Nvidia users, immediate testing required

[wolf66]

Rune

do you have a EVGA 8800 GTX card ?

[rune]

Somewhat, but remember I have the 8800 GTX and I am getting 14-15 fps at best/best, which is better then you are doing. however, the card I have is obviously faster and has 768 meg memory.

Edited, yes I have the evga 8800gtx card, with 768 megs of memory as I stated.

Rune

[Dirtweasle]

Well, I have to say that if arguably the top two out of three GeForce cards, (8800GTX 768 & 8800GTS 640) on good PC platforms are getting less than first class frame rates it ain't the card.

[YankeeDog]

... except that those two cards are from the same manufacturer, and share many of the same components, both hardware and software. So that the same problem could be happening with both cards is quite plausible.

[Dirtweasle]

MSI = eVGA?

[peleprodigy]

Doom, quake wars demo for new Opengl...run like a dream on my machine.

star trek elite force, old Opengl game, runs like a dream.

trust me, combat mission shlock farce is the only game that does not run like a dream on my machine.

it is not the card, it is the game, period.

until the developers answer the question that has been asked several times (i.e. what system provides great performance at max settings? which has been asked by myself and others) that will be my contention.

[Cpl Steiner]

Anyone using a 7xxx series nVidia card might find these settings useful (my own card is a 7600GT):

Driver version: 163.67 (beta)

In nVidia Control Panel:

AA: 4x

AF: 8x

Texture Filtering Quality: High Quality

Triple Buffering: On

VSync: Application Controlled

In Game Options Screen:

Resolution: Desktop

3D Model Detail: Balanced

Texture Quality: Improved

Antialias/Multisample: On

VSync: Off

The game looks great and FPS is very good too. The only drawback is that you don't see as much detail in the distance when zoomed out due to having to use Balanced 3D Model detail. On smaller maps you may be able to increase to Improved 3D Model Detail when in-game using shift-} and still have good FPS.

P.S. - Using these settings I now see the Battlefront intro which always gave me a blank screen before, so they definitely appear to help for my system.

P.P.S. - Other games look better too with no noticeable FPS drop. I tried it with "Red Orchestra" and it looked like a different game the graphics were so much better - and the FPS seemed just as good as they had always been on my system.

I am looking forward very much to when I can run CM:SF with max settings (my PC is after all less than a year old with a not bad graphics card - specifically bought for CM:SF as well as a couple of other high-spec games) but until that time (if it ever comes) this is the best I can do.

[ September 12, 2007, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: Cpl Steiner ]

[Kawabonga]

I wont play on best/best not balanced/improved setting with normal FPS (least 25 FPS) On my GF 7600 GS i have 3Dmark01=25177, 3Dmark03=15265, 3Dmark05=7131,3Dmark06=3864 points. Such result should do to play on maximum details.

[Dirtweasle]

I ran those OpenGL benchmark tests and got really good results.

The accompanying report though stated -

GL_EXT_copy_texture was not found, but has the entry point glCopyTexSubImage3DEXT

GL_EXT_subtexture was not found, but has the entry point glTexSubImage3DEXT

GL_NV_half_float has the entry point glVertexWeighthNV missing!

GL_NV_half_float has the entry point glVertexWeighthvNV missing!

WGL_NV_vertex_array_range was not found, but has the entry point wglAllocateMemoryNV

WGL_NV_vertex_array_range was not found, but has the entry point wglFreeMemoryNV

GL_HP_occlusion_test was not found, but is available in driver version 2.1.0

GL_NV_framebuffer_multisample_ex was not found, but is available in driver version 2.1.0

GL_NV_texture_compression_latc was not found, but is available in driver version 2.1.0

GL_OES_conditional_query was not found, but is available in driver version 2.1.0

Not sure what to do about that, or if it matters.

[Battlefront.com]

peleprodigy,

it is not the card, it is the game, period.

until the developers answer the question that has been asked several times (i.e. what system provides great performance at max settings? which has been asked by myself and others) that will be my contention.

Are you purposefully being dense, or are you simply not reading ANYTHING we have written in the dozen posts concerning nVida card problem? In either case I will answer your questions AGAIN:

1. Framerate is HIGHLY variable depending on many factors, including game settings, system specs, and the sceanrio being played. However, 8800 users with a decent CPU (last two years) should be getting 20+ FPS at least with the highest settings for most scenarios.

2. There is a problem specific to the 8800 cards. This has been acknowledged more times than I can count. And no, just because other games work fine doesn't mean that the problem is Combat Mission. Sorry, that is the reality of hardware/software. It has always been that way and always will be. There is PLENTY of evidence that other software has problems with the 8800 cards. nVidia has even admitted that there are significant problems with it.

It doesn't matter one bit if you don't understand this or believe it. It is simple fact and facts are more important than your uninformed complaining.

3. Even though we feel the problem is with nVidia hardware/drivers, we are trying to figure out what we can do to work around the problem/s. This is difficult to do without knowing what the problem/s is/are. We can't do anything about the bugs in the nVidia drivers that fail to have the card handle VRAM correctly (this is what ALT-TAB fixes).

4. We think there are far more than just one problem dogging nVidia people. Some 8800 card users have NO problems at all (it is a fact), some find the ALT-TAB thing works, some found the latest drivers offered an improvement, and some will find that v1.04 will help out too. But we think some people will not see much improvement with v1.04.

Bottomline... we KNOW there is a problem with 8800 cards and are spending considerable time trying to figure out what the problem (likely problems) is and how to work around it if possible. Whining, complaining, being a jerk about it will NOT get this issue fixed any sooner. So why be a jerk?

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Here is another thread for you guys to check out. It is a link to nVidia's own website that offers possible fixes.

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=70&t=000387

Steve

[LuckyStrike]

I have a 7950 GTX and the game runs VERY much smoother after setting Thread Optimisation to OFF in the control panel.

[peleprodigy]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

peleprodigy,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />it is not the card, it is the game, period.

until the developers answer the question that has been asked several times (i.e. what system provides great performance at max settings? which has been asked by myself and others) that will be my contention.

Are you purposefully being dense, or are you simply not reading ANYTHING we have written in the dozen posts concerning nVida card problem? In either case I will answer your questions AGAIN:

1. Framerate is HIGHLY variable depending on many factors, including game settings, system specs, and the sceanrio being played. However, 8800 users with a decent CPU (last two years) should be getting 20+ FPS at least with the highest settings for most scenarios.

2. There is a problem specific to the 8800 cards. This has been acknowledged more times than I can count. And no, just because other games work fine doesn't mean that the problem is Combat Mission. Sorry, that is the reality of hardware/software. It has always been that way and always will be. There is PLENTY of evidence that other software has problems with the 8800 cards. nVidia has even admitted that there are significant problems with it.

It doesn't matter one bit if you don't understand this or believe it. It is simple fact and facts are more important than your uninformed complaining.

3. Even though we feel the problem is with nVidia hardware/drivers, we are trying to figure out what we can do to work around the problem/s. This is difficult to do without knowing what the problem/s is/are. We can't do anything about the bugs in the nVidia drivers that fail to have the card handle VRAM correctly (this is what ALT-TAB fixes).

4. We think there are far more than just one problem dogging nVidia people. Some 8800 card users have NO problems at all (it is a fact), some find the ALT-TAB thing works, some found the latest drivers offered an improvement, and some will find that v1.04 will help out too. But we think some people will not see much improvement with v1.04.

Bottomline... we KNOW there is a problem with 8800 cards and are spending considerable time trying to figure out what the problem (likely problems) is and how to work around it if possible. Whining, complaining, being a jerk about it will NOT get this issue fixed any sooner. So why be a jerk?

Steve </font>

[Battlefront.com]

peleprodigy,

The point you don't seem to get is that you can not abuse us into getting a fix any sooner than it would come out anyway, so why do you bother? You're not happy with CM's performance on your system... we get it. So why not try and be helpful instead of spending your energies here on this Forum being a "jerk"? Or do you think that being like that motivates us to spend even more time on this problem?

1) There is nothing on display in this game at the absolute highest settings that should result in a frame rate any lower than 30 fps at 1920*1200 on an 8800 gtx, c2d 6600 and 2mb ram. I have played far too many games to accept that.

CM is always going to be a pig compared to other games because of the environment and the numbers it is pushing. Your expectations are too high if you think the most monster CM scenario should run 30+ regardless. Unlike those other games you play, Combat Mission is *not* artificially restricted in terms of how much is asked of the processor and graphics card. Which is why your apples to oranges arguments mean nothing. The same thing happened with CMBO when it came out too.

Your statement about "20+ fps... in most scenarios" (most is a nice disclaimer, by the way) reveals alot about the underlying game engine.

The disclaimer is in there because the amount of stuff on the screen has a HUGE impact on framerate. That's simple physics, so you are insisting I give you an answer that can never exist. Second, it does reveal a lot about the underlying game engine... generally it's pushing more polygons and doing more calculations that most any game out there, so couple that with an Editor that let's people do whatever they want irrespective of impact on FPS, well... use some imagination. People brought CMx1 games down to single digit frames too.

Had I known that was the top performance I would get I never would have purchased this game. I recommend putting a much more demanding scenario in the demo to fully disclose the performance a potential purchaser can expect to receive.

Smashing Steel is a "more demanding scenario". It isn't the MOST demanding, but it is certainly representational.

2)Yes, it is a fact that I am not having problems with any other opengl games both newer and older than CM

Which means nothing, as I have said. "Nobody" experienced any left-click mouse problems with ATI cards with other games. Why not? Because none of them, apparently needed to use 3D mouse clicks. If a game did it would have had the same problems that CM has because we identified 3 bugs in ATI's drivers. We've also already proven that there are tons of bugs in nVidia's cards. In fact nVidia just released a new driver for Quake. Your logic would dictate that this was unnecessary because you personally don't have any problems with OpenGL games. Yet the drivers were released because of major performance issues and those issues were obviously nVidia's. There's plenty of documentation of nVidia bugs, so it's useless to try and argue they don't exist.

3) Here is perhaps the biggest: I paid $65 for a game whose recommended specs I blow away with my rig, yet after 4 weeks the game demonstrates an unplayable framerate. And obviously since I spend the money to be up to date on hardware, and am diligent enough to be up to date on drivers, I feel I have kept up my end of the bargain.

Are we denying there is a problem? No. Are we working hard to find the cause? Yes, oh God yes. Are we posting potential workarounds whenever we find them? Yes. Are they helping some people? Yes! What more should we be doing that we aren't already doing?

So instead of calling a customer a jerk, simply refund my $65, and I will send you back the game, and then I will be a satisfied customer.

How about you just put the game down until we fix the problem if you're so bothered by it? We will get to the bottom of this and your insistence on being counter productive is, well, counter productive. For all we know we might have this issue fixed for you tomorrow.

Until then, I am an unsatisfied customer and am expressing that dissatisfaction. And I didn't call you any names either, though the same may not be said for you.

You have a right to say that you are unsatisfied and dissatisfied even. But you have no right to be a jerk (I'll just keep using that "name" because it fits). And no, you did not call ME personally a name, but your insistence that we're not answering your questions is more than a little insulting and even more untrue. I could say that calling the game "combat mission shlock farce" counts as name calling, and it is in fact the reason for me taking the tone I am with you. Well, that and your sniping and refusal to see that your questions have been answered more than once is getting more annoying each time you do it.

One more thing, even in your heated response in which you called me dense, you still failed to answer my question about what system you the developer used to max-out the game at optimal performance. I really wish someone from the development team would answer that.

It's because this is not a question that can be answered, nor is it relevant. I've already told you, flat out, that you should be getting better framerates on your system than you have been posting. So what possible difference would it make knowing that we developed the game on a 486 or a 8GHz Quad super computer? I've already told you that your performance is NOT what it should be. That is really the only important thing to consider, is it not?

Putting aside the illogic of what you're asking for, I've explained over and over and over again, that there are many variables to framerate, the biggest of them being the particular scenario being played. There is no magical answer to give you, even if it was relevant (which it isn't). You're also apparently missing the fact that the "development team" (if you mean programmer) consists of one guy... Charles. And he's busy trying to fix the problem, which is the way it should be.

Enough posters have stated their systems and framerates here that you should have had your answer long ago (as I have repeatedly pointed out to you). We have nothing super slick and in fact our systems are generally lower in the pecking order than most people posting here. At best we have a couple of run of the mill 2GHz dual core processors with various cards, some of which are 8800s. One of our star testers, and contributors to this 8800 stuff, is Rune. He just got a super duper quad core system with the troublesome 8800. He certainly isn't getting the framerate he should either because, as we already know, there is a problem with 8800s. Not all, but far too many.

So let's summarize...

There's a problem (or likely problems), we're working on it, and as soon as we have a fix we'll get it out to you.

Steve

[peleprodigy]

No one has ever told me what system the DEVELOPERS used to max out the system at good frame rates. All I need is one system that was used: processor, graphics, memory, OS. And no, that question has never been answered though I fully expect you to not answer it again.

and I got creative with the name of the game out of frustration. My apologies for that.

However, if this was any type of product other than software, I would have returned it by now and you would be done with me. Though I have learned two valuable lessons about Battlefront that will help me not make the same mistake in the future.

[Cameroon]

Originally posted by Hukka:

Yes it appears that the 8800 GTS texture memory bug has a big part on this whole mess. I tried this at Allah's Fist: I moved the camera right and left until the fps dropped to around 15 when the camera was still, then I alt+tabbed and voila! fps raised to around 32.

So I guess that the fps shouldn't drop to around 15 in this kind of test at all without the bug.

edit: I did some more testing and now I'm quite sure about this. Altough it's kind of hard to explain...

I go to the blue edge of the map. I am at the center of the map. I'm at the zoom level 4. Then I tilt the camera to the far right and far left, my fps drops to around 15 and stop my camera and look straight across the map. fps is still 15.

The I alt+tab and boom! my fps raise to 32 and if I tilt the camera a bit to right and left, I still got the 32 fps. But if I tilt to the right extreme and left extreme and look straight after that, my fps is 15.

I've been poking around with alt-tab and it appears that it raises the FPS because CM ends up shortening the draw distance for 'doodads' (2d graphics of grass and such). Try this:

Do the alt-tab and record your FPS

Now, use shift-] to increase from Balanced to Better and record your FPS

Use shift-[ to go back to Balanced and check your FPS again

If it's like my experience (7950 GT w/ 512 MB), you'll be back at yours starting FPS.

Run through the procedure again and you'll probably notice after the alt-tab that the grass isn't drawn as far out (again, if it's like my experience).

[Battlefront.com]

peleprodigy,

No one has ever told me what system the DEVELOPERS used to max out the system at good frame rates. All I need is one system that was used: processor, graphics, memory, OS. And no, that question has never been answered though I fully expect you to not answer it again.

You have to understand, by now, that I am not dodging your question. The problem is your question doesn't make any sene. You might as well ask me what type of crayons I ate for breakfast If your qyestion has any relevance to anything, then apparently I am not understanding the question. Are you asking what we have that's getting 30+ fps on all scenarios all the time? If so, then the answer is "none". We only have sub par and mediocre systems on purpose since it forces us to code to medium specs. Charles' system is something like 4 years old. Single processor in the 3 GHz range IIRC and some card of similar vintage. I don't know the specifics becuse, as I've said, it is irrelevant.

and I got creative with the name of the game out of frustration. My apologies for that.

Accepted.

However, if this was any type of product other than software, I would have returned it by now and you would be done with me. Though I have learned two valuable lessons about Battlefront that will help me not make the same mistake in the future.

What, that we're trying like Hell to clean up some other developer's mess? Video card drivers are generally buggy and the 8800 cards are particullarly messy. Just scope out the other game boards and development discussion Forums like we've been doing for several weeks now. The fact that some people with 8800 cards are actually having no problems (that we can see) is actually surprising.

I've lost track of how many special case things people have done to get their 8800s to work a bit better or a lot better than before. The thing that is maddening is that these fixes seem to work for 1 in 10 that try them. People shouldn't have to be messing around with the low level stuff like they are, but we aren't to blame for that. We are, however, responsible for figuring work arounds for these problems regardless. It's a major distraction for us since we should be spending 100% of our time improving the game, not working around bad drivers.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Yes, the Alt-tab thing shows conclusively that there is a bug in nVidia's drivers specific to memory handling as has been reported on other websites. Hukka is spot on when he suspected there is no way one should get a FPS boost by Alt-tabbing if the nVidia stuff was doing its job correctly.

There are other problems beyond this, though. We're pretty sure of that. Some may even be ours, or at least there might be things we're doing that make things works. But fundamentally this memory handling thing is probably at the root of all 8800 problems. We're also wondering if the people that have "no problems" with 8800 cards may find that their performance goes up once this problem is fixed.

Steve

[peleprodigy]

"We only have sub par and mediocre systems on purpose since it forces us to code to medium specs"

Thank you for saying that, I knew you didn't take modern systems into account when designing the game. It is quite evident in the problems you are having with 8800s.

See, I did have a reason to ask that question.

[Cameroon]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Yes, the Alt-tab thing shows conclusively that there is a bug in nVidia's drivers specific to memory handling as has been reported on other websites. Hukka is spot on when he suspected there is no way one should get a FPS boost by Alt-tabbing if the nVidia stuff was doing its job correctly.

There are other problems beyond this, though. We're pretty sure of that. Some may even be ours, or at least there might be things we're doing that make things works. But fundamentally this memory handling thing is probably at the root of all 8800 problems. We're also wondering if the people that have "no problems" with 8800 cards may find that their performance goes up once this problem is fixed.

Steve

But does the same apply for those of us with 7950s and similar? I had started to write a different post and ended up with the reply to Hukka and accidentally left off that I've got a 7950 GT w/ 512 MB of RAM.

I get playable framerates, but they don't change no matter what settings I turn on/off in the control panel. Campaign mission #2 and Allah's Fist both get ~20 FPS pre-alt-tab and 24-27 after with just about any combination of AF/AA, screen rez, etc.

I wouldn't be surprised if the G80 memory bug is affecting the G70 series as well and I figure there's a good chance that any improvements for the G80 series will trickle down for me. I also figure it's good to get information indicating that it isn't just G80 owners that are getting performance changes from alt-tab or similar tweaks.

[thelmia]

Yeah, the workarounds for the 8800 work on my 7800. And whenever you guys have a suggestion to help FPS, it helps me.

[Battlefront.com]

peleprdigy,

Thank you for saying that, I knew you didn't take modern systems into account when designing the game. It is quite evident in the problems you are having with 8800s.

Er... no. That's not how it works. No developer designs his game to work around a buggy product. Developers instead design their games around APIs that are supposed to work on all cards in all situations.

What you fail to understand is that the 8800 is a defective product. As I said before, just open your eyes and look around. There are tons of problems with the 8800 cards. You can bury your head in the sand about this fact and blame us for everything, however that is not only counter productive, but it is factually incorrect. If you wish to challenge that statement you should start by explaining why even nVidia says there are problems with their 8800 series cards. Then you can explain why they had to release a special patch for Quake OpenGL which fixed some problems for some 8800 users playing CM. Oh, and while you're at it... explain why CM works fine on some 8800s and not others.

Look, I understand you are frustrated. But you are not nearly as frustrated as we are. We've been doing this 3D thing for 10 years now and this is the worst problem we've ever experienced with a particular piece of hardware. And the fact that we can't even figure out what the problem is (other than the suspect GPU problem) is extremely tiresome for us. We have other things we want to be doing than trying to work around someone else's defective work.

Steve

[ September 12, 2007, 11:24 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Battlefront.com]

Cameroon,

It would not surprise me to find out that whatever the problem is with G80 is found in the G70. Hmmm... actually, do you have Vista? From what I was reading earlier today Vista really brings out the worst in this problem.

Steve

[The DesertFox]

Originally posted by thelmia:

Yeah, the workarounds for the 8800 work on my 7800. And whenever you guys have a suggestion to help FPS, it helps me.

I really hope BF.C will manage to get Nvidia convinced that CMSFs obvious inability to use state of the art hardware is due to forceware driver issues.

This certainly will be the easy way for BF.C to go.

I however have my doubts that this approach will result in a solution, because you need to IDENTIFY the exact reason the driver fails to work with your product. The 8800 memory problem obviously is unrelated to this general problem, because shuffling around 100megs of data is hardly a problem for a card with 640megs of VRAM and the epidemiology of all the OpenGL games working with forceware drivers will make it especially hard to construct a convincing argument against Nvidia without having any hard data.

There are no hard data which proove that the forceware drivers are the problem with CMSF, right ? Go ahead and find some!

However from a customers point of view all this fuzz might tell you a lot and you certainly can learn some lessons from it: Never, ever buy the cat in the bag when it comes to an advertised software product.

[peleprodigy]

I play alot of games.

My 8800 gtx works well, shoot, outstanding! for all of them, except one.

My 8800 gts works for all of them, except one, (though at lower resolutions, it only has 320mb ram).

I guess I hadn't heard that the 8800 was a defective product until I came across Combat Mission. Go figure.