Dev1200]

2 gigs ram



Theres no reason i shouldnt be able to play this technically speaking.

Why does PR recommend 6gigs of ram? =)

Also, I think it's all the statics from the new maps, and all the undergrowth. Most of the new maps have fields galore.. and looking at them makes your FPS crawl to 15ish.

[ralfidude]

i was runnign XP with a QUAD core at 3ghz and a GTX260 and 4 gigs of ram, and Falujah was NOT playable.


Explain that to me...

I just did a systems upgrade, and have windows 7 with 6 gigs of ram, same GPU, and a i7 920, everything runs fine now.

My last PC specs should have had no problems though, its something else... Somoe ppl said something abotu the tank, but i think thats just wild speculation, like saying making squads too early causes the squad bug.... IT DOESNT !!! lol.

But if you truly want to run everythign fine, buy a supercomputer made to run arma on highest settings, and you might be able to play PR, lol. But all jokes aside... it was very annoying....

[Conman51]

Im planning on getting this for a upgrade ( click specs tab)
Newegg.com - ASUS G Series G73JH-X1 NoteBook Intel Core i7 720QM(1.60GHz) 17.3" 8GB Memory 500GB HDD 7200rpm DVD Super Multi ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5870 - Laptops / Notebooks

If i lag on that then there is defiantly a problem with PR

but my question is how does PR sucks sooo much RAM, is it just because map size?