EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > Support Forums > Tech Area > Performance Support
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-06-2010, 05:33 PM   #31
Garavic
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Vertigo
Rank: Officer

Loremaster
Garavic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 29
Default

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

I never considered this before, but do you think there would be noticable performance change if Guilds designated a specific raid appearence armor?  Not only would it be marginally amusing, but wouldn't that also lesson the amount of items being loaded by our systems substantially?  And how do illusion factor in as far as load?  More or less then a distinctively geared player?

The question becomes how much of a difference would it make.

I need to whip up 24 sets of the orange Bristlebane Day armor...

Oh yeah if I'm gonna try this it's gonna be obnoxious.  I have always wanted a 24 person panda raid.

Garavic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 08:03 PM   #32
Skwor

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 338
Default

Rothgar wrote:

Skwor wrote:

Rothgar wrote:

We're always looking at ways to improve performance and we've been working on some changes to flora and other areas that kill frame rate.

Keep in mind this is an MMO and you can't compare framerates to other types of games.  MMO's give you the freedom to wear almost any type of armor and we have 6 years worth of expansions.  When you're around large groups of people you may very well be loading tons of different textures and shaders in order to render the wide array of armor and effects that you see.  As the game gets older and more unique textures are added, the potential for higher memory usage keeps growing and growing.  Sometimes the bottleneck is your machine being able to load these resources from disk fast enough.  If you see a dip in frames but after a few seconds it comes back up, this is most likely the cause.

If the framerate drop you're seeing is in an area where there are no people, please let us know exactly what you're looking at.  Perhaps there is an issue in the zone geometry we can look at fixing.

From the above I feel the need to point out it may be a bit more than your state here.

I run an I-975 Extrmeme overclocked to 4.2 gig, with an x58 motherboard 6 core rdy. It has 12 gig 1600 gaming ram and a GTX 295. Add to this an SSD harddrive, WIN 7 Pro 64 bit and a true GIGAbyte network with all cables CAT 6 and QUAD RG6 to fiber. With a 610 router I get net bandwidth measured at 20 MB DLs and 5 MB ULs and that is from Washington DC to San Fanciso with a ping average of 90 msecs and jitter of 1 msec consistently with QOS always greater than 85%.

Given the above I still see significant slowdowns in large zones and with raids. Some of this goes away after a second or two but there is still the odd "less than 30 FPS on average performance settings" when in large open zones or large group of players. Not to mention some sort of lag spike every 20 seconds or so occasionally on raids (I think this is more related to SSD access or Nagle's algorithm which I am still tweaking registry settings for)

A machine that is as high end as above 6 years after a game release really should tear up performance. I am surprised how EQ2 is the only game that can bring my machine to its knees. It seems something in the engine is not as efficient as it could be.

If you think it will help I will gladly /bug the times and places where performance appears to take an inapproprite drop.

Can you reproduce the framerate dips?  Do they always happen in certain areas or coincide with a specific set of events?  Can you tell if your machine is hitting the disk during those dips by running something like Process Explorer?

Do you see the same problems if you run on Extreme Performance?  If the issues go away, it could be related to particle effects, shadows or some other graphics setting that gets disabled.

Toxxulia Forrest loc 302 124 3006 running FR goes into low 20's, standing still fr in mid 30's. This is on quality setting of profit. No other PC's around, very repeatable. Waiting 5 minutes at the location to ensure everything loads and same results. On performance setting of Profit I run at 50 fps standing still and low 30's when running at same loc. I will post more stuff as encounter it

Skwor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2010, 02:22 PM   #33
Gaige

Loremaster
Gaige's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
Default

Skwor wrote:

I run an I-975 Extrmeme overclocked to 4.2 gig, with an x58 motherboard 6 core rdy. It has 12 gig 1600 gaming ram and a GTX 295. Add to this an SSD harddrive, WIN 7 Pro 64 bit and a true GIGAbyte network with all cables CAT 6 and QUAD RG6 to fiber. With a 610 router I get net bandwidth measured at 20 MB DLs and 5 MB ULs and that is from Washington DC to San Fanciso with a ping average of 90 msecs and jitter of 1 msec consistently with QOS always greater than 85%.

A machine that is as high end as above 6 years after a game release really should tear up performance. 

If EQ2 is your main concern then you wasted a ton of money.  Gratz on that.

975 extreme?  Useless.  All i7s can overclock to ~4Ghz.  12GB of ram?  Useless.  6GB is just as good for EQ2 (and pretty much everything).  GTX 295?  Useless.  Gratz on your underclocked GTX 260 SLi on a single card, ps EQ2 doesn't use SLi so you're basically getting slower than GTX 260 performance.

The SSD is nice, if you care about shaving 5 seconds off your zoning times.  All of that network stuff doesn't matter.  Broadband = same performance from EQ2 regardless if its a 10/100 or 1000 network.

So basically you spent about 4x more than you needed to on hardware when you play a game that really only cares about one thing:  CPU megahertz.  Nothing else matters.  Get a shader 3.0 card, overclock your dual/quad core cpu as far as you can and have at least 4GB of ram and you're gtg.

An $800 machine will play EQ2 as well as a $4k machine.  Its been that way for six years.

__________________
Gaige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2010, 04:55 PM   #34
Kain-UK

Loremaster
Kain-UK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 441
Default

Unfortunately, Gaige is exactly right... thankfully I built my machine to play things OTHER than EQ2, but wanted more performance out of it (my Core2Quad Extreme did not overclock well).

Strangely, I've noticed my other games are starting slower and seem to have a mild performance hit. I copied EverQuest II to my SSD and it's running MUCH better now. I suspect I may need to defrag the games drive... so I'll be doing that tonight.

__________________
Yaevin T'Kar: 90/250 Conjuror

Elnan Tarmikos: 90/250 Shadowknight

Teion Orval: 90/250 Guardian
Kain-UK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 10:14 PM   #35
Orlac

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 83
Default

Another point. No matter how fine your rig is, if you have a lot of extraneous background programs (Firefox is worst) Antivirus, software firewalls etc. running you will never get top performance.

Orlac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2010, 04:37 PM   #36
Kain-UK

Loremaster
Kain-UK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 441
Default

Rothgar, I've noticed a few places were performance seems to plummet, even after tweaking my machine a bit and getting a fairly steady 60fps out of it (sometimes higher, never lower).

  1. North Qeynos: Standing near the collection guy looking towards the claymore. Usually drops FPS down to 35-ish.
  2. Kylong Plains: Dregs Landing, looking towards Karnor's Castle. This is especially bad if you arrive at Dregs Landing from Teren's Grasp via sokokar.
  3. Whenever my SK evac's: No idea on this one. It doesn't matter what zone he's in... hitting evac will drop my FPS from 100 right down to 10... or even 5! I literally have to get up and walk away for a few minutes while the game sorts itself out. What I don't understand is that it ONLY does this on my SK... not my Conjy with a totem of escape... and it doesn't do it if I use city call spells. This is also with running EQ2 off an SSD.

Not sure if that info will help you at all, but there you go. SMILEY

__________________
Yaevin T'Kar: 90/250 Conjuror

Elnan Tarmikos: 90/250 Shadowknight

Teion Orval: 90/250 Guardian
Kain-UK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 03:35 PM   #37
Rymheart

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3
Default

For almost the last two weeks the game has become really laggy.. I will go from 60 fps down to 4. stay there for about 4 min. then it goes back up.. I have been talking to eq2 tech since it happened.. I have had my isp out here and they have checked all the lines.. and my pings and hops.. its not the internet..  I have turned off everything on start up.. as the eq2 tech said to do.. still nothing.. I updated drivers  nothing.. I am at my wits end as I have a 90 raiding warden on befallen and can not play..

I have a brand new computer..

quad processor.  6b geforce9100  1Tb   windows 7.. and for months have no issues until Jul 3.. thats when it all started.. I am not a teckie.. I am not that savy..

I am soooo frustrated.. I was told today by someone in guild. 5 servers are having lag issues.. and that BG is sharing our server.. Yet EQ GM said its not a game problem.. Well I play Aion. no issues there.. so it has to be eq2 or something with it.

Rymheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 03:41 PM   #38
Laenai
Server: Oasis
Guild: Tyranny
Rank: Raider

Loremaster
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 634
Default

Skwor wrote:

Toxxulia Forrest loc 302 124 3006 running FR goes into low 20's, standing still fr in mid 30's. This is on quality setting of profit. No other PC's around, very repeatable. Waiting 5 minutes at the location to ensure everything loads and same results. On performance setting of Profit I run at 50 fps standing still and low 30's when running at same loc. I will post more stuff as encounter it

Tox forest is a [Removed for Content] nightmare. Even if you're all alone in the zone, its laggy as hell. PoRT and ERP are the same. Moors is still nothing but lag around Firmroot, again, even if you're all alone in the zone.

__________________
Laenai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 05:54 PM   #39
Leinna

Loremaster
Leinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 92
Default

Rothgar,

If I may ask as a lead programmer, what are your system specifications that you play and develop the game on and how does EverQuest II perform on those machines?  Can you run them full at a usable frame rate(29+ FPS)?

I am curious (as probably others) to see how a developer plays and what type of hardware they use.

__________________
Leinna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 09:35 AM   #40
Coolit

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 53
Default

I have a decent system that was high end 8 months ago when I bought it and the game doesn’t run well for me either but I accept everything said in this thread and have taken the games age into consideration, so I'm not overly shocked. I get a solid 30fps (extreme settings) with crossfire disabled as I get higher fps for some reason, very odd.

AMD Phenom II 950 @ 3.8ghz

Quad Crossfire, 2x HD4850x2's 2gb cards

4gb DDR3 (2000mhz rated)

2x Crosair performance series SSD's in Raid 0

Its a full AMD Dragon Platform so everything is designed to work well together. My biggest complaint is that crossfire has worse performance than a single card even though there is clearly an ATI profile for the game as it enables and works. As a new player myself I can see why the “un-optimization” would put a lot of new players off.

 

Coolit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 12:03 PM   #41
Zin`Car

General
Zin`Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Neriak - Third Gate
Posts: 612
Default

Coolit wrote:

I have a decent system that was high end 8 months ago when I bought it and the game doesn’t run well for me either but I accept everything said in this thread and have taken the games age into consideration, so I'm not overly shocked. I get a solid 30fps (extreme settings) with crossfire disabled as I get higher fps for some reason, very odd.

AMD Phenom II 950 @ 3.8ghz

Quad Crossfire, 2x HD4850x2's 2gb cards

4gb DDR3 (2000mhz rated)

2x Crosair performance series SSD's in Raid 0

Its a full AMD Dragon Platform so everything is designed to work well together. My biggest complaint is that crossfire has worse performance than a single card even though there is clearly an ATI profile for the game as it enables and works. As a new player myself I can see why the “un-optimization” would put a lot of new players off.

 

i get much better performance with SLi enabled on my 295 GTX than without.  I run max quality for everything, all the time except on raids.  I turn off particles simply because i cannot see what i am stabbing, lol.

3GHz AMD Quad core4GB ramNVidia 295 GTX video card.

One thing i know most all of you do not do is optimize your virtual memory.  i can almost guarantee over 90% you haven't even touched it, much less even know what i am talking about.  Google it.  Do it.  You'll see considerable differences in performance.

__________________
The problem with humanity is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
Zin`Car is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 03:56 PM   #42
Mercn

General
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9
Default

MartinusPe wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I think at this stage they are thinking about Everquest 3, I'm not sure if they will re-write the whole engine.

I must admit, I find the graphics certainly very acceptable for a 6 year old engine, at launch they said it's an engine warrant for the future, at that time I could only dream about Very High Quality and Extreme Quality, but I would have never guessed a $3500 computer 6 years later would still not be able to run it smoothly.

There is only one story and conclusion here, bad 3D engine with very poor hardware usage. It's like mounting square wheels on a Ferrari...

If they do another Everquest, I doubt it will be on a PC. It will run on PS/3. SOE is working on DC Online. If all goes well on the consol market, you can bet the next EQ wont be on the PC.

We all wish that SoE would invest more in providing a better up to date client. But sadly EQ2 don't have the account base of WoW. This kind of project cost alot of money and resources.

This is expectable. EQOA had a great system for the console, and I would be happy to use something like that again provided that it was on the PC as well. A PS3 is a computer with its own OS but the issue is the games get developed for the lesser console gamer species. This means The glorious PC master race has to endure shoddy interfaces so the console peasants can play.

Which is a shame really. I would own a PS3 if I could play EQ Next on it and still have the interface options I love on PC. I am not talking windows... I am talking controls. Keyboard and mice support in game and not just on the "desktop." Though having the ability to load custom UI settings would be great. [Removed for Content] is that 300 gig PS3 HDD for anyway? 

Mercn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2010, 06:57 PM   #43
Berge
Server: The Bazaar
Guild: Down the Rabbit Hole
Rank: Mad Hatter

Loremaster
Berge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 21
Default

I find Kerra Isle to be FPS killer, I was running on Balanced and went to that isle and dropped to 5 fps, the minute I zoned out and went somewhere else FPS went up to normal 40+ went there again and FPS dropped again. Guildies say the same thing we all avoid kerra isle like the plague.

Berge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2010, 04:57 AM   #44
drakkenshie

General
drakkenshie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 243
Default

Rothgar wrote:

We're always looking at ways to improve performance and we've been working on some changes to flora and other areas that kill frame rate.

I have a question about that:

Why did you remove the options in flora to animate it when you walk through it?  That never had any impact on my system at all, so why remove it?  If people have problems, they can turn it off.  Choice is much better than removing a really nice and immersive feature.

I keep hearing that a lot of the recent changes were driven by the need to make the game run faster.

I can understand giving people options to increase performance, but instead you are removing features that were never an issue for many of us.

Choice is good, removal is just bad, really bad.

The irony too that my guild and friends have noticed is this: the special effects are now lower quality, fewer colors, harder to see and determine in a fight, and performance is down not up.

In the larger group runs and raids thus far since the update, graphics quality is down, there are new graphics corruption issues, and the performance has not increased, and in some cases has decreased.  Again, this points to options being a great idea, and removal of them being a bad idea.

It seems that the stated goal is in conflict with observed results, and the price has been pretty high.

My guild and friends are still here, we still play the game and have fun... but our frustatration level is increasing a great deal, and we don't understand the reasoning behind changes being made.

__________________
drakkenshie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:50 PM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.