3570k with integrated graphics
BVKnight
Join Date: 2012-02-26 Member: 147496Members
Join Date: 2012-02-26 Member: 147496Members
<div class="IPBDescription">Low fps, not bound by graphics settings?</div>I just finished my new PC build, which for the moment is only using the 3570k processor at 3.4GHz with the integrated GPU.
Now I know that the iGPU won't be sufficient for everything, but since it can run 25+ fps at 1080p in games like Skyrim and BF3, and knowing that NS2 is more CPU-limited than graphics, I figured that I might get some decent performance with it.
Unfortunately, when I launch the game everything is slow: the menu feels delayed, and I only get 10-20 fps in the readyroom. Changing the graphics level does absolutely nothing.
Anyone have a similar experience with this chip? I guess I'm trying to figure out why I was getting 30-50 fps at 1080p on an i7-9xx with AMD 58xx card on medium/high, but getting such low fps on an even faster CPU at 1280x1024, especially since reducing the graphics level doesn't improve anything. Any thoughts?
Now I know that the iGPU won't be sufficient for everything, but since it can run 25+ fps at 1080p in games like Skyrim and BF3, and knowing that NS2 is more CPU-limited than graphics, I figured that I might get some decent performance with it.
Unfortunately, when I launch the game everything is slow: the menu feels delayed, and I only get 10-20 fps in the readyroom. Changing the graphics level does absolutely nothing.
Anyone have a similar experience with this chip? I guess I'm trying to figure out why I was getting 30-50 fps at 1080p on an i7-9xx with AMD 58xx card on medium/high, but getting such low fps on an even faster CPU at 1280x1024, especially since reducing the graphics level doesn't improve anything. Any thoughts?
Comments
NS2 is CPU bound, but the CPU you have has a GPU on-die. NS2 is more CPU-limited than most games right now yes, but pairing it with a lawnmower engine instead of a Lotus or Ferrari will make a big difference.
NS2 is CPU bound, but the CPU you have has a GPU on-die. NS2 is more CPU-limited than most games right now yes, but pairing it with a lawnmower engine instead of a Lotus or Ferrari will make a big difference.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This doesn't quite make sense. I understand that the integrated GPU may simply not be powerful enough to smoothly handle NS2 at any level, but the fact that it can do so for other games suggests that NS2 even at its lowest graphical settings is not doing much to conserve gpu power. Either that, or there is some weird un-optimization going on, that someone like Max could shed some light on.
The GPU is just pushing pixels. Using your own analogy, think of the GPU as the engine and the screen as a weighted trailer. The size of the trailer scales with the resolution, and the pile of stuff on the trailer grows with the level and quality of graphics content. The speed that the engine can pull the trailer is FPS.
If my 3570k can pull a 30 foot trailer (1920x1080) stacked two feet high with stuff (low settings in Skyrim/BF3) at 30 FPS, then shouldn't it reasonably be able to pull a 15 foot trailer (1280x1024) even if it was stacked four feet high (low settings in NS2) with roughly the same performance? If it can't, doesn't that suggest that a lot of the things that NS2 is loading onto the trailer are more heavy than normal (unoptimized)?
<!--quoteo(post=1937610:date=May 20 2012, 05:26 AM:name=Floodinator)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Floodinator @ May 20 2012, 05:26 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1937610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Just use your old HD5800! I f.e. Run NS2 ona i72600k with a HD5870 ang got no FPS problems at all, lowest FPS is around 35 if alot of things happen in late game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The old computer was a shared comp that belongs to someone else. I can still play on it for a while, but I can't pull the graphics card from it. I will be installing a video card in this new build as soon as I get the money for it, but I'm trying to see what I can get away with until then.
2. Different games have different bottlenecks. It may be that the graphics part of NS2 is heavy on the exact things your integrated card is worst at (e.g. memory bandwidth, not sure).
3. Try disabling atmospherics with 'r_atmospherics false' in console. Older graphics cards suffer a lot from it. Shadows should be off by default on ridiculously awful, but if they aren't, do 'r_shadows false'. Other useful commands are 'r_aa false' and 'r_bloom false'.
4. I don't know exactly what the graphics settings do, but they don't seem to do much more than changing texture quality. Performance will not differ that much even on a GPU bound system, unless the graphics card completely runs out of video memory.
Even my old 2006 era ATI HD4850 is much faster then the HD4000 because it is a high end graphics card, which in itself is not even comparable to the HD4850 in terms of performance... And with NS2 not being optimised yet in terms of GPU offloading and also hogging the CPU, the HD4000 is not going to help out much compared to even the older Gaming specific cards, in fact it will probably cause FPS issues due to this...
<a href="http://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-review/15" target="_blank">http://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-int...3770k-review/15</a>
Dghelneshi and Kouji have both given examples of what I was looking for, that there might be something in the way the HD4000 handles games that is crippling its performance. I'm fine accepting this, I just want to know if that's really the case.
And Obraxis, I appreciate your comments, they just keep raising more questions for me. That link you just posted at Anandtech, for example, doesn't really help your case. It's irrelevant to say "HD4000 is barely faster than this card, which was slow, so it must be slow too" when those benchmarks clearly show playable framerates on modern games, no matter how relatively slow they might be. The question then is what is different about NS2 that makes the performance worse compared to those other games, or else what is wrong with my system that might be slowing it down.
Like I said, it probably is just a case of the HD4000 being not equipped enough to handle the game. But if there is a chance it's not the hardware side, and is instead something in the code or drivers, then we can make it better and possibly fix it! And those benchmarks seem to suggest that the hardware is capable, or at least more capable than what I am experiencing.
Keep in mind all of those games have things like pre-baked lighting and 3 times more engine programmers than UWE has total employees. NS2 runs fine on the GPU side, we're just too spoiled by games made by huge companies and them having to optimize for 512MB RAM consoles anyways.
I also found a few reports that Intel's drivers for the HD4000 are very buggy, and only optimized for a few (most of them big name) titles, with crashes occurring in many others. Unfortunately it sounds like Intel optimized the chip to look good in benchmarks of popular titles, we can only wait and see if they bring some driver revisions that add stability and performance across the board.
That card is in another computer in the house, that belongs to someone else. I am currently building my own so I don't have to share screen time :). But I will definitely continue playing NS2 on that one until I can get a better video card for my new build.
Have the same GPU and all things are transparent, not like a Wallhack, I only see the Background Textures any Ideas?
r_aa true
That is all you need, you might want to create a profile for NS2 so you don't have to fiddle with the control center settings each time you want to play another game where you do use the control center settings...