EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > General EverQuest II Discussion > General Gameplay Discussion
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-30-2011, 09:21 AM   #1
JAKJ

Lorekeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Default

Don't say vsync. I know about vsync.

I want my EQ II to not go above 30 fps. Right now I can cap it to 60 fps which is my monitor's framerate, but I want to cap it at 30 fps.

Every other game I have ever played in the past four years other than little bitty indie games have an FPS slider or .ini option except this one.

JAKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 09:50 AM   #2
Banditman

Loremaster
Banditman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,459
Default

EQ2 is much older than four years old.  Thus, we don't have the engine options that newer games do.

__________________
Banditman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 10:48 PM   #3
JAKJ

Lorekeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Default

So there just flat-out isn't a way to do this? Seriously? This game runs my CPU and GPU hotter than any other game, even games that I let reach 60 fps, and it's just wasting my electricity for no reason. 30 fps is more than playable.

It's not my hardware, either: I can max absolutely every setting in the game, from antialiasing to texture resolution to particle quality to animation rate, to shadow complexity, and STILL get above 30 fps, so there is just no reason for this.

I can't find any reasonable third-party program that works on anything above DX9. I saw something called IsBoxer, but you have to get a subscription to some other fool game just to get the program.

I'm not going to accept having to sit here and listen to my fans running at maximum and a reduction in the overall lifespan of my hardware just to play this game. I'm very unhappy that such a simple technical feature hasn't been made available in a game this old that isn't even free-to-play.

JAKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:40 PM   #4
deadcrickets2

Loremaster
deadcrickets2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Default

There may be a way.  It involves messing with the power options under Vista and Windows 7.  Instead of letting it run on Balanced (100% full load, 5% no load), you could change it to run at say.. maximum 50% at full load for the CPU.

Go to Control Panel, Hardware and Sound,  Power Options, Create a power plan.

__________________
Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe

Am also on Playxpert.

If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

deadcrickets2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2011, 11:42 PM   #5
Cocytus

Loremaster
Cocytus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,908
Default

Another reason we need an option like this is to cut down on video recording filesizes.

Cocytus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 06:54 AM   #6
JAKJ

Lorekeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Default

deadcrickets2 wrote:

There may be a way.  It involves messing with the power options under Vista and Windows 7.  Instead of letting it run on Balanced (100% full load, 5% no load), you could change it to run at say.. maximum 50% at full load for the CPU.

Go to Control Panel, Hardware and Sound,  Power Options, Create a power plan.

No, underclocking the system isn't the answer, because that cuts power when it actually -is- needed. Let's say I'm in a fight with a bunch of people, and it's fairly calm, and the cpu is clocking in at about 70% power to handle all the fanciness at 30 fps. Then, a bunch of explosions and stuff falling and the earth opening up and whatever all happens at once, and the cpu jumps to 100% to maintain 30 fps for a short bit, and then things calm down and it goes back down to 70% thereafter. If the system were underclocked, it would simply have choked there and dropped to single-digit fps.

What you describe is best for keeping power usage and temperatures low when doing long tasks like video encoding. When I'm compressing hours of video, I use a program called BES to cap the video encoder's processor usage at 66%, to keep the temperature low, while leaving the rest of the system uncapped so it has the power it needs when it needs it.

JAKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 07:02 AM   #7
JAKJ

Lorekeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Default

Cocytus wrote:

Another reason we need an option like this is to cut down on video recording filesizes.

If you use FRAPS, it should be able to cap it at any desired framerate while recording, if you check the box that says "Lock framerate". It's a pitty FRAPS is closed-source, because if it weren't, I could just tweak the code to be able to lock the framerate even when not actually capturing video.

And you know that the framerate-cap code must already be in the game, because it has a Synchronize Refresh option: It already caps the framerate to your monitor's refresh setting if you check that. All they have to do is add a box that says "Synchronize Refresh to (n) Hz" and use that number instead.

This is really why closed-source software is terrible. When open-source software lacks a feature, nobody has to beg the creator to put it in: They just put it in themselves.

JAKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 12:11 PM   #8
deadcrickets2

Loremaster
deadcrickets2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Default

JAKJ wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:

There may be a way.  It involves messing with the power options under Vista and Windows 7.  Instead of letting it run on Balanced (100% full load, 5% no load), you could change it to run at say.. maximum 50% at full load for the CPU.

Go to Control Panel, Hardware and Sound,  Power Options, Create a power plan.

No, underclocking the system isn't the answer, because that cuts power when it actually -is- needed. Let's say I'm in a fight with a bunch of people, and it's fairly calm, and the cpu is clocking in at about 70% power to handle all the fanciness at 30 fps. Then, a bunch of explosions and stuff falling and the earth opening up and whatever all happens at once, and the cpu jumps to 100% to maintain 30 fps for a short bit, and then things calm down and it goes back down to 70% thereafter. If the system were underclocked, it would simply have choked there and dropped to single-digit fps.

What you describe is best for keeping power usage and temperatures low when doing long tasks like video encoding. When I'm compressing hours of video, I use a program called BES to cap the video encoder's processor usage at 66%, to keep the temperature low, while leaving the rest of the system uncapped so it has the power it needs when it needs it.

I do understand perfectly what it does.  You, however, are asking for a new feature that gives no benefit to players.  The cost-benefit analysis does not favor implementing it.    You pointed out in another post you can do this through a third party program.  I would suggest just doing that.

__________________
Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe

Am also on Playxpert.

If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

deadcrickets2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 07:29 PM   #9
JAKJ

Lorekeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Default

deadcrickets2 wrote:

JAKJ wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:

There may be a way.  It involves messing with the power options under Vista and Windows 7.  Instead of letting it run on Balanced (100% full load, 5% no load), you could change it to run at say.. maximum 50% at full load for the CPU.

Go to Control Panel, Hardware and Sound,  Power Options, Create a power plan.

No, underclocking the system isn't the answer, because that cuts power when it actually -is- needed. Let's say I'm in a fight with a bunch of people, and it's fairly calm, and the cpu is clocking in at about 70% power to handle all the fanciness at 30 fps. Then, a bunch of explosions and stuff falling and the earth opening up and whatever all happens at once, and the cpu jumps to 100% to maintain 30 fps for a short bit, and then things calm down and it goes back down to 70% thereafter. If the system were underclocked, it would simply have choked there and dropped to single-digit fps.

What you describe is best for keeping power usage and temperatures low when doing long tasks like video encoding. When I'm compressing hours of video, I use a program called BES to cap the video encoder's processor usage at 66%, to keep the temperature low, while leaving the rest of the system uncapped so it has the power it needs when it needs it.

I do understand perfectly what it does.  You, however, are asking for a new feature that gives no benefit to players.  The cost-benefit analysis does not favor implementing it.    You pointed out in another post you can do this through a third party program.  I would suggest just doing that.

Obviously you did not actually read my post, because if you had, you would understand that I do -not- have a third-party program that will cap the framerate of a DX11 application. Unless you are seriously suggesting that I run FRAPS in 30-second caching mode the entire time I play. (For the record, I did try this, just out of curiosity, and it did cap the framerate, as well as making my processor run an entire 2 C hotter than it did without.)

As for no benefit to players, it is demonstrated (if you bother to Google it) that dropping fullscreen 3D games to 30 fps can save as much as 30 watts regularly off the PSU's consumption, which over the course of a month will be a significant savings off the power bill if you play frequently. Not to mention the already-mentioned savings of hardware lifespan by running it cooler.

This "feature" as you call it (or "missing core function" as I call it) is not only implemented in many modern 3D games such as Just Cause 2 and Crysis 2, but also in the World of Warcraft and Dungeons and Dragons Online, arguably the two most financially-successful 3D MMORPGs on the planet, currently. This is hardly an unknown and unused feature.

If you aren't actually going to read my posts in order to participate constructively in the discussion, kindly do not participate at all.

JAKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 08:00 PM   #10
Cocytus

Loremaster
Cocytus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,908
Default

JAKJ wrote:

Cocytus wrote:

Another reason we need an option like this is to cut down on video recording filesizes.

If you use FRAPS, it should be able to cap it at any desired framerate while recording, if you check the box that says "Lock framerate". It's a pitty FRAPS is closed-source, because if it weren't, I could just tweak the code to be able to lock the framerate even when not actually capturing video.

And you know that the framerate-cap code must already be in the game, because it has a Synchronize Refresh option: It already caps the framerate to your monitor's refresh setting if you check that. All they have to do is add a box that says "Synchronize Refresh to (n) Hz" and use that number instead.

This is really why closed-source software is terrible. When open-source software lacks a feature, nobody has to beg the creator to put it in: They just put it in themselves.

Yup, but I mean with the in-game recorder.

Cocytus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 08:04 PM   #11
Lethe5683

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,351
Default

JAKJ wrote:

As for no benefit to players, it is demonstrated (if you bother to Google it) that dropping fullscreen 3D games to 30 fps can save as much as 30 watts regularly off the PSU's consumption, which over the course of a month will be a significant savings off the power bill if you play frequently. Not to mention the already-mentioned savings of hardware lifespan by running it cooler.

Yeah, all of $5 per month if you run the game 24/7... what a waste.

Lethe5683 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 08:10 PM   #12
ffd700

Lord
ffd700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 318
Default

There was a program called EQPlayNice that offered CPU/GPU throttling, but I'm not sure if it works with EQ2 as well.

ffd700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 08:15 PM   #13
JAKJ

Lorekeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Default

ffd700 wrote:

There was a program called EQPlayNice that offered CPU/GPU throttling, but I'm not sure if it works with EQ2 as well.

The fact that there is a commerical program that costs $36/year to use should be more than enough illustration that I am not the only person on this planet who cares about this, whether or not it would work with EQ2. That's an extra $3/month on top of your subscription!

JAKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 09:32 PM   #14
deadcrickets2

Loremaster
deadcrickets2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Default

JAKJ wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:

JAKJ wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:

There may be a way.  It involves messing with the power options under Vista and Windows 7.  Instead of letting it run on Balanced (100% full load, 5% no load), you could change it to run at say.. maximum 50% at full load for the CPU.

Go to Control Panel, Hardware and Sound,  Power Options, Create a power plan.

No, underclocking the system isn't the answer, because that cuts power when it actually -is- needed. Let's say I'm in a fight with a bunch of people, and it's fairly calm, and the cpu is clocking in at about 70% power to handle all the fanciness at 30 fps. Then, a bunch of explosions and stuff falling and the earth opening up and whatever all happens at once, and the cpu jumps to 100% to maintain 30 fps for a short bit, and then things calm down and it goes back down to 70% thereafter. If the system were underclocked, it would simply have choked there and dropped to single-digit fps.

What you describe is best for keeping power usage and temperatures low when doing long tasks like video encoding. When I'm compressing hours of video, I use a program called BES to cap the video encoder's processor usage at 66%, to keep the temperature low, while leaving the rest of the system uncapped so it has the power it needs when it needs it.

I do understand perfectly what it does.  You, however, are asking for a new feature that gives no benefit to players.  The cost-benefit analysis does not favor implementing it.    You pointed out in another post you can do this through a third party program.  I would suggest just doing that.

Obviously you did not actually read my post, because if you had, you would understand that I do -not- have a third-party program that will cap the framerate of a DX11 application. Unless you are seriously suggesting that I run FRAPS in 30-second caching mode the entire time I play. (For the record, I did try this, just out of curiosity, and it did cap the framerate, as well as making my processor run an entire 2 C hotter than it did without.)

As for no benefit to players, it is demonstrated (if you bother to Google it) that dropping fullscreen 3D games to 30 fps can save as much as 30 watts regularly off the PSU's consumption, which over the course of a month will be a significant savings off the power bill if you play frequently. Not to mention the already-mentioned savings of hardware lifespan by running it cooler.

This "feature" as you call it (or "missing core function" as I call it) is not only implemented in many modern 3D games such as Just Cause 2 and Crysis 2, but also in the World of Warcraft and Dungeons and Dragons Online, arguably the two most financially-successful 3D MMORPGs on the planet, currently. This is hardly an unknown and unused feature.

If you aren't actually going to read my posts in order to participate constructively in the discussion, kindly do not participate at all.

I don't think you understand.  When I state cost-benefit analysis I mean in reference to the game company.  It makes more sense for them to implement new graphical features, new content, and performance enhancements which are dourly needed than to implement something that will not be used by even 5% of players.

__________________
Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe

Am also on Playxpert.

If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

deadcrickets2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 09:38 PM   #15
deadcrickets2

Loremaster
deadcrickets2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Default

JAKJ wrote:

ffd700 wrote:

There was a program called EQPlayNice that offered CPU/GPU throttling, but I'm not sure if it works with EQ2 as well.

The fact that there is a commerical program that costs $36/year to use should be more than enough illustration that I am not the only person on this planet who cares about this, whether or not it would work with EQ2. That's an extra $3/month on top of your subscription!

"Power Capping Power capping is nothing new. The idea is not to save energy (kWh), but to limit the amount of power (Watt) that a server or a cluster of servers can use. That may sound contradictory, but it is not. If your CPU processes a task at maximum speed, it can return to idle very quickly and save power. If you cap your CPU, the task will take longer and your server will have used about the same amount of energy as the CPU spends less time in idle, where it can save power in a lower p-state or even go to sleep (C-states). So power capping does not make any sense in a gaming rig: it would reduce your fps and not save you any energy at all. Buying CPUs with lower maximum TDP is similar: our own measurements have shown that low power CPUs do not necessarily save energy compared to their siblings with higher TDP specs. "

Anandtech answers the issue.

__________________
Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe

Am also on Playxpert.

If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

deadcrickets2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 11:28 PM   #16
Lethe5683

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,351
Default

deadcrickets2 wrote:

JAKJ wrote:

ffd700 wrote:

There was a program called EQPlayNice that offered CPU/GPU throttling, but I'm not sure if it works with EQ2 as well.

The fact that there is a commerical program that costs $36/year to use should be more than enough illustration that I am not the only person on this planet who cares about this, whether or not it would work with EQ2. That's an extra $3/month on top of your subscription!

"Power Capping Power capping is nothing new. The idea is not to save energy (kWh), but to limit the amount of power (Watt) that a server or a cluster of servers can use. That may sound contradictory, but it is not. If your CPU processes a task at maximum speed, it can return to idle very quickly and save power. If you cap your CPU, the task will take longer and your server will have used about the same amount of energy as the CPU spends less time in idle, where it can save power in a lower p-state or even go to sleep (C-states). So power capping does not make any sense in a gaming rig: it would reduce your fps and not save you any energy at all. Buying CPUs with lower maximum TDP is similar: our own measurements have shown that low power CPUs do not necessarily save energy compared to their siblings with higher TDP specs. "

Thats not true at all.  Most games will always be using the CPU by a fairly significant amount.  Capping the CPU speed will save power in almost any game 'nuff said.

Lethe5683 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 12:29 AM   #17
deadcrickets2

Loremaster
deadcrickets2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Default

Lethe5683 wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:

JAKJ wrote:

ffd700 wrote:

There was a program called EQPlayNice that offered CPU/GPU throttling, but I'm not sure if it works with EQ2 as well.

The fact that there is a commerical program that costs $36/year to use should be more than enough illustration that I am not the only person on this planet who cares about this, whether or not it would work with EQ2. That's an extra $3/month on top of your subscription!

"Power Capping Power capping is nothing new. The idea is not to save energy (kWh), but to limit the amount of power (Watt) that a server or a cluster of servers can use. That may sound contradictory, but it is not. If your CPU processes a task at maximum speed, it can return to idle very quickly and save power. If you cap your CPU, the task will take longer and your server will have used about the same amount of energy as the CPU spends less time in idle, where it can save power in a lower p-state or even go to sleep (C-states). So power capping does not make any sense in a gaming rig: it would reduce your fps and not save you any energy at all. Buying CPUs with lower maximum TDP is similar: our own measurements have shown that low power CPUs do not necessarily save energy compared to their siblings with higher TDP specs. "

Thats not true at all.  Most games will always be using the CPU by a fairly significant amount.  Capping the CPU speed will save power in almost any game 'nuff said.

I'll take the word of a tech site that's been around longer than HardOCP and SharkyExtreme over yours.

__________________
Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe

Am also on Playxpert.

If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

deadcrickets2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 03:17 AM   #18
Lalen
Server: Everfrost
Guild: Divine Reapers
Rank: Elder Officer

Loremaster
Lalen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 766
Default

JAKJ wrote:

So there just flat-out isn't a way to do this? Seriously? This game runs my CPU and GPU hotter than any other game, even games that I let reach 60 fps, and it's just wasting my electricity for no reason. 30 fps is more than playable.

It's not my hardware, either: I can max absolutely every setting in the game, from antialiasing to texture resolution to particle quality to animation rate, to shadow complexity, and STILL get above 30 fps, so there is just no reason for this.

I can't find any reasonable third-party program that works on anything above DX9. I saw something called IsBoxer, but you have to get a subscription to some other fool game just to get the program.

I'm not going to accept having to sit here and listen to my fans running at maximum and a reduction in the overall lifespan of my hardware just to play this game. I'm very unhappy that such a simple technical feature hasn't been made available in a game this old that isn't even free-to-play.

WinEQ will cap it for 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

Lalen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 10:26 AM   #19
Aneova
Server: Kithicor
Guild: Masters of the Universe
Rank: Raider

Loremaster
Aneova's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,027
Default

instead on implementing things to save you money on your power bill... why not just play less?

__________________
http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=438341

Originally Posted by Smed: I've been a regular lurker on this site for a while but I wanted to step in here and dispel something that's just plain not true - I don't have my name highlighted here, but anyone that doubts it's me can email me at [email protected] and I'll happily reply. We aren't going to be allowing RMT in any way, shape or form on the non-exchange enabled EQ II servers. Period. End of statement. In any event, I wanted to stop in and at least set the record straight - you aren't going to be seeing RMT allowed on the non-exchange enabled servers.

John Smedley President, Sony Online Entertainment
Aneova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 12:03 PM   #20
DxPreist1

Loremaster
DxPreist1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sconnie, land of Drunkards and Cheese
Posts: 151
Default

So, why not easy mode it and set your monitor to run at 30 FPS and THEN Vsync, problem solved.

__________________
Soloing will always rule until SOE reprograms the majority of their users to not be horrible at playing the game. Pure fact.
DxPreist1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 01:25 PM   #21
Lethe5683

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,351
Default

deadcrickets2 wrote:

Lethe5683 wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:

JAKJ wrote:

ffd700 wrote:

There was a program called EQPlayNice that offered CPU/GPU throttling, but I'm not sure if it works with EQ2 as well.

The fact that there is a commerical program that costs $36/year to use should be more than enough illustration that I am not the only person on this planet who cares about this, whether or not it would work with EQ2. That's an extra $3/month on top of your subscription!

"Power Capping Power capping is nothing new. The idea is not to save energy (kWh), but to limit the amount of power (Watt) that a server or a cluster of servers can use. That may sound contradictory, but it is not. If your CPU processes a task at maximum speed, it can return to idle very quickly and save power. If you cap your CPU, the task will take longer and your server will have used about the same amount of energy as the CPU spends less time in idle, where it can save power in a lower p-state or even go to sleep (C-states). So power capping does not make any sense in a gaming rig: it would reduce your fps and not save you any energy at all. Buying CPUs with lower maximum TDP is similar: our own measurements have shown that low power CPUs do not necessarily save energy compared to their siblings with higher TDP specs. "

Thats not true at all.  Most games will always be using the CPU by a fairly significant amount.  Capping the CPU speed will save power in almost any game 'nuff said.

I'll take the word of a tech site that's been around longer than HardOCP and SharkyExtreme over yours.

It is so obviously wrong it's not even funny and really makes me doubt their credibility.

Lethe5683 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 09:16 AM   #22
JAKJ

Lorekeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Default

[email protected] wrote:

WinEQ will cap it for you.

If the program's description is accurate, yes, it will. I would prefer to not pay an additional $3/month to play the game, but that is certainly an option, thank you.

DxPreist1 wrote:

So, why not easy mode it and set your monitor to run at 30 FPS and THEN Vsync, problem solved.

I have an LCD monitor and the only refresh rates I can figure out how to set it to are 60Hz and 75Hz. I tried setting the refresh rate to 30 in the .ini file, but it just booted up in failsafe 1024x768 and I had to put it back to native resolution at 60Hz, so probably my monitor doesn't support it, or else EQ2 doesn't run it.

JAKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 11:41 AM   #23
deadcrickets2

Loremaster
deadcrickets2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Default

Lethe5683 wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:

Lethe5683 wrote:

deadcrickets2 wrote:

JAKJ wrote:

ffd700 wrote:

There was a program called EQPlayNice that offered CPU/GPU throttling, but I'm not sure if it works with EQ2 as well.

The fact that there is a commerical program that costs $36/year to use should be more than enough illustration that I am not the only person on this planet who cares about this, whether or not it would work with EQ2. That's an extra $3/month on top of your subscription!

"Power Capping Power capping is nothing new. The idea is not to save energy (kWh), but to limit the amount of power (Watt) that a server or a cluster of servers can use. That may sound contradictory, but it is not. If your CPU processes a task at maximum speed, it can return to idle very quickly and save power. If you cap your CPU, the task will take longer and your server will have used about the same amount of energy as the CPU spends less time in idle, where it can save power in a lower p-state or even go to sleep (C-states). So power capping does not make any sense in a gaming rig: it would reduce your fps and not save you any energy at all. Buying CPUs with lower maximum TDP is similar: our own measurements have shown that low power CPUs do not necessarily save energy compared to their siblings with higher TDP specs. "

Thats not true at all.  Most games will always be using the CPU by a fairly significant amount.  Capping the CPU speed will save power in almost any game 'nuff said.

I'll take the word of a tech site that's been around longer than HardOCP and SharkyExtreme over yours.

It is so obviously wrong it's not even funny and really makes me doubt their credibility.

Again, I'll take an expert that Intel and AMD have trusted with unreleased products to benchmark and more than someone I don't know... you.

__________________
Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe

Am also on Playxpert.

If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

deadcrickets2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 11:55 AM   #24
GussJr

Loremaster
GussJr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,061
Default

[email protected] wrote:

instead on implementing things to save you money on your power bill... why not just play less?

HaHa!!! I love it! Common sense at its finest...what a silly thread...most people complain about not getting high enough FPS...you're complaining because you get too much! If your worried about how you're gonna pay your electric bill, maybe you don't really need to be spending money on a game like EQ2...

__________________
Collametta, 91 HE Ranger, 90 Mstr Armorer

Siame, 90 K. Zerk, 90 Alchemist

Palayna, 34 Fae Monk, 90 Master Carpenter

Beastmastress, 90 WE BL, 31 Prov
GussJr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 12:07 PM   #25
JAKJ

Lorekeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Default

GussJr wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

instead on implementing things to save you money on your power bill... why not just play less?

HaHa!!! I love it! Common sense at its finest...what a silly thread...most people complain about not getting high enough FPS...you're complaining because you get too much! If your worried about how you're gonna pay your electric bill, maybe you don't really need to be spending money on a game like EQ2...

Get over yourself. Wanting to save money =/= hurting for money. If you don't care about how much you spend on things you don't actually need or want, and just throw it away uselessly, one day you'll want to do something expensive and unexpected and you'll either simply not be able to do it, or be even more stupid and take out a line of credit for it. If you save just $5/month that you won't even miss spending, that's another $60 you have at the end of the year for something you actually want. That's a full-priced game on release day, or a whole lot of designer coffee, or even part of a nice new big-screen television.

It's called living wisely. You don't have to be poor to think about what you spend money on.

JAKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 01:41 PM   #26
Lethe5683

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,351
Default

JAKJ wrote:

GussJr wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

instead on implementing things to save you money on your power bill... why not just play less?

HaHa!!! I love it! Common sense at its finest...what a silly thread...most people complain about not getting high enough FPS...you're complaining because you get too much! If your worried about how you're gonna pay your electric bill, maybe you don't really need to be spending money on a game like EQ2...

Get over yourself. Wanting to save money =/= hurting for money. If you don't care about how much you spend on things you don't actually need or want, and just throw it away uselessly, one day you'll want to do something expensive and unexpected and you'll either simply not be able to do it, or be even more stupid and take out a line of credit for it. If you save just $5/month that you won't even miss spending, that's another $60 you have at the end of the year for something you actually want. That's a full-priced game on release day, or a whole lot of designer coffee, or even part of a nice new big-screen television.

It's called living wisely. You don't have to be poor to think about what you spend money on.

The amount of power your computer has used while posting and reading this topic is far more than what you could have saved by limiting your processor speed for months.

Lethe5683 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 01:49 PM   #27
deadcrickets2

Loremaster
deadcrickets2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 707
Default

JAKJ wrote:

GussJr wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

instead on implementing things to save you money on your power bill... why not just play less?

HaHa!!! I love it! Common sense at its finest...what a silly thread...most people complain about not getting high enough FPS...you're complaining because you get too much! If your worried about how you're gonna pay your electric bill, maybe you don't really need to be spending money on a game like EQ2...

Get over yourself. Wanting to save money =/= hurting for money. If you don't care about how much you spend on things you don't actually need or want, and just throw it away uselessly, one day you'll want to do something expensive and unexpected and you'll either simply not be able to do it, or be even more stupid and take out a line of credit for it. If you save just $5/month that you won't even miss spending, that's another $60 you have at the end of the year for something you actually want. That's a full-priced game on release day, or a whole lot of designer coffee, or even part of a nice new big-screen television.

It's called living wisely. You don't have to be poor to think about what you spend money on.

I gave you an option built into the operating system itself.  You could easily switch into your EQ2 gaming mode power profile for the game and go back to Balanced afterwards.  Only takes a few clicks.  The need for such a feature built into a game is minimal.

__________________
Find me on Steam, Skype and Raptr: tigerglebe

Am also on Playxpert.

If I have time I'll even answer tech questions.

deadcrickets2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:46 AM.

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.