so none has figured out how to do a fast camera spin without lag frames in giran for ex??
I only can do that if I set the video to show only closer characters....
but the point of searching in giran is to see stores far away!
( yes.. this bothers me because i spend a LOT of time in market trying to get some money!)
Without ncsoft developing and implementing support for Geometry instancing and countless other performance enhancing, more efficient ways of dealing with the graphics in this game...
for a fact
there is currently no way for any machine... to be able to make the game perform as well as it "should".... As it is in itself a bottleneck of the system.
Currently high performance system simply are waiting for the engine to keep up with it.. not making it work all that hard to begin with... (quad core I5/I7's and the like as a perfect example)
Even modern Graphics cards are twiddling their thumbs in many circumstances..
It's not raw horse power that is the problem.. we've got plenty of that by todays standards..... it lack of having anything worthwhile to tow currently...
I mean most of the texture resolution in game aren't even that high either...... model detail isn't exactly extensive.... but MMOs are what they are.....
Proper SLI/XFIRE support would be a good start. :D
but yeah pretty much what judas said, at the end of the day the engine is old and outdated. there was mension of performance tweaks in GoD but i havent seen any specific details on this.
AMD Phenom II x6 1090T (unlocked black edition)
ASUS Crosshair IV Formula ROG (Republic of Gamers) motherboard
2x2GB G.Skill Flare Series DDR3-2000 CL 7 ram
AMD HD Radeon 6950 @ 6970 w/2GB GDDR5 ram x2 in xFire (difference between 6950 and its bigger bro is power supply with the 6950 having 2 6-pin power connectors and the 6970 having 1 8-pin and 1 6-pin connector; the bios versions on each card are different with the 6950 bios doing a software lockout of pat of the GPU; flashing the 6950 bios over with a 6970 bios removes that lock effectively upgrading the 6950 card into a 6970 with slightly less overclocking head room)
Crucial C-300 256GB SSD
LG Blu-ray player
LG Blu-ray burner
Coolermaster Gold Series 800W PSU
Coolermaster Cosmos 1000 case
Samsung Syncmaster PX2370 LED Backlit 23" monitor x2
I can run any game currently released at 1920x1080 resolution with all graphical settings maxed out. With aftermarket heat sinks operating on air, it does tend to get warm in my room. I might upgrade to water cooling next fall.
Lineage II puts no strain on it all, when I do get any lag it is always due to network latency issues from the University throttling the **** out of my connection.
Everybody who sais he or she can play a siege (250++ ppl) on full details with full npc/pc viewing implemented without a powerpoint shutter effekt, (im talking of more the 20fps) is plainly lieing or has serious eye problem and should see a doctor.
the game engine is a total **** compared to what is possible at the moment.
so none has figured out how to do a fast camera spin without lag frames in giran for ex??
I only can do that if I set the video to show only closer characters....
but the point of searching in giran is to see stores far away!
( yes.. this bothers me because i spend a LOT of time in market trying to get some money!)
RAID 0 3 SSD drives. I have constant 20-30 FPS in giran on max details and HDR rendering.
RAID 0 3 SSD drives. I have constant 20-30 FPS in giran on max details and HDR rendering.
Raid 0 4x SSD with OCZ Vertex 3 120gb still produces "lag" in giran while loading which will reduce your frame rate down to 0 for a short time... but it's still there.
Maintaining 20-30fps doesn't really have much to do with the hardrives after everything is loaded...
And knowing full well what 2x 6990 2gb in crossfire and 2 of the 580 GTX's in SLI are capable of on a intel i 7 980 solution with those 4 SSDs in raid 0 can do... not to mention the 2000mhz DDR3 12gb (3x4gb)....
20-30fps in giran is not entirely easy for that machine in giran with max detail. Hell enabling shadows alone on both machines sevearly cripples the frame rate in giran or seige... When the most powerful machines out there with the highest end graphics system, top of the line memory.... insane solid state drive solution, is barely manageing to sustain 10fps in giran with all graphics options enabled.... and when you pull up the performance information of the machine and find your cpu is sitting at about 15-20% load... your gpu's are mostly idling, and there is utterly no hardrive activity to speak of...... it's not hard to determine that hey, the game engine just can't do much more.
Sorry.. but 20-30fps in giran with max detail is a bit iffy.... unless of course your referring to standing away from majority of the crowd..... i test giran by standing at the gate keeper and looking west-south-west as that will give the hardest hitting results.
Disable shadows and watch your framerate double sometimes triple depending on the machine... (even quadruple)...
HDR itself doesn't suck up any resources at all in this game really.. it's a post processed effect, modern cards don't even have to flex to run it... actually with HDR.... FSAA doesn't work at all... so that actually "lowers" in game graphics quality.
Really i could go on and on about the various graphic specific functions and how each card reacts to it and the average frame rate
Also taking into consideration that resolution at this point in time with this engine has utterly no bearing on the frame rate for highend to midrange cards.
be it a more standard 1280x800 to 1920x1080/1200 to 2560x1600 to 3456x2048 to 7680x4800.....
If i get the same frame rate at 3456x2048 as i do at 1280x800.... there are numerous possible reasons why there is a bottleneck... and most would say it's definitely no gpu limitations as that wouldn't make sense.... nor would it be hardrive.... most would say ram/cpu... but even when those are increased there is still no difference...... so what's left... some MMO's and internet related games have always had frame rate limitations as well... but that doesn't seem to matter.
I also find disabling shadows improve my FPS by whole a lot. That's why I usually keep them disabled all the time.
My rig: i5-2500k @ 4.6Ghz, 2x2GB Mushing 2000Mhz, GTX 570 Phamtom and Corsair 60GB F series SSD. Nothing special really but this guarantees me stable ~15 and higher FPS during sieges. No HDR rendering, no shadows. Everything else maxed out.
Everybody who sais he or she can play a siege (250++ ppl) on full details with full npc/pc viewing implemented without a powerpoint shutter effekt, (im talking of more the 20fps) is plainly lieing or has serious eye problem and should see a doctor.
the game engine is a total **** compared to what is possible at the moment.
fraps or never happend.
This. I'd love to see this game run smoothly like the MMO we don't speak of, but I'm afraid it will never happen.
The game runs the same for me today with a Radeon 6970 as it did when I had an x1950 Pro 4-5 years ago.
Edit: Is there a way I can see my framerate in Lineage II?
I must have missed the memo that moved this thread from a discussing how to optimize L2 thread into a look at my rig and e-***** thread
i'm sorry... i beleive i recall you starting the e-***** derailment in this thread by using Solid State Drives as directly effecting your 20-30fps in giran with "Max Graphics and HDR rendering"
i guess trying to explain a little more about that using actual various forms of system specs ... and how having the most powerful machine in the world essentially means nothing in running lineage II in this day and age..
I don't think i was actually expressing any e-***** rage at all, actually quite the opposite.. considering that as i stated before..... computer power means nothing in lineage II.. and hasn't for several years...
This is partly true, if you play L2 with an overclocked P4 3.8GHz cpu, it will outperformance even the newest i5/i7 cpu's, simply because of the higher speed on 1 core.
This is partly true, if you play L2 with an overclocked P4 3.8GHz cpu, it will outperformance even the newest i5/i7 cpu's, simply because of the higher speed on 1 core.
uh.... no...
the P4 Extreme Edittion cpu's which running at 4.4ghz still couldn't touch the i5/i7's under the same conditions today...
Even if you set the FSB to matching frequencies of the i5/i7's, The extra GHZ ends up made moot by the other factors that need to be taken into consideration....
At this point now... even 6ghz wouldn't produce anything noticeable for improved results..
I've tested and tried it..... unless it's 10-15% boost in performance.. it's nothing really tangeable or reasonable for a difference (worth mentioning)
Actually the 3.6ghz P4 with HT (not dual core) performance significantly worse for lineage II then a intel i3 530 (lowest end desktop i3 cpu)
the P4 Extreme Edittion cpu's which running at 4.4ghz still couldn't touch the i5/i7's under the same conditions today...
Even if you set the FSB to matching frequencies of the i5/i7's, The extra GHZ ends up made moot by the other factors that need to be taken into consideration....
At this point now... even 6ghz wouldn't produce anything noticeable for improved results..
Come on Judas, you know what i mean, don't give me the general lecture that the new cpu's will outperform an old one.., that's a given fact.
I agree with you if you talk about programs and games of these days.
But... we're talking about L2 here, i.e. old game engine that has no idea what to do with the multiple cores of today's cpu's.
I've tested and tried it..... unless it's 10-15% boost in performance.. it's nothing really tangeable or reasonable for a difference (worth mentioning)
exactly, 10-15% is a boost, if it's a reasonable difference or not, is opinion related.
Actually the 3.6ghz P4 with HT (not dual core) performance significantly worse for lineage II then a intel i3 530 (lowest end desktop i3 cpu)
My experience is different with this so i've to disagree (i'm talking about dual and quad core etc, before the i3/i5 and even i7), you sure we're still talking about L2 here?
I strongly doubt an i3 530 can outperform a P4 3.6GHz (L2 performance related only), unless you talk about multiboxing... that's a different story.
My AMD 940 @ 4.4ghz still doesn't make much of a difference..
It's not so much the GHZ.. remember that is only a partial part of the equation.
If you want to get into the realms of lets say the E series of the Intel Duo Core 2's, so be it, i've had numerous of them, and even with their slightly higher dual core clock vs the counter parts Quad core versions, the difference for Lineage is nelegiable to no excistant.
Like i said, unless it's 10-15% better, the results are all within errors of margin.
The only time lets say 5% makes a huge difference is when your pushing big numbers already.... as a 5% increase at 100fps is a mear 5fps boost which is still imo, within errors of margin.. where as at 30fps, 5% equates to essentially nothing.
5% at 500 is 25fps boost... which actually turns into something equateable.
But it's still insignificant to the whole.
Efficiency > Brute force.
This is the difference between the P4 extreme eddition 4.4ghz and an intel i3 530.... Dual core solutions work well with lineage II... not great.. but well enough.
But considering the engine itself was never intended for our current technology... basic SSE2 compliancy only, hell i was part if not THE first to provide bug reports and feedback when the first dual core cpu's arrived back in 2005 from AMD.. the x2 4400+ i had which didn't make a significant difference over the AMD 1900+ or Barton 2500+ i had at the time .. the barton i had which was overclocked to 3ghz+ at the time... obviously the advantages of the dual core (or quad core today) is the offloading of other tasks to the other cores so that the game can basically take full advantage of the other cores completely, having them all to themselves with zero wait states.
Like i've said over and over again.... currently, the engine is the limitation, and it simply doesn't matter today how much ram, cpu, gpu power you throw at it, things show essentially no decernable improvement.
My AMD 940 @ 4.4ghz still doesn't make much of a difference..
It's not so much the GHZ.. remember that is only a partial part of the equation.
When it's faster to just kill the game from Task Manager and relaunch/relog instaed of waiting for ingame lag to end by itself, you can be sure it's not your hardware that would make a difference :D
Well let's just agree to disagree on that Judas :)
When it's faster to just kill the game from Task Manager and relaunch/relog instaed of waiting for ingame lag to end by itself, you can be sure it's not your hardware that would make a difference :Dlol
Problem is that L2 is using Unreal engine
At L2 C1 it was Unreal 1.3
In CT5 they introduced 2.0 Unreal engine ( https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Unreal_Engine ).
It was using some technics of drwaing polygons / triangle etc .. but in majority cases it was based on brutal force of calculating ..
I guess now they use UT2.5 while (it was introduce in 2004 ) it is mostly done for support for x64 / EAX (3D sound) / and all non PC platforms
That engine still has same problem.
It is based on DX8.0 (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/DirectX ), there is no good support of HSR, what is biggest pain :/
Z-buffer was just introduce and it has very ineffective algorithm. (*)
Worst is ofc lack of real implementation of HSR (Hidden Surface Removal). It is biggest pain at any mass PvPs
Our PC load ALL stuff in range compute ALL, and after all .. figure out, you are inside small room in castle and you see can nothing http://board.kj-clan.de/images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif
But still you are hit by lag of 200 ppl in range ...
Most annoying thing is HSR was announce in 2001 (as concept) but in practice used by Microsoft in DX9.0
Again full support of DX 9 have only ... UT3 engine where HSR is incorporated...
For now we can enjoy of 3rd sense of approaching enemy by lag....:/
(*) In fact it is so ineffective that officially DX9 supports real HSR.
Problem is that L2 is using Unreal engine
At L2 C1 it was Unreal 1.3
In CT5 they introduced 2.0 Unreal engine ( https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Unreal_Engine ).
It was using some technics of drwaing polygons / triangle etc .. but in majority cases it was based on brutal force of calculating ..
I guess now they use UT2.5 while (it was introduce in 2004 ) it is mostly done for support for x64 / EAX (3D sound) / and all non PC platforms
+1
Except L2 uses the Unreal Engine 2.5 since beta, there was an alpha version of it before that using a much older engine (not sure if it was Unreal Engine 1)
see this video -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkSN6ZFBYHQ
Worst is ofc lack of real implementation of HSR (Hidden Surface Removal). It is biggest pain at any mass PvPs
Our PC load ALL stuff in range compute ALL, and after all .. figure out, you are inside small room in castle and you see can nothing http://board.kj-clan.de/images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif
But still you are hit by lag of 200 ppl in range ...
Most annoying thing is HSR was announce in 2001 (as concept) but in practice used by Microsoft in DX9.0
Again full support of DX 9 have only ... UT3 engine where HSR is incorporated...
For now we can enjoy of 3rd sense of approaching enemy by lag....:/
(*) In fact it is so ineffective that officially DX9 supports real HSR.
So thats why, when i am im the empty CH in Aden, and i turn around into direction where are sellers sitting behind the walls and i had lags. Or when im running on the route in Aden, and even if in not at the square, or near the square i have so **** lags.
actually with the orginal design concepts starting in 2000, they would have started out with a very basic pre-alpha concept using either unreleased and testing a unreal 2 engine SDK or with unreal 1 engine as their "dabbling" platform.. and likely even were playing with their own conception of an engine they created (unlikely but not unheard of)..
When the real work started the initial first unreal 2 engine was released... that'd be 2.0.. licenscing and such would have started at the time.. since the unreal engine 2.0 didn't officially launch fully until 2002..
At this point in time.. 2 years after lineage II was officially birthed and floating about in it's developement... The unreal 2 engine would be be in it's infancy, and making an MMORPG out of the unreal 2 engine was a still relatively new, which would require ncsoft to devote a lot of time into "modifying it" to work.
Now that they fully have the groundwork for lineage II... developement started at full throttle with unreal 2 engine 2.0 with subsequent updates to the engine that followed...
Actually reviewing some of the orginal lineage II files will present you with unreal 1.x UTX and map files, there orginal design was using the unreal 1 engine for some of the basic stuff, and were basically directly imported into the new engine (gotta love how easy it is to move that stuff from one engine to the next, this is what makes epic's unreal engine so favorable and nice to use... it's basically childs play)
It was this way until approximately C4 when a complete version of unreal 2.5 was intergrated into the client and was a necessity due to in C4, the servers were officially upgraded to a 64bit server system. (2.5 was the first to make use of 64bit client/server) (unreal 2.5 engine was mostly launched around the same time as unreal tournament 2004 which launched in march of 2004, 6 MONTHS AFTER lineage II had officially launched in korea october 1st 2003)
Through consistant updates provided by the licensing that epic provides for their unreal engine SDKs and major updates provided by additional marginal expenses for which ncsoft would continue to "upgrade" the games engine over time and allowing for improved fuctions to be intergrated at the pace they could manage.
The initial engine had limited terrain and model restrictions and of course for 2003/2004 the video hardware at the time was more on an even playing field for the engine... One of the very reasons the orginal models don't have "individual" fingers is of course due to these restrictions...
Unreal 2.5 fixed many of these restrictions, further improving it, allowing for the Kamaels to have overall better detail as well. Not to mention higher resolution textures and complexity in the geometry. This is why traveling through talking island (pre GOD) through gludin to gludio to dion to giran to aden and up through to goddard and rune and into the various outlaying lands shows a clear and cut distinction for gradual improvement. Even with the updates that improved these areas over time, some of the detail levels aren't quite as good. And actually some of these updates is why it has somewhat "broken" some things.
Today we run a heavily modified version of unreal 2.5/2.x, call it a hybrid of sorts... it's still as up to date as possible per the unreal 2 engines capabilities.
There have been under the hood changes made that epic has provided as solutions, dx 8.1 allows for pixel shader 1.4, but the unreal 2 2.5 engine supports various functions of dx 9 as well.. while it's not 100% compliant with DX9 due to the engine being developed over time and updates taking place...
GOD from the little bit i've looked at still is unreal 2.5/2.x .... however ncsoft .. provided with enough funding to make it worthwhile... could quite easily with not much difficult import all the necessary textures and map data and ID and basically the entire game into unreal 3 engine (today would be best to go unreal 3.5+) and this would open up the flood gates for HUGE improvements.. as the unreal 3 engine is one of the first to actually provide "more" intentional support for an MMO world system, not out of the box .. but better then the previous unreal engines by a whole lot.
Ontop of that.... full support for tons of functions and higher resoltion textures details and so forth. with unreal 3.5+ i think if they focused on updating all the character details.. (orcs/elves/de/etc) completely with in your face textures and up to date geometry and so forth.... even including pixel shaders and vertex shaders into the characters, hell they could even created with relative easy collision detection so that weapons don't cut their heads off when doing simple skills... not perfect but somewhat better detection for all world enviroments.. make world weather effects realy realistic and amazing... the limits are endless in comparison to the old aging and die unreal 2 engine.
And even including those major changes and upgrades to visuals.... our machines would perform even better and get better frame rates due to making better use of the video cards and gpu's we have today. Less brute force, more effiency.
GOD from the little bit i've looked at still is unreal 2.5/2.x .... however ncsoft .. provided with enough funding to make it worthwhile... could quite easily with not much difficult import all the necessary textures and map data and ID and basically the entire game into unreal 3 engine (today would be best to go unreal 3.5+) and this would open up the flood gates for HUGE improvements.. as the unreal 3 engine is one of the first to actually provide "more" intentional support for an MMO world system, not out of the box .. but better then the previous unreal engines by a whole lot.
Ontop of that.... full support for tons of functions and higher resoltion textures details and so forth. with unreal 3.5+ i think if they focused on updating all the character details.. (orcs/elves/de/etc) completely with in your face textures and up to date geometry and so forth.... even including pixel shaders and vertex shaders into the characters, hell they could even created with relative easy collision detection so that weapons don't cut their heads off when doing simple skills... not perfect but somewhat better detection for all world enviroments.. make world weather effects realy realistic and amazing... the limits are endless in comparison to the old aging and die unreal 2 engine.
And even including those major changes and upgrades to visuals.... our machines would perform even better and get better frame rates due to making better use of the video cards and gpu's we have today. Less brute force, more effiency.
Updating the characters, textures and geometry will take quite alot of time, on top of that i've never seen an MMO change from one engine to the other.
Updating the characters, textures and geometry will take quite alot of time, on top of that i've never seen an MMO change from one engine to the other.
EVE online did a pretty good update from like DX 7 or something to DX10/11. Basically they re-did all the art assets in the game. Of course EVE isn't exactly a graphics powerhouse to begin with and much different in scale to modify then L2.
And, as for me, i don´t really need the new textures etc. I like to settle with the all as it is now, but with more FPS.
agreed.
EVE online did a pretty good update from like DX 7 or something to DX10/11. Basically they re-did all the art assets in the game. Of course EVE isn't exactly a graphics powerhouse to begin with and much different in scale to modify then L2.
Yeah all that space sure is alot of work to redo :D
I didn't exactly see this question answered in either thread, and kind of forgot about it until now, but...
What is the GPU Animation toggle actually intended to do?
It just popped-up with one of the chronicles, and I've never seen a difference between having it check and unchecked. I assume it's supposed to make the game rely more on the GPU rather than the CPU, but I really have no idea.
Considering the name of the option "GPU ANIMATION" it doesn't seem to have any distinct definition because frankly it could mean almost anything.
While i think it's more for Hardware TnL (updated or more robust), enabling it while within range of light objects (something that emits light and isn't ambient) seems to change the way the light sources work
It could be for vertex vs lightmap style lighting modes, projected or not..
it's totally unclear.. and while i can see that some very minor changes occur.... what i cannot determine with certainty is that it actually offloads more to the gpu or not... i think it does... but usually something like that would require a restart of the client which this does not..
If i had access to the client in which to dig up the options and how they are tagged, i'd be able to tell you.. but unfortunately ncsoft has encrypted and made it fairly impossible to access them... plus according to them even just viewing the file without modification is against EULA due to having to bypass the encryption of the files.
I'm sure i could find "another" source ..... but i've had a little bit of an arguement in the past with a HGM about stating what i would find harmless and helpful things like this. (hell we talk about everything else almost)
They suggest you to use this option if you have good graphic cards. The details of the toons(only) is processed by the GPU instead of CPU when this option is selected. Higly recommended with highend graphic card.;)
They suggest you to use this option if you have good graphic cards. The details of the toons(only) is processed by the GPU instead of CPU when this option is selected. Higly recommended with highend graphic card.;)
Thank You! It has been a mistory to me for quite some time.
Will re-enable it tonight though I bearly notice a differance.
Thank You! It has been a mistory to me for quite some time.
Will re-enable it tonight though I bearly notice a differance.
when it first came i tested it abit, i had a slight increase in FPS on the system i had back then, after that i always had it turned on, but i havent checked if there is any difference now.