Improve Frame Rate - Best Option?

[BaldEagl]

The first thing I'd do is get an add-on soundcard.  The Creative X-Fi cards have their own processors and RAM and totally unload sound processing off the rest of the system.  The X-Fi Gamer is about $90.  Don't forget to disable the onboard sond and uninstall those drivers.

The next thing I'd do is OC the CPU.  If you're using the stock Intel fan I'd replace it first.  I use an Arctic Freezer 7 Pro (about $30) and it dropped my CPU temps by 10-15 degrees C.  Don't forget to get some Artcic Silver thermal paste at the same time.  Once you have a decent cooler you should be able to get an easy 20% gain out of your CPU (I run my 2.66 Ghz E6750 at 3.2 Ghz) as long as your motherboard supports overclocking.

After that the only real other option is a new video card.  A 9800GTX or GTX+ would give you a gain and probably without having to replace your current PSU but you'll need to verify that your PSU has the right connectors and puts out enough amps on the 12 volt rails.

IIRC you haven't mentioned what your RAM speed is but if it's under DDR2800 replacing it might also be a consideration, particularily if you OC the CPU.

[The Fugitive]

I'm curious... that 8800 is a nice card (no doubt about it) but I'm wondering if that FSAA maxed out is causing it. Can you lower it to 4x FSAA or so? Second notch in, probably? As a test, what kind of FPS does that yield?

At lower resolutions I don't think it would be as much of an issue, but at 1600 I'm curious.

Ya thats the first think I noticed too. anti-alising take alot of horse power to run.

[TequilaChaser]

anti-alising take alot of horse power to run.

so does an USB headset ........ 

bet if you dropped that 1600 x 1050 res back 1 or 2 clicks lower, you be chitten and a grinnin....... and might even be pegging out on your fps to whatever your monitor refresh rate is .....

[Krusty]

Well the card might be strong enough to run pegged at that res if he lowers the FSAA.

Maybe (*shrug*).

The thing about FSAA is that it really was from a time before these gigantic resolutions we have now. It's much more helpful on lower resolutions where the jagged lines are much more visible because they were larger on our monitors. Now with larger and better monitors, the most you ever really need to antialias is 2x or 4x. Above that there's not much difference in the end result, and less so if you run at mega resolutions.

End result: Faster FPS for no visible loss in quality. Whether it makes a difference or not? Worth a shot!

[BaldEagl]

so does an USB headset ........  

bet if you dropped that 1600 x 1050 res back 1 or 2 clicks lower, you be chitten and a grinnin....... and might even be pegging out on your fps to whatever your monitor refresh rate is .....

I wouldn't run an LCD below it's native res.  It will look like crap.

I didn't notice the ingame AA maxed.  Lowering that might help a lot.  I control mine through the NVidia control panal and don't let the game overide my settings.

If you want to compare video settings I have an 8800 GTS 512Mb with the same G92 GPU that you have and I run a steady 59 fps (monitor refresh rate) in-game with all in-game options maxed except I don't use self shadows or soft shadows.  Here's my settings:

[Ghosth]

I'm with Krusty, I'd start by pulling the AA down. I might even try dropping max texture size down one.

Might experiment even with lower screen resolution. As all those are easy to change and reset back to where you had them.

Also try turning the local water reflections off, see if that helps.

Also I wasn't following if you had a sound card vs onboard sound or USB headset, either of which will rob CPU cycles when you need them most.

[Krusty]

I don't think the issue is really one of CPU cycles being gobbled up. But that sparks a question I wanted to ask (and forgot to ask!). I'll post that in another thread.

[38ruk]

Which drivers are you running with the 8800GT?  I would also look at which IRQ's are shared .

[Foz]

I am still doing some testing with the additional suggested settings ....thanks all  

Tell me if this thought process makes sense...under windows task manager-->performance tab.  My cpu usage for each core (when running 70 processes) stays well below 100% even when running AH.  

Would that data suggest that the CPU is not the rate limiting factor?

Also, I am using the latest nvidia graphic drivers and am including my irq assignments

IRQ 0   System timer   OK IRQ 4   Communications Port (COM1)   OK IRQ 8   System CMOS/real time clock   OK IRQ 9   Microsoft ACPI-Compliant System   OK IRQ 9   SCSI/RAID Host Controller   OK IRQ 11   Intel(R) ICH9 Family SMBus Controller - 2930   OK IRQ 12   Logitech-compatible Mouse PS/2   OK IRQ 13   Numeric data processor   OK IRQ 16   Intel(R) G33/G31/P35 Express Chipset PCI Express Root Port - 29C1   OK IRQ 16   NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT    OK IRQ 16   Intel(R) ICH9 Family USB Universal Host Controller - 2937   OK IRQ 16   Standard Dual Channel PCI IDE Controller   OK IRQ 16   Intel(R) ICH9 Family PCI Express Root Port 6 - 294A   OK IRQ 16   Intel(R) ICH9 Family USB Universal Host Controller - 2939   OK IRQ 16   VIA OHCI Compliant IEEE 1394 Host Controller   OK IRQ 17   Intel(R) ICH9 Family PCI Express Root Port 1 - 2940   OK IRQ 17   Intel(R) ICH9 Family PCI Express Root Port 5 - 2948   OK IRQ 17   Realtek RTL8168/8111 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet NIC   OK IRQ 18   Intel(R) ICH9 Family USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 293C   OK IRQ 18   Intel(R) ICH9 Family USB Universal Host Controller - 2936   OK IRQ 19   Intel(R) ICH9 Family USB Universal Host Controller - 2935   OK IRQ 19   Intel(R) ICH9 2 port Serial ATA Storage Controller 1 - 2921   OK IRQ 19   Intel(R) ICH9 2 port Serial ATA Storage Controller 2 - 2926   OK IRQ 21   Intel(R) ICH9 Family USB Universal Host Controller - 2938   OK IRQ 22   Microsoft UAA Bus Driver for High Definition Audio   OK IRQ 23   Intel(R) ICH9 Family USB Universal Host Controller - 2934   OK IRQ 23   Intel(R) ICH9 Family USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 293A   OK

Thanks

Foz

[Spikes]

I wouldn't think the CPU is limiting it, but it can surely help/go higher if need be.

[DREDIOCK]

Bald summed it up.



Third would be to go into your windows services and disable some of the junk you really don't want or need. This is the hardest part -- finding out what you need and what you don't. Google is your friend, but don't take it all at face value, check several websites until you start recognizing which ones are more reputable than others.

Probably the best known is Black Viper
http://www.blackviper.com/

[Anodizer]

Your set up should not be giving you the performance issues you are having.. 
My auxiliary system is more or less the same..  It has an e4400 C2D at 2.2ghz with a Geforce 9600GT(same pretty much as an 8800GT) and 2 gigs of RAM..
I can run it balls out with with 2 clicks of FSAA at 1440x900(no shadows)..  No over clocking or anything..  Just a stock XP install updated to SP3 using the latest drivers for everything..
Has a steady 59 fps regardless of the situation in gameplay.. 
If I had your system for any hour, it'd be running AH the way it should..  You don't happen to live in Indiana, do you?

[Krusty]

Foz, is that example from before you started this thread, or are you STILL running 70 processes at idle?

[DREDIOCK]

Foz, is that example from before you started this thread, or are you STILL running 70 processes at idle?

70 processes??  

Im surprised the thing isnt as slow as a drunken slug

[Spikes]

Never really thought about the processes myself...I have 55 at idle...doesn't slow anything downa t all, though.