Well, i guess performance DID improve

[karambaitos]

i think the lagg is largely caused by overly accurate collision meshes on objects i remember when i screwed around in my friends mod and put a huge collision mesh on a building it lagged in the same manner when you look toward it, it laggs then you look in another direction and its all fine and dandy (this was in fallout3).
maybe the collision on trees and building could be reduced
in 0.87 when i would look toward the fortress in the city on muttrah there would be no FPS drop and in 0.9 there is a noticeable drop so some objects were changed there obviously whether its collision or the tris on the objects.
also i agree 0.87 was like the great and if it had the new deviation system that would have made it THE BEST EVAR.

[>para<]

Mz Ram Booster - Free software downloads and software reviews - CNET Download.com

^
solved problems with lag and fps (for me)
intel pentium D 3 GHz
2 GB RAM
9800 GT 512mb

[Dragonfire43560]

i think the lagg is largely caused by overly accurate collision meshes on objects i remember when i screwed around in my friends mod and put a huge collision mesh on a building it lagged in the same manner when you look toward it, it laggs then you look in another direction and its all fine and dandy (this was in fallout3).
maybe the collision on trees and building could be reduced
in 0.87 when i would look toward the fortress in the city on muttrah there would be no FPS drop and in 0.9 there is a noticeable drop so some objects were changed there obviously whether its collision or the tris on the objects.
also i agree 0.87 was like the great and if it had the new deviation system that would have made it THE BEST EVAR.

lol this is turning into a CS 1.6/CSS or Socom 2/Socom Confrontation scenario where people always remember the old version (.87) as the best one.

;1318443']Mz Ram Booster - Free software downloads and software reviews - CNET Download.com

^
solved problems with lag and fps (for me)
intel pentium D 3 GHz
2 GB RAM
9800 GT 512mb

Ive never trusted those kind of things but its worth a try.

[>para<]

Ive never trusted those kind of things but its worth a try.

me too but i try it ,since 0.909 have to low my settings to medium after that program i "high" my settings and AA to x8 now i dont have problems
[R-DEV]Afterdune recomend that program
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr-bf2-general-discussion/77325-optimizing-ram-when-playing-pr.html

[Tim270]

Doing what Rhino said (removing Field.con) had a look at Gaza as it always felt laggy for me around the grass on that map. I looked With/without and for me I got 29 with it on, 38 with it off. Although grass is kinda essential in some parts of the map. This was done on a local so I obviously had more FPS than in a usual 64 man. Although this was only done looking at the grass when near it, looking from the middle of the city it only changed by 1 fps with it on/off.

Specs
E8400 @3.0Ghz
4gb RAM
8600GT 512 @ 1680x1050
Win7

However, I would like to say my personal experience of the patch is overall much better performance on the offending maps. I got getting around 25 and now its boosted to a good 30 and above on some that makes it so much more enjoyable to play.

Also, what about the kits/kit bags, there is a hell of a lot more everywhere now (obviously) than there used to be. Could be another small factor.

[Rhino]

in 0.87 when i would look toward the fortress in the city on muttrah there would be no FPS drop and in 0.9 there is a noticeable drop so some objects were changed there obviously whether its collision or the tris on the objects.
also i agree 0.87 was like the great and if it had the new deviation system that would have made it THE BEST EVAR.

Nothing has been changed with the statics in Muttrah City, including the fort other than it moving location in the repo...

Doing what Rhino said (removing Field.con) had a look at Gaza as it always felt laggy for me around the grass on that map. I looked With/without and for me I got 29 with it on, 38 with it off. Although grass is kinda essential in some parts of the map. This was done on a local so I obviously had more FPS than in a usual 64 man. Although this was only done looking at the grass when near it, looking from the middle of the city it only changed by 1 fps with it on/off.

Specs
E8400 @3.0Ghz
4gb RAM
8600GT 512 @ 1680x1050
Win7

Interesting, not 100% sure what setup Gaza has with its fields might be something to do with more the type of fields its using or in the way its using them or something but on Fallujah there is little to no performance increase, at least on most systems. Try the same test on Qwai and Fallujah I would like to see your results.

[AfterDune]

;1318486'][R-DEV]Afterdune recomend that program
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr-bf2-general-discussion/77325-optimizing-ram-when-playing-pr.html

I didn't recommend it, I said people with troubles could give it a try.

I reinstalled everything recently, fps increased like mad! really, format and reinstall, start clean is best.

Also, if you have troubles, get a second hdd, run pr on one, put the page file on the other.

[frankwilliam]

I didn't recommend it, I said people with troubles could give it a try.

I reinstalled everything recently, fps increased like mad! really, format and reinstall, start clean is best.

Also, if you have troubles, get a second hdd, run pr on one, put the page file on the other.

Page files?
How do i do it?

[ZZEZ]

Doing what Rhino said (removing Field.con) had a look at Gaza as it always felt laggy for me around the grass on that map. I looked With/without and for me I got 29 with it on, 38 with it off. Although grass is kinda essential in some parts of the map. This was done on a local so I obviously had more FPS than in a usual 64 man. Although this was only done looking at the grass when near it, looking from the middle of the city it only changed by 1 fps with it on/off.

Specs
E8400 @3.0Ghz
4gb RAM
8600GT 512 @ 1680x1050
Win7

Now thats interesting - can you show screenshots exactly in same place with FRAPS or ingame fps counter?
It was tested in the development cycle and it had zero impact on performance...sometimes even positive impact.

AncientMan;1249049']Removing fields.con made it even worse for me, went from 100 to 50 instead of 100 to 70 with it on ... Also made it look ridiculous

[CCCode]

Gone from 50 to 80 for me so it works.

[Tim270]

Now thats interesting - can you show screenshots exactly in same place with FRAPS or ingame fps counter?
It was tested in the development cycle and it had zero impact on performance...sometimes even positive impact.

With

Without

With

Without

I took a few more but it pretty displayed the same results mostly, However, there seemed to a negligible difference when in the city and looking north, with or without the grass, although I will have a look over a few more locations to make sure.

That is really quite bizarre heh, makes FPS go up for some but down for others?

[Rhino]

I see the problem with the Overgrowth fields on Gaza, I did highlight this ages ago when it was first done but it must have been ignored. Going to post more info in the dev forums zzeze

[Tim270]

Interesting, not 100% sure what setup Gaza has with its fields might be something to do with more the type of fields its using or in the way its using them or something but on Fallujah there is little to no performance increase, at least on most systems. Try the same test on Qwai and Fallujah I would like to see your results.

Without

With

Without

With

Without

With


Just removing the field.con.

[Dragonfire43560]

Just tried fiddling with settings again. First of all that ram booster didnt help at all.


Second, I found my game runs BETTER when the graphics are turned to all high/medium at 1280x720 with 2x AA than it does on ALL LOW. Average is like 25 fps on all maps, with the best map being probably silent eagle at like 30 fps average. Its not smooth at all.


I really hate to say this, but ive been wasting too much time trying to get both this version and the last version to run so im just gonna call it quits. This is way too much stress for me, especially considering i usually play PR to relieve stress.



Slight observation though, did you look into the new weapon kits for performance drops? Remember how the kit "duffel bags" were replaced with each factions respective assault rifle? I dunno ive noticed those being glitchy (AKA popping in and out), maybe it effects performance for some reason. Just brainstorming here.

[Rhino]

Without

With

Without

With

Without

With


Just removing the field.con.

Interesting, your the first person I've seen to have a large FPS difference from removing the fields, what's your textures set at?

[DankE_SPB]

Rhino, is there similar quick way to remove fields on Dragon Fly(there is no Fields.con for that map)?

[Rhino]

iirc Dragonfly is using the old style of the fields and also they are quite buggy the one's its using, they need to be replaced with my new fields but no there isn't a quick way other than deleting them one by one out of the staticobjects.con or loading the map in the editor, selecting all the fields (can select one then "select all of same type") and then deleting them.

[bazza_1964]

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.

Same here, 2gb DDR(1)on an AGP mobo nonetheless, with an ATI 3650 AGP 512 mb DDR2, and a P4 2.8 clocked to 3ghz. I run a lot of my settings on high, 2xAA, 100% draw distance. For some reason, PR doesn't run too badly on my system. Sure, some bits are laggy, and I'm sure my frame rate suffers sometimes, but the game is hardly unplayable. Although, if I can get these results out of my current PC, I can't WAIT to see what an upgrade would allow me to do. One step at a time!

Some interesting reading:

How many frames per second can the human eye see?

cheers,

Bazza

[Tim270]

Interesting, your the first person I've seen to have a large FPS difference from removing the fields, what's your textures set at?

Medium.

[SocketMan]

Athlon 64 3000+
2 gigs ram
8800 GTS 328


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

Every game out there benefits from going (at least) dual-core.
It is not even the game itself,but rather how Windows runs things.
Dual core cpu would allow system calls (hardware,network,drivers,directX,etc) to be
executed without "interrupting" the game.

If you're getting 20fps with a single core,doubling the core count would bring you to 30
minimum.

"Proof":




iXBT Labs - Multi-Core Processors in 3D Games - Page 1: Introduction, Crysis