ResourceMemory

N

Nigel_Barker

New member
Hi Guys,

I've had TC3 for a week now and can't get any decent performance out of it at all. My specs are :

P4 2.8 GHz
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro 256 mb
3072 mb system memory
Virtual memory min and max set at 4095 mb

I have tried ResourceMemory at the recommended half of system memory at 1536 then 2048, 1024 and even 0 (yes zero) It has made not one iota of difference in the performance. Frame rates remain the same, it stutters in exactly the same place(s) on my test bit of track. Using 800 x600 rather than 1024x768 again makes no difference.

Clearly I am doing something wrong as others with comparable kit on here seem to get either TRS2006 or TC3 to run somewhat better

I've put this on the UKTrainz forum as well

Any help would be appreciated

Thanks

Nigel
 
Have a look at this thread.

http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=14993

I note that your video card is a little on the light side. It's probably an AGP card so an ATI AGP 3850 or 3650 will keep your system running a little longer. www.Ebuyer.com have some between 50 and 100 quid. 3650 puts less strain on the power supply and is probably as fast as your cpu can keep it fed. Have a look at tomshardware.com and do a little research. Be very careful you get something that has the correct output for your monitor.

Cheerio John
 
I've exactly the same config as yours and I can play with trs2006 sp1 and trs2009. All the drivers are on top, and I've downloaded the last version of catalyst control for the card. But I can't have all the cursors on maxi in trs 2006, and it's very difficult on big stations and with more than four locos on the same place. :o
 
Nigel_Barker said:
John,

Thanks for the reply. Will the benchmark test run in TC3?

I've just found the following thread on here which suggests TC3 does what it wants with the ResourceMemory allocation

http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=31287


Difficult to know what to do if that is the case.

Nigel
Click to expand...

I'd take that thread with a pinch of salt. Measuring resources without impacting what you are measuring is always difficult. Even Frap cuts down the frames per second you see.

What I suggest is do the benchmark then compare your results. If they are vaguely the same then that's life but if they are lower then is the time to have a look at your machine, make sure you have Microsoft auto updates running and check for Malware etc.

Cheerio John
 
John,

Downloaded your benchmark but have 4 missing dependencies which I don't seem to be able to overcome. Only been doing this a week so perhaps it is my lack of knowledge.

Nigel
 
I have a similar system to yours except mine is an ATI Radeon X1050 and I only have 2Gb RAM. TC3 runs perfectly happily - unless I run the Settle and Carlisle route which I am led to believe can be very resource-hungry! Even with sliders turned right down, the S&C stutters in places!

You don't say what you have been trying to run in TC3 but can I suggest you try a couple of different routes and see if you get any better results?
 
Nigel_Barker said:
John,

Downloaded your benchmark but have 4 missing dependencies which I don't seem to be able to overcome. Only been doing this a week so perhaps it is my lack of knowledge.

Nigel
Click to expand...

Rats I got mixed up, it was built for TC1/2 so uses TC1 /2 built in content. The Settle and Carlisle route is a killer by the way so don't expect reasonable frame rates on this route.

Cheerio John
 
I have done a repeated 5 minute test on the "Cattle for Hawes (Ride)" session within the "Yorkshire Dales" route.
I have just let it run and apart from moving the schedule screen out of the way I have not changed views etc.
I had no internet, no firewall, no anti-virus and had run Enditall to get rid of anything else

From the Jetlog I get the following :

(Display Settings, Cache, Vsync, Freq, Resolution, Tuning, Frame Rate)

Opengl, 2048, full, 75, 1024 x 768, Default, 14.384
Directx, 2048, full, 75, 1024 x 768, Default, 14.141

Opengl, 2048, auto, auto, 1024 x 768, Default, 12.829
Directx, 2048, auto, auto, 1024 x 768, Default, 13.111

Opengl, 1024, auto, auto, 1024 x 768, Default, 13.153
Directx, 1024, auto, auto, 1024 x 768, Default, 13.020

Opengl, 2048, full, 75, 1024 x 768, Left, 21.990
Opengl, 2048, full, 75, 1024 x 768, Right, 8.929

Opengl, 2048, full, 75, 800 x 600, Default, 14.646


Conclusions

Everything is marginal and really may not mean much but....

There seems to be no difference between Opengl and Directx

1024x768 was as near as damn it the same as 800x600.

Setting Vsync to full rate and frequency to 75 was better than auto

All the tuning sliders to the left(except gamma) improve frame rate but was unusable.

All the tuning sliders to the right was a show stopper

The only setting changes to my Catalyst video card drivers that made any difference were to apply triple buffering and to Force 24 bit buffer depth in the OpenGL settings. This reduced stuttering but didn't improve frame rates. All others needed to be on performance settings.

13/14 fps is to my mind too low for what I want. Not sure what I need to do now as I'm not going to replace my machine at this point.


Nigel
 
TRS2009 should give you better frame rates that's the cheapest option. I'd probably up the video card.

Which anti virus product are you using?

Cheerio John
 
John,

I am using AVG Pro. I completely uninstalled it the other night but it had no effect on the performance whatsoever. I don't think it's that.

Nigel
 
Never had any problem with it. I agree "resident shield" does slow things up but I switched that off on day 1. Updates work a treat ... well they do here. You can find a web page knocking just about every piece of software. I think you just use what works for you.

Nigel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Intel Turbo Boost - Uninstall it and get higher frame rates
Replies
14
Views
13K
boc61
B
S
How in the world do I get good performace and good looks from This?
Replies
17
Views
5K
SD45T-2
S
B
New graphics card
Replies
7
Views
2K
BLACKWATCH
B
I
NVidia 8600 GT 256mb DDR3
Replies
8
Views
5K
itareus
I
M
which graphics card is better
Replies
6
Views
3K
misterchugg
M
Back
Top