Competitor rules

The $6m Dan · 5 Apr 2006 at 10:23

00fil00 said:
that is so much bull. not you, the site you got that from. 37fps on 1028 res for x1900xtx??? my ass. im playing oblivion ultra settings hdr, high quality filtering max and resolution 1600x!! no lag except when on top of mountaina nd u can see the whole world, then only slightly. some sites just talk out their ass.

Remember that the game is CPU limited, and changing the resolution has only a small affect. So increasing the res will give only slightly less frames per second.

Fx-Overlord · 5 Apr 2006 at 10:34

HangTime said:
FS has a performance analysis up. Looks quite a demanding game in places:

With 11fps average in 1024x768, not much point bothering to get this for my 6800GT (albeit I probably wouldn't use HDR or AF).

Just turn off the grass, and then tweak it using the coolbits reg (see sig). That gives me about 20-30fps on my overclocked 6800NU outside with 2xAA and 8xAF (no hdr or shadows). Its definately playable if you don't use the maximum settings which kill lower-mid range cards.

00fil00 said:
that is so much bull. not you, the site you got that from. 37fps on 1028 res for x1900xtx??? my ass. im playing oblivion ultra settings hdr, high quality filtering max and resolution 1600x!! no lag except when on top of mountaina nd u can see the whole world, then only slightly. some sites just talk out their ass.

Firing squad is a very reputable site, and i trust them aswell. Remember that 37fps is in foliage, with lots of grass, i would imagine, and by all accounts many people with x1900 series seem to be getting around that in highly grassy areas with all the graphics settings maxed out.

Dutch Guy · 5 Apr 2006 at 10:35

The Tweakguides article is up :cool:

Ashcrapper · 5 Apr 2006 at 20:17

Some useful stuff here too: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=66785

HangTime · 5 Apr 2006 at 21:51

Fx-Overlord said:
Firing squad is a very reputable site, and i trust them aswell. Remember that 37fps is in foliage, with lots of grass, i would imagine, and by all accounts many people with x1900 series seem to be getting around that in highly grassy areas with all the graphics settings maxed out.

I commend FS for having the balls to post a proper, intensive benchmark, rather than the wishy-washy ones some sites come out that aren't indicative of the *worst case* situations.

For example, the indoor benchmark shows most cards running at about 4x the FPS. But that's just for people patting themselves on the back about how great their shiny new card is, it doesn't show how low the FPS can drop in certain areas of the word with lots of action going on.

Dutch Guy · 5 Apr 2006 at 22:35

I did these texture replacements and it is so much better now, no more washed out distant texture, it takes a while to do it and I had to download 7-zip to unzip them but it was well worth it:
http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=328524
http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=338352 (use the Filefactory mirror and have some patience)

And also this mod to get rid of the "Loading Area" messages:
http://www.tessource.net/files/file.php?id=1846

geeza · 5 Apr 2006 at 22:56

wellibob said:
where as the 7900GT got 80 fps on average. Big difference there.

is that an average for inside or outside? My X1800xt is on par with your 7900gt and i get 80s-100+ inside. outside is another matter though and in 1280x1024 hdr max everything I have had it dip down to 20fps before. In built up foliage its around 25-35fps most of the time

nikebee · 5 Apr 2006 at 23:09

Dutch Guy said:
I did these texture replacements and it is so much better now, no more washed out distant texture, it takes a while to do it and I had to download 7-zip to unzip them but it was well worth it:
http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=328524
http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=338352 (use the Filefactory mirror and have some patience)

And also this mod to get rid of the "Loading Area" messages:
http://www.tessource.net/files/file.php?id=1846

have you noticed any other effects from the new textures?

apparently one of the *bugs* from using the high res textures is that the lighting in the game (when mixing with Oblivions original res textures and the new high res textures) doesn't quite look right... any experiences?

nikebee · 5 Apr 2006 at 23:18

HangTime said:
FS has a performance analysis up. Looks quite a demanding game in places:

With 11fps average in 1024x768, not much point bothering to get this for my 6800GT (albeit I probably wouldn't use HDR or AF).

worth noting that if your going to be playing the game without HDR and AF, then look at this chart (not sure if you read the whole article?)

00fil00 said:
that is so much bull. not you, the site you got that from. 37fps on 1028 res for x1900xtx??? my ass. im playing oblivion ultra settings hdr, high quality filtering max and resolution 1600x!! no lag except when on top of mountaina nd u can see the whole world, then only slightly. some sites just talk out their ass.

wouldn't mind seeing some screenshots with FRAPS or even using the console and the TDT command to see what sort of frames per second your getting

i play on a 4000+ @2.6GHz, 2GB G.Skill ZX ram, 7800GT @ 490/1180 and the game installed on a Raptor - gaming at 1024*768.
i get upwards of 70frames indoors and anywhere between 20-30 outside, in graphically intensive areas it sometimes dips a bit lower... i've done a fair wad of tweaks, and i play with everything maxed (use Bloom not HDR) and 2xAA with 8xAF

again, (not the first time i've mentioned this in an Oblivion thread) its worth noting that this game doesn't need 70FPS to feel smooth... its an RPG not a First Person Shooting... you don't spend all your time running around aiming for that wonderful "BOOM... HEADSHOT~~!", so the game can still feel smooth at 20-30FPS

Dutch Guy · 6 Apr 2006 at 08:33

nikebee said:
have you noticed any other effects from the new textures?

apparently one of the *bugs* from using the high res textures is that the lighting in the game (when mixing with Oblivions original res textures and the new high res textures) doesn't quite look right... any experiences?

I haven't tested in detail, I did the mods, started a game where I was outside near the beginning, got on my horse and walked around looking at the scenery far away admiring the far better textures, I did not see any issues but as said I only tested for a few minutes.

The advantage is that if it turns out there are issues all you have to do is delete the files and it is back to stock, nothing is replaced

Trick · 6 Apr 2006 at 19:29

I haven't encountered any shading/shadow issues with using the LOD landscape textures so far. Nor any slowdowns.

I've managed to get pretty good fps on my Opteron 146 @ 2.8ghz, 6800gt at Ultra speeds. Currently, Oblivion is set to 1280x1024, hdr on, 4xAF, objects, view distance, items maxed, grass distance maxed, specular on half, shadows on half both int and ext, no tree canopy shadows.

Tweaking the ini files and using the LOD textures, I get 18-30 fps outside even in high foliage areas with plenty going on, 40-60 fps indoors.

The LOD textures are excellent for making things look better without having to alter uGridDistantCount=5. Likewise, iMinGrassSize=160 gives a massive boost to fps without affecting the visuals too much and used in conjunction with iMaxGrassTypesPerTexure=4 ensures things still look good. bForceFullLOD=1 makes things look very sharp with AF. There are loads of decent tips out there to tweak Oblivion with to get good performance on last gen hardware, it just takes a little effort to install the decent mods and tweak the .ini file a bit.

Dutch Guy · 6 Apr 2006 at 22:18

Trick said:
I haven't encountered any shading/shadow issues with using the LOD landscape textures so far. Nor any slowdowns.

Me neither, only thing they advise you to do is diable filtering optimisations, either manually or selecting High Quality (this is for nVidia cards)

Trick · 6 Apr 2006 at 23:26

Dutch Guy said:
Me neither, only thing they advise you to do is diable filtering optimisations, either manually or selecting High Quality (this is for nVidia cards)

Actaully, knocking this setting in the Control Panel down from High Quality to High Performance has bagged me quite an increase in performance - some 4/5fps in outdoor areas. Can't really see a big difference between the two settings visually either, although I admit I haven't taken screenies to do a direct comparison.

Tarty · 7 Apr 2006 at 08:41

Is anybody else testing this on x64, as people seem to be having loads more problems with this game on a 7800gt than me at 1600x1200, average fps is ~30ish unless animals come about, which on full prettyness makes it abit "shakey"

man_from_uncle · 7 Apr 2006 at 09:54

What's the general conclusion about usefulness of SLi in this game. It seems to be both heavily (compared to other games at least) CPU bound and unoptimised for dual card systems. Has anyone got any good stories of using SLi? A friend of mine just got a second 7800gtx and is hoping for a flawless game at 1280x1024, but he's only running a 4000+ at stock speeds.

Dutch Guy · 7 Apr 2006 at 10:16

man_from_uncle said:
What's the general conclusion about usefulness of SLi in this game. It seems to be both heavily (compared to other games at least) CPU bound and unoptimised for dual card systems. Has anyone got any good stories of using SLi? A friend of mine just got a second 7800gtx and is hoping for a flawless game at 1280x1024, but he's only running a 4000+ at stock speeds.

I don't think it is very CPU limited, I do notice a difference going from 1280x1024 to 1024x768

I think that it isn't really optimised for SLI or Dual GPU as it also is released for Xbox360

It looks like it is GPU limited like FEAR

nO}{8 · 7 Apr 2006 at 10:29

Dutch Guy said:
I don't think it is very CPU limited, I do notice a difference going from 1280x1024 to 1024x768

I think that it isn't really optimised for SLI or Dual GPU as it also is released for Xbox360

It looks like it is GPU limited like FEAR

gamespot seem to think differently, their cpu tests show a huge difference between low and high end cpus.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6147127/index.html

Richdog · 7 Apr 2006 at 10:38

nO}{8 said:
gamespot seem to think differently, their cpu tests show a huge difference between low and high end cpus.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6147127/index.html

Agreed, the game requires a hell of a lot of processing power and scales very well with faster CPU's.

It is definately very CPU dependant due to the many intensive AI etc calculations the game has to make.

Dutch Guy said:
I think that it isn't really optimised for SLI or Dual GPU as it also is released for Xbox360

It looks like it is GPU limited like FEAR

SLI/crossfire almost doubles performance outside, check the latest firingsquad benchies in the other thread.

man_from_uncle · 7 Apr 2006 at 10:41

That's interesting. I thought the xbox360 was somehow multi core though. Well I'll guess we'll just have to suck it and see.

Dutch Guy · 7 Apr 2006 at 10:46

Richdog said:
It is definately very CPU dependant due to the many intensive AI etc calculations the game has to make.

SLI/crossfire almost doubles performance outside, check the latest firingsquad benchies in the other thread.

Those two statements contradict each other, if the game is CPU limited you would not get a doubling of performance with Crossfire/SLI :confused:

Competitor rules

Oblivion Peformance So Far