PDA

View Full Version : The main reason why a lot of you experience stutters



legacy-froudeg
03-23-2004, 01:27 AM
Hi,

I've been looking into the long map load, in game stutter problem - that in the majority of cases seems to be from hard drive access during the game. This is our old friend 'page file swapping' - some of you don't believe this is the cause and in some cases, based on the type of freeze/stutter you are getting it may not be, but the following will shed some light on why some of you with high end systems are getting disk swapping:

The problem lies with the sheer amount of ram ut2k4 uses, mainly in ONS mode - far more than people realise, and far more than the developers have let on. It's true that their minimum system spec of 256mb with occasional disk swapping is correct - but as you will see there are a few unmentioned restrictions.

Anyway, i have tested on 2 systems just what the true physical memory usage is of ut2k4 when playing different game modes, with different texture settings and options. By the way, looking at the memory usage in the task manager, via the process list is pointless - this is only half the story...it doesnt show usage by system drivers such as the gfx driver, the sound drivers...dll modules such as the openal driver and many other bits nd bobs that go into the whole memory usage equation.

Below is a table showing the true memory usage of ut2k4 after playing a few different rounds (and server swaps), of differing game modes. Please note the game was reloaded between switching game types - so as too acurately see the memory usage of just that game mode, without any bits of memory still allocated from a different game mode:


http://www.coolmods.com/generalpics/ut2k4memusage.jpg

As you can see the memory usage is quite high. You will notice ive colour coded the memory usage values - i'll get on to that in a moment.

Initial thoughts from looking at that might be 'hey its only using 400mb, and i've got 512mb so i should be fine'. Well unfortunately, windows xp consumes about 200mb b4 you even start the game, of which about 100mb can be swapped out at best. Which basically leaves you with no breathing room when the game is using 400mb.

Under these situations, what happens is that you cant fit all the world textures, sounds, character textures etc into physical ram in one go...stuff has to be swapped back nd forth to the virtual memory page file. This results in large stutters during the game when you see something new, or an event happens (like an air strike)...some stuff has to be swapped to hd from ram, to load in whatever you just seen, eg the air strike. Then you find as you go on playing the thing that was swapped is now needed and something else is swapped out - and so on...resulting in multi-second pauses.

Map loads can take ages...the maps are big and take a while to load as is, now if you have got swapping going on as well - then as with all hard drives, you ask them to read/write multiple things at once, and they will not just take twice as long to do it, but 10 times as long - as the access time of the heads comes into play flying back and forth doing multiple file reads/writes in blocks...thats what all that rattling noise is from your hd - it having to load the map, and swap stuff to the page file on the hd, at the same time...making the heads go frantic.

Now this does vary some what from one system to the next with the same amount of ram. When you are so close to the edge of available physical memory, little things like what sound card, gfx card, or other hardware you got can tip the balence - as drivers for all sorts of hardware use varying amounts of ram...some more than others etc.

Anyway, back to the chart. The colours indicate what the minimum ram you should have to ensure you dont get swapping on the big ONS maps with lots of players.

Green = 512mb
Blue = 768mb
Red = 1024mb

High isn't it. This is why a lot of people with 512mb ddr are getting swapping...even with normal textures on, a huge ONS map with a lot of players is too much. Notice tho, how DM maps are fine - they are much smaller, far less textures and no vehicles to deal with.

As for why the demo plays so much better - it uses less ram...why? - well for starters it has only a few characters, this saves like 50-100mb's of ram in character models. On a server with a lot of players, the demo characters dont take up much ram...but the full game has so many possible characters that the ram usage is far greater.

Secondly the demo has only normal textures, and it comes with a relatively small ONS map, compared to the goliath's like dria. I also think the sound files for the demo r of a slightly lower quality - saving more ram.


Finally, some people may say that their DM maps are also swapping...well if the case is you have just come out of an ONS map, then you porbably have got what i call a 'groggy' windows/ut2k4 - this is the result of nearly everything but the kitchen sink being swapped to the hard disk. Also having things like Norton Antivirus installed doesnt help (disabled or not) - that memory hog will lock near on 50-100mb or ram up, which cant be swapped out. So your effective memory usage is upto 100mb + the above readings.

After a big ONS map thats been playing for a while, huge parts of windows and the game itself that wasnt in use during your ONS game have been swapped to the hard drive, now comes the time to load a DM map, large parts of the game are still swapped to the hard drive, the map will take ages to load and that DM map will stutter like hell until it all gets back in - which can take a while, as its only called as needed..resulting in stuttery play.

Ok, so now you have heard why your getting hard drive swapping - whats the solution.

Well the most obvious is more ram! lol - but there are others, some of which people with 512mb are not going to like.

For people with 512mb you need to get the game usage down to about 350mb with the big ONS maps....you should first attempt just putting characters on low - least this doesnt sacrifice gfx too much and could save you 50mb on the big player servers. If its still a bit glitchy, well then you got no choice but to cut into other things - low sound quality is a good one, that can save a load...then start knocking down the texture detail from normal.

Of course, also dont even think about using preload player skins unless you have 768mb or more ram.

Finally - as for Epics 256mb minimum ram with little swapping - yep you can play with 256mb with not much swapping...just have textures on lowest, low sound detail, characters on lowest detail, and close everything you can b4 you run the game and big ONS maps with lots of players will probably be playable lol - look crap, but playable lol.

Of course 256mb and normal textures is playable for most dm and ctf maps.

To recap, the memory issues only tend to crop up with big ONS maps - unfortunatley this just so happens to be the most popular game mode, and the most fun :)

UT2004 is the best game i have ever played, its also one of the most graphically and texture intensive multiplayer games out there...combine that with the incredible game physics...and you have got one heck of a pc ball buster! - its pushed the envelope, just like the original unreal did, it just needs more ram! :)

legacy-froudeg
03-23-2004, 02:18 AM
Forgot to mention that the memory usage maybe so high because of a bug.

I have a sneaky suspicion that there is a problem on some systems with a memory leak with one of the drivers....and if i were going to hazard a guess at this stage, from what i've seen, i'd say the current revision of sound blaster audigy drivers - i've been looking at that, and will be doing some tests soon with older drivers, to check the memory usage.

As for people without audigys, it could be because of the reasons in my first post.

legacy-DaPlayer1
03-23-2004, 02:32 AM
wow! Thanks for the info bro! Gonna go get me some more RAMS tomorrow, so it's up to 1 gig. yep...

legacy-.:volt:.Pug
03-23-2004, 02:40 AM
I experience major freezes occationally...but then last night I decided to test my average comp at highest settings and everything turned on (cept preload skins)...still ran 30-40 fps on ONS Dria with bout 16 players on...and no freezes within the 90 or so mins I played.

I dunno...I just hope the first patch fixes nuff that it's playable consistantly.

I only have XP 2000+, GF4 Ti 4400 and 512 pc2700...

Ah well...soon c I spose...might have to go buy some more RAM with the $0.17 in my bank. :(

legacy-CovenantUK
03-23-2004, 02:43 AM
I've already got 1gb of RAM - game still stutters.

So much for the RAM theory.

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 03:42 AM
as my post says - if you put ur page file over 2 h/drives if you have them this will all go away, one reads one writes.

made the wworld of differance to me, so put whatever c:'s settings are for d.
or whatver ur drives called.

it works - its that simple youl be amazed at the differance in it all.

not eveyones solution - but this will be a few peoples.

legacy-Mosh83
03-23-2004, 03:55 AM
This would sound logical to one who has not encountered problems but;

Even with all settings on lowest, I get extremely long loading times. Not one bit of difference does it make if I have everything notched up to the very highest, or lowest. Sound detail, H/W audio, nothing except precaching options from the .ini file drop my load times.

People with less ram and less power load faster than I do.

This would support the theory of a bug. TOAB.

There are such discrepensies in the performance of the game on such a wide spectrum of systems, you must concur that Epic is to come up with a fix.

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 04:10 AM
i know people say it takes a while to load but what drives do you lot have?
are they fast or old 2 meg cache ones - this is alot of data beign pushed about.

you do need a fast system i have my ddr at 265 fsb.

im not saying people dont and im sure not defending atari, but i have a couple of sata 10 raptors im my main rig
, on my old 2600 xp that has a new ibm deskstar in in the loading times are alot longer.

the game code needs tightening deffo, but this will be a pain to run, and you can have a ton of ram but if the data cant get off ya drive very fast into the cpu and the ram then it aint gonna make no odds, unless you have a ton of ram and even then u need fast ram and a good cpu and gfx to push it with.

i see alot of people complaing and then mention there gforce 4 and there 1 gig on pc2100 and a old 5000k rpm drive.

people need to be a bit realistic here this game is throwing about a gig of stuff nearly.

but this is no excuse as atari should have been honest about the specs.

legacy-Mosh83
03-23-2004, 04:13 AM
Originally posted by chriski
i know people say it takes a while to load but what drives do you lot have?
are they fast or old 2 meg cache ones - this is alot of data beign pushed about.

you do need a fast system i have my ddr at 265 fsb.

im not saying people dont and im sure not defending atari, but i have a couple of sata 10 raptors im my main rig
, on my old 2600 xp that has a new ibm deskstar in in the loading times are alot longer.

the game code needs tightening deffo, but this will be a pain to run, and you can have a ton of ram but if the data cant get off ya drive very fast into the cpu and the ram then it aint gonna make no odds, unless you have a ton of ram and even then u need fast ram and a good cpu and gfx to push it with.

i see alot of people complaing and then mention there gforce 4 and there 1 gig on pc2100 and a old 5000k rpm drive.

people need to be a bit realistic here this game is throwing about a gig of stuff nearly.

but this is no excuse as atari should have been honest about the specs.

I have a fast S-ATA drive, RAM runs at 400FSB.

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 04:17 AM
400fsb ha i think ur a bit off there, ur talkign dual mode, in that case im 265 times 2
530 fsb.

anyway, im not saying its you in particular, and sata don tmean a drives quick.

but alot of people are moaning and there pcs aint up to it - in that case if you have 2 drives try what i said.

what gfx u have anyway mate?

i ahd the same trouble as you it sounds like the loads were about 2 mins at first regardless of what settings i had i would turn up about 2 mins plu sinto a game.

i have a 9800 pro.

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 04:21 AM
dont forget the people with less ram and less power may have a raid. and people do lie, what some peopel are happy with others are not - they say its fine but it probably wont be to another person.

but if its none of this then all ur drivers are bang on and installed properly u drive is clean and quick, and your os is well looked after - atari needs a patch.

the code is a bit leaky i do admit tho and i agree with you 100 percent, this silence from atari is condeming isnt it

legacy-NotZero
03-23-2004, 04:31 AM
Disabling the Voice Recognition seems to of helped some people with slower CPU's.

Also, if you have two harddrives then try having your swapfile and UT on different drives.

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 04:34 AM
thats exatly what i did put it over the two drives, none of the voice stuff worked.

basically i agree with the thread starter u will stutter, this game is huge unless you can find a way of limiting swapping.

legacy-DaPlayer1
03-23-2004, 04:38 AM
okay, i have a question....my main drive is c:\, but i have a separate drive d:\ and that's where I installed my games...should i create a swapfile there too?

legacy-DaPlayer1
03-23-2004, 04:39 AM
Originally posted by NotZero
Disabling the Voice Recognition seems to of helped some people with slower CPU's.

Also, if you have two harddrives then try having your swapfile and UT on different drives.

wouldn't that lag a bit more compared to having the swapfile on the same drive as ut?

legacy-Mosh83
03-23-2004, 04:41 AM
200 is the speed of the fsb, but in terms of RAM 400 is the term used. I really don't think I need to overclock that yet, no game should require an Athlon to be running at more than 200FSB, because that is already top of the line.

Anyway, FSB measurements are different on Intels and AMDs, because the architecture is totally different. So don't confuse them.

My GFX card is a 9600XT. Totally capable of good framerates with high settings. I am not burning money on a 9800 (IMO: which is over the top in price and performance, and when that sort of performance is ever required, there will be a new line of graphics cards anyway). For Unreal Tournament 2004, there is no doubt a Radeon 9600XT on an Athlon XP Barton running at 400FSB should have any trouble. This is a bug.

Because people with under 2 gig cpus and slow 256RAM and 2 year old gfx cards are getting better performance in some aspects (maybe not fps, but in loading and stability).

People with 9800XT's and 1024 DDR400 are getting the same problems, so it really isn't down to performance.

Hardware is almost always ahead of games, and this is the case with UT2k4. I think there is just a problem with memory managment and caching procedures, or maybe such a huge installation is open to errors.

legacy-NotZero
03-23-2004, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by DaPlayer1
wouldn't that lag a bit more compared to having the swapfile on the same drive as ut?

No, the opposite actually. When you hit the swapfile you're doing a lot of read/writes and when you're playing UT you're also doing a lot of read/writes especially when you're loading a level. Having them on different phsycial drives can be less of a bottleneck than having them on one drive.

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 04:58 AM
yeah i know about fsb all i said was i was running my mem at 265 fsb and hence on a 1:1 divider - sorry if i was not clear.
, i know the diff between p4 and atlons and unfortunatley the athlons are bandwith starved
my ram pushes over 6 gig a sec on sandra, and i think that really helps me here. 200fsb isnt top of the line unfortunatley by a long shot and this is the first in a new generation of dx9 games to emerge.

i have a atrhlon sitting next to me a 512meg 2600xp and i put my 9800 pro in earlier and it played aweful. far worse than my other pc so i took it out.

anyway i can now enable pre cache and play dria fine with no stutters at all - just takes 5 secs longer to load at startup.

im glad i got that spare drive now.

good luck sorting it all out - if in doubt take it back and get far cry on friday.

legacy-Mr.Bojangles
03-23-2004, 04:59 AM
Im not flaming anyone here im just setting things right:
NotZero: True
Mosh83: Flase: memory management is done by the kernel not the games
chriski: Don't bomb thier code you know how many hours it takes to code anything?
-------------------------------------------------------------
Their code may have a few bugs but since it's oh say 200 megs thats about 209715200 letters now who thinks they can take on that? come on thats only about 69905066 words.....easy.(SARCASIM)

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 05:01 AM
mate u have a good point actually maybe the 6 disk marathon and all that data means bits of code may get missed hmmmmmmmmmmm or not transfer proper, or maybe the publisher bodged the copying, i had to take my fist copy back - the cd1 was blank, i put it in a few pcs and it asked me it i wanted to write data on it - like ablank disk.

u may have something

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 05:03 AM
im not boming anyones code mate but i have the right to bombwhatever i want when i pay money for it and it dont work and they refuse to comment after 7 days.

i pay
i maon if it dont work i dont care if it take someones whole life.

who cares how long it takes, what kinda remark is that?

legacy-chriski
03-23-2004, 05:06 AM
i pay for a product - it dont do what it said.

im shocked at your stupidity in that remark.

oh yeah dont worry i know it took a long time to program and u are making millions,
so what if it dont work? but i dont mind it will one day so ill put it back on my shelf till then.

thanks for all the hard work .

i dont bomb betas or free software
i have every right to bomb 40 bucks worth of software.

legacy-Mr.Bojangles
03-23-2004, 05:12 AM
eah i know about fsb all i said was i was running my mem at 265 fsb and hence on a 1:1 divider - sorry if i was not clear.
, i know the diff between p4 and atlons and unfortunatley the athlons are bandwith starved
my ram pushes over 6 gig a sec on sandra, and i think that really helps me here. 200fsb isnt top of the line unfortunatley by a long shot and this is the first in a new generation of dx9 games to emerge.

i have a atrhlon sitting next to me a 512meg 2600xp and i put my 9800 pro in earlier and it played aweful. far worse than my other pc so i took it out.

anyway i can now enable pre cache and play dria fine with no stutters at all - just takes 5 secs longer to load at startup.

im glad i got that spare drive now.

good luck sorting it all out - if in doubt take it back and get far cry on friday.
Whoa hold up I really hope you didn't just put down AMD proc's amd procs are based on mip procs ( Most supercomputers use mip or risc procs ). Preformance isn't related to mhz or say the FSB it has to do with many different things like how many registers does the cpu have, etc people assume that 400000ghz must be hella better than say a powerpc running at 2GHZ but the only reason this is..is because intel saw that people were ignorant ( no offense to anyone ) to the fact that speed isn't always mhz ( ever wonder why amd uses a rating system? ) Also intel just made more deeper pipes giving there procs higher mhz ratings while leaving performace as a secondary. Just for a comparison windows is compiled for something called i386 which means it uses none of the extra instruction sets that come with the proc that means no mmx no sse no sse2 no mmx2 no 3Dnow nothing nada it uses zero extra instuction sets.

legacy-DaPlayer1
03-23-2004, 05:18 AM
Originally posted by Mr.Bojangles
Whoa hold up I really hope you didn't just put down AMD proc's amd procs are based on mip procs ( Most supercomputers use mip or risc procs ). Preformance isn't related to mhz or say the FSB it has to do with many different things like how many registers does the cpu have, etc people assume that 400000ghz must be hella better than say a powerpc running at 2GHZ but the only reason this is..is because intel saw that people were ignorant ( no offense to anyone ) to the fact that speed isn't always mhz ( ever wonder why amd uses a rating system? ) Also intel just made more deeper pipes giving there procs higher mhz ratings while leaving performace as a secondary. Just for a comparison windows is compiled for something called i386 which means it uses none of the extra instruction sets that come with the proc that means no mmx no sse no sse2 no mmx2 no 3Dnow nothing nada it uses zero extra instuction sets.

i like that...speed isn't always mhz. Reminds me of cars...like a V8 isn't always gonna be faster than an I-4, I-6, V6.

legacy-Mr.Bojangles
03-23-2004, 05:18 AM
i pay for a product - it dont do what it said.

im shocked at your stupidity in that remark.

oh yeah dont worry i know it took a long time to program and u are making millions,
so what if it dont work? but i dont mind it will one day so ill put it back on my shelf till then.

thanks for all the hard work .

i dont bomb betas or free software
i have every right to bomb 40 bucks worth of software.

I have no affiliation with atari. As for that I know you might be having problems but it could be a huge plethora of things it could be anything you installed on your OS. Please don't start this into a flame contest you have to understand the vast ammount of things it could.

legacy-TK Doom
03-23-2004, 05:21 AM
Wow.

Lots of problems, really too bad that companies are STILL releasing games early.

Luckily I didn't care for it much, thus didn't buy it, but it is disappointing that it doesn't run smoothly for you guys. I have been reading that lots, LOTS of people like it, but just don't like the performance.

One day, maybe, software companies will release TRUE specs for their games.

legacy-Mr.Bojangles
03-23-2004, 05:27 AM
Anyone care for a screen shot of Ut2004 running at 50FPS on a P3 800MHZ with 256MB of ram and a geforce fx5200? with zero stutter zero clipping. How do you ask? I used linux and not windows I bet I could get it to work on a P3 500mhz without many problems. I have no problems with stutter no probelsm with anything at all nothing for problems.

legacy-Mosh83
03-23-2004, 07:19 AM
A 200mhz fsb speed on an Athlon is pretty damn close to top of the line. Only the 3000 and 3200+ bartons even implement it to start off with, out of the box. And they are still among the fastest processors (Pentium4 does have a clear edge, but not huge for the home user). Overclocking is a different matter, but is mostly for people interested in pushing the envelope; not for people who just want to play games. Games have not yet outrun the 200fsb Bartons. Not even UT2004, because hte most CPU reliant option, terrain detail, does not have any hit on performance.

People with 64bit (Athlon64) processors will not have an advantage either. First, chipsets for the 64bit processor line are still early models, and far from the polished chipsets such as Nforce2 (Nforce3 is nowhere near the potential). Second, a new technology always has stumbling stones. Third, nobody at home uses 64bit applications.

Anyway, this is not all that important here. Since it has been established even extremely high, top-end systems are running the game slower than old tinboxes, there must be something in the game code itself to vouch for the discrepencies.

legacy-froudeg
03-23-2004, 08:50 AM
Hi,

I've done a bit more testing on this other pc here - its a 512mb A64 box. Even though it stutters somewhat on the big ONS maps, it does clear up and runs stutter free after a bit. It's no where near as bad as a friends pc which has hard drive swapping like crazy.

Again he has got an audigy - this pc hasn't. He's also using the latest drivers. I have started to see a common link (not all) but quite a few people have audigy's, who are getting disk swapping.

Another friend with a very similar system is using his original cd drivers for his audigy and says he doesnt get any major stutters (just ones at map start) - although i dont know if he has played any real big, ons maps with lots of players.

I'm going to get my other m8 to put original drivers on, see what effect it has - actually first i'll get him to pull out the audigy completely and give it a whirl.

legacy-Postalgeist
03-23-2004, 09:43 AM
I have an AthlonXP 1800 on an NForce2 mobo, a Radeon9800XT, 512MB of RAM, and a year old WD 120GB hard drive. The game was extremely choppy, whereas the demo ran fine with everything maxed out. I turned down all of the settings, and the game still sucked. Then, I turned off speech and pre-loading of skins, and it is all good now. I did have to turn the resolution down to 1280X1024 on the Onslaught maps, though. The load times are long, but defragging helped a bit.

legacy-PsychoChihuahua
03-23-2004, 09:49 AM
Does windows know how to interleave across multiple spindles/swap files? Or will it use one until it's 'full', and then move on to the next?

Personally I put my swap file on a non-O/S spindle. I'd consider multiple swap files if the O/S can interleave them. If not, one big swap file on a defragged, dedicated swap partition, on the fastest drive in the system, is the way to go.


Originally posted by chriski
as my post says - if you put ur page file over 2 h/drives if you have them this will all go away, one reads one writes.

made the wworld of differance to me, so put whatever c:'s settings are for d.
or whatver ur drives called.

it works - its that simple youl be amazed at the differance in it all.

not eveyones solution - but this will be a few peoples.