You could be onto something, I vaguely recall seeing my cpu in task manager running above 0 without any programs on. Ill have to check tomorrow. Does anybody know if msi afterburner gives analysis on the separate cores?
To check your cpu usage, simply press ctrl+shift+esc and click on the performance tab.
0-4% but I have background programs, a lil spikey around 6-10% when I tossed the performance window around that's about it no info on the individual cores though.
^Bacon. It's because his 4core intel will actually feed his 6900 series gfx. You trying to run that phenom x3 on a crossfire setup is like merging a 4 lane highway into a country road, it gets clogged up.
The way I understood 4 cores is that they are made to be much better at handling multiple tasks. Like running a game, music, and photoshop for example. But when it comes down to focusing on one item at a time (so if you were only running a game) the added cores don't give hardly anything for improved performance. Something about the majority programs are not yet written in a way to take full advantages of all the cores.
Rumors say that certain games are starting to utilize the more of the additional cores. So I guess it partially depends if the devs down at NS2 are writing the latest and greatest codes. If they are I still doubt its enough to excuse my brother getting 40 fps higher on way higher settings. Gotta give my computer SOME credit though, it wasn't built in the half life 1 era >.> or half life 2 for that matter. 1 half scripted core wouldn't set his computer platforms above mine in performance like that.
You could be onto something, I vaguely recall seeing my cpu in task manager running above 0 without any programs on. Ill have to check tomorrow. Does anybody know if msi afterburner gives analysis on the separate cores?
To check your cpu usage, simply press ctrl+shift+esc and click on the performance tab.
0-4% but I have background programs, a lil spikey around 6-10% when I tossed the performance window around that's about it no info on the individual cores though.
^Bacon. It's because his 4core intel will actually feed his 6900 series gfx. You trying to run that phenom x3 on a crossfire setup is like merging a 4 lane highway into a country road, it gets clogged up.
The way I understood 4 cores is that they are made to be much better at handling multiple tasks. Like running a game, music, and photoshop for example. But when it comes down to focusing on one item at a time (so if you were only running a game) the added cores don't give hardly anything for improved performance. Something about the majority programs are not yet written in a way to take full advantages of all the cores.
Rumors say that certain games are starting to utilize the more of the additional cores. So I guess it partially depends if the devs down at NS2 are writing the latest and greatest codes. If they are I still doubt its enough to excuse my brother getting 40 fps higher on way higher settings. Gotta give my computer SOME credit though, it wasn't built in the half life 1 era >.> or half life 2 for that matter. 1 half scripted core wouldn't set his computer platforms above mine in performance like that.
We must be looking at different graphs, because the ones in those articles clearly show that one core is mostly insufficient for most popular, 2010-era games. There are clear performance gains from using more cores, but there are diminishing returns with 3 or more cores.
The current issue for gamers is that any CPU worthy of playing a game with medium to high performance is generally going to be a quad-core or better CPU (e.g. your i5/i7/Phenom/Bulldozer/Piledriver/etc). Simply put, trying to run a modern game on your Core2Duo isn't going to work well not because its a dual core but because its old.
My cpu really isn't THAT far behind http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X3+720 As I said in my first post that I initially linked to, my cpu outranks the recommended cpu. If my cpu is so pathetic that it deserves the 9 fps I'm getting then those recommendations are grossly miscalculated to the point of false advertising. But since my profiler is showing whacked results with large random spikes, & my performance at one point was clear. Plus the fact that experts believe my processor to still be relevant makes me doubt my cpu is the issue. Not to mention the numerous other posters with much better setups than mine struggling in the same fashion.
This question of 4 fully functional cores really depends on what type of coding the NS2 devs are doing.
Anyway, is there anymore data that ca be taken from my profiler?
My cpu really isn't THAT far behind http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X3+720 As I said in my first post that I initially linked to, my cpu outranks the recommended cpu. If my cpu is so pathetic that it deserves the 9 fps I'm getting then those recommendations are grossly miscalculated to the point of false advertising. But since my profiler is showing whacked results with large random spikes, & my performance at one point was clear. Plus the fact that experts believe my processor to still be relevant makes me doubt my cpu is the issue. Not to mention the numerous other posters with much better setups than mine struggling in the same fashion.
This question of 4 fully functional cores really depends on what type of coding the NS2 devs are doing.
Anyway, is there anymore data that ca be taken from my profiler?
You do know that which part of your system is the bottleneck is based on the program you run, right?
Your CPU is the bottleneck with regards to NS2. However, there is obviously a bug causing you to get less fps than you should.
Unless you use windows 8, I would use process monitor to check CPU as it also accounts for interrupts.
That is a good point, as this will show exactly what is using up the cpu cycles on the 3rd core there..
@baconbits it doesn't look exactly like the same problem I had, but maybe it's worth a shot to run the game and then change the affinity so that it doesn't run on the 3rd core and see if it helps.
It looks like you have a bit higher usage on the 3rd core, but its nowhere near as bad as the problem I had..
I can tell you without a doubt, bacon, that its bottlenecking. I used an athlon2 with a 560 non-ti. It bottlenecked. I used a phenom1055t 6 core with a 560non-ti, it didnt bottleneck as baddly as the athlon, but my frames jumped 50fps when i got a 3770k. It was almost unplayable on the phenom1055t, and you're using something half of that.
@morbo<br />
true.. I misunderstood, I thoughed you ment the cores in total.<br />
A core itself can very well hit 0% and park. <br />
<br />
Unless you use windows 8, I would use process monitor to check CPU as it also accounts for interrupts.
<br />
<br />
You do know that which part of your system is the bottleneck is based on the program you run, right?<br />
Your CPU is the bottleneck with regards to NS2. However, there is obviously a bug causing you to get less fps than you should.
Yes I understand what a bottleneck is and how they work. I was just revealing what some experts believe about my cpu because my cpu is being drastically underestimated. 9-11 fps is far from normal with this setup at these low settings. I'm glad you recognize that.
Lastly on the topic of 4 cores I'd like to remind posters that skyrim is a game boasting the requirement of 4 cores. My system has shown 35+ fps even during large events on high graphics and with a boat load of mods. Ns2 does not list that requirement and runs at 9-11 fps even when nothing is happening. More frequently during events and especially during large events. I have Ns2 on the lowest possible settings on a resolution smaller than my desktop. With an effective game booster and a higher set affinity.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
eek. I ment process explorer. (process monitor is its brother program doing different stuff) http://www.sysinternals.com. Yes they will link you to microsoft technet as it should.
Also lets not kid ourselves. NS2 pushes a CPU far far far FAR more then skyrim ever does. If I want to give my cpu a break from playing NS2 I should loadup skyrim.
Looks like my 3rd cpu has generally higher usage than the others. None of the cpus sat idle (0%) for very long, only a split second and then back up 6% usually.
@ DC I thought you meant resource monitor so I ran that and mighta found something interesting in the disc reading section. The graph shows me that my disk goes wild every so often. When I was studying it I had no other programs, Those full graph sized spikes in the midst of low functions seems funky to me but I wouldn't have a clue as to whats normal.
Actually that's the calmest I've seen the graph, last night was even more spikey. No difference in what programs I had on. When I was exploring other options I found that windows indexing rates my hard disk below everything else by at least .6 points with a rating 5.9 with regards to disk data transfer rate. Online I caught somewhere that 6.0 and above was meant for gaming with 7.5 as max. I don't put a lot of faith in windows indexing but it made me curious. That in connection with the graphs made me wonder maybe the problem isn't my cpu. Do you think something could be wrong with my hard drive's reading? I have a terrabyte drive with 614 gb free, couldn't tell you anything else about it without opening my case.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
process explorer shows a i/o menu which is somewhat similar to thwat you notice in the resource monitor. (No, do not quote me I did not say it was similar ) The difference on CPU usage on core 3 is neglect able. No need to look into that if its that little.
Windows index score is pretty spot on since windows 7 so I would put some faith in that.
You can use process monitor (also on sysinternals) to make a readout (capture). Do not let it run continues. It has options to see which folders & files ask mostly for disk access. And other nice lil details.
At the moment I am interested in your disk. What do you have? How is it connected, sata3G, 6G? Do you run the chip in IDE, raid, AHCI? Are latest drivers installed & installed during windows install? (yes, doing it later gives at times very very very very weird problems. Install ahci drivers during windows setup and update them lateron)
Looks like there's a few complaints in the comments but mostly good reviews, not sure what to make of it
I installed all the required items during OS installation and let windows do auto updates on all essential software before I moved on to catalyst and audio drivers. I didn't manually search and install any hard drive drivers.
I attached the Process explorer file. I let it run alone for a few minutes while I went to the bathroom and got dressed then saved it.
Running the game on 2 cpus instead of 3 didn't have any affects. On a side note I've occasionally seen the NS2 main menu running at 115-170 fps. I haven't found out how to reproduce this, it seems to happen randomly. Once I tab alt or join a game the main menu fps returns to my normal range of 56-89 fps. I used to get around 200 fps in main menu in the builds that were running shortly after the 50% steam sale.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
Does not do me much mate. This time I ment process monitor. (its again another program haha)
Also check if you have recent ahci drivers installed. You have a green drive, which basicly means exactly that. Its green. Its less fast to conserve power and thus enviroment.
Its still a possiblity of course that the HD is the source of some fps issues for me but I have my doubts since I'm not experiencing hiccups in any other games. A problem with the HD isn't going to segregate itself to one item. HD issues certainly can't explain the Error: IDirect3DDevice9::Reset to 1280x1024 failed (Device lost) or why the profiler is messed up and spitting out odd details. Regardless of how this driver thing turns out I think we need observe my build and data not as an isolated case. Instead view it as a mid range system experiencing a bug that is also plaguing users with high end pc's like @artfunkel with low fps, errors, and strange profilers.
It looks like my best hope of playing normal again is the upcoming 247 maintenance build but, I don't have my hopes up. This is really frustrating having noobs whooping my ass and comp players grinding my face to dust because of performance. I had excellent performance during the steam sale when I was a noob in NS2. Now that I've gotten a lot better and its like fuck I can't do anything with 9 fps.
AMD phenom II x3 720 2.8 (OC to 3.2) (4th core not enabled)
8 GB RAM
Radeon HD 4850.
I can get at least 40 fps. You definitely have something going wrong. Do you have enough CPU cooling? Sometimes when you unlock a new core you lose CPU temp sensing.
Very glad you posted camron. Your post is pretty solid proof that my machine is in fact capable of running this game. Just out of curiosity what kind of hard drive are you using? And what settings are you running the game at?
I'm starting to have doubts my 4th core exists/running so cooling prolly won't be relevant. Skyrim's performance in a troubled area seemed to improve after it was unlocked. Unfortunately during my testing task manager and other monitors didn't show a 4th core or any options for one. Tonight I'll run some before and after tests to see for sure.
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
good point on janking the card out. Or perhaps disable the slot?
Ok let just check everything because im running out ideas.
* What is your CPUs max frequency while running ns2? - Check this in resource monitor. Processor tab, blue bar. You used the resource monitor before for the disk. Anything below 100% for ns2 is usually a cooling issue. (or perhaps bios, but in any case wrong)
* check your disk with porgrams booting from CD to check it for health. Use stuff like HDtune to check your disks speed. * Naturally no mods etc. Fullscreen and or windowed. Low graph settings, etc.
* Set your graphics driver in different settings, force more by the driver. You can use a different profile in most drivers there days for any game. Do not touch antialias. Leave that application controlled. * update drivers. main things are graphics, lan, chipset, disk controllers but more is not bad. Find in device manager which ones you have and we may be able to help. Each driver has a details tab with a PID and VID in it. We want!
* On device manager, if possible, enable hard disk caching. Makes you lose some data on a powerloss, so dont jank out your power cables while the pc runs. * test your memory with a bootcd because why not.
* No harm getting video card benchmarks and benching it. Try to make it hot. Perhaps the vid cooling is failing? * Check event viewer in windows for errors and consider a fresh install if you had issues in the past.
* disable and/or pull out anything you do not need. Run on one card, do not have a attached printer, use a cabled mouse instead of wireless (if you have wireless). ps/2 instead of usb. * run disk cleaner (in windows) to cleanup temp folders and free up disk space.
* defragment. Use windows own defrag if win7. Never defrag a SSD. * If you got a SSD, backup everything and check for firmware upgrades. Upgrade the firmware. Never a 100% guarantee it will not brick a drive so thats why backups. But in the super majority you need that firmware update.
* check computer insides & motherboard for anything weird. * Download the SLI profiles. (I think amd had sli profiles if I remember ok)
* Download new grahics driver & sli profile. Pull out internet cable so you have no internet. Remove the installed graphics driver & reboot. Cleanup every scrap. Install newly downloaded one. Do not save settings, yes you have to reconfigure your graphics settings if you changed those.
* use autoruns (https://www.sysinternals.com) and start tagging off stuff to boot. Using this tool usually enables you to enable stuff again incase you disabled important stuff. Do not disable windows / microsoft stuff. You can even test without stuff like AV but it is a risk. Do not do this for extended times and do AV scans from a bootcd after, just incase. * actually, also do a AV scan from a bootcd in any case.
Im sure I thoughed of more by the time you finished with this list. hehe
Comments
true.. I misunderstood, I thoughed you ment the cores in total.
A core itself can very well hit 0% and park.
Unless you use windows 8, I would use process monitor to check CPU as it also accounts for interrupts.
0-4% but I have background programs, a lil spikey around 6-10% when I tossed the performance window around that's about it no info on the individual cores though.
Graph
http://s880.photobucket.com/user/Baconbits19/media/Cpu.png.html
Processes
http://s880.photobucket.com/user/Baconbits19/media/Processes.png.html
The way I understood 4 cores is that they are made to be much better at handling multiple tasks. Like running a game, music, and photoshop for example. But when it comes down to focusing on one item at a time (so if you were only running a game) the added cores don't give hardly anything for improved performance. Something about the majority programs are not yet written in a way to take full advantages of all the cores.
Rumors say that certain games are starting to utilize the more of the additional cores. So I guess it partially depends if the devs down at NS2 are writing the latest and greatest codes. If they are I still doubt its enough to excuse my brother getting 40 fps higher on way higher settings. Gotta give my computer SOME credit though, it wasn't built in the half life 1 era >.> or half life 2 for that matter. 1 half scripted core wouldn't set his computer platforms above mine in performance like that.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/07/05/how-many-cpu-cores-do-games-need/1
All the games tested here show 1-6 cores getting about the same fps, maximum difference of 2 or 3.
I think I trust the cpu authorities of the reliable site tomshardware more than you
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/359412-28-bottleneck
AMD phenom II x 3 720 is said to not be a bottleneck for the GTX 560 Ti, a card in the top 10 as of may 13th 2013
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+560+Ti
My cpu really isn't THAT far behind http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X3+720
As I said in my first post that I initially linked to, my cpu outranks the recommended cpu. If my cpu is so pathetic that it deserves the 9 fps I'm getting then those recommendations are grossly miscalculated to the point of false advertising. But since my profiler is showing whacked results with large random spikes, & my performance at one point was clear. Plus the fact that experts believe my processor to still be relevant makes me doubt my cpu is the issue. Not to mention the numerous other posters with much better setups than mine struggling in the same fashion.
This question of 4 fully functional cores really depends on what type of coding the NS2 devs are doing.
Anyway, is there anymore data that ca be taken from my profiler?
Process monitor? Is this what you guys are talking about? http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh457551.aspx
I'll try it soon
Yes I understand what a bottleneck is and how they work. I was just revealing what some experts believe about my cpu because my cpu is being drastically underestimated. 9-11 fps is far from normal with this setup at these low settings. I'm glad you recognize that.
Lastly on the topic of 4 cores I'd like to remind posters that skyrim is a game boasting the requirement of 4 cores. My system has shown 35+ fps even during large events on high graphics and with a boat load of mods. Ns2 does not list that requirement and runs at 9-11 fps even when nothing is happening. More frequently during events and especially during large events. I have Ns2 on the lowest possible settings on a resolution smaller than my desktop. With an effective game booster and a higher set affinity.
I ment process explorer. (process monitor is its brother program doing different stuff)
http://www.sysinternals.com. Yes they will link you to microsoft technet as it should.
Also lets not kid ourselves. NS2 pushes a CPU far far far FAR more then skyrim ever does.
If I want to give my cpu a break from playing NS2 I should loadup skyrim.
http://s880.photobucket.com/user/Baconbits19/media/cpuusage.png.html
@ DC I thought you meant resource monitor so I ran that and mighta found something interesting in the disc reading section. The graph shows me that my disk goes wild every so often. When I was studying it I had no other programs, Those full graph sized spikes in the midst of low functions seems funky to me but I wouldn't have a clue as to whats normal.
http://s880.photobucket.com/user/Baconbits19/media/diskactivity.png.html
Actually that's the calmest I've seen the graph, last night was even more spikey. No difference in what programs I had on. When I was exploring other options I found that windows indexing rates my hard disk below everything else by at least .6 points with a rating 5.9 with regards to disk data transfer rate. Online I caught somewhere that 6.0 and above was meant for gaming with 7.5 as max. I don't put a lot of faith in windows indexing but it made me curious. That in connection with the graphs made me wonder maybe the problem isn't my cpu. Do you think something could be wrong with my hard drive's reading? I have a terrabyte drive with 614 gb free, couldn't tell you anything else about it without opening my case.
The difference on CPU usage on core 3 is neglect able. No need to look into that if its that little.
Windows index score is pretty spot on since windows 7 so I would put some faith in that.
You can use process monitor (also on sysinternals) to make a readout (capture). Do not let it run continues. It has options to see which folders & files ask mostly for disk access. And other nice lil details.
At the moment I am interested in your disk. What do you have? How is it connected, sata3G, 6G? Do you run the chip in IDE, raid, AHCI? Are latest drivers installed & installed during windows install? (yes, doing it later gives at times very very very very weird problems. Install ahci drivers during windows setup and update them lateron)
Its a Sata
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136317
Looks like there's a few complaints in the comments but mostly good reviews, not sure what to make of it
I installed all the required items during OS installation and let windows do auto updates on all essential software before I moved on to catalyst and audio drivers. I didn't manually search and install any hard drive drivers.
I attached the Process explorer file. I let it run alone for a few minutes while I went to the bathroom and got dressed then saved it.
This time I ment process monitor. (its again another program haha)
Also check if you have recent ahci drivers installed.
You have a green drive, which basicly means exactly that. Its green. Its less fast to conserve power and thus enviroment.
http://s880.photobucket.com/user/Baconbits19/media/2013-05-15_00001.jpg.html
http://s880.photobucket.com/user/Baconbits19/media/2013-05-15_00002.jpg.html
Looking for hard drive drivers has turned into a wild goose chase. Multiple websites fishing for money and registrations or with empty promises of the desired driver. The one reliable source I found http://drivers.softpedia.com/get/FIRMWARE/HP/HP-Pavilion-A4316F-SATA-Firmware-Update-BX-for-Windows-7.shtml turned up with the error "your system does not meet the minimum requirements" Is there a way to update via windows?
Its still a possiblity of course that the HD is the source of some fps issues for me but I have my doubts since I'm not experiencing hiccups in any other games. A problem with the HD isn't going to segregate itself to one item. HD issues certainly can't explain the Error: IDirect3DDevice9::Reset to 1280x1024 failed (Device lost) or why the profiler is messed up and spitting out odd details. Regardless of how this driver thing turns out I think we need observe my build and data not as an isolated case. Instead view it as a mid range system experiencing a bug that is also plaguing users with high end pc's like @artfunkel with low fps, errors, and strange profilers.
It looks like my best hope of playing normal again is the upcoming 247 maintenance build but, I don't have my hopes up. This is really frustrating having noobs whooping my ass and comp players grinding my face to dust because of performance. I had excellent performance during the steam sale when I was a noob in NS2. Now that I've gotten a lot better and its like fuck I can't do anything with 9 fps.
I'm starting to have doubts my 4th core exists/running so cooling prolly won't be relevant. Skyrim's performance in a troubled area seemed to improve after it was unlocked. Unfortunately during my testing task manager and other monitors didn't show a 4th core or any options for one. Tonight I'll run some before and after tests to see for sure.
Ok let just check everything because im running out ideas.
* What is your CPUs max frequency while running ns2?
- Check this in resource monitor. Processor tab, blue bar. You used the resource monitor before for the disk. Anything below 100% for ns2 is usually a cooling issue. (or perhaps bios, but in any case wrong)
* check your disk with porgrams booting from CD to check it for health. Use stuff like HDtune to check your disks speed.
* Naturally no mods etc. Fullscreen and or windowed. Low graph settings, etc.
* Set your graphics driver in different settings, force more by the driver. You can use a different profile in most drivers there days for any game. Do not touch antialias. Leave that application controlled.
* update drivers. main things are graphics, lan, chipset, disk controllers but more is not bad. Find in device manager which ones you have and we may be able to help. Each driver has a details tab with a PID and VID in it. We want!
* On device manager, if possible, enable hard disk caching. Makes you lose some data on a powerloss, so dont jank out your power cables while the pc runs.
* test your memory with a bootcd because why not.
* No harm getting video card benchmarks and benching it. Try to make it hot. Perhaps the vid cooling is failing?
* Check event viewer in windows for errors and consider a fresh install if you had issues in the past.
* disable and/or pull out anything you do not need. Run on one card, do not have a attached printer, use a cabled mouse instead of wireless (if you have wireless). ps/2 instead of usb.
* run disk cleaner (in windows) to cleanup temp folders and free up disk space.
* defragment. Use windows own defrag if win7. Never defrag a SSD.
* If you got a SSD, backup everything and check for firmware upgrades. Upgrade the firmware. Never a 100% guarantee it will not brick a drive so thats why backups. But in the super majority you need that firmware update.
* check computer insides & motherboard for anything weird.
* Download the SLI profiles. (I think amd had sli profiles if I remember ok)
* Download new grahics driver & sli profile. Pull out internet cable so you have no internet. Remove the installed graphics driver & reboot. Cleanup every scrap. Install newly downloaded one. Do not save settings, yes you have to reconfigure your graphics settings if you changed those.
* use autoruns (https://www.sysinternals.com) and start tagging off stuff to boot. Using this tool usually enables you to enable stuff again incase you disabled important stuff. Do not disable windows / microsoft stuff. You can even test without stuff like AV but it is a risk. Do not do this for extended times and do AV scans from a bootcd after, just incase.
* actually, also do a AV scan from a bootcd in any case.
Im sure I thoughed of more by the time you finished with this list. hehe