-
Welcome Back to Digital Pinball Fans - please read this first
DX11 slow performance?
- Thread starter Punisher
- Start date
I'm not expecting much of anything in terms of performance,
I'm running a Radeon HD 2600 Pro (mobile) on a core 2 duo 2Ghz.
DXDiag tells me it's DX11 compatible but when I try and run TPA, my driver just crashes and recovers.
Well, I'm going to try some older drivers and then I'll give up lol.
I mean...I was hoping it would at least start, wasn't expecting to really enjoy things
2600 Pro only supports up to DX 10. It's a pretty ancient card with only 512k on it. That processor is pretty old too. The Duo's came out in the 2008 time frame. Closing in on 10yr old technology.
Time to start looking at new computers.
hitman12
New member
- Jun 11, 2014
- 46
- 0
Acer Aspire E1 2*2.4 ghz GT710m 4 gb ram - allmost all tables running on 60 fps with only few exceptions, buffer 1600*800 MSAA Samples 1,MSAA Quality 50,Anisotrophy 16.Only few tables running below 60 fps,not hardware problem,guess some tables need performance tweaks because these tables are not very demanding graphically.
Sir_LANs-a-lot
New member
- Jun 1, 2012
- 193
- 0
Just out of curiosity, what are the percentages of graphics/physics processing CPU/GPU? - Are all the Physics done with the CPU or are they offloaded to the GPU (eg. to PhysX on nVidia cards)?
JPelter
New member
- Jun 11, 2012
- 652
- 0
I don't actually know for sure on TPA so this is just pure speculation, but physx etc is generally only really good for very specific types of calculations, and it's hard to imagine they'd make a specific build just for cards that can take advantage of it for TPA. I'd hazard that the entire physics engine is handled by the CPU. Either way it shouldn't be an issue for basically any PC setups since the physics system is identical on iOS and they have less juice than even low end PC CPUs.
Alex Atkin UK
New member
- Sep 26, 2012
- 300
- 0
Out of curiosity I tried running DX11 on my Asus T100. It might only be an Atom CPU but compared to mobile that's actually quite good, it only benchmarks slightly slower than my Galaxy Note 4 and slightly above a Galaxy Note 3.
With back buffer right down at 600x768 its "almost" playable on No Good Gophers (although PA has poor scaling, the font on the UI is not reduced to fit and the bottom of the table is chopped off) which is quite impressive as the GPU is a super cut down Intel HD Graphics.
Makes me sad that there isn't a DX11 version that can turn off post-processing as I believe DX11 has other benefits above DX9, not just for lighting. For example the game works WAY better under DX11 than it does on DX9 if I try to turn ball reflections on.
It also sucks that the only version Farsight can safely turn on touch controls, is the version that is too heavy for my touch device.
With back buffer right down at 600x768 its "almost" playable on No Good Gophers (although PA has poor scaling, the font on the UI is not reduced to fit and the bottom of the table is chopped off) which is quite impressive as the GPU is a super cut down Intel HD Graphics.
Makes me sad that there isn't a DX11 version that can turn off post-processing as I believe DX11 has other benefits above DX9, not just for lighting. For example the game works WAY better under DX11 than it does on DX9 if I try to turn ball reflections on.
It also sucks that the only version Farsight can safely turn on touch controls, is the version that is too heavy for my touch device.
Last edited:
superballs
Active member
- Apr 12, 2012
- 2,653
- 2
Yeah its pretty ancient. Something new is in the pipe but it won't be something I would ideally build probably just a budget box with a gfx card thrown in.
Alex Atkin UK
New member
- Sep 26, 2012
- 300
- 0
You could always try throwing in a new graphics card first, I would not be surprised if that was enough to get it working.
If you plan on buying a new video card, don't get an AMD one. Farsight will not support AMD, they never did. I experience slowdown on certain tables (not all of them), even on old tables like black hole, and I use a HD 7770. Try to understand why I get a steady 60 fps rate on TAF and not on TOAN, it doesn't make any sens at all. Everyone that I know who plays this game and use an AMD gpu report the same problem. But Farsight will not acknowledge the problem, or they will say they aren't able to reproduce the problem and the discussion will end there. Bottom line: you are required to buy a Nvidia gpu if you want to play PA. Thanks for your purchase.
Wrong.
Both, AMD and Nvidia users report slowdowns.
The question is, which AMD or which Nvidia card do you have?
AMD also offers a wide range of graphic cards and AMD hardware is usually cheaper.
If you buy a cheap PC which wasn't designed for modern games, the chances are that you get AMD hardware.
A lot of users in the beta simply don't have a modern gaming PC. Some of them have PS3 like hardware or worse but they expect PS4 like graphics.
Plus, TPA doesn't seem to be very well optimized (yet?). So the software doesn't get the most out of your AMD or Nvidia hardware.
And by the way, I've said it multiple times, I don't have performance issues with
my AMD GPU & AMD CPU (max settings & 1080x1920 portrait) and I'm not the only one.
Last edited:
Intel i5 quad core, 8 GB RAM and HD Radeon 7770 1GB should be more than enough for PA in dx11. The proof: I get a steady 60 fps on TAF, Earthshakers, Diner, TZ, Star Trek, etc., etc., but not on Circus Voltaire and TOAN (depending on which camera I'm using, and whether it's zooming in or out). So, it's on developers' end, not on my hardware. I was planning to buy a GTX 960 4GB for games that require such a card, not for an unoptimized pinball game. It pisses me off to spend 300$ now while it could have wait for later.
And I should add I was also having issues with dx9. A lot of AMD users were experiencing a high level of blurriness that wasn't affecting most Nvidia users. And Farsight was never able to fix this problem. They told me dx11 would fix it, and they were right, but now I get fps drops on some tables. I have been waiting for 2 years to play this game and to get graphic quality and performances similar to what Nvidia counterparts get, everything held constant. All of that because I committed the crime of buying an AMD video card, which never posed me problem with any other games before.
Alex Atkin UK
New member
- Sep 26, 2012
- 300
- 0
DX11 is in BETA, this is EXACTLY what a beta is for, to find and report issues.
Last edited:
8 Gigs have no effect. This game doesn't even make proper use of 4 Gigs.
Next, your CPU, a powerful CPU but the game runs almost exclusively on your GPU.
As you can see in this post: click
I run the game on a machine which has a crappy old CPU, but even this CPU has almost nothing to do when I play the game.
Besides, I wasn't talking about your hardware in my previous post.
I told you, why a lot of users, who complain about slowdowns, have AMD hardware.
And that it really matters which AMD or which Nvidia card do you have.
"most", still it was also an issue on Nvidia cards.
I don't remember a high level of blurriness and I'm currently an AMD user.
Instead I remember a couple of Nvidia users who complained about jagged edges when post processing is on.
This was an AMD issue at first, but got fixed after a while - at least on my card.
You see, I don't care if you buy Nvidia or AMD but it to easy to say, that only one company gives you trouble.
and you get fps drops if you buy an equivalent Nvidia card.
Last edited:
The loafer
Member
- Oct 28, 2012
- 494
- 0
Understandable frustration but let's not jump to conclusion by stating there is little to no support for AMD GPU's. They are heavily invested into supporting AMD led devices as both generation consoles use AMD GPU's, so lots of what they learn code wise will eventually lead itself back to the PC version.
I think that Farsight have been going through a checklist and have actually notched a few outstanding items off their list, so here's hoping they keep up the good work.
I think that Farsight have been going through a checklist and have actually notched a few outstanding items off their list, so here's hoping they keep up the good work.
Mike Reitmeyer
FarSight Employee
- Mar 13, 2012
- 1,735
- 1
There are many factors in the performance on one table vs another. More modern table doesn't necessarily mean more performance needed.
The size and number of the point lights affects performance. Generally, the more lights the slower it runs. However a large number of really small lights will use less performance than a small number of really large lights.
Things like transparency (like the huge glass plate on Black Hole) affect performance. Anytime you render to the same pixel multiple times it affects performance. This happens a lot in tables with a lot of transparent parts. Like TOTAN with its clear ramps.
CV has a really large tube light that's simulated by using dozens of point lights. In computer graphics there is no bent neon tube light type, so we fake it with a whole bunch of lights. Those point lights are also very large to they light up the area properly. Large number of lights + large sized lights = slow performance on old or low end graphics cards.
The size and number of the point lights affects performance. Generally, the more lights the slower it runs. However a large number of really small lights will use less performance than a small number of really large lights.
Things like transparency (like the huge glass plate on Black Hole) affect performance. Anytime you render to the same pixel multiple times it affects performance. This happens a lot in tables with a lot of transparent parts. Like TOTAN with its clear ramps.
CV has a really large tube light that's simulated by using dozens of point lights. In computer graphics there is no bent neon tube light type, so we fake it with a whole bunch of lights. Those point lights are also very large to they light up the area properly. Large number of lights + large sized lights = slow performance on old or low end graphics cards.
rehtroboi40
New member
- Oct 20, 2012
- 1,668
- 0
That is a good point. I have AMD R7 onboard graphics, a 3.4 GHZ AMD A10-7700K R7 w/10 compute cores processor, 12 GB ram on a 64-bit win 8.1 operating system. Some tables work nearly as well as they do w/DX9 (Jack*Bot, LCA, and TAF, for examples) , but some do not work well at all, including main culprits like BH, CV, ToM, etc.
I'll just stick with DX9 for now, as it still handles all of the tables well. Once DX11 exits the beta stages, I'll be able to make a more informed decision as to whether or not to buy a new graphics card.
FarSight seems to be taking lots of positive steps lately. (DX11, 360, PS3 table releases). At least I can still be the grouchy neighbor on the WiiU forums.
"Get out of my yard!" Hmm, this is fun..........
Last edited:
HP ENVY 700-406?
The AMD A10-7700K is a quad (4) core CPU with an integraded R7 Graphics Unit.
It is designed to act as a CPU and GPU on a single chip.
On-board graphic usually refers to a graphics unit which is fixed to the mainboard.
If you google for benchmark results, you will notice that the A10-7700K (CPU&GPU) is not very powerful.
Again, 12 GB RAM have no effect when you play TPA.
Last edited:
seattlemark
New member
- Jan 8, 2013
- 295
- 0
Hey, Biff. I am not sure I have ever read which AMD GPU you actually have. Which one do you use? And you are able to play DX11 Cirqus and Black Hole without lag? If so, what MSAA settings are you using with those tables?
At this point I am just curious, because as I think you know, I finally ditched my AMD R7770 video card for a way more powerful NVIDIA GTX 960. I am now able to have everything maxed out in DX11 on all tables without any lag.
Last edited:
Hi,
I run the game on a Radeon HD 7950 GPU (AMD Athlon II X4 3.0 GHZ CPU)
Max settings (MSAA Samples 8, MSAA Quality 100, Anisotropy 16)
1080x1920 portrait mode.
No slowdowns on any table.