Have an 8800 GTX ? Try this!

[Trooper5]

I have ben running Alahs Fist and have found a great performance boost. My system is as follows:

nForce 680i

Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 3.30GHz

2GB Corsair RAM @ 800MHz

Geforce 8800 GTX 768MB

Win XP

Set game model and texture to BALANCED

Turn VSync and AA to OFF

Set Video card to AA 2XQ, and Anisotropic to 16X

The game now runs with model and textures set at BEST and the FPS is 25 to 120!!!

Try it out.

PS: If you set the game model and textures to anything other than balanced the frame rate drops to nothing and visually it looks like it set to fast or something. I think the game trys to overide the Video card but can't. So let the card control everything. This set up gives me no less than 60+ fps!!! in the Al Huqf Engagement scenario.

[peleprodigy]

Shoot! didn't work for me. Thanks for the idea, though, maybe it will work for someone else.

[Hukka]

Didn't work for me either. I have a 8800 GTS though.

[SlapHappy]

Trooper5

I tried your suggestion and had fantastic improvement. And I have an 8600GTS card.

In a test with the map editor, I was able to improve from 10 FPS static to 37 FPS static on my 800m x 2000m test benchmark. This is definitely going to improve the playability of the larger setups for me.

Thanks for the suggestion...I was beginning to despair of ever figuring out what the problem was with my frame rates.

[thelmia]

WHOA. I have 2 7800GTX SLI and I notice the same thing- it FLIES. FRAPS lags me, so I don't know what FPS I'm getting. With laggy FRAPS it's 25. Without it's much better.

The game looks incredible this way. It's an amazing improvement. And it does it with more FPS.

Wow, wow, wow. Totally new game. I think it might be because I have a relatively weak CPU (a Pentium 830d) but lots of graphics capacity on the 2 7800GTXs. Anything that moves the load off the CPU gives my system a massive boost in performance.

[ September 04, 2007, 02:01 AM: Message edited by: thelmia ]

[RobboG]

Worked for me. Great find!!

[Dirtweasle]

I'll re-test this, maybe I did something wrong setting the options, but right now I have to report it did not work for me.

[Knaust1]

shoot...it works also for my crappy ATI 200M series...good FPS

maybe this is Aladdin's lamp

the overall solution?

[Mord]

BFG NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GT PCIe 256MB GDDR3 Ram (newest Driver) Running at 1024 X 768 32 bit, 60Hz

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core

Core Processor 4200+

2.20 GHz, 1.50 GB Ram

WinXP Media Edition SP2 (all Updated)

DirectX 9.0c

Not only did it increase the FPS it fixed my sound stutter...

My FPS shot up considerably! Big time notice! I am running at 8xs AA and 16X AF and it still rocks!

Are you sure this is running the in game settings at Best? Regardless it's an excellent compromise if it's not.

THANKS!

Mord.

[Trooper5]

I've run the game with settings at BEST and it looked the same as with this workaround.

[Mord]

Outstanding find! GREAT JOB!!

AGAIN many thanks!

It's really nice to get the performance out of this card that I bought it for.

I got this comp and NVIDIA card in anticipation of CMSF about a year and a half ago. The guy suggested an ATI but I didn't want to chance the Fog Tables thing..I am very happy I thought ahead, after this fix my card screams CMSF!

Mord.

[Sekra]

Sorry to say this guys but looking "under the hood" (with nvidias GLExpert) this is actually no workaround. All it does is lower the load on your CPU to produce bigger FPS because currently the game is running in software mode (in other terms it isnt using the 3D acceleration of your hardware) and naturally since your processor has to do all the stuff that your gfx card(s) should be doing lowering the graphics will have huge impacts on FPS. So dont get your hopes up.

[RobboG]

I understand this Hotti after reading your post and am certainly not ticking the box as 'solved' but it is a workaround until the real issues are sorted. When I built my current system, the idea was that I should, pretty much, be able to max out most games that I had and CMSF should be no different. Keep up the great work.

[thelmia]

Originally posted by Hotti:

Sorry to say this guys but looking "under the hood" (with nvidias GLExpert) this is actually no workaround. All it does is lower the load on your CPU to produce bigger FPS because currently the game is running in software mode (in other terms it isnt using the 3D acceleration of your hardware) and naturally since your processor has to do all the stuff that your gfx card(s) should be doing lowering the graphics will have huge impacts on FPS. So dont get your hopes up.

Uh, but it works. How is that not a workaround? If it is true that the program isn't using hardware acceleration, then why the hell isn't it? Isn't that a problem?

I get what you are saying, but I am getting BETTER FPS with this than I did on "fastest" settings. And more detail.

I'm happy to be completely ignorant if this leads to some sort of fix.

[ September 05, 2007, 05:10 PM: Message edited by: thelmia ]

[SlapHappy]

It helps my frame rates, too, but I understand what Hotti is getting at as well.

[Cpl Steiner]

I Would like to chime in here and say every nVidia user with problems should give this a go. I tried it tonight and was frankly astonished at how much it improved the game for me. Using AA 2xQ as Trooper5 suggested I found it a bit too jaggy so I increased it a notch to 4x and it looked a lot better with little discernible drop in frame-rate. Just to re-emphasize, the improvements I have seen aren't subtle. Far from it, you would have to be an idiot not to notice them. Frame-rate is greatly increased, and the whole game had a better look, comparable (dare I say it) to the latest console games!

Now I know Hotti is saying that this is not solving the real issue, i.e. that some users' systems are dropping down to software render mode. However, I can only ask the question, how can my graphics card's AA and AF settings be making a difference if the game isn't using my graphics card at all? Assuming Hotti is right and my CPU is rendering the game, then maybe this is freeing up the graphics card to apply loads more AA and AF than I would have believed possible until now. I know this is a perverse way of looking at it, but if it works...!

Anyway, I heartily recommend trying what Trooper5 suggests. I can't wait to play through the entire Trask Force Thunder campaign on these settings.

My current PC Specs:

Athlon 64 Dual Core 3800+

2.01GHz, 2.00GB RAM

Windows XP with Service Pack 2

1280 x 1024 Desktop Resolution

70Hz LCD Monitor Refresh Rate

nVidia Geforce 7600 GT PCI-E Graphics Card

nVidia Forceware Driver version 163.16

4x AA (in nVidia Control Panel)

16x AF (in nVidia Control Panel)

VSync Application Controlled (in nVidia Control Panel)

My current CM:SF Game settings:

Resolution: Desktop

3D Detail: Balanced

Texture Quality: Balanced

Vsync: Off

AA/Multisampling: Off

Priority: Normal

Hope this helps someone.

[peleprodigy]

you are all running the game at lower settings, of course the frame rates will be better. run the model settings to 'best' while in game, and then you will see what you are missing.

[thelmia]

No, I'm NOT RUNNING IT AT LOWER SETTINGS. It runs faster than it did on 'Fastest.' How to explain that?

Whatever is causing it, and I understand I am taking load off of the CPU, it works.

[peleprodigy]

if you followed the instructions your are running balanced/balanced. did you raise the model settings to 'best' from inside the game like i said? if so, did you notice any visual quality improvement? if you answered yes to both questions then YES, you are running it at lower quality settings.

ps-balanced is not some magical setting that excuses the game code from any rendering. it is just a mid- range quality setting. i have no idea why fastest wouldn't have higher frame rates. did you measure it with fraps?

[Cpl Steiner]

peleprodigy,

Have you actually tried this? I think you are missing the point. Whether or not the 3D Detail and Texture Quality is higher on settings above Balanced, the differences are marginal when compared against the terrible drop in frame-rate. However, as you are able to crank up AA and AF pretty much to max on Balanced/Balanced and still have great frame-rates, it is by far the better way to play the game IMHO. There may be some dropping off of quality for more distant objects but the foreground is just as high quality and the huge amounts of AA and AF used make the game shine like never before.

Now the game looks beautiful and the frame-rate is totally great I've been playing CM:SF into the early hours and having an absolute blast. I replayed the 2nd scenario in the Battle folder and it was awesome. I dismounted every squad on the edge of town and had the whole company just blaze away at the buildings on the outskirts and any enemy foolish enough to show himself, and it was like watching Full Metal Jacket! Let's just say, Frame-Rate (plus bags of AA/AF) has a Quality all its own!

Just for sheer looks, compare Best/Best with no AA/AF (forget frame-rate for now) against Balanced /Balanced with AA/AF maxed out. The latter looks far better and the frame-rate is higher. It's a win/win situation as far as I'm concerned.

[thelmia]

Originally posted by peleprodigy:

if you followed the instructions your are running balanced/balanced. did you raise the model settings to 'best' from inside the game like i said? if so, did you notice any visual quality improvement? if you answered yes to both questions then YES, you are running it at lower quality settings.

ps-balanced is not some magical setting that excuses the game code from any rendering. it is just a mid- range quality setting. i have no idea why fastest wouldn't have higher frame rates. did you measure it with fraps?

1. Yes, I raised models to 'best' in settings. FPS went down, drastically. It does not look any better. The horizon does increase for high detail.

2. Yes, I FRAPS'd it. I got a 5 FPS improvement from 'fastest' to 'balanced'. It's even better without FRAPS, because FRAPS causes lag. I'm not making this up. It really goes faster while looking better.

I don't know why this works. I'm just reporting what I'm seeing. I'm a weird case because I have a relatively weak CPU (Pentium 830d) but good graphics cards (2 NVIDIA 7800GTX).

I think what you're saying is that the card tweaking is more important than the in- game settings. I agree with that. I don't know why I'm getting the results that I am getting, and I doubt that it's typical.

[Trooper5]

Thanks for that Cpl Steiner. I've tried your suggestion and made my modifications in the nvidia control panel with in game at BALANCED all round. New settings are AA 16xQ, AF 16x with AA overide and vsyn on (off in game). The results are amazing even better than before (Hotti dose'nt get it, but the video card does work, my CPU is'nt that good). I can see the shadows from the slat armour on the hull of the stryker!!! Plus, I get at least 30 fps. This may not be the solution but I'm happy and it's better than anything Battlefront has come up with so far. I hope any of this will help them.

[ September 05, 2007, 08:30 PM: Message edited by: Trooper5 ]

[thelmia]

Originally posted by Trooper5:

Thanks for that Cpl Steiner. I've tried your suggestion and made my modifications in the nvidia control panel with in game at BALANCED all round. New settings are AA 16xQ, AF 16x with AA overide and vsyn on (off in game). The results are amazing even better than before (Hotti dose'nt get it, but the video card does work, my CPU is'nt that good). I can see the shadows from the slat armour on the hull of the stryker!!! This may not be the solution but I'm happy and it's better than anything Battlefront has come up with so far. I hope any of this will help them.

Yeah, it looks even better. I think I took a little FPS hit. I feel like I'm playing the game that the devs are playing. Before it was really terrible, and obviously not what they intended.

I don't know why this works for some people but not others. I think the key is the viewing distance. At higher settings the horizon for high detail increases and drastically hurts FPS. We don't need that much viewing distance to see what we want to see at high detail. So, the additional rendering at longer distances is wasted. Just a guess.

[peleprodigy]

When I follow the directions to the letter, the game is more playable in terms of frame rates (airport scenario). nothing i would hang my hat on as preferable, but better than best/best.

but it looks a bit like ass. so when I raise the settings to 'best' within the game, it looks better, but the frame rate goes down.

I am jealous that you all appear to be getting good results, by all means stop wasting your time posting on this board.

[thelmia]

LOL. Yeah, pretty much all my problems have been solved. I figured out how to beat multiplayer lag, and now my game looks good. Now if only I could use setup artillery without crashing in multiplayer, I'll be good.