Trainz+ poor performance and latest update error

[JCitron]

HD Terrain is a whopper when it comes to performance. I noticed a big hit when I tried it myself and I keep my graphics lowered even with a RTX3080, 64GB, and an i9-12900K.

 

[johnnytrain]

HD Terrain is a whopper when it comes to performance. I noticed a big hit when I tried it myself and I keep my graphics lowered even with a RTX3080, 64GB, and an i9-12900K.

Tried to restore some grids to 5m but it's too finicky. It also partially fills in my carefully sculpted (by hand and brush tool) cuttings. I think to be honest I need one of those quantum computer things that calculates every possible position of every molecule of my route before I even hit the drive button.

 

[JCitron]

Tried to restore some grids to 5m but it's too finicky. It also partially fills in my carefully sculpted (by hand and brush tool) cuttings. I think to be honest I need one of those quantum computer things that calculates every possible position of every molecule of my route before I even hit the drive button.

We all need machines like that.

I used a clone of my route that I deleted once I found it wasn't workable. My route is 320 miles of track end-to-end. Like your route, it may be a bit overgrown but I built it to cover the branches in and around a seaport and represents a region and not just a single railroad, although there is a single railroad running in the region along with passenger commuter and long-distance trains and outside freights. And probably like your route, it grew over time. Mine started in early January 2004.

The way I look at it, HD terrain is not ready for upgrading older large routes and probably works fine for new creations, although being limited to16 textures per baseboard has its own ball of wax for us to contend with. I ran into this when working with a TransDEM generated route due to the topographic map (ordinance map) textures being a few too many. This left the route unworkable because it reduced them all to shmooze.

 

[daviejc]

It's the track being used. Try a different track and the route will run better. Some track is "heavy" and causes really bad performance. One of the symptoms is the track drawing in S L O W L Y and coming in chunks a bit at a time. The other symptom is moving around and having nothing but spline points then the track appears.

If you still experience this kind of performance problem, I recommend dropping the vsync down to half. That helps a lot and I noticed that also dropped my GPU temps a lot too.

I tried different track and vsync set to half and still the same issue. Running Task Manager, I see CPU utilization around 25-30% and GPU utilization stays around 30-37% (even when running on gravel while trying to draw the track). I did not have this problem on the previous build.

 

[JCitron]

I tried different track and vsync set to half and still the same issue. Running Task Manager, I see CPU utilization around 25-30% and GPU utilization stays around 30-37% (even when running on gravel while trying to draw the track). I did not have this problem on the previous build.

What are your performance settings?

The former standard setting in performance is now the new basic. If you are running standard, lower that to basic and you should see a big difference.

 

[daviejc]

What are your performance settings?

The former standard setting in performance is now the new basic. If you are running standard, lower that to basic and you should see a big difference.

I set everything down to minimum with a screen setting of 1366x768. Windows 10 is set to use hardware accelerated GPU scheduling. It makes no difference. The problem persists. It does not appear to be a graphics processing issue. I checked my cpu loading and cores 0, 4, and 7 were loaded to 140%. All others (16 total) were less than 20%. The gpu is running 20 - 40% loaded at maximum resolution settings. This build is not utilizing the processing power that is available to it.

I am running 23 trains on the route and when I hit pause, everything magically appears instantly.
I checked CPU loading while it was drawing the track (train running on ballast) and found the following (only cores 4 and 5 are fully loaded):

Sensor	Current	Minimum	Maximum​	Average​
v l System: ASUS
O Virtual Memory Committed	19,951...	18,646...	19,968 MB	19,128 MB
O Virtual Memory Available	17,421...	17,404...	18,725 MB	18,243 MB
O Virtual Memory Load	53.3 %	49.8 %	53.4 %	51.1 %
O Physical Memory Used	13,633...	13,144...	13,645 MB	13,343 MB
O Physical Memory Available	18,875...	18,863...	19,364 MB	19,165 MB
O Physical Memory Load	41.9 %	40.4 %	41.9 %	41.0 %
O Page File Usage	0.0 %	0.0 %	0.0 %	0.0 %
v CPU [íto]: Intel Core Í9-12900K
> $ Core VIDs	1.245 v	1.197 V	1.329 v	1.233 v
$ SA VID	0.898 v	0.896 v	0.903 v	0.900 v
> O Core Clocks	4,400....	3,700....	4,901.2 M...	4,374.3 ...
©Bus Clock	100.0 ...	100.0 ...	100.0 MHz	100.0 MHz
O Ring/LLC Clock	3,600....	3,600....	4,700.0 M...	3,609.2 ...
> O Core Effective Clocks	1,033....	0.4 MHz	4,844.2 M...	839.0 MHz
O Average Effective Clock	1,189....	780.4 ...	1,559.1 M...	958.7 MHz
v O Core Usage	21.7 %	0.0 %	98.8 %	17.5 %
O P-core 0TO Usage	66.2 %	51.4 %	74.1 %	58.2 %
O P-core 0T1 Usage	0.8 %	0.0 %	7.3 %	0.3 %
O P-core 1T0 Usage	56.8 %	36.0 %	68.2 %	46.0 %
O P-core 1T1 Usage	0.8 %	0.0 %	6.4 %	0.3 %
O P-core 2T0 Usage	50.1 %	7.6 %	59.2 %	35.8 %
O P-core 2T1 Usage	0.8 %	0.0 %	4.9 %	0.3 %
O P-core 3T0 Usage	40.9 %	0.0 %	52.3 %	17.9 %
O P-core 3T1 Usage	0.8 %	0.0 %	5.2 %	0.4 %
O P-core 4 TO Usage	96.8 %	75.1 %	98.8 %	96.8 %
O P-core 4T1 Usage	0.0 %	0.0 %	26.7 %	0.8 %
O P-core 5 TO Usage	96.3 %	80.1 %	98.6 %	97.0 %
O P-core 5T1 Usage	0.8 %	0.0 %	22.0 %	0.5 %
O P-core 6T0 Usage	39.8 %	0.0 %	41.1 %	11.7 %
O P-core 6T1 Usage	0.8 %	0.0 %	3.8 %	0.4 %
O P-core 7 TO Usage	15.3 %	0.0 %	33.2 %	2.4 %
O P-core 7T1 Usage	1.0 %	0.0 %	1.8 %	0.2 %
O E-core 8T0 Usage	8.7 %	6.6 %	30.1 %	9.1 %
O E-core 9T0 Usage	7.1 %	3.4 %	28.8 %	6.0 %
O E-core 10 TO Usage	6.3 %	3.8 %	29.6 %	6.3 %
O E-core 11 TO Usage	5.5 %	4.1 %	26.2 %	6.0 %
O E-core 12 TO Usage	6.8 %	3.8 %	25.9 %	6.3 %
O E-core 13 TO Usage	6.8 %	4.0 %	26.2 %	6.1 %
O E-core 14 TO Usage	5.1 %	3.1 %	27.0 %	5.8 %
O E-core 15 TO Usage	6.0 %	4.0 %	23.0 %	6.2 %
© Max CPU/Thread Usage	96.8 %	80.1 %	98.8 %	97.3 %
© Total CPU Usage	21.7 %	14.4 %	32.0 %	17.5 %

The GPU shows the following (Max load 43%:

Sensor	Current	Min​	Max	Avg
J GPU Temperature	52.8 °C	49.7 °C​	57.5 °C	54.0 °C
J GPU Memory Junction Temperature	58.0 °C	52.0 °C​	62.0 °C	58.1 °C
J GPU Hot Spot Temperature	63.6 °C	60.1 °C​	67.9 °C	64.6 °C
l GPU Thermal Limit	84.0 °C	84.0 °C​	84.0 °C	84.0 °C
$ GPU Core Voltage	0.890 v	0.890 v​	0.965 v	0.892 v
> $ GPU Rail Voltages		12.263 v​	12.376 v​
83 GPU Fan1	0 RPM	0 RPM	1,299 ...	146 RPM
83 GPU Fan2	0 RPM	0 RPM	1,216 ...	144 RPM
■ GPU Power	43.461...​	40.803...​	58.496...	44.509...​
> , ' GPU Rail Powers		4.559 w	84.784...
O GPU Clock	1,140....	585.0 ...	2,625....	812.4 ...
O GPU Memory Clock	1,250....	1,250....	2,625....	1,278....
© GPU Video Clock	1,965....	1,965....	2,145....	1,968....
© GPU Effective Clock	1,292....	598.3 ...	2,622....	820.7 ...
O GPU Core Load	28.0 %	12.0 %​	43.0 %	36.3 %​
O GPU Memory Controller Load	12.0 %	5.0 %	17.0 %​	11.3 %​
O GPU Video Engine Load	0.0 %	0.0 %	0.0 %​	0.0 %​
O GPU Bus Load	1.0 %	0.0 %	2.0 %​	0.8 %​
O GPU Memory Usage	34.2 %	29.1 %	36.2 %​	31.3 %​

				​

 

[JCitron]

I have seen this same kind of issue myself. The things I mentioned worked for me. There are other things that can cause this including poorly created assets. Using Google Sketch-up buildings for example, is okay but due to how they're built with lots of polygons, this can cause performance to drop off in an area in the vicinity of the assets. If you are using these, try replacing them with something else. I recommend making a copy of your route before doing this in case you don't like the looks.

You can actually test this by running the performance profiler. Click on Developer and Show Profiler. You'll see your FPS and other things, if you can understand them all the better, but this is helpful for finding the huge load that's hitting your computer.

Try setting the V-Sync to Half (30) instead of Full (60). If you're running with none, try the other settings. There have been instances with recent NVidia drivers where setting the V-Sync to non has actually worked better, but you need to try it.

You should run the program at the native resolution and by all means, turn off G-Sync because G-Sync will hurt the performance. Running the program at less than the native resolution can hurt performance.

And finally, try windowed mode. I've had better luck, sometimes running windowed instead of full screen. You can still maximize the window but the detractor is the title bar if you can live with that.