Upgrade Advice Needed

[gawpo50]

Upgrade

Something a lot of us need to be aware of using TS09 / 10 is that when it is running on Vista or Win 7, you need to install all of the DX9 files from the latest re-distribution from Microsoft as both the above Op systems only have a core set of DX9, not the complete files which TS09 / 10 need to run well. I only discovered this after upgrading to a high spec graphics card and couldn't understand why my FPS was not significantly higher. After much searching on the forum, I came across some advice on doing this. So went and did it and noticed an immediate increase of around 50% of FPS. Game runs much smoother now.

Peter

 

[johnwhelan]

Something a lot of us need to be aware of using TS09 / 10 is that when it is running on Vista or Win 7, you need to install all of the DX9 files from the latest re-distribution from Microsoft as both the above Op systems only have a core set of DX9, not the complete files which TS09 / 10 need to run well. I only discovered this after upgrading to a high spec graphics card and couldn't understand why my FPS was not significantly higher. After much searching on the forum, I came across some advice on doing this. So went and did it and noticed an immediate increase of around 50% of FPS. Game runs much smoother now.

Peter

Do you have a link?

Thanks John

 

[lewisner]

In reference to the double slot cards in the 400 series my 460gtx needs 9-1/2" to 10" of space including the two 6 pin power cables for the card depending on the type of cables on the PSU.
Dave

Plus on my HAF 932 case although it has Tooless slots on the rear the type of friction grip used is prevented from engaging on the bottom slot by the design of the GTX 460 case.However the top grip holds it in securely.

 

[djt]

you need to install all of the DX9 files from the latest re-distribution from Microsoft as both the above Op systems only have a core set of DX9, not the complete files which TS09 / 10 need to run well.

I'm not sure what “re-distribution” you are referring to but all that is needed on any OS, XP, Vista or Windows 7 is the DirectX update, which is no different from what's required with any other DirectX game/sim -


http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...FamilyID=3b170b25-abab-4bc3-ae91-50ceb6d8fa8d




http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...38-db71-4c1b-bc6a-9b6652cd92a3&displayLang=en

 

[William0d0]

Card Is Installed

Card is installed.

For some reason in Trainz when you hit the "print screen key" the fraps number display is not included with the saved pic.

But I do have this:

Before:

[/IMG]

After:

[/IMG]

The before test was done before I added 2 gigs more memory. Don't see why that would make a difference (most of it is unusable, lol).

I guesstimate a doubling in FPS in trainz. I'll go into more detail concerning trainz later. I have some online racing to do right now.

 

[djt]

Card is installed.

For some reason in Trainz when you hit the "print screen key" the fraps number display is not included with the saved pic.

But I do have this:

In the options with Fraps there is a check to include the frame rate display in screen shots.

The “3DMarks” doesn't really tell us much. Questions like what resolution was used, how much AA, and how was the new card installed? In what condition was the OS in before the the new card was installed?

Trainz is a lot more CPU dependent then the 3DMarks test also.

 

[William0d0]

In the options with Fraps there is a check to include the frame rate display in screen shots.

The “3DMarks” doesn't really tell us much. Questions like what resolution was used, how much AA, and how was the new card installed? In what condition was the OS in before the the new card was installed?

Trainz is a lot more CPU dependent then the 3DMarks test also.

I installed the card by first removing it in hardware mangler. Swapped card. Let it boot with just VGA. Installed drivers. I guess the normal way.

XP SP3, working fine. No changes between cards.

Running Trainz 1280*1024 AA 4X, settings sliders in the middle.

As an example running ECML in places where the old card would chug along at 8-10 frames per second I'm now getting 15-20 frames per second. In some areas I'm even getting rates in the mid 30's, the old card never go higher then the low 20's.

Would upgrading the CPU instead of the video card have produced better results? It would have cost more, and cost was a major factor.

Overclocking at first seem to work, but eventually it crashed. So the CPU is back at default settings. I haven't totally given up on overclocking.

The game has a distinctly smoother feel now.

With the new video card the CPU is obviously the bottle neck now. I won't argue there.

Since the game really doesn't make use of a quad core, a near future option could be a 3.0 ghz dual core. Then of course I'll be out of options for this machine.

Long term goal is a new machine. Once I get a job the money will again flow like the good ol days.

I'm happy with the results.

 

[djt]

XP SP3, working fine. No changes between cards.

Between the amount of system RAM and the memory on the video card XP 32-bit isn't going to do you very much good. In addition there are known issues between the 400 GTX series and Windows XP.

As an example running ECML in places where the old card would chug along at 8-10 frames per second I'm now getting 15-20 frames per second. In some areas I'm even getting rates in the mid 30's, the old card never go higher then the low 20's.

You'd be surprised at what kind of performance increases I've seen out of just a fresh OS install. I've been amazed at how many people suffer from poor performance just from a botched/corrupted OS.

Would upgrading the CPU instead of the video card have produced better results?

Not unless you have the money for a major upgrade.

Since the game really doesn't make use of a quad core, a near future option could be a 3.0 ghz dual core.

I wouldn't even bother sinking money into a dual core anymore. Six and even eight core CPU's will become the norm in the not to distant future and it would be better off to save your money for a major upgrade latter on.

 

[William0d0]

Between the amount of system RAM and the memory on the video card XP 32-bit isn't going to do you very much good. In addition there are known issues between the 400 GTX series and Windows XP.





You'd be surprised at what kind of performance increases I've seen out of just a fresh OS install. I've been amazed at how many people suffer from poor performance just from a botched/corrupted OS.




Not unless you have the money for a major upgrade.




I wouldn't even bother sinking money into a dual core anymore. Six and even eight core CPU's will become the norm in the not to distant future and it would be better off to save your money for a major upgrade latter on.

Your right about 32 bit windows. But if I move to 64 bit then I'll also need to buy a new force feedback steering wheel (my old but fully functional microsoft wheel is barely supported with 32 bit XP).

I do occasionally reinstall windows, could be getting near that time again. Good point.

I don't seem to be having any issues.

Bottom line:

My upgrade choice may not have been the 100% correct one, perhaps a more in between card would have been more cost effective.

I'm posting this on my laptop, I have one of my UMR2010 AI sessions running with 15 trains running on the desktop machine. Everytime I see a train pass by (tracking view) at over 30 FPS and the birds are flying overhead and the video is smooth as silk I feel increasingly better about it all.

As a side note; I been playing with it for a few hours now and I've yet to see it totally choke up on UMR2010 and have all the trees disappear like my old card would do from time to time.

Your points are all valid.

Maybe the 9400GT is just a terrible video card.

In any event, to spend a little over 100 dollars and get observable results is moving in the right direction in my book.

Thank you for all your fine input on this matter.

When I have enough money for a new system I shall of course seek recommondations once again here. After all, it did change my initial path.:wave: