New to Falcon BMS
-
In the waaaay past from coders was said the exact opposite. Era before dx9.
They said above 30 cause more trouble.
The reasoning was like the code doesn’t have the time to make the calculations cause it runs at x speed and awaits at x speed the results while your system runs 2x or 3x and this causes trouble.
I’m not saying this is the case now, just how it was mentioned.sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
I thought this was a reference to the accelerated game speed? Not native FPS.
-
Nope… This also. BUT this was back then. Maybe now it’s not the case.
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
Nope… This also. BUT this was back then. Maybe now it’s not the case.
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
This doesn’t make any sense to me then. You’re saying someone told you that any frame rate over 30 fps caused negative impact on the game’s ability to function? Your frame rate will never exceed what the CPU requires to complete a loop. If it gets better than 30 fps, that means it completed all the required calculations and exited to the draw call at the end of the loop. There is some multi-threading built in, but unless it was very poorly implemented, it would still need to report complete before you could exit back to the main loop and call the draw–number of times the draw is called is FPS. Maybe lost in translation somewhere, but that seems not quite right to me.
-
Ho Hum Dee Dum……:D
C9
-
I agree completely C9. Mortesil I don’t believe before dx9 era there was multithreading implemented in Falcon.
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
I agree completely C9. Mortesil I don’t believe before dx9 era there was multithreading implemented in Falcon.
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
I don’t believe the two have anything to do with each other. DX did not support multi-threading prior to DX12. So if the two were added concurrently, they have nothing to do with each other. But I have read that multi-threading has been incorporated since the beginning, in some way or another.
EDIT: I almost forgot to add my reference… silly me: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dn859354(v=vs.85).aspx
Straight from the horse’s mouth.
-
Do you know if this is going to be a dynamic selection based on DAT files, or hard coded? The former opening the doors for flight computer models for all aircraft, and the latter just coding one specific for the F-18.
Perfo data are .dat … FLCS is harcoded.
-
Perfo data are .dat … FLCS is harcoded.
I know that’s how it is now, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t change in the future. Sad to hear this though, so much potential is wasted when things get hard coded.
-
I tend to disagree with “anything over 25 is good”
It’s good enough for visuals–but frame rate also determines game updates (To be clear up front: This is an assumption based on my observations, I have NOT dug through the old code to verify this, read on for explanation). Every frame is a cycle of the game loop, which means everything that happens in the 3D, AI decisions, campaign, comm updates, weapons in the air, other entities out there, etc… everything gets updated every frame (Or at specific intervals, depending on how it’s coded, but my observations lean toward every frame for most things in the game–both explained later). So it’s not JUST about not having any tearing or visual glitches and lag, it’s also about the underlying object management in the code.Very true. And it is well know in BMS, when FPS becomes critical one might have issue in flight dynamics calculation leading into loss of control of the a/c. But 100 FPS is not needed.
I run BMS since 2009 with an average frame rate between 25FPS (Campaing+TGP+weather+FLIR) and 60FPS (clean TE) … I never had in issue because of it.
-
Mortesil I never said DX has anything to do with multithreading. When saying before dx9 era I’m talking before dx9 falcon era thus before 4.32.
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
Very true. And it is well know in BMS, when FPS becomes critical one might have issue in flight dynamics calculation leading into loss of control of the a/c. But 100 FPS is not needed.
I run BMS since 2009 with an average frame rate between 25FPS (Campaing+TGP+weather+FLIR) and 60FPS (clean TE) … I never had in issue because of it.
I wasn’t trying to infer that low FPS would cause issues per se. I think I really just meant to get people to realize that FPS is more than just how fast the images get drawn. It’s way more than just a good GFX card with a lot of video RAM. The examples about CCRP were just to illustrate where issues could occur that you wouldn’t normally associate with something like FPS.
-
-
What is the main factor for FPS in BMS 4.32/4.33? High CPU clock speed on a single core? Increased number of cores? VRAM speed? GPU speed?
My old Q9550 with 8GB DDR2 and a GTX 760 2GB runs BMS 4.32 (under XP) with FPS ranging from 25-50 over FLOT during the first day of the Rolling Fire campaign.
(1920x1200). Using TGP will really cause the FPS to dip but even without TGP, at times I find myself in <20 FPS. Any idea what the main driver is in this, given that my rig can run newer games still quite well in 1080p. Of course none of those have such old internals like Falcon 4.0 and none of these mimic a full scale war either. -
The 120 pixel lines more than the 1080.
Adding pixel lines on the Y axis is a killer for vga’s
Also your CPU. I had a similar and when I went to a newer 2 core it was better.
sent from my mi5 using TapatalkEdit. Oh and your ddr2 ram.
Also your hdds are on sata2 logically.So all those hold it back.
With same VGA when I went from Q6600 to the 2 core and now 4 core system things where better.
The 2 core was on the same Mobo. -
Personally I prefer higher FPS for a smoother game play. However, as long as it’s above 40 in the air I’m happy. I bought into GSync technology recently which is very nice, but it’s not cheap!
-
The 120 pixel lines more than the 1080.
Adding pixel lines on the Y axis is a killer for vga’s
Also your CPU. I had a similar and when I went to a newer 2 core it was better.
sent from my mi5 using TapatalkEdit. Oh and your ddr2 ram.
Also your hdds are on sata2 logically.So all those hold it back.
With same VGA when I went from Q6600 to the 2 core and now 4 core system things where better.
The 2 core was on the same Mobo.Arty, any notable difference between 2 and 4 core?
I’m considering building a dedicated pc for BMS and wonder if I’m better off with
I3 7350(k) at stock 4,2
Or
I5 7600(k) at xtock 3,8
Initially no intention to OC. Price difference is over a 100€ here. -
What is the main factor for FPS in BMS 4.32/4.33? High CPU clock speed on a single core? Increased number of cores? VRAM speed? GPU speed?
My old Q9550 with 8GB DDR2 and a GTX 760 2GB runs BMS 4.32 (under XP) with FPS ranging from 25-50 over FLOT during the first day of the Rolling Fire campaign.
(1920x1200). Using TGP will really cause the FPS to dip but even without TGP, at times I find myself in <20 FPS. Any idea what the main driver is in this, given that my rig can run newer games still quite well in 1080p. Of course none of those have such old internals like Falcon 4.0 and none of these mimic a full scale war either.It’s a little bit of a hodgepodge when you compare 4.32 and 4.33. There are countless posts in the forums where certain people swear up and down that there are NO graphical changes from .32 -> .33 that SHOULD change your FPS or game play. But there are 4x as many posts from people who claim they experience such issues… so I try to tread lightly in this specific area. That being said, read my previous post to understand why both sides of that coin can technically be true at the same time.
Newer games that run fine do so because they leverage newer graphics APIs. As developers start to learn ins and outs of new APIs, and they get updated, developers find ways to optimize their code to work specifically with the newer APIs, which produces better performance. A lot of this has to do with the way the newer APIs talk to to newer graphics cards, how they manage the graphics pipeline, and to what extent they leverage the GPU to augment the CPU in complex math. Falcon uses an older DirectX, which is probably only about 60% as efficient as DX11, and much less so for DX12. BMS Devs are constantly adding new semi-HiRes textures (TGP and Weapon View), increasing resolution (4K wasn’t even a thought when DX9 came out), better models, more complex AI, a TON more math involved with the AFM than the basic FM, etc… and the older DX version just can’t keep up. There are reasons why Games and Applications look so much better today than they did 10-15 years ago, and it’s NOT because people lacked the artistry skill back then. DX9 (Which is what most of BMS is built around) can NOT effectively talk to newer GPUs and hardware in an efficient manner. If they changed nothing else but a DX update to 11, I would bet a year’s worth of my sizable salary that every player in the community would see a 60-70% increase in FPS just from that change alone. If they forced people to use Win10 and went DX12, it would probably be 3x that increase because DX12 will natively use multiple cores from your CPU during the render stage.
For your specific instance, I would venture to guess it’s your processor that is holding you up. Changing GFX cards would likely help a little too, but my best guess is the older architecture in the Q Series processor. Newer CPUs can overcome a lot of the inefficiency in DX 9 by sheer brute force. The older CPUs just can’t manage it. The TGP tends to be one of the biggest FPS killers in the game, which makes me REALLY wonder how it’s implemented on the back side. It should not have that effect. Rendering a separate camera view to a texture, with minimal resolution, should not have such an impact on FPS. If it were being rendered to a distinct viewport outside the main window, at HiRes, then I could understand it. But for what it’s doing in the MFD window, I can’t for the life of me figure out why so many people have problems with it.
-
The resolution ain’t minimal for the mfd and it’s duplicating or triplecating independently, ain’t just the same thing but re rendering the same area with all the calculations it inherit like rendering 3 times (view-tgp-wpn) , thus the obvious frame drop. I believe any scenario or other platform with the same request would have similar impact.
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
Edit: I would say , it’s a miracle how the impact in BMS is so minimal.
-
Arty, any notable difference between 2 and 4 core?
I’m considering building a dedicated pc for BMS and wonder if I’m better off with
I3 7350(k) at stock 4,2
Or
I5 7600(k) at xtock 3,8
Initially no intention to OC. Price difference is over a 100€ here.Well 4 cores to have room for the future.
AND overclock… Life is short , gain is great, money are low.
Sure thing first: know or learn how to do it so not to spend more instead of gain.sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
The resolution ain’t minimal for the mfd and it’s duplicating or triplecating independently, ain’t just the same thing but re rendering the same area with all the calculations it inherit like rendering 3 times (view-tgp-wpn) , thus the obvious frame drop. I believe any scenario or other platform with the same request would have similar impact.
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
Edit: I would say , it’s a miracle how the impact in BMS is so minimal.
You believe wrong. It’s still just a camera view, in a small texture area. It shouldn’t be that bad unless the entire scene is being rendered independently for each camera view. In which case, poor decision making is the culprit, not the amount of rendering. This is no different than a mirror reflection, or the cockpit reflection–which can be found in dozens of games with no impact at all. It’s just (Or should be) another camera view in the world, in this case being rendered to a texture instead of an independent view port (Window). And it shouldn’t be that high of resolution either.