Compatibility Mode Running Smoother than Native Mode

[dricketts]

Are there any reasons compatibility mode would run smoother than native on error free routes?

I've noticed on a couple of error free routes that native mode is somewhat jerky or stutters. These same routes run a lot smoother in compatibility mode.

With compatibility mode my fps rarely drop below 20. Even on a route that is heavily resource intensive with trees everywhere it runs pretty smooth. In native mode the frame rates are about the same but at times it's very jerky and even comes to a complete freeze from time to time.

Any ideas on what might be going on?

Here's my specs:

 

[Dermmy]

You say 'trees everywhere' - what sort?

I get a similar result if there are a lot of older-style billboard trees in Native mode. Comp mode appears (I'm guessing) to cope better with the alpha sorting. I favour viewing via tracking cameras and in Native with lots of billboard trees there is always a big stutter when the camera changes. Same route in Comp is smooth as silk...

Andy

 

[4ndylloyd]

I get the same with my system (specs below). Native mode with anti-alaising turned on is a nightmare but compatibily mode is quite smooth. The average fps in compatibilty mode is lower but the numbers are fairly constant. In native mode I see rapid jumps from low to high fps . I have noticed also that OpenGL is smoother than Directx even though on all previous versions of Trainz Directx as been the better option with the ATi graphics cards that I have used

Andy

 

[dricketts]

You say 'trees everywhere' - what sort?

I get a similar result if there are a lot of older-style billboard trees in Native mode. Comp mode appears (I'm guessing) to cope better with the alpha sorting. I favour viewing via tracking cameras and in Native with lots of billboard trees there is always a big stutter when the camera changes. Same route in Comp is smooth as silk...

Andy

Thanks for the reply Andy. I think I remember you posting on this same subject previously.

Yes they are the older billboard trees and I noticed they don't quite look right. This would explain the odd results of comp mode giving so much better performance.

You recommended Trunda's trees for the billboard type to me earlier. Do these trees seem to avoid the performance hit in native mode?

 

[Dermmy]

Do these (Trunda's) trees seem to avoid the performance hit in native mode?

Nope. Well to be fair their performance in Native is brilliant, they are hit hard by the alpha sorting thing - in fact they look downright awful

Also you should be aware that N3V have obsoleted most of Trunda's trees in 12 and substituted 3D trees of the very ordinary sort.

Many of Jan's trees and some of Dave Drake's are much better prospects if you want billboards in a Native map. Which ones work best is pretty much a try-it-and-see approach...

Andy

 

[mrscsi]

Are there any reasons compatibility mode would run smoother than native on error free routes?

I've noticed on a couple of error free routes that native mode is somewhat jerky or stutters. These same routes run a lot smoother in compatibility mode.

Chances are while those routes may show error free they have assets that are really not conducive to native mode. That would be my guess anyway. There's content in TS12 dating back to 1.5 I believe, I don't know whether it's 100% error-free because if you make a clone of it or open it for edit it shows up with all kinds of errors, then if you revert it goes back to being error-free.

 

[boleyd]

Trundra Trees - TS2010

If you do not have it get the Kentucky-III route at CheckRail. It is the premier example of how trees should look. The obvious feature is that the Trundra trees seem to not have the distance issues that the speedy trees have where they turn indistinct. The speedy trees are great if you are a bird seeking a nest and need to search within the tree but at a distance they become indistinct and do not look like real trees.

I loaded Kentucky-III into TS2012 and it did the usual substitution from Trundra trees to speedy trees. If you want to see just how bad the speedy trees look that is an excellent way to compare. So, I keep TS2010 and TS2012 on my system.

Of course some disagree but there are people who believe that a Big Mac is as good as a $50 steak dinner.

 

[dricketts]

Nope. Well to be fair their performance in Native is brilliant, they are hit hard by the alpha sorting thing - in fact they look downright awful

Andy

Uh oh... I recently placed a lot of Trunda's trees on a large route I've been working on. I wanted to make sure I was using top quality looking trees but also gave me good performance/frame rates in native mode. I just now realized the appearance problem with the Trunda trees in native mode (I had the compatibility box ticked).

Maybe Pofig trees will give me better performance in native mode while not sacrificing a lot in appearance... as I'm building the route in 2009 but want to make sure it will get good performance in 2012 also.

Edit:
I was just reading through the EK3 thread again. Looks like I'm dealing with the same internal struggle you are. Trainz has always been about appearance for me and I just can't decide if I want to sacrifice appearance for performance. Maybe using Trunda's trees for the time being until something (if ever) as realistic comes along is a solution. Using the replace asset tool for trees in the future would only take a fraction of the time compared to the total time I've spent on my entire route.

 

[dricketts]

Well guys I guess I'm late to the party.

I just realized this problem with native mode affects most all the quality looking vegetation out there. I just assumed if it was error free it would look just fine. What a huge disappointment... quality lifelike vegetation is what brings a route to life. The detail of beautiful grass around a small farm pond with real looking trees in the background. This is what Trainz is about for me. I can't stand the thought of putting any more endless hours into route creation without using the the most realistic vegetation out there. It looks like TS2012 or native mode will not let us do that.

I guess I have no use for TS2012 for the time being.

 

[gfisher]

I guess I have no use for TS2012 for the time being.

Welcome to the club....

 

[BLACKWATCH]

Are there any reasons compatibility mode would run smoother than native on error free routes?

I've noticed on a couple of error free routes that native mode is somewhat jerky or stutters. These same routes run a lot smoother in compatibility mode.

With compatibility mode my fps rarely drop below 20. Even on a route that is heavily resource intensive with trees everywhere it runs pretty smooth. In native mode the frame rates are about the same but at times it's very jerky and even comes to a complete freeze from time to time.

Any ideas on what might be going on?

Here's my specs:

Well your processor is a bit low & your graphics is lower than mine, so if you are trying to run anything over TRS2004, then you are going to struggle.

Here are my specs & I run TRS2004 without problems, you need to spend some cash.

Case - CoolerMaster
M/B - an MSI MS-7345
CPU - Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 2.8ghz
L2 cache 3072 KBs (12 way)
2gb of DDR2 memory in Dual mode
Maxtor 500gb SATA-II
Maxtor Diamond Max 200gb
Optiarc AD7200S SATA-II DVD RW


GPU - NVIDIA GeForce 9800GT 512mb GDDR
Memory Clockspeed - 900 MHz
Bandwidth - 57.6 gb/s
Ramdac - 400 MHz
Bus - PCI-E 2.0
Video - HDMI

LG Flatron widescreen monitor

 

[dricketts]

Here are my specs & I run TRS2004 without problems, you need to spend some cash.

It's not my machine. My machine runs Trainz great until I try to run native mode with older realistic vegetation.

After further research I see 2012 or (native mode) only likes to play with speedtreez designed vegetation. I'm sure I would get great performance if I was willing to use the toy like speedtreez vegetation.

 

[BLACKWATCH]

So if you want your vegetation to be "realistic", forget 2012, stick with the best, TRS 2004, "You know it makes sense".

 

[Dermmy]

So if you want your vegetation to be "realistic", forget 2012, stick with the best, TRS 2004, "You know it makes sense".

Not trying to start a "my-version-is-better-than-yours" thing - in fact I still have 04 installed and I still use it a lot. Truth to tell you'd be hard pressed to convince me that 04 isn't still the best route-building platform Trainz ever produced. But for sheer running performance TS10 in Comp Mode is hard to beat!

I have 12 - the disks won't install though - but looking at screenshots I'm honestly not all that fussed. Apart from the lighting, that is. The lighting looks superb...

Andy

 

[torino72]

2010 Compatibility Frame Rates

I have bought TRS-2010 and am awaiting delivery. I went for 2010 over TS-2012 because of the compatibility mode with 2006. I'm still not sure whether I’ll use 2010. My question for those who went from 2006 to a newer version is this. When running 2006 assets/routes under compatibility mode, does 2010 usually improve frame rates over what you would get running TRS-2006? Or, is compatibility mode simply 2006 running under a 2010 banner with little or no operational improvement?

My specs:

Windows XP SP3, 32 bit
AMD Phenom II x 4 955 processor 3.2GB
Nvidia GeForce 250 video
Ram 4GB DDR (Shows 3327MB/2653MB free)
Primary drive is a WD7501AALS (about 80% HD space free)

 

[wreeder]

Or, is compatibility mode simply 2006 running under a 2010 banner with little or no operational improvement?

We have a winner! Except for a few bug fixes and improvements to engine sounds introduced in TC3, compatibility mode = TRS06 in performance on the same PC. In fact, if you don't reduce the draw distance back to 1500 meters like TRS06, the performance might be even worse.

William