Which component to upgrade?

[Approach_Medium]

Hello;
I am running TS2009 on a 4yr old system with the following components:

Asus P5AD2-E Premium mobo
Intel P4 Hyper-Threading (not the extreme version) 3.4Ghz
BFG GeForce 6800 w 256MB on PCI Express
3GB DDR2-PC-533
RAID0 HDD system (approx 320GB)
Viewsonic VX2000 20" LCD monitor on DVI
Running TS2009 in 1600 x 1200 or 1280 x 1024 (runs smoother in lower res of course)
Windows Paging file set to NONE

In TS2009 Surveyor, I notice that when I have a lot of scenery, and I am moving quickly around the route, the display frequently pauses briefly as though data is not moving fast enough from HDD or memory to the video card.

In testing the system on PassMark, I see full-screen frame rates max out at about 39Hz.

I'm wondering whether upgrading RAM to 4GB of PC-850 and over-clocking would help, or maybe upgrading the video card would be the best option.

The mobo uses the Intel 925X chipset, and max DDR rate is supposed to be 533Mhz, but I am thinking that if I get faster RAM, I may be able to get away with overclocking to at least 20%.

What do you think?

Thanks

FW

 

[Napalm]

Hi FW,

Guess my first question is how much do you want to spend?

My first opinion would be to change the Processor to a Dual Core as TS2009 can use multiple cores, but then I looked at the spec of your motherboard and noticed that you would need to change that to use a Dual Core.

After thinking about it a bit more, buying a newer graphics card would be the best upgrade for the least money as you have a fairly outdated board.

I recently upgraded my system and started at the graphics, then changed the processor, then changed the mobo and upped the memory. With me it's a continous task, when I see a bargain I go for it :hehe:

Nathan

p.s. my competer spec:

Intel Core2Duo E6300
ASUS P5QL PRO Mobo
Corsair 4GB Kit (2x2GB) DDR2 800MHz
Nvidia 9600GSO 768MB DDR3
Soundblaster Xfi Extreme
250GB Western Digital SATA HD
80GB Maxtor IDE HD
Logitech G15 Keyboard
Samsung 20" Widescreen

 

[Approach_Medium]

Hi Nathan;
I didn't want to go full out and upgrade the whole system, but I see that I can get a BFG 9800 w 512MB for about $150.
Compared to the 6800, that should be a huge upgrade.

Then, I could just live with what I've got until I have the $$ for a full upgrade, although that's probably not going to happen anytime soon<g>

It hurts to know that I spent over $500 on the BFG 6800 w 256MB 4yrs ago, but that's life, especially in the computers/electronics market<g>

FW

 

[Napalm]

It hurts to know that I spent over $500 on the BFG 6800 w 256MB 4yrs ago, but that's life, especially in the computers/electronics market

Tell me about it, if I looked back and worked out how much I had spent on PC's since I started playing with them I think I would be a rich man .

I started playing with PC's in 1994 when my first PC was a Packard Bell 386SX 33mhz monster:hehe:. It had 2MB Ram, 40MB Hard Drive, No soundcard and No CD-Rom. It cost me small fortune adding a soundcard, CD-Rom and 2MB extra memory just so I could play 'Elite - Final Frontier'!!!

Nathan

 

[johnwhelan]

You have 3 gigs of memory so increasing the memory will not help. cpu could be faster but that's a major upgrade so the only thing left is the video card.

Extra memory here will cut done the amount of data transfer to and from the cpu and may save the odd cpu cycle.

Newegg has a 9800GTX+ whatever at $144
SPARKLE SFPX98GTX+512D3H GeForce 9800 GTX+ 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card - Retail

My preference would be $174.99 but that would involve cleaning out the old drivers. A4850 might do better on the power consumption. The ATI cards 4850 4870 do need less power than the equivalent nVidia.
SAPPHIRE 100259L Radeon HD 4870 512MB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail


http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3517&p=13 shows power consumption under load of various cards note this is only the video card you need to know what else is in the machine, but not that the current nVidia options in this price range drawn more power under load.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-radeon,2151-3.html compares different cards performance.

Cheerio John

 

[Approach_Medium]

You have 3 gigs of memory so increasing the memory will not help. cpu could be faster but that's a major upgrade so the only thing left is the video card.

Extra memory here will cut done the amount of data transfer to and from the cpu and may save the odd cpu cycle.

Newegg has a 9800GTX+ whatever at $144
SPARKLE SFPX98GTX+512D3H GeForce 9800 GTX+ 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card - Retail

My preference would be $174.99 but that would involve cleaning out the old drivers. A4850 might do better on the power consumption. The ATI cards 4850 4870 do need less power than the equivalent nVidia.
SAPPHIRE 100259L Radeon HD 4870 512MB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail


http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3517&p=13 shows power consumption under load of various cards note this is only the video card you need to know what else is in the machine, but not that the current nVidia options in this price range drawn more power under load.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-radeon,2151-3.html compares different cards performance.

Cheerio John

I'll be checking out my options (in video cards) once I really get my TS2009 route populated with performance gobbling content. I want to see how poorly it will perform with what I have now; and the worst thing that will happen is the price of the video card will drop, so I will be able to buy an even better one, or maybe if I wait long enough, I can upgrade the whole rig.

As fir ATI, I won't go there. I started with an ATI card in this machine when I first put it together, but the card would not drive my Viewsonic VX2000 monitor in DVI mode.
I returned the card, and bought the BFG 6800.
I'm going to stick with the Nvidia chipset.

FW

 

[Approach_Medium]

Tell me about it, if I looked back and worked out how much I had spent on PC's since I started playing with them I think I would be a rich man .

I started playing with PC's in 1994 when my first PC was a Packard Bell 386SX 33mhz monster:hehe:. It had 2MB Ram, 40MB Hard Drive, No soundcard and No CD-Rom. It cost me small fortune adding a soundcard, CD-Rom and 2MB extra memory just so I could play 'Elite - Final Frontier'!!!

Nathan

And if you hadn't spent any of that money on PC's where would you be now?
Sometimes money isn't the best thing to have. I like the experiences it can buy, better than having it around<g>

FW

 

[johnwhelan]

I'll be checking out my options (in video cards) once I really get my TS2009 route populated with performance gobbling content. I want to see how poorly it will perform with what I have now; and the worst thing that will happen is the price of the video card will drop, so I will be able to buy an even better one, or maybe if I wait long enough, I can upgrade the whole rig.

As fir ATI, I won't go there. I started with an ATI card in this machine when I first put it together, but the card would not drive my Viewsonic VX2000 monitor in DVI mode.
I returned the card, and bought the BFG 6800.
I'm going to stick with the Nvidia chipset.

FW

Check your power supply in that case very carefully. The new ATI cards are very good, I've seen odd problems with both ATI and nVidia. I'd wait until nVidia have a few more cards with the lower power consumption that comes with the 55 fab process, they have only one so far their very latest offering and that didn't seem to be in your price range.

Cheerio John

 

[Approach_Medium]

Check your power supply in that case very carefully. The new ATI cards are very good, I've seen odd problems with both ATI and nVidia. I'd wait until nVidia have a few more cards with the lower power consumption that comes with the 55 fab process, they have only one so far their very latest offering and that didn't seem to be in your price range.

Cheerio John

I've got a 550W power supply. Thanks for the heads up.

FW

 

[Approach_Medium]

Hi FW,

Guess my first question is how much do you want to spend?

My first opinion would be to change the Processor to a Dual Core as TS2009 can use multiple cores, but then I looked at the spec of your motherboard and noticed that you would need to change that to use a Dual Core.

After thinking about it a bit more, buying a newer graphics card would be the best upgrade for the least money as you have a fairly outdated board.

I recently upgraded my system and started at the graphics, then changed the processor, then changed the mobo and upped the memory. With me it's a continous task, when I see a bargain I go for it :hehe:

Nathan

p.s. my competer spec:

Intel Core2Duo E6300
ASUS P5QL PRO Mobo
Corsair 4GB Kit (2x2GB) DDR2 800MHz
Nvidia 9600GSO 768MB DDR3
Soundblaster Xfi Extreme
250GB Western Digital SATA HD
80GB Maxtor IDE HD
Logitech G15 Keyboard
Samsung 20" Widescreen

What about the "extreme" version of the P4?
When I bought the 3.4Ghz there was an extreme version which cost a lot more. I don't think it's too expensive anymore, and it would work on my board.

FW

 

[AussieNightcrawler]

Hello;
I am running TS2009 on a 4yr old system with the following components:

Windows Paging file set to NONE

What do you think?

Thanks

FW

I would like to know why you have the page file set to none?

You do know that the page file is used for loading and caching, I played with different settings for the page/swap file a few years ago and found that setting it to none lowered the performance, for best performance I found that setting it manually was best.

Other then that, a graphics card with more memory would be the way to go, a 9800GTX+ would be the better 'budget' option, unless you go for an ATi card.

 

[Approach_Medium]

I would like to know why you have the page file set to none?

You do know that the page file is used for loading and caching, I played with different settings for the page/swap file a few years ago and found that setting it to none lowered the performance, for best performance I found that setting it manually was best.

Other then that, a graphics card with more memory would be the way to go, a 9800GTX+ would be the better 'budget' option, unless you go for an ATi card.

I have generally been getting better performance with page file set to 0, but now I'm not so sure about that.
I did find that when I increased resource cache size from 256 to 512 I got a noticeable improvement in Surveyor while looking around a fairly complex area.
What exactly is the resource cache size?

Also, wasn't there a way to show frame rates during play?
I'm not sure whether that was in MSTS, MSFS, or TS.

FW

 

[SuperFudd]

Go with ~$150 worth of 512M Nvidea video card. A better card might be limited by the rest of the machine.
Most of us use FRAPS ( www.fraps.com ) to monitor FPS in real time.

When measuring maximum FPS for comparisons, be sure Trainz is not set to limit the maximum FPS. I have set mine to max out at 32 fps, I think. This is said to cause less hesitation when changing from a high fps area to a low one and visa versa. 32fps seems to be plenty to me.

 

[AussieNightcrawler]

I have generally been getting better performance with page file set to 0, but now I'm not so sure about that.
I did find that when I increased resource cache size from 256 to 512 I got a noticeable improvement in Surveyor while looking around a fairly complex area.
What exactly is the resource cache size?

FW

Windows page/swap file and resource cache are actually 2 different things.

Windows page/swap file is basically 'virtual memory' that windows/programs can use if they run out of 'physical memory' (RAM) that is installed, it is a file, usually pagefile.sys that sets a certain amount of hard drive space for use as 'virtual memory'. I usually set this manually to 1.5x ~ 2.0x the 'physical memory' I have installed, right now its set for 4096MB (4GB).

Resource Cache is a set amount of memory that is set aside by Trainz for caching to reduce the amount of time Trainz accesses the disk to help prevent 'stutter' in frame rates. This is set in Trainz options, I usually set this to 1024.

 

[Approach_Medium]

Windows page/swap file and resource cache are actually 2 different things.

Windows page/swap file is basically 'virtual memory' that windows/programs can use if they run out of 'physical memory' (RAM) that is installed, it is a file, usually pagefile.sys that sets a certain amount of hard drive space for use as 'virtual memory'. I usually set this manually to 1.5x ~ 2.0x the 'physical memory' I have installed, right now its set for 4096MB (4GB).

Resource Cache is a set amount of memory that is set aside by Trainz for caching to reduce the amount of time Trainz accesses the disk to help prevent 'stutter' in frame rates. This is set in Trainz options, I usually set this to 1024.

Thanks for the info.
I re-set my pagefile to start at 1024, and up to 3096 I believe, but maybe I should have it set to max at 4096 which would be 1.5x my 3Gigs.
For some reason, some apps seem to perform better without the pagefile, but I guess not so intensive as TS.

FW

 

[Approach_Medium]

Go with ~$150 worth of 512M Nvidea video card. A better card might be limited by the rest of the machine.
Most of us use FRAPS ( www.fraps.com ) to monitor FPS in real time.

When measuring maximum FPS for comparisons, be sure Trainz is not set to limit the maximum FPS. I have set mine to max out at 32 fps, I think. This is said to cause less hesitation when changing from a high fps area to a low one and visa versa. 32fps seems to be plenty to me.

How do you set max FRAPS in TS2009?

I think that I also need to keep my settings in TS to a compromise between decent quality and performance.

Edit: I installed FRAPS, and found that in my route, which is not heavily populated yet, I get FPS up to 60, and not lower than about 30.
But, when I opened Razorback Classic, and played with the video settings, I got FPS as low as 8 and high around 30.
If I want to keep FPS at 30 or above, I needed to set draw distance to minimum. Scenery detail slider set to mid seemed to work as well as set to min, and texture detail didn't have as much effect as draw distance.
I am sure I will want the new video card if I want to enjoy my route once it gets fully populated. I am modeling Northeast NJ and there are some pretty congested areas.
Also, I haven't tried running FRAPS when I have trains running. That should be a more interesting test.

Thanks for the link for Fraps. I don't know whether I will buy the full version, as I really need that money for the video card<g>, but it's a great little app even in the unregistered mode. I don't really have much interest in screen captures rught now anyway.

FW

 

[johnwhelan]

Thanks for the info.
I re-set my pagefile to start at 1024, and up to 3096 I believe, but maybe I should have it set to max at 4096 which would be 1.5x my 3Gigs.
For some reason, some apps seem to perform better without the pagefile, but I guess not so intensive as TS.

FW

Set the max and min to be the same otherwise XP sends time allocating and deallocating disk space. If you have the disk space set it to 4 gigs.

Cheerio John

 

[Approach_Medium]

Set the max and min to be the same otherwise XP sends time allocating and deallocating disk space. If you have the disk space set it to 4 gigs.

Cheerio John

OK. Thanks for the advice.

FW