Need help with frame rates

I just had a new PC built and I am not happy with the frame rates. System is as follows: MB-Intel D850EMVR AAC18369-605;CPU P4 2.4;Mem-256 RD 800 mh; WD 40G 7200 hard drive; 52x24x52 CD burner;32X DVD; ATI expert 2000 32MG{Rage 128 chip set}Windows 98SE. Running in 1024X768 I only get frame rates of 14 to 21. My old sys PII 400 with a 32mb trident chip ran almost as fast but had more stutter. AT 800X600 I get about 25 to 33FPS, but I don't like running at that res. setting. Can any body tell me whats going on.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: Need help with frame rates, LAHDPOP, Aug-09-03, 03:09 PM, (1) RE: Need help with frame rates, cody45, Aug-09-03, 03:14 PM, (2) RE: Need help with frame rates, LAHDPOP, Aug-09-03, 04:50 PM, (3) RE: Need help with frame rates, derekmorton, Aug-09-03, 09:28 PM, (5) RE: Need help with frame rates, kmanc21, Aug-09-03, 06:25 PM, (4) RE: Need help with frame rates, derekmorton, Aug-09-03, 09:30 PM, (6) RE: Need help with frame rates, Eagleknight, Aug-10-03, 00:33 AM, (7) RE: Need help with frame rates, cody45, Aug-10-03, 00:39 AM, (8) RE: Need help with frame rates, Bing, Aug-10-03, 12:43 PM, (9) RE: Need help with frame rates, kevarc, Aug-10-03, 12:47 PM, (10) RE: Need help with frame rates, theduke_490, Aug-13-03, 02:19 AM, (13) RE: Need help with frame rates, derekmorton, Aug-13-03, 02:35 AM, (14) RE: Need help with frame rates, cody45, Aug-10-03, 01:17 PM, (11) RE: Need help with frame rates, Bing, Aug-12-03, 11:22 PM, (12) RE: Need help with frame rates, OTTODAD, Aug-13-03, 10:55 AM, (15) RE: Need help with frame rates, Bing, Aug-13-03, 02:06 PM, (16)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

From a quick look at your system, your video card is the biggest bottleneck. The Rage 128 is a very old chipset. That card might be just the ticket for your video editing applications (if that's what you do), but it's severely lacking for serious 3D gaming punch. Usually MSTS is more dependant on processor than vid card, but in your case, I'd say replace the card. Your new system seems to be A-OK except for the card (and of course, more RAM would never hurt). Those Rage 128s are just too old.
All opinion, of course, but that's what I'd do.Bret

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Thats what I thought to and had to argue the point with the guy who built it for me. I have just ordered a G-Force 4 with 64mb ram and I am going to add anothe 256mbs of ram. Thanks for your reply, and any comments on you might have on the new card. Joe.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Which G4 is it? Be aware that the MX line is the low-end version of their cards, and not the same Graphics Processing Unit as the G4 Ti Series. But hey, all you can do is get the best you can afford.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>Thats what I thought to and had to argue the point with the
>guy who built it for me.He does not undestand gaming or is just trying to get rid of old stock>I have just ordered a G-Force 4 Don't get am MX>with 64mb ram and I am going to add anothe 256mbs of ram.
>Thanks for your reply, and any comments on you might have on
>the new card. Joe.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

After a quick look at your specs - it looks like you could use more and faster RAM. If your mobo will take DDR RAM, I would recommend a minimum of 512MB DDR, at the fastest speed your chip fsb will handle. I am running an AMD Barton 2500 with 768MB DDR 2100 RAM and a GeForce3 Ti200 64MB and on most routes will run an average of 45-50 fps with a drop to the high teens on some of the route with a lot of custom objects. Also, I installed DirectX9 and the latest nVidia drivers for my card and picked up 5 - 8 fps. I know that MSTS doesn't make use of DirectX 9, but it seems the video card processes quicker with it installed.Ken

How did I survive before MSTS

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>After a quick look at your specs - it looks like you could
>use more and faster RAM.He has RDRAM

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I was going to say also he is using RDRAM which is faster than DDR juast more expensive. If you can afford it put 256mb more of ram in your system and get a better video card. G4 TI4200 are good and relativly cheap or you can get a higher end Geforce FX or a ATI radeon card.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Thanks for all your help, Joe

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Aug-10-03 AT 12:46 PM (EDT)

Google yourself over to Guru3D and check the forums on video cards. I would say, avoid the MX line. If it's Gf4, the Ti-4400 is reasonably priced, has 128 Meg onboard RAM, and does a good job with MSTS (I have one on my older system).RAM - I would not turn on the system with less than 512 Meg RAM, suit yourself. I went to 1.0 Gig RAM on my new Alienware system. What happens in TS with less than 512 Meg RAM is the swap (paging file) will be working overtime, resulting in lagging performance, there ain't no way around it: system RAM is faster than any swap or paging file. YOu will not, however, be able to do much about the Lurch Loading unless you get yourself an HD with not just 7200 rpm, but also with a 8 Meg cache (this is called by different names, the idea is a larger cache ON the HD). I no longer have Lurch Load - there will be a slight pause in some places, but no lurching. Do not be surprised that even with a better system you continue to get 18 to 21 fps in heavy polygon areas. There are routes - feedback directly from the designer - where 12 fps is good ON THE BEST SYSTEM, a less capable system cannot handle this add-on. Urban area,lots of trains, more important the designer did not optimize the graphics, and every little polygon counts against you. MSTs is an old application by today's standards, though not that old. I have other 3D apps from the same time period which run so much better it isn't funny. Madden NF 2003 was in the works when TS was released, and was available mid-2002, versus summner of 2001 for MSTS - believe Sniper just posted the record of the first Train Sim library file, middle or late July 2001. So you have only six to nine months separating them. Kuju and Microsoft didn't care about what they were doing, I have to believe that, everything points to it. Graphics performance in Maden NFL 2003 is stunning, no other word for it. None of the crap we have to put up with in MSTs - it's DirectX too, not OpenGL. Love it or leave it, that's MSTS - lately I have been leaving it for sims and games I don't have to go two out of three falls with, just to get them to run reasonably well. Bing

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I just dropped a 9600Pro in this computer and it does make a difference over the POS that was in here. Though the MOBO only has a 4X AGP.Kevin Arceneaux
DEFAULT IS FOR DUMMIES
Lone Wolf Activities Forum and Activity Packs are on www.3DTrains.com

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Hey Kevin,
How do you guy's messure ( FPS )
I just through in a FX5900ULTRA and
i'm kinda curious what my system will
do. My MOBO has 8xAGP. Thank's
Jerry

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

FPS = <shift> zDerek

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

My HD is a WD ultra ATA with 8mb cashe.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

There are so many parameters involved with "getting better frame rates" it's impossible to zero in on just one. Follow the usual troubleshooting routines: SHut off everything running in the background. EVERYTHING. Free up RAM, disable VSync, set FramesRenderedAHead to zero, yada, yada. FSAA makes a lot of difference, I found I can live with 2X at a rez of 1600 X 1200 X32, although the new FX 5600 is optimized for DX9, I can get by because the card had 256 Megs RAM onboard, plus I have 1 Gig system RAM. What is happening with the new cards is we are leaving MSTS behind in the dust, we can only hope MSTS2 will be set up properly for DX9, but why don't I trust Kuju to do that? Nominal frame rates are low with the FX 5600, but fps is not and never has been the entire story. If I get down to a "crawl" of 17 fps, but the rendering is so smooth I don't know it, what does it mean? Rendering is equally as important, maybe more so, because the fps readouts are sometimes misleading, and can be totally wrong. Below 12, I have a problem, but this relates also to the poly count of the equipment: I can run a NEC4 consist in the rain (rain is usually a killer), get 20's in the heavily builtup NEC4 and no problem, though there are a couple places where the old lurch factor kicks in. Not real bad, but it's there. Other routes I don't have Lurch Load any more. Keep working at it, youi will get better performance. ONe thing: Asking a system to run MSTS - unless it's naked scenery tiles - with less than 512 Meg system RAM means the OS will be swapping out - or "paging out" - to a form of memory which isn't nearly as fast. There's only one way around that I know: System RAM is cheap. Buy some. Bing

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

It took the guys here a long time to convince me that the answer to improving anything MSTS is to run it in WIN-XP, HOME being more Gaming / Multi-Media orientated than PRO.My Frame rates improved dramatically, also helped by a nVIDIA TI-4600, confirmed by a number of comparison tests between WIN-98SE and WIN-XP in the Forum.O t t o

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

If I were not looking ahead to MSTS2, I would take the Ti-4600 any day. MSTS1 will run like a banshee on it, I have a Ti-4400 on my other winXP rig, it does OK, what holds it back is the AMD XP 2000+ and Gigabyte mobo - we can jabber all we want about other aspects, but when it comes to processing, it's the bus which goes or don't go as fast as you need. So, I stepped up to an Intel 875P. Bigger power supply - 420 watts, better HD - one with an 8 Meg cache, the Lurch Load factor has all but disappeared except in NEC4. But the FX 5600 isn't as good in terms of speed with DX9 and MSTS1 as the older, slower machine - 2 Ghz max from the AMD versus a P4 3 Ghz AND a much better front-side bus (now, how can it be both? "Hey, look at my front-side beer belly.") We'll assume MSTS2 will be built for DX9, and right now I want the FX 5600 for Madden NFL 2004 and NASCAR 2003. That's the tradeoff and I'll live with it; I can always hook up the older WinXP machine on the other side of my Belkin KVM. You pays yer money, you takes yer cherce. Bikng

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | File Library ] Copyright © 2002 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.