Project Reality 0.9 - Performance Reporting Template

[boilerrat]

System Specifications

* Operating System : Vista home premium 32bit
* CPU : 1.80ghz intel celeron dual core processor.
* Graphics Card : NVIDIA 9500gt 512mb.
* Amount of RAM : 3gb
* Sound Card : onboard


BF2 Graphics Settings

* Resolution : 1280x1024@75Hz

* Terrain : quality 3 (looked at my .con file for these)
* Effects : quality 3
* Geometry : quality 3
* Texture : quality 2
* Lighting : quality 3
* Dynamic Shadows : quality 3
* Dynamic Light : quality 3
* Anti-Aliasing : 8x
* Texture Filtering : 16x



1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?

Yes

2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.

1

3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.

Fallujah, lashkar, gaza.

4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.

Fallujah - looking towards new US base.
Lashkar - Towards the base.
Gaza - New base
5. Name any maps that you have no performance issues with.

Silent eagle.
Kashan

[[R-DEV]OkitaMakoto]

System Specifications

• Operating System : Windows XP sp3, Media Center Edition
• CPU : Dual Core 2.8 Ghz, Pentium D
• Graphics Card : X1950GT 512Mb, updated drivers to 9.11[Legacy]
• Amount of RAM : 3Gb
• Sound Card : X-fi Xtreme Music

BF2 Graphics Settings

• Resolution : 1680x1050

• Terrain : Low/Off
• Effects : Low/Off
• Geometry : Low/Off
• Texture : Low/Off
• Lighting : Low/Off
• Dynamic Shadows : Low/Off
• Dynamic Light : Low/Off
• Anti-Aliasing : 2x
• Texture Filtering : Low/Off

Before .9[.7/.8 and earlier] I was running on All HIGH settings with maybe one or two MEDIUM settings if I wanted extra stable play. I had 4x AA on. When I started PR .9 and hopped in with these settings, I was getting such terrible FPS. So I went out and in a rage turned all settings down to what I list above. And the performance didnt increase, at least, not when looking in the problem areas. There may and probably was an increase in performance when looking outside the map, but as said, these middle of maps were still giving me slide show 15FPS or lower

1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?

Yes

2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.

2

3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.

Lashkar
Fallujah West
Silent Eagle
[will have to man up and play some more to find others in the coming days]

4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.

Lashkar was worse when I looked towards the center valley area. If I looked to the outside of the map/mountains, it would give me a DRASTIC FPS boost. As in about a 30-40FPS rise from the 15 I get when looking at the middle of the map/main road area

Fallujah was much the same, when I would look to the center of the map[towards the city] it would go to a slide show. It shows 15FPS but it feels far slower. Playing was impossible. Looking from main USMC base to outside of map was fine, performance and FPS would increase drastically.

Silent Eagle was generally ok until I got to the center city area, then my fps would plummet to the standard 15fps. Aiming was impossible, moving was a task in itself, and I was relieved to get out to power plant because my FPS increased a good deal there.

5. Name any maps that you have no performance issues with.

Outside areas of Silent Eagle are much more smooth[when not in the central city] Power plant on Silent Eagle was also smooth

[Lucke189]

System Specifications

• Operating System : Win XP
• CPU : AMD Athlon 64 X2 2.2GHz
• Graphics Card : ATI Radeon HD4850 512MB
• Amount of RAM : 2GB
• Sound Card : Realtek AC'97

BF2 Graphics Settings

• Resolution : 1600x1200

• Terrain : High
• Effects : High
• Geometry : High
• Texture : Medium
• Lighting : High
• Dynamic Shadows : High
• Dynamic Light : High
• Anti-Aliasing : x4
• Texture Filtering : x16

1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?

Yes

2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.

Before: 8
Now: 6

3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.

Gaza Beach, Fallujah, urban maps. And new Qwai River.

4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.

While looking towards buildings. Doesn't matter if they are far away or close.

5. Name any maps that you have no performance issues with.

Don't know.

[BigHope]

System Specifications
Operating System : WinXP Pro (32bits)
CPU : AMD Athlon 64 3500+
Graphics Card : 8800GT (G92)
Amount of RAM : 2 Gigs
Sound Card : Audigy 2 Platinum

BF2 Graphics Settings
Resolution : 0.874 (1920x1200) > 0.9 (1680x1050)
Terrain : Medium
Effects : Medium
Geometry: Medium
Texture : Medium
Lighting : Medium
Dynamic Shadows : OFF
Dynamic Light : OFF
Anti-Aliasing : 2x
Texture Filtering :High

1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?
Yes for sure. Plus, half of the time CTD with "BF2 Memory Error" messages

2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.
Before on 0.874 > 8, now on 0.9 > 4

3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.
Lashkar Valley (awful performance), Beirut, GazaBeach

4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.
All of them, everywhere I can look at is like a pain in the ...

5. Name any maps that you have no performance issues with.
Seems that SilentEagle was ok but I did not browse the whole map, and I could not enjoy all maps so far because of CTD. (seems that I crash everytime I load IronRidge till 14%)

[NyteMyre]

New one on low

System Specifications

* Operating System : Windows XP Prof
* CPU : AMD Athlon 64 - 3500 (2.2 GHz)
* Graphics Card : Asus ATi X850xt 256MB
* Amount of RAM : 2GB DDR (on Dual Channel)
* Sound Card : onboard


BF2 Graphics Settings

* Resolution : 1024x480

* Terrain : low
* Effects : low
* Geometry : low
* Texture : low
* Lighting : low
* Dynamic Shadows : low
* Dynamic Light : Off
* Anti-Aliasing : Off
* Texture Filtering : Low
* View distance : 95%



1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?

Yes

2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.

3/10

3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.

Dragon Fly / GazaBeach


4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.

Dragonfly - No performance drop when walking straight ahead. Making small turns are impossible.
Gazabeach - Looking towards the middle of the city

[503]

System Specifications

• Operating System : Home Premium
• CPU : Intel Q6600 Quad Core OC'd at 3.2 GHz
• Graphics Card : Geforce 9800 GTX
• Amount of RAM : 4 GB
• Sound Card : Soundblaster something (cheap)

BF2 Graphics Settings

• Resolution : 1440 x 900

• Terrain : Highest
• Effects : Highest
• Geometry : Highest
• Texture : Highest
• Lighting : Highest
• Dynamic Shadows : Highest
• Dynamic Light : Highest
• Anti-Aliasing : Highest
• Texture Filtering : Highest

1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?
Yes, there is a performance decrease.


2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.
9.5


3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.
Yamalia


4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.
Looking at the fields through binoculars or tank zoom


5. Name any maps that you have no performance issues with.
All the rest

[Zrix]

System Specifications

• Operating System : Win7 64bit
• CPU : Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16GHz 1333MHz
• Graphics Card : ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2
• Amount of RAM : 8GB (4x2GB) DDR2 PC6400 Corsair DHX XMS2
• Sound Card : Basic noname external USB soundcard.

BF2 Graphics Settings

• Resolution : 1920*1200

• Terrain : High
• Effects : High
• Geometry : High
• Texture : High
• Lighting : High
• Dynamic Shadows : High
• Dynamic Light :High
• Anti-Aliasing : 8x
• Texture Filtering : High

1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?
Yes. Gone from a stable FPS at around 70 or above on all maps, to frequently dropping to 20-30 FPS on many maps(old and new).


2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.
5 (Still playable, but looking at other versions, it could be a lot better)


3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.
Fallujah, Yamalia, Dragon Fly. Pretty much all new maps.


4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.
Often when looking at large open areas(problem with the overgrowth?). Also, on Fallujah my FPS dropped from 60 to 15 just by looking at the Bradley inside the US main base. However, on some map just looking towards the centre of the map lowers the FPS significantly, even if there's something in the way.


5. Name any maps that you have no performance issues with.
Most old maps. Iron Ridge is OK as well.

[Salraine_Chi]

System Specifications

* Operating System : Win XP 32bit
* CPU : Intel E8500 @ 3.00ghz.
* Graphics Card : 2 x 8800GT's in SLI.
* Amount of RAM : 4gig(yes 32 bit windows does not use it all....I know)
* Sound Card : X-Fi Fatality gamer Pro


BF2 Graphics Settings

* Resolution : 1680x1050@60Hz

* Terrain : High
* Effects : High
* Geometry : High
* Texture : High
* Lighting : High
* Dynamic : High
* Dynamic Light : High
* Anti-Aliasing : 4x
* Texture Filtering : Low

This setup/settings ran the previous version perfectly apart from a FPS drop inside the Fallujah US main.



1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?

Yes


2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.

4

3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.

Fallujah, lashkar, gaza (the worst).

4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.

Fallujah - Inside the city in most place and the bottom left of map near US main.
Lashkar - Near any buildings/dense tree areas.
Gaza - Looking North in most areas of map and worst in top right quarter of map.
I am also having frequent screen freezes ranging from 1 - 5 seconds, sound loops and stuttering as well as FPS drop in most maps which has never happened before 0.9.

5. Name any maps that you have no performance issues with.

Muttrah is playable but still has less FPS than previous version. Asad Khal is good in the open and frames drop near buildings.

[[R-MOD]Jigsaw]

System Specifications

• Operating System : Windows Vista 64
• CPU : Intel Q8400 Quad ~ 2.6GHz
• Graphics Card : Nvidia 9800GTX+ 512mb
• Amount of RAM : 4GB
• Sound Card : On board

BF2 Graphics Settings

• Resolution : 1600x900

• Terrain : High
• Effects : High
• Geometry : High
• Texture : Medium
• Lighting : High
• Dynamic Shadows : High
• Dynamic Light : High
• Anti-Aliasing : 8x
• Texture Filtering : High

1. Have you noticed a significant performance decrease from 0.87 -> 0.9?

No.

2. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate your performance in 0.9.

9

3. Name three or more maps in 0.9 which result in the worst performance.

Silent Eagle, Lashkar Valley and Iron Ridge.

4. From the maps mentioned above, state which specific areas/directions affect your performance the most.

For Lashkar I get a solid 40-60FPS except when looking towards the direct center of the map where it drops to 20.

For Silent Eagle I get only 20-30FPS in the center of the village and when firing a H-AT at a BMP-3 there I had so much lag the missile appeared to hit the vehicle and disappear. Otherwise is is fine.

Had a minor FPS drop on Iron Ridge when looking direct North from the South-Western corner of the map, otherwise no problems.

5. Name any maps that you have no performance issues with.

So far played Silent Eagle, Lashkar Valley, Qwai River, Dragonfly, Beirut and Iron Ridge and only experienced the above issues. Have also tried all other maps on local and experienced very few issues of note.

[Ulysses]

System Specifications

* Operating System : XP Pro SP2
* CPU : AMD Athlon64 X2 6000+ 3GHz
* Graphics Card : MSI ATI HD 3650
* Amount of RAM : 4GB DDR2 800
* Sound Card : onboard


BF2 Graphics Settings

* Resolution : 1280x1024
* Texture : Medium
* Anti-Aliasing : 2x
all else high




1. Yes. I couldn't load the first map i tried (Lashkar Valley) without CTD, sometimes with an error message about memory allocation failure, sometimes not. Set Textures to medium then which made it work better, but i still get CTDs sometimes.

In 0.87 i sometimes got CTDs in the late stages of loading one of the "heavier" maps. Now they sometimes happen right when a new map starts loading.

Didn't look at FPS in detail yet because i just wanted to play, but it seems to have gotten worse in certain situations like scoping in, using binocs etc..



2. If performance in 0.87 was 8 (some CTDs) then i'd say its at 5 now (more frequent CTDs, lower texture setting required, low FPS in some situations).


3./ 4./ 5. Didn't look into it in detail yet, have to play some more with FPS counter running.
Edit: i found a "hole in the sky" on Yamalia: Standing in the trenches in the northwest i saw a pitch black part of the sky when facing west/255-ish. it was a black slice, about 15 deg. wide, from zenith to the horizon. Told a squadmate and he saw it too.