[Removed for Content] why is this happening to me.....

shadowman1 · 07-01-2011, 08:06 AM

Hello, and thank you for reading. Now here are EQ2 reccomended system requirements:

Recommended: Windows® 2000/XP/Vista, Pentium® 4 2 Ghz or greater, 1 GB RAM, DirectX 9 Compatible video card. Pixel shader and vertex shader compatible hardware with 128MB of texture memory or greater, DirectSound compatible audio hardware, Broadband Internet Connection, 16x DVD-ROM, 10GB Hard Drive Space.

Now compare it with my computer specs:

OS: Windows 7 64-bit

Proccessor: AMD Athlon II x4 (quad core) 635 2.9 Ghz

Memory: Corsair Dual Channel RAM 8129 MB

GPU: EVGA Nvidia GTS 250 4069 MB

Why do I lag on balanced settings still? One more thing why when I hit default settings in display options does it put me on the highest settings but I can barely run the game with it set as that I have my resolution matching that of my monitor, and card so whats up.

Any advice in enhanceing my experiance would be great. Ty

darwich · 07-01-2011, 08:11 AM

game was made with 1 processor in mind... doesnt really recognize the multi processor cores... (not sure if this is totally accurate as im not a techy just from what ive read)...

Table · 07-01-2011, 08:39 AM

Have you updated video card drivers lately? Almost sounds like an issue with that to me.

urgthock · 07-01-2011, 10:39 AM

As mentioned already, EQ2 coding does not take advantage of multiple processor cores. As such, it's better to have 1 fast core than 4 semi fast cores. But, with your build I really don't see why you sould be having too many client side rendering issues. Are you sure it is graphics lag and not server or network lag of some sort? Can you describe the lag you are seeing?

Wurm · 07-01-2011, 11:01 AM

Its your CPU and Graphic card combined, My daughters PC is almost the same hardware and she runs in balanced or gets a ton of graphic lag. She however has a 260GTX which is quite a bit faster than the 250.

1) CPU: The Athlon II is the budget AMD processor, upgrade that thing to at least 3.2 Ghz Phenom and you will notice a huge difference. I suggest trying to overclock your current Athlon II to that speed first. If it OCs to at least 3.2 you might be OK.

2) The 250 was a budget card from the beginning. Try to find at the very least a cheap 460 (there is plenty of them out there). And make sure that your drivers are all up to date.

Thats the two best options if you don't want to buy all new hardware.

Aibyouka-Mew · 07-01-2011, 11:04 AM

My PC has a similar setup, yet I lag pretty harsh.

My laptop runs pretty [Removed for Content] well, balanced on PQs with no change in graphic lag, any higher in a PQ and it gets kinda chuggy. Mind you these are PQs on AB where usually theirs a crap ton of people at the PQs..

I don't even have dedicated video..

It's all in the processor and RAM. Laptop has a pretty decent CPU, plus I don't install anything unnecessary. Most I have installed is EQ2, vent, firefox and yahoo.

Lalen · 07-01-2011, 11:08 AM

shadowman1 wrote:

Hello, and thank you for reading. Now here are EQ2 reccomended system requirements:
Recommended: Windows® 2000/XP/Vista, Pentium® 4 2 Ghz or greater, 1 GB RAM, DirectX 9 Compatible video card. Pixel shader and vertex shader compatible hardware with 128MB of texture memory or greater, DirectSound compatible audio hardware, Broadband Internet Connection, 16x DVD-ROM, 10GB Hard Drive Space.
Now compare it with my computer specs:
OS: Windows 7 64-bit
Proccessor: AMD Athlon II x4 (quad core) 635 2.9 Ghz
Memory: Corsair Dual Channel RAM 8129 MB
GPU: EVGA Nvidia GTS 250 4069 MB
Why do I lag on balanced settings still? One more thing why when I hit default settings in display options does it put me on the highest settings but I can barely run the game with it set as that I have my resolution matching that of my monitor, and card so whats up.
Any advice in enhanceing my experiance would be great. Ty

LOL

Dude I have a Phenom x6 1100T Black Edition OC to 4.2Ghz running Turbo (so a single core can oc itself 20% higher if needed) with 16GB Super Talent 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM with 3x SLI EVGA Nvidia GTX 570 Super Clocked (DDR5) 4x4 and I top out in the over-land zones at about 30fps with everything on extreme (Crysis2 runs at 120fps and this system passmarked as one of the top 100 pc's in the world less than 90 days ago)

But that 2.9Ghz is what is killing you.

Lamprey_02 · 07-01-2011, 11:49 AM

It's not about the clock speed, it's about the processor type. I run a 2.66 Ghz i7, max settings and everything's silky smooth. If you ever wondered why people pay more for an Intel processor that might have the same or even lower clock speed - now you know SMILEY

Also, better video card might help. You can buy a good card for around $100.

Wurm · 07-01-2011, 11:58 AM

Lamprey_02 wrote:

It's not about the clock speed, it's about the processor type. I run a 2.66 Ghz i7, max settings and everything's silky smooth. If you ever wondered why people pay more for an Intel processor that might have the same or even lower clock speed - now you know
Also, better video card might help. You can buy a good card for around $100.

Yes it is about the clock speed, comparing a i7 to a Athlon II is like comparing apples to oranges. And like you said your CPU also costs quite a bit more.

Bet you have a waaaaay better GPU as well.

My Phenom 940 @ 3.5Ghz with my 470GTX runs the game butter smooth on extreme quality as long as I use the GPU shadows.

Come to think of it... @ the OP, are you switching the CPU shadows to GPU under settings? its about a +10 point FPS difference.

Fadedspirit · 07-01-2011, 12:03 PM

I don't mean to be rude, however EQ2 DOES in fact support multicores now. My FPS went from 64 to the 400s when I upgraded from a dual-core to a quadcore recently.

Also, if you want to see for yourself there's a "multicore support" option to check in your options. If you have a quadcore & uncheck/check it you'll see major differences.

Just wanted to point out how terribly incorrect more than half this thread is (ancient info).

FYI: an Nvidia 250GTS is a hunk of dog poodoo, fix your GFX card. Also, what KIND of ram? The amount doesn't matter as much as the speed & type of RAM (DDR2, DDR3?). What's the SPEED of the RAM, PC600,PC800 etc etc?

Wurm · 07-01-2011, 12:16 PM

Fadedspirit wrote:

I don't mean to be rude, however EQ2 DOES in fact support multicores now. My FPS went from 64 to the 400s when I upgraded from a dual-core to a quadcore recently.
Also, if you want to see for yourself there's a "multicore support" option to check in your options. If you have a quadcore & uncheck/check it you'll see major differences.
Just wanted to point out how terribly incorrect more than half this thread is (ancient info).
FYI: an Nvidia 250GTS is a hunk of dog poodoo, fix your GFX card. Also, what KIND of ram? The amount doesn't matter as much as the speed & type of RAM (DDR2, DDR3?). What's the SPEED of the RAM, PC600,PC800 etc etc?

It now has a multicore support, but it doesn't do much at all. That fact has been discussed quite a few times in the support forums, and if you don't believe me open your task manager while playing and you will see that only one core is doing most of the work. If the multi-core support was really working as it should be you would see most of the cores running at the same percentage. This game was designed for one single fast core. They added a bandiad later but it didn't do much. So if everything else is equal (not another i7 to Athlon II comparison for example), the faster your core speed the better EQ2 runs.

You also didn't mention which CPU you switched out and with which CPU you replaced it with. I do agree with the 250 not being a good gaming card however. The RAM really doesn't matter.

And 64 to 400 fps? huh?

Lalen · 07-01-2011, 12:18 PM

Fadedspirit wrote:

I don't mean to be rude, however EQ2 DOES in fact support multicores now. My FPS went from 64 to the 400s when I upgraded from a dual-core to a quadcore recently.

That is not entirely true.. There is a diffrence of making use of the cores and supporting multicore threading...... Allow me to explain..

Say a segment of the code needs a 183 threads processed and seg 2 has 28 processed... currently they're broken down to where seg1 is sent to core 0, and seg 2 is sent to core 1... Core 0 sits maxed out for 8 seconds while Core 1 zips right through it. So yes it does "use" multi-cores, however it does not support multi-core threading, where the game itself compiles the segments into one work-load based on cores, and sends 20 threads to core 0, 20 to core 1, 20 to core 2, 20 to core 3, 20 to core 4, and 20 to core 5...

Bekkr · 07-04-2011, 07:27 AM

Never mind, I was basically going to reiterate what Wurm said already. Nothing to see here, move along.

Princess Ariel · 07-05-2011, 12:31 PM

Just know it isn't only you. My hubby built my computer, it should run everything at max with decent fps rate, to say the least it will not. I have to set everything lower then my old gateway dual processor that only had 2 gigs of memory and now I have 8 with another gig on the video card. I am pretty sure it has to do with more then one or 2 processors. When the game was made they made the game thinking the cpu's would just get faster and faster instead processors and computer designers went a totally different direction.

Peogia · 07-05-2011, 01:05 PM

I wonder why SOE hasn't ported Everquest II to the playstation console like Everquest 1 and Free Realms yet

07-01-2011, 11:01 AM	#5
Wurm Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,003	Its your CPU and Graphic card combined, My daughters PC is almost the same hardware and she runs in balanced or gets a ton of graphic lag. She however has a 260GTX which is quite a bit faster than the 250. 1) CPU: The Athlon II is the budget AMD processor, upgrade that thing to at least 3.2 Ghz Phenom and you will notice a huge difference. I suggest trying to overclock your current Athlon II to that speed first. If it OCs to at least 3.2 you might be OK. 2) The 250 was a budget card from the beginning. Try to find at the very least a cheap 460 (there is plenty of them out there). And make sure that your drivers are all up to date. Thats the two best options if you don't want to buy all new hardware. __________________

07-01-2011, 11:08 AM	#7
Lalen Server: Everfrost Guild: Divine Reapers Rank: Elder Officer Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 766	shadowman1 wrote: Hello, and thank you for reading. Now here are EQ2 reccomended system requirements: Recommended: Windows® 2000/XP/Vista, Pentium® 4 2 Ghz or greater, 1 GB RAM, DirectX 9 Compatible video card. Pixel shader and vertex shader compatible hardware with 128MB of texture memory or greater, DirectSound compatible audio hardware, Broadband Internet Connection, 16x DVD-ROM, 10GB Hard Drive Space. Now compare it with my computer specs: OS: Windows 7 64-bit Proccessor: AMD Athlon II x4 (quad core) 635 2.9 Ghz Memory: Corsair Dual Channel RAM 8129 MB GPU: EVGA Nvidia GTS 250 4069 MB Why do I lag on balanced settings still? One more thing why when I hit default settings in display options does it put me on the highest settings but I can barely run the game with it set as that I have my resolution matching that of my monitor, and card so whats up. Any advice in enhanceing my experiance would be great. Ty LOL Dude I have a Phenom x6 1100T Black Edition OC to 4.2Ghz running Turbo (so a single core can oc itself 20% higher if needed) with 16GB Super Talent 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM with 3x SLI EVGA Nvidia GTX 570 Super Clocked (DDR5) 4x4 and I top out in the over-land zones at about 30fps with everything on extreme (Crysis2 runs at 120fps and this system passmarked as one of the top 100 pc's in the world less than 90 days ago) But that 2.9Ghz is what is killing you. __________________ Quote: Patch Notes All ground mounts have received a large boost in speed. So they can now outrun FLYING mounts in the air? EPIC FAIL

07-01-2011, 11:49 AM	#8
Lamprey_02 Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 353	It's not about the clock speed, it's about the processor type. I run a 2.66 Ghz i7, max settings and everything's silky smooth. If you ever wondered why people pay more for an Intel processor that might have the same or even lower clock speed - now you know Also, better video card might help. You can buy a good card for around $100.

07-01-2011, 11:58 AM	#9
Wurm Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,003	Lamprey_02 wrote: It's not about the clock speed, it's about the processor type. I run a 2.66 Ghz i7, max settings and everything's silky smooth. If you ever wondered why people pay more for an Intel processor that might have the same or even lower clock speed - now you know Also, better video card might help. You can buy a good card for around $100. Yes it is about the clock speed, comparing a i7 to a Athlon II is like comparing apples to oranges. And like you said your CPU also costs quite a bit more. Bet you have a waaaaay better GPU as well. My Phenom 940 @ 3.5Ghz with my 470GTX runs the game butter smooth on extreme quality as long as I use the GPU shadows. Come to think of it... @ the OP, are you switching the CPU shadows to GPU under settings? its about a +10 point FPS difference. __________________

07-01-2011, 12:16 PM	#11
Wurm Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,003	Fadedspirit wrote: I don't mean to be rude, however EQ2 DOES in fact support multicores now. My FPS went from 64 to the 400s when I upgraded from a dual-core to a quadcore recently. Also, if you want to see for yourself there's a "multicore support" option to check in your options. If you have a quadcore & uncheck/check it you'll see major differences. Just wanted to point out how terribly incorrect more than half this thread is (ancient info). FYI: an Nvidia 250GTS is a hunk of dog poodoo, fix your GFX card. Also, what KIND of ram? The amount doesn't matter as much as the speed & type of RAM (DDR2, DDR3?). What's the SPEED of the RAM, PC600,PC800 etc etc? It now has a multicore support, but it doesn't do much at all. That fact has been discussed quite a few times in the support forums, and if you don't believe me open your task manager while playing and you will see that only one core is doing most of the work. If the multi-core support was really working as it should be you would see most of the cores running at the same percentage. This game was designed for one single fast core. They added a bandiad later but it didn't do much. So if everything else is equal (not another i7 to Athlon II comparison for example), the faster your core speed the better EQ2 runs. You also didn't mention which CPU you switched out and with which CPU you replaced it with. I do agree with the 250 not being a good gaming card however. The RAM really doesn't matter. And 64 to 400 fps? huh? __________________

07-01-2011, 08:06 AM	#1
shadowman1 Journeyman Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 8	Hello, and thank you for reading. Now here are EQ2 reccomended system requirements: Recommended: Windows® 2000/XP/Vista, Pentium® 4 2 Ghz or greater, 1 GB RAM, DirectX 9 Compatible video card. Pixel shader and vertex shader compatible hardware with 128MB of texture memory or greater, DirectSound compatible audio hardware, Broadband Internet Connection, 16x DVD-ROM, 10GB Hard Drive Space. Now compare it with my computer specs: OS: Windows 7 64-bit Proccessor: AMD Athlon II x4 (quad core) 635 2.9 Ghz Memory: Corsair Dual Channel RAM 8129 MB GPU: EVGA Nvidia GTS 250 4069 MB Why do I lag on balanced settings still? One more thing why when I hit default settings in display options does it put me on the highest settings but I can barely run the game with it set as that I have my resolution matching that of my monitor, and card so whats up. Any advice in enhanceing my experiance would be great. Ty

07-01-2011, 08:11 AM	#2
darwich Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 840	game was made with 1 processor in mind... doesnt really recognize the multi processor cores... (not sure if this is totally accurate as im not a techy just from what ive read)...

07-01-2011, 08:39 AM	#3
Table Apprentice Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 31	Have you updated video card drivers lately? Almost sounds like an issue with that to me.

07-01-2011, 10:39 AM	#4
urgthock Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Houston, TX. Posts: 1,308	As mentioned already, EQ2 coding does not take advantage of multiple processor cores. As such, it's better to have 1 fast core than 4 semi fast cores. But, with your build I really don't see why you sould be having too many client side rendering issues. Are you sure it is graphics lag and not server or network lag of some sort? Can you describe the lag you are seeing?

07-01-2011, 11:04 AM	#6
Aibyouka-Mew Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 90	My PC has a similar setup, yet I lag pretty harsh. My laptop runs pretty [Removed for Content] well, balanced on PQs with no change in graphic lag, any higher in a PQ and it gets kinda chuggy. Mind you these are PQs on AB where usually theirs a crap ton of people at the PQs.. I don't even have dedicated video.. It's all in the processor and RAM. Laptop has a pretty decent CPU, plus I don't install anything unnecessary. Most I have installed is EQ2, vent, firefox and yahoo.

07-01-2011, 12:03 PM	#10
Fadedspirit Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 32	I don't mean to be rude, however EQ2 DOES in fact support multicores now. My FPS went from 64 to the 400s when I upgraded from a dual-core to a quadcore recently. Also, if you want to see for yourself there's a "multicore support" option to check in your options. If you have a quadcore & uncheck/check it you'll see major differences. Just wanted to point out how terribly incorrect more than half this thread is (ancient info). FYI: an Nvidia 250GTS is a hunk of dog poodoo, fix your GFX card. Also, what KIND of ram? The amount doesn't matter as much as the speed & type of RAM (DDR2, DDR3?). What's the SPEED of the RAM, PC600,PC800 etc etc?

07-01-2011, 12:18 PM	#12
Lalen Server: Everfrost Guild: Divine Reapers Rank: Elder Officer Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 766	Fadedspirit wrote: I don't mean to be rude, however EQ2 DOES in fact support multicores now. My FPS went from 64 to the 400s when I upgraded from a dual-core to a quadcore recently. That is not entirely true.. There is a diffrence of making use of the cores and supporting multicore threading...... Allow me to explain.. Say a segment of the code needs a 183 threads processed and seg 2 has 28 processed... currently they're broken down to where seg1 is sent to core 0, and seg 2 is sent to core 1... Core 0 sits maxed out for 8 seconds while Core 1 zips right through it. So yes it does "use" multi-cores, however it does not support multi-core threading, where the game itself compiles the segments into one work-load based on cores, and sends 20 threads to core 0, 20 to core 1, 20 to core 2, 20 to core 3, 20 to core 4, and 20 to core 5... __________________ Quote: Patch Notes All ground mounts have received a large boost in speed. So they can now outrun FLYING mounts in the air? EPIC FAIL

07-04-2011, 07:27 AM	#13
Bekkr Tester Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 208	Never mind, I was basically going to reiterate what Wurm said already. Nothing to see here, move along.

07-05-2011, 12:31 PM	#14
Princess Ariel Loremaster Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 196	Just know it isn't only you. My hubby built my computer, it should run everything at max with decent fps rate, to say the least it will not. I have to set everything lower then my old gateway dual processor that only had 2 gigs of memory and now I have 8 with another gig on the video card. I am pretty sure it has to do with more then one or 2 processors. When the game was made they made the game thinking the cpu's would just get faster and faster instead processors and computer designers went a totally different direction.

07-05-2011, 01:05 PM	#15
Peogia Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 928	I wonder why SOE hasn't ported Everquest II to the playstation console like Everquest 1 and Free Realms yet __________________ The FBI is encouraging users to visit a website run by its security partner, http://www.dcwg.org , that will inform them whether they're infected and explain how to fix the problem. After July 9, infected users won't be able to connect to the Internet.