Performance

[gabravo2005]

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

To garner further information, if you are having performance problems can you please post your screen resolution, and also whether you have any multi-monitor setup running.

Also, as a thought, I wonder whether disabling desktop composition might help with the issue as a temporary workaround.

We appreciate your patience while we try and solve these configuration issues.

Cheers

Pip

Win 7 64-bit, Core i7-3820 @3.6GHz, 32GB RAM, GeForce GTX670 with 2GB of RAM @1920x1080 single monitor (Samsung SA550), Command is installed on a 2TB WD Caviar Black HDD, currently 1.34TB are free on that drive. OS is installed on a 120GB Kingston HyperX SSD.

[thewood1]

1366 x 768 HP laptop with AMD A8-4500M and Radeon graphics...8Mb RAM.

btw, win 8 and I don't think you can turn off desktop composition in Win 8.

[NefariousKoel]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

I recently took a look at a tester's PC (high-end) that had similar performance problems. It turned out he had all sorts of crapware installed, plus a myriad 'helper' apps running at start time. After i removed the crapware, speed went up roughly by two.

My desktop has almost nothing running in it's system tray, and the Avast anti-virus is turned off. I disable all the non-essentials in the MSCONFIG tool so they don't even start when the computer does.

Oddly enough, my laptop has a lot of extra junk running in the background and it runs slightly better. With nearly every other program, it's the opposite way around - my desktop runs better.


EDIT: Desktop runs at 1680x1050
Notebook runs at 1366x768

Aero is off on both.

[thewood1]

I went into win 8 advanced system settings and changed processing priority from background processes to programs and it has seemed to help a little...I think.

[montanaza]

Exactly what I was hoping to hear - make no mistake, ANYONE READING THIS WONDERING WHETHER TO BUY OR NOT! This game is one dream of a sim if you have even a remote interest in Naval or aerial warfare. The level of fidelity, and scope (GLOBAL!) is incredible.

Yes, when I posted this thread I had some concerns. I live in south Africa, and here, with the current exchange rate this game cost the same as 30 Big Mac medium meals (lol Big Mac index) but totally worth it.

The fact that the dev team and forum admins are open and HONEST means alot. When taking the plunge on something like this I have no objection to bugs, especially when the dev team is a 4 man job, with day jobs. RESPECT. I have NEVER spent this much on a game, but I decided a year ago to take the plunge based on what I saw coming up on youtube / warfaresims etc.

Ultimately, what I respect most is the open and honest commitment to make this release perfect.

You guys have my support. And if this is the calibre of Matrix devs, and forum admins, I'll def be buying from you again.

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Hi guys - we've had an internal review and we have some ideas why we might have issues with machines completely unrelated to their performance.

We're working on a hotfix for you guys to try out. If at all possible we'll have it for you to try before the weekend but we can't guarantee it yet.

One thing you can be sure of - we are aware of the issues and will get them fixed ASAP. Once again apologies for the inconvenience.

[Emx77]

I don't own CMANO (yet) but maybe my experience could be useful for devs. I have decent machine (Intel i5, 4GB RAM, Nvidia GTX275) but in some 2D strategy games I noticed a lot of lag and stuttering during map scrolling. At the same time, Far Cry 3 and other demanding 3D games are running smoothly without any problems. When Ageod published AJE (Alea Jacta Est) lag was unbearable on max zoom out level. With other Ageod games (they all uses same engine) I didn't have any problems. It turned out main reason was introduction of so called "red borders" (dynamic borders between different factions).

So, where is a link between AJE red borders and CMANO? Red borders are some kind of 2D vectors. I suspect that CMANO uses different kinds of 2D vectors. Problem is that on some machines WDDM doesn't handle that vectors well. Here is excerpt with more details from my private conversation with Ageod programer where you can find hints about this issue:

Yesterday I googled for potential source of this problem. It seems it is, at least to some extent, related with WDDM 1.1 in Win 7 (WDDM - Windows Display Driver Model). According to people with similar problem there is something wrong in WDDM 1.1 which causes very bad 2D graphic performance on some cards (both NVIDA and ATI). There is a program called PerformanceTest 7.0 which shows that on affected systems drawing of 2D solid and transparent vectors is extremely slow. Only solution for Win7 users is to install older WDDM 1.0 drivers which are used in Windows Vista.

To test this I measured 2D vectors performance with latest NVIDIA drivers (301.42, WDDM 1.1) and then installed old NVIDA drivers (182.42, WDDM 1.0). Here are the results:

WDDM 1.1
Solid vectors - 0.52 thousand vectors/sec
Transparent vectors - 0.52 thousand vectors/sec

WDDM 1.0
Solid vectors - 2.57 thousand vectors/sec
Transparent vectors - 2.52 thousand vectors/sec

Although result is still not satisfactory (8.8 thousand vectors/sec is recorded at some machines), there is considerable improvement over WDDM 1.1 (approximately 500%). Unfortunately, this solution is not without issues in newer 3D games (for example there are nasty artifacts in Skyrim with older NVIDIA driver).

Then I started both games with map scrolling issues. In Decisive Campaigns problem is entirely gone. In AJE there is noticeable improvement but still scrolling is not as smooth as in previous Ageod games. I'm pretty much sure that difference in AJE is related to red borders as I assume they are some kind of 2D vectors.

Here is one forum link where people are discussing WDDM 1.1 issue.

After discussing this with Ageod's programer he introduced in-game option for turning off that borders which eventually solved performance issue in AJE. Maybe you can investigate CMANO performance problem in this direction.

[Dimitris]

Okay, we have identified at least one bottleneck; the "Borders + Coastlines" map layer is taking a large chunk of the rendering pipeline. Everyone with map lag problems, please disable this layer and see if this helps performance as a temporary measure. Thanks!

[thewood1]

I never had them on

[JOhnnyr]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Okay, we have identified at least one bottleneck; the "Borders + Coastlines" map layer is taking a large chunk of the rendering pipeline. Everyone with map lag problems, please disable this layer and see if this helps performance as a temporary measure. Thanks!

Someone had mentioned this early in the thread, I've had them turned off, it didn't seem to make a difference.

[HercMighty]

I didn't see a difference, tried this along with the pre-frame rendering...

[JRyan]

Thought I would add my experiences in here..

First machine I used in Beta is a 2008 level XP machine with a mediocre graphics card (128MB) generic flavor ATI. I had issues getting the game to run the first time but it was many Beta's ago. I eventually did something to it and it worked and I had decent speeds. It is my wife's computer so I am not sure of the specs but when it had the $400 Geforce card in it played the latest and greatest for my son. When that card died I put the Generic ATI in.

2nd machine was my 2003 Laptop, with an 2.4Ghz Althlon 64 with 2GB of ram and a 128MB + 128MB of system memory ATI embedded card. It installed fine and ran slow, not just on zoom but it was playable but not the fastest. We did this as it was one of the lower end machines on the Beta test I think. Anyhow my first hours were spent playing it on this machine as the wife would not let me have hers for hours at a time and she knows how I get with cold beer in the fridge and a great Naval sim...(Many years of pooning taught her this).

So I went and finally bought a laptop after 3 years of waiting on the Red Pill. I have a Geforce M650? or an embedded Intel 400? to choose from. I have 16GB of ram and a 3rd Gen i7 Intel running that darn Win8 crap. Anyhow, I found that the game runs no better on the Geforce than the Intel so I know the sim is not taxing the graphics card. I rarely see CPU usage over 50% either. Although I see a slight pause on zoom in/out it is not anything that I find difficult to deal with. One of the problems I had was zooming in on what I wanted and using the keyboard arrows was a pain. What I found out later is to put the mouse where I want to zoom, right click to center and then scroll. I will not say there is a painful wait but there is a noticeable pause but no more than 1 sec for me on 1 sec compression. Those that say they play on higher compression kinds of make me wonder as I am so used to micromanaging the sim that I just need to back off and let the AI handle it. That is one thing I have noticed right off the bat. The AI is handing me my arse much more than harpoon ever did, Classic or Dos...


I read through this and can not understand why so many are seeing this. I have all kinds of crap running in the background, AV, Firewall, Gadgets, Downloads, Chrome and such and I don't have any real issues and I have played it on 3 machines.

I am curious on this one and will keep watch. I would be curious to see what his task manager says is running. I know one darn thing if windows is downloading their updates it still slows the whole machine down.

[JOhnnyr]

ORIGINAL: JRyan

Thought I would add my experiences in here..

First machine I used in Beta is a 2008 level XP machine with a mediocre graphics card (128MB) generic flavor ATI. I had issues getting the game to run the first time but it was many Beta's ago. I eventually did something to it and it worked and I had decent speeds. It is my wife's computer so I am not sure of the specs but when it had the $400 Geforce card in it played the latest and greatest for my son. When that card died I put the Generic ATI in.

2nd machine was my 2003 Laptop, with an 2.4Ghz Althlon 64 with 2GB of ram and a 128MB + 128MB of system memory ATI embedded card. It installed fine and ran slow, not just on zoom but it was playable but not the fastest. We did this as it was one of the lower end machines on the Beta test I think. Anyhow my first hours were spent playing it on this machine as the wife would not let me have hers for hours at a time and she knows how I get with cold beer in the fridge and a great Naval sim...(Many years of pooning taught her this).

So I went and finally bought a laptop after 3 years of waiting on the Red Pill. I have a Geforce M650? or an embedded Intel 400? to choose from. I have 16GB of ram and a 3rd Gen i7 Intel running that darn Win8 crap. Anyhow, I found that the game runs no better on the Geforce than the Intel so I know the sim is not taxing the graphics card. I rarely see CPU usage over 50% either. Although I see a slight pause on zoom in/out it is not anything that I find difficult to deal with. One of the problems I had was zooming in on what I wanted and using the keyboard arrows was a pain. What I found out later is to put the mouse where I want to zoom, right click to center and then scroll. I will not say there is a painful wait but there is a noticeable pause but no more than 1 sec for me on 1 sec compression. Those that say they play on higher compression kinds of make me wonder as I am so used to micromanaging the sim that I just need to back off and let the AI handle it. That is one thing I have noticed right off the bat. The AI is handing me my arse much more than harpoon ever did, Classic or Dos...


I read through this and can not understand why so many are seeing this. I have all kinds of crap running in the background, AV, Firewall, Gadgets, Downloads, Chrome and such and I don't have any real issues and I have played it on 3 machines.

I am curious on this one and will keep watch. I would be curious to see what his task manager says is running. I know one darn thing if windows is downloading their updates it still slows the whole machine down.

CPU use is a 0%, no updates running. I can run pretty much any game at maximum settings and get at least 50-60FPS. It's not my computer, that much I know =(

[JRyan]

ORIGINAL: JOhnnyr

CPU use is a 0%, no updates running. I can run pretty much any game at maximum settings and get at least 50-60FPS. It's not my computer, I know that much.

Oh I am sure of that hardware wise. I just can not see why some do and some don't, the only thing that really differs is software. I am sure they will get it figured out soon.

[JOhnnyr]

ORIGINAL: JRyan

ORIGINAL: JOhnnyr

CPU use is a 0%, no updates running. I can run pretty much any game at maximum settings and get at least 50-60FPS. It's not my computer, I know that much.

Oh I am sure of that hardware wise. I just can not see why some do and some don't, the only thing that really differs is software. I am sure they will get it figured out soon.

Yeah, I hope so =)

[Dimitris]

One more thing: Can everyone please install the DirectX pack from the \PreRequisites folder (even if you have checked it to be installed during the initial installation). Then give it one more spin. Thanks!

[2ndACR]

Okay, I am not seeing any performance issues. I ran the air to air tutorial again, launched way more planes at same time, ran speed to 30 sec setting, zoom works with little (I don't notice it) to no delay, game ran normal and I shot down every enemy plane before I could even react to it, so my game runs fine at all clock speeds so far, no stall above 15 sec.

Running the following:

Vista 64 bit Home
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300
6 GB DDR2 RAM
Nivida GeForce 210

Oh and I am running NET 4.5 instead of the 4.0

[NefariousKoel]

Seems like most of the performance issues are for people using Windows 7. Amiright?

[2ndACR]

Go back to Vista Nef, LOL

[NefariousKoel]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Go back to Vista Nef, LOL

It'll be a cold day in hell! [:'(]

[2ndACR]

Nef try going to Net 4.5..............that is what I am running on my machine. See if that does anything for you.