<1 FPS - Quad Core I5 - nVidia GTX 260

[_ArkAngel_]

I have two lower-spec'd computers that are running this fine. I have not been able to get this to even run at 1 FPS.





I'm running the current build of StarMade and Java 8. The game maxes out 2 cores. The red part of the graph indicates the CPU is running system code. Specifically, in this case, it's one thread maxing out cycles in the the nVidia driver code. (nvoglv64.dll) For a few minutes. Then suddenly, it stops.


I've confirmed I'm running 64-bit java 8. Most recent version just downloaded. Whether I run that or the java bundled with StarMade by Steam, I get the same results.

I have all the graphics options turned down as much as possible. The default options got me about 10 seconds per frame - 1 frame every ten seconds. Lowering them gets me closer to 1 frame a second.


It looks like I'm barely touching the GPU capabilities. The graphics driver thread gets maxed out for a few minutes on CPU... then when that thread gets down to less than 2% cpu usage, there is no corresponding increase in framerate. And the GPU usage remains around 8%.

I would love any suggestions. This is the with most recent nVidia drivers.

The computer is able to run Kerbal Space Program and Minecraft both pretty smoothly, so this is unexpected.

graphicsinfo.txt
Running on thread: main
Adapter: null
Driver Version: null
Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
OpenGL Version: 3.3.0
Renderer: GeForce GTX 260/PCIe/SSE2
GLSL Ver: 3.30 NVIDIA via Cg compiler

 

[Mariux]

I have no idea how other computers pulled this off, but your graphics card is way, WAY too slow. If you want to upgrade a GTX 750 ti is a very cheap option.

EDIT:

Keep in mind that KSP and Minecraft are less GPU intensive games, at least from my experience

 

[_ArkAngel_]

I realize the GTX 260 is dated, but it's not that bad.

I genuinely think it's a bug because the graphics thread is pegging a CPU (not the GPU), while the GPU is just... not coming close to breaking a sweat. Then the graphics thread chills way out, but there is still one CPU core pegged... why?

 

[Crashmaster]

I got a 260, need to keep framebuffer turned off or 1fps.

 

[Mariux]

I got a 260, need to keep framebuffer turned off or 1fps.

Yeah, you can try that, but you might as well just upgrade...

 

[Crashmaster]

budget? it's tight as fuck

 

[_ArkAngel_]

GTX 750 Ti looks like something I can get for under $100. So... that could be in the budget. But, it also looks like it performs about 3 times faster than the card I have.

So... from 1FPS to 3?
PassMark - Video Card Performance Comparison

I'm trying the framebuffer thing right now.

WOW. I just turned off framebuffer. I thought I turned everything down so far that couldn't possibly matter. Nope. 800FPS.


So... FrameBuffer = 1FPS? What is that all about?

 

[Brokengauge]

Some people don't have the option to upgrade. The last pc I built, I turned around and had to sell due to the ever throbbing presence of The Murphy. I play on a couple old laptops, and only recently got a gaming rig gifted to me. I was in the process of cobbling something together out of hand me down parts that were only considered top of the line when I was in high school lol. Some people don't get to budget for their hobbies, they just have to make due with whatever is lying around.

That being said, my oldest laptop actually gets the best performance lol. I have a 3 year old HP laptop with Windows 8, and it's ok. I most often use a 4 year old budget Dell. I've got the graphics set the same on both, and generally the dell beats it.

What kind of black magic is this?

My o/s is a very minimal (and free!) distribution of Linux called "bunsen labs"

If Windows is a gas guzzling dump truck when it comes to ram usage, bunsen is more like a prius that's been converted to run on its driver's smug sense of satisfaction...

Not saying that's the thing to do at all, since "replace your o/s!" Is a bit more drastic than "upgrade your hardware!" but I wanted that laptop to work, and I was totally blown away after I put that o/s on it.

 

[Batavium]

StarMade = CPU

The GPU does not do much. But it does need to have some recent hardware instructions else the game will not run. Old Intel GPU = No StarMade

Then the graphics thread chills way out, but there is still one CPU core pegged... why?

There is a Windows Update bug that takes one CPU 100% Core and does not give it back on Windows 7. "possible Windows Server 2008 R2"

Maybe you have this? I had it to.

So... FrameBuffer = 1FPS? What is that all about?

[Silly Mode]You can read Buffer also as Dam so... A Buffer for the Frames. Halt only one at a time![/Silly Mode]

What kind of black magic is this?

Hardware Specs of the laptops?

 

[Brokengauge]

StarMade = CPU

The GPU does not do much. But it does need to have some recent hardware instructions else the game will not run. Old Intel GPU = No StarMade



There is a Windows Update bug that takes one CPU 100% Core and does not give it back on Windows 7. "possible Windows Server 2008 R2"

Maybe you have this? I had it to.



[Silly Mode]You can read Buffer also as Dam so... A Buffer for the Frames. Halt only one at a time![/Silly Mode]



Hardware Specs of the laptops?

Sure!
The HP w/ Windows 8.whatever it is:


And the dell with Linux:

 

[Crusade]

framebuffer enables some more complicated/advanced shader effects - It's very likely your GPU simply doesn't support these (older shader model), and instead of crashing it's pegging the CPU trying to render them in software, though honestly I have no idea and it could just be computer gremlins.

 

[SmilingDemon]

graphicsinfo.txt
Running on thread: main
Adapter: null
Driver Version: null
Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
OpenGL Version: 3.3.0
Renderer: GeForce GTX 260/PCIe/SSE2
GLSL Ver: 3.30 NVIDIA via Cg compiler

this doesnt look right to me
and why are you using a server OS to play on ?
i actually cant find GPU drivers for W2008Server R2 from Nvidia for GTX260

 

[therimmer96]

i actually cant find GPU drivers for W2008Server R2 from Nvidia for GTX260

Should be the same drivers as Windows Vista, seeing as they share the same base.

 

[_ArkAngel_]

Keep in mind that KSP and Minecraft are less GPU intensive games, at least from my experience

I'm pretty sure physics is the real killer on KSP and StarMade. Neither is asking the GPU for that much.

I think what I've determined is my problem has more to do with running out of graphics memory.

framebuffer enables some more complicated/advanced shader effects - It's very likely your GPU simply doesn't support these (older shader model), and instead of crashing it's pegging the CPU trying to render them in software, though honestly I have no idea and it could just be computer gremlins.

I thought it might be dropping to software rendering as well at first. You can see in the various stats the shader model is fine. It's honestly not even that slow - too slow for turning on AA or stuff like that.

The card reports that it has 4GB total memory, but most of that is shared.

But.... it still has 896MB of dedicated VRAM.

I still consider this a bug. Something is off. It can't be taking a whole second to copy the framebuffer from VRAM to system RAM. Turning framebuffer off and turning lighting on triggers the exact same results.

Right now, I'm fishing for the best mix of settings I can use that minimizes ram use but looks the best. I would love to find some way to get lighting [Edit: Shadows. I can't enable Shadows] to work. It's possible that anything that uses post-processing at all is just not going to work.
[doublepost=1484665269,1484665085][/doublepost]

this doesnt look right to me
and why are you using a server OS to play on ?
i actually cant find GPU drivers for W2008Server R2 from Nvidia for GTX260

What doesn't look right? The adapter:null driver version:null part?

Windows Server 2008 R2 is actually the same kernel (and drivers) as Windows 7. I'm running it because initially I was running VMs on the Hyper-V architecture that 2008 R2 brought - including the ability to use 3d hardware from a VM.

But I haven't actually used that in over a year, so I don't have a lot of reason to be on a Server OS at this time.
[doublepost=1484666849][/doublepost]Update - Actually, I'm able to increase almost all of the settings, use the bigger texture maps, even enable 8AA samples, and still get 450+ FPS.

Just no FrameBuffer. No Shadows. No Bloom.

 

[Batavium]

I'm pretty sure physics is the real killer on KSP and StarMade. Neither is asking the GPU for that much.

I think what I've determined is my problem has more to do with running out of graphics memory.

I share your conclusion.

Though Starmade also uses very little Graphics Memory. The amount of dedicated graphics memory 896 MB is more than enough.

4 GB of your Systems RAM is available to the Graphics Card. Note available that does not mean it is used all the time. But your total system RAM is 8 GB and the 4 GB kept in reserve might not be given to StarMade or the rest of the System. That leaves 4 GB for the Windows OS and StarMade. There might be a Bios option to turn off the memory share.


The default Windows setting of System memory share given to the Graphic Card. Is to mirror the available dedicated RAM on the Graphic Card.

So 4 GB RAM set to possible use by the Graphic Card.

Your GTX260 has 896 MB. Windows reserves 896 MB of the 4 GB shared system RAM to it with out even doing anything. So GTX260 896 MB + 896 MB RAM = 1792 MB RAM for the GTX260

That leaves 4096 - 896 = 3200 MB unused in reserve for the GTX26o. Windows releases the rest of this RAM only when the GTX260 demands it.


Also check to make sure JAVA is set to use 2 GB and not 1 GB RAM.

Update - Actually, I'm able to increase almost all of the settings, use the bigger texture maps, even enable 8AA samples, and still get 450+ FPS.

Just no FrameBuffer. No Shadows. No Bloom.

Shadows are just for looks and are a real performance killer do not use it. Bloom is highly depended on how the Graphics Card Driver handles it or if it even supports it. Lucky it is just for looks so again do not use it.

The FrameBuffer bit sound to me like a bug. Or that StarMade uses it in a way that not all Graphic Cards understand.

You just need to try to give a little bit more RAM to the System.


The GTX260 is clearly strong enough and you were even able to have some extra settings so enjoy playing StarMade!

 

[Batavium]

Sure!
The HP w/ Windows 8.whatever it is:


And the dell with Linux:

The two CPU's are very much a like performance wise. Even though the A10 is a quad core and has a newer instruction set. The P320 can hold it own against the A10 is a few Benchmarks. In others the A10 is a clear winner. So then it all comes down to. If StarMade makes use of the A10 newer architecture.

You think the Dell P320 system runs the game better. so lets then make a Reserved conclusion that StarMade does not make full use of the A10 extra capabilities.



One thing that i can not make up from your specifications is what kind of storage device each laptop uses. It is possible that the HP Laptop has a faster one and that will give a dramaticly more responsive feel to that system. Think SSD vs HD.

You could try to tell StarMade on the HP A10 Laptop to use 3 of the 4 CPU cores. Look up this line in your server.cfg file and add a 3 as value.

CHUNK_REQUEST_THREAD_POOL_SIZE_CPU = 3 //Available threads of total for CPU generation. WARNING: too high can cause CPU spikes. About the amount of available cores minus one is best


Both Systems use simple Graphic Cards but as long as they support the basic instructions required by StarMade. Then albeit with some limitations StarMade should run.

EDIT: How do you merge a post?

 

[SmilingDemon]

What doesn't look right? The adapter:null driver version:null part?

yes .. for Nvidia that usualy looks something like this

Running on thread: main
Adapter: nvd3dumx,nvwgf2umx,nvwgf2umx,nvwgf2umx
Driver Version: 10.18.13.6881
Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
OpenGL Version: 4.5.0 NVIDIA 368.81
Renderer: GeForce GTX 980M/PCIe/SSE2
GLSL Ver: 4.50 NVIDIA

so .. no clue if that is caused by the server OS or not .. i do not have the hardware to verify that

for reference .. my not maxed out settings without shadows do use around 1,1 GB of dedicated GPU memory .. enabling Framebuffers (which i have todo because of it being an AMD card) adds another 130Mb.

 

[Brokengauge]

The two CPU's are very much a like performance wise. Even though the A10 is a quad core and has a newer instruction set. The P320 can hold it own against the A10 is a few Benchmarks. In others the A10 is a clear winner. So then it all comes down to. If StarMade makes use of the A10 newer architecture.

You think the Dell P320 system runs the game better. so lets then make a Reserved conclusion that StarMade does not make full use of the A10 extra capabilities.



One thing that i can not make up from your specifications is what kind of storage device each laptop uses. It is possible that the HP Laptop has a faster one and that will give a dramaticly more responsive feel to that system. Think SSD vs HD.

You could try to tell StarMade on the HP A10 Laptop to use 3 of the 4 CPU cores. Look up this line in your server.cfg file and add a 3 as value.

CHUNK_REQUEST_THREAD_POOL_SIZE_CPU = 3 //Available threads of total for CPU generation. WARNING: too high can cause CPU spikes. About the amount of available cores minus one is best


Both Systems use simple Graphic Cards but as long as they support the basic instructions required by StarMade. Then albeit with some limitations StarMade should run.

EDIT: How do you merge a post?

Both hard drives are HDD's.

I'm totally gonna change my server settings tonight. Thanks!

 

[_ArkAngel_]

yes .. for Nvidia that usualy looks something like this


so .. no clue if that is caused by the server OS or not .. i do not have the hardware to verify that

for reference .. my not maxed out settings without shadows do use around 1,1 GB of dedicated GPU memory .. enabling Framebuffers (which i have todo because of it being an AMD card) adds another 130Mb.

I was wondering how you got those numbers. I had this great idea of demonstrating how this bug works by monitoring the graphics memory as I added the frame buffer. It ended up being an inconclusive test. Before:

Load Starmade

I wanted to show the big jump when I enabled framebuffer. But... I enabled framebuffer and the game kept working just fine. So I enabled lighting. I enabled bloom. The game looked great! And.. was still running.

I was consistently getting more than 30FPS, though now finally stressing out the GPU.

I don't know what to make of this. Suddenly it's working... and I didn't change anything in the system. I didn't even reboot.

I... reinstalled Adobe Reader and WinRar for unrelated reasons. That's it...

 

[SmilingDemon]

did you change sectors in the game ? .. maybe there is now less going on ..
or was there any lighting changes on chunks going on ? (running light or stuff like that?)
i did use GPU-Z for monitoring the data. (and i subtracted the amount of ram before starting Starmade because of all the browsers running )
maybe get me your latest settings.cfg and i try it on my GPU to compare it then?