Performance Tuning 2006 on a Core 2 Duo (dual core) PC

[nismit]

Posting Deleted.

 

[manjoe]

Thanks. Will try it on TRS2004. I get an error because of the VSYNC=2, probably because TRS2004 shows only two options. Removing it got around the problem. Will let you know how it goes. :wave:

 

[nismit]

Check! Try again - no 2006 specific options used here

Posting Deleted.

 

[johnwhelan]

With 2 gigs of memory have a search in the forum about this parameter to see if its the optimum setting.

-ResourceMemory=512

Cheerio John

 

[john259]

I've had a chance to play with 2006 on a Dell laptop (Intel Core 2 Duo 1.5Ghz, 2GB RAM, 256 MB dedicated video) over the weekend.

Useful info, thanks.

Can I ask if that computer has got integrated graphics or a proper video board (any idea which?), and whether it's running Vista or XP?

John

 

[manjoe]

Enter excactly as typed:

-vsync=2

Remember the dash-sign, the - in front of vsync and NO spaces in between.

A similar set of options works perfectly in TRS 2004, where I have used it for years now.

Thanks Nismit........I was looking at the Vertical Sync option of the Configure Trainz> Advanced Options> Refresh Rate> Vertical Sync where it shows 3 options, Auto, Full Rate, Half Rate. When I did not see a "2", I thought I had made an error.:wave:

 

[manjoe]

Hello all..........For some reason -VSYNC=2 or -VSYNC=3 does not allow TRS2004 @2365 to load on my system. The message I get is "unable to communicate correctly with Trainz............" If I use -VSYNC=1, there is no problem. Maybe the graphics card has something to do with it. The Trainz writeup on -VSYNC states that "this option may be overridden by the video card driver settings". This is way over my head and far beyond my understanding, but I am nontheless receiving excellant results from these Trainzoptions settings...........:wave:

 

[DaveW]

Hi nismit,
Interesting, tried your settings on my system, got average 14.8fps on a 'heavy' layout.
Reverted to default settings, +resource= 1024, average 24.1fps same layout.
I think these settings are very system specific, as discussed in many previous posts.

DaveW

 

[nismit]

Thanks for your feed back

Posting Deleted.

 

[johnwhelan]

johnwhelan:
"With 2 gigs of memory have a search in the forum about this parameter to see if its the optimum setting.

-ResourceMemory=512"

There is no optimum setting, it depends a lot on the layout and the way assets are used. The extremes are

1) few assets with many instances of each
2) many assets with few instances of each

Case 2) will typically require more resource cache.

nismit

My memory must be slipping then, I was under the impression that there had been a fair amount of discussion and the setting you have would be considered a little unusual in those threads.

Cheerio John

 

[nismit]

It's all down to what you value in your simulator

Posting Deleted.

 

[johnwhelan]

There would be little reason for this thread, if I had come up with similar results.

Hardware capacity are finite while - at least relatively - the size and complexity of layouts/sessions are not.

That is: for any tuning giving acceptable performance with some class of layouts/sessions, you can find any number of layouts/sessions outside thyat class (with higher resource/processing requirements), than cannot be handled by the hardware and its tuning.

Obviously layouts, that use more than 511 base boards and/or more than 512 MBs of asset resources, might benefit from further tuning. In the end any hardware with any tuning can be loaded with layout and session traffic beyond capacity leading to poor performance.

I too have seen some pretty wild tuning suggestions here, claims of amazing frames rates. Before we started tuning, the laptop averaged 45 FPS, but with serious flickering and drops.

With a heartbeat of 0.03 seconds, there can each second be 33.3 different simulator states and thus 33.3 different video frames from a moving viewpoint. Then asking the hardware to produce more than about 30 FPS may seem pointless and it certainly does not improve the ability to cope with more intense layouts and sessions.

nismit

I must confess I was a little puzzled by the reason for the thread.

So I interpret this as you as saying that these recommendations only apply to a particular layout and should not be used as a general guide line or have I missed something?

Probably what we need is a "reference" layout, and a more detailed discussion of the effect of different values of -ResourceMemory.


Cheerio John

 

[john259]

Probably what we need is a "reference" layout, and a more detailed discussion of the effect of different values of -ResourceMemory.

We did that. Here's the results.

Hardware:
Model Dell Dimension 8300
Processor 2.60GHz Pentium 4
Main ram 3GB PC3200
Video board XFX GeForce 7600GT 256MB AGP
Hard disk 7200rpm Serial ATA 8MB cache (defragged; plenty of free space)

Default BIOS settings:
Memory Information > AGP aperture size 256MB
CPU Information > Hyperthreading Yes

Software:
Windows XP Home Edition SP2
Startup programs Minimal
Trainz TRS2004 Build 2370 (UK SP4)
DirectX 9.0c
Control panel > Display Resolution: 1024 x 768 x 32 bit @ 75Hz
Hardware acceleration: Full
Enable write combining: Yes

Default nVidia Control Panel settings:
Anisotropic filtering 2x
Antialising - Gamma correction On
Antialising - Setting 2x
Antialising - Transparency Multisampling
Conformant texture clamp Use hardware
Extension limit Off
Force mipmaps Bilinear
Multi-display Single display performance mode
Texture filtering - Anisotropic mip filter optimisation Off
Texture filtering - Anisotropic sample optimisation Off
Texture filtering - Negative LOD bias Clamp
Texture filtering - Quality Quality
Texture filtering - Trilinear optimisation Off
Triple buffering On
Vertical sync Use the 3D application setting
Program settings - TRS2004 Use global settings

Default trainzoptions.txt:
-AreaLimit=200
-CabinFOV=72
-Debug
-DepthBits=24
-DriverFOV=60
-FastMenus
-Filter=trilinear
-Frequency=75
-FullScreen
-Intro=disable
-Jet=bin
-LoadingTime=20
-ResourceMemory=512
-SectionLimit=20
-ShowKuids
-StencilBits=8

Default TRS2004 In-Game Options:
Display settings DirectX
Resolution 1024 x 768
Bit depth 32
Ground texture passes 100%
Ground detail level 100%
Ground draw distance 100%
Scenery draw distance 100%
Spline editing 100%
Train poly count 100%
Gamma 40%
Good weather fog 40%
Bad weather fog 80%
Particle effects 40%
Texture quality High
Resource cache size (overidden by -ResourceMemory in trainzoptions.txt) 256
Disable environment map No
Fix GeForce3 textures No
Ground polygon offset No
Vertical sync Auto
Frequency Auto
Disable hardware TL No
Shadows No
Vertex offset No; 50%

Installed Assets:
RBR essential assets
RBR V6.2 layout
RBR Shunt layout
Standard RBR asset packs
My TFN scenarios
Monorail project layout and rolling stock
NOT installed: RBR Dual, Dual layout assets or the Dual rolling stock packs

Test Scenario:
"Benchmark" - A normal GameScript scenario (not created with the Razorback development system) - Razorback V6.2 layout - steam train with mixed rolling stock running through Altona station, passing an AI train with mixed rolling stock that starts moving in the opposite direction as we approach it - external camera looking back down the train from the front and slightly to one side.

Results:
Frames per second are as reported at the end of the jetlog file. The higher figure the better. Unless otherwise stated only one parameter was changed in each case.

Default (with all settings at their default values as listed above) 19.1fps

Effects of changes to BIOS settings:
Disabled hyperthreading 20.3fps
Reduced AGP aperture size to 32MB 20.0fps

Effect of changes to nVidia Control Panel settings:
Increased anisotropic filtering to 16x 20.0fps
Increased antialising - setting to 8xS 19.5fps
Increased antialising - transparency to supersampling 19.3fps
Changed all texture filtering settings to high performance/optimisation on 20.1fps
Changed all settings to highest quality 18.7fps

Effect of changes to trainzoptions.txt:
Reduced AreaLimit to 100 19.8fps
Increased AreaLimit to 400 20.0fps
Reduced Filter to bilinear 20.0fps
Reduced LoadingTime to 5 20.1fps
Reduced ResourceMemory to 0 20.0fps
Reduced ResourceMemory to 64 20.0fps
Increased ResourceMemory to 1024 20.1fps
Reduced SectionLimit to 10 20.0fps
Added -disablecarz=1 20.2fps

Effect of changes to in-game options:
(Setting some of these options to minimum quality/highest performance reduces the image quality to well below that which is acceptable)
Changed from DirectX to OpenGL 20.5fps
Reduced resolution to 800 x 600 20.0fps
Reduced ground texture passes to 0% 20.1fps
Reduced ground detail level to 0% 22.0fps
Reduced ground draw distance to 0% 26.3fps
Reduced scenery draw distance to 0% 22.2fps
Reduced train poly count to 0% 20.1fps
Increased both fogs to 100% 19.8fps
Reduced particle effects to 0% 20.1fps
Increased particle effects to 100% 20.0fps
Reduced texture quality to low 20.0fps
Set disable environment map to yes 20.3fps
Set disable hardware TL to yes 20.1fps
Set shadows to yes 18.7fps

Conclusion: once you have a powerful enough computer (especially the video board), the settings don't affect frame rates much.

John

 

[wreeder]

Thank you Nismit for posting your tests with the dual core cpu. It is good to see that Trainz does seem to make use of both cores. I'm like you, I value a smooth experience over high fps. Hence my Trainzoptions are set close to yours.

I find all your posts interesting to read and full of good ideas.

Thanks again,

William

 

[johnwhelan]

We did that. Here's the results.

Hardware:
Model Dell Dimension 8300
Processor 2.60GHz Pentium 4
Main ram 3GB PC3200
Video board XFX GeForce 7600GT 256MB AGP
Hard disk 7200rpm Serial ATA 8MB cache (defragged; plenty of free space)

Default BIOS settings:
Memory Information > AGP aperture size 256MB
CPU Information > Hyperthreading Yes

Software:
Windows XP Home Edition SP2
Startup programs Minimal
Trainz TRS2004 Build 2370 (UK SP4)
DirectX 9.0c
Control panel > Display Resolution: 1024 x 768 x 32 bit @ 75Hz
Hardware acceleration: Full
Enable write combining: Yes

Default nVidia Control Panel settings:
Anisotropic filtering 2x
Antialising - Gamma correction On
Antialising - Setting 2x
Antialising - Transparency Multisampling
Conformant texture clamp Use hardware
Extension limit Off
Force mipmaps Bilinear
Multi-display Single display performance mode
Texture filtering - Anisotropic mip filter optimisation Off
Texture filtering - Anisotropic sample optimisation Off
Texture filtering - Negative LOD bias Clamp
Texture filtering - Quality Quality
Texture filtering - Trilinear optimisation Off
Triple buffering On
Vertical sync Use the 3D application setting
Program settings - TRS2004 Use global settings

Default trainzoptions.txt:
-AreaLimit=200
-CabinFOV=72
-Debug
-DepthBits=24
-DriverFOV=60
-FastMenus
-Filter=trilinear
-Frequency=75
-FullScreen
-Intro=disable
-Jet=bin
-LoadingTime=20
-ResourceMemory=512
-SectionLimit=20
-ShowKuids
-StencilBits=8

Default TRS2004 In-Game Options:
Display settings DirectX
Resolution 1024 x 768
Bit depth 32
Ground texture passes 100%
Ground detail level 100%
Ground draw distance 100%
Scenery draw distance 100%
Spline editing 100%
Train poly count 100%
Gamma 40%
Good weather fog 40%
Bad weather fog 80%
Particle effects 40%
Texture quality High
Resource cache size (overidden by -ResourceMemory in trainzoptions.txt) 256
Disable environment map No
Fix GeForce3 textures No
Ground polygon offset No
Vertical sync Auto
Frequency Auto
Disable hardware TL No
Shadows No
Vertex offset No; 50%

Installed Assets:
RBR essential assets
RBR V6.2 layout
RBR Shunt layout
Standard RBR asset packs
My TFN scenarios
Monorail project layout and rolling stock
NOT installed: RBR Dual, Dual layout assets or the Dual rolling stock packs

Test Scenario:
"Benchmark" - A normal GameScript scenario (not created with the Razorback development system) - Razorback V6.2 layout - steam train with mixed rolling stock running through Altona station, passing an AI train with mixed rolling stock that starts moving in the opposite direction as we approach it - external camera looking back down the train from the front and slightly to one side.

Results:
Frames per second are as reported at the end of the jetlog file. The higher figure the better. Unless otherwise stated only one parameter was changed in each case.

Default (with all settings at their default values as listed above) 19.1fps

Effects of changes to BIOS settings:
Disabled hyperthreading 20.3fps
Reduced AGP aperture size to 32MB 20.0fps

Effect of changes to nVidia Control Panel settings:
Increased anisotropic filtering to 16x 20.0fps
Increased antialising - setting to 8xS 19.5fps
Increased antialising - transparency to supersampling 19.3fps
Changed all texture filtering settings to high performance/optimisation on 20.1fps
Changed all settings to highest quality 18.7fps

Effect of changes to trainzoptions.txt:
Reduced AreaLimit to 100 19.8fps
Increased AreaLimit to 400 20.0fps
Reduced Filter to bilinear 20.0fps
Reduced LoadingTime to 5 20.1fps
Reduced ResourceMemory to 0 20.0fps
Reduced ResourceMemory to 64 20.0fps
Increased ResourceMemory to 1024 20.1fps
Reduced SectionLimit to 10 20.0fps
Added -disablecarz=1 20.2fps

Effect of changes to in-game options:
(Setting some of these options to minimum quality/highest performance reduces the image quality to well below that which is acceptable)
Changed from DirectX to OpenGL 20.5fps
Reduced resolution to 800 x 600 20.0fps
Reduced ground texture passes to 0% 20.1fps
Reduced ground detail level to 0% 22.0fps
Reduced ground draw distance to 0% 26.3fps
Reduced scenery draw distance to 0% 22.2fps
Reduced train poly count to 0% 20.1fps
Increased both fogs to 100% 19.8fps
Reduced particle effects to 0% 20.1fps
Increased particle effects to 100% 20.0fps
Reduced texture quality to low 20.0fps
Set disable environment map to yes 20.3fps
Set disable hardware TL to yes 20.1fps
Set shadows to yes 18.7fps

Conclusion: once you have a powerful enough computer (especially the video board), the settings don't affect frame rates much.

John

Interesting, different machine, I'm a little unclear why ResourceMemory 512 gave 19.1, ResourceMemory 0 / 64 gave 20.0 and ResourceMemory1024 gave 20.1. What you are saying is that ResourceMemory set to half the physical memory gives the best results though. TC doesn't seem to care.

I'm under the impression that the Razorback layout is set in the US so fairly sparse scenery compared to a European layout?

Thanks

Cheerio John

 

[john259]

I'm a little unclear why ResourceMemory 512 gave 19.1, ResourceMemory 0 / 64 gave 20.0 and ResourceMemory1024 gave 20.1.

What I'm really saying (I think!) is that in this case the differences are so tiny that they can be ignored. But as ever "your mileage may vary", especially with less powerful hardware.

I'm under the impression that the Razorback layout is set in the US so fairly sparse scenery compared to a European layout?

Actually Australia, and extremely varied with some parts semi-desert and others rich forests. The RBR Classic layout was designed by Greg Furlong (Shutter) with performance very much in mind but the area where I chose to do the benchmark has numerous tracks, quite a few buildings and other features but not a lot of vegetation. It isn't the most performance sensitive place on the layout (that's probably Hunter station), but it is pretty taxing.

BTW there was no flickering and only minimal occasional stuttering during all those tests.

John