beautifulNihilist, on 08 January 2015 - 07:22 AM, said:
Is there any way to improve FPS/performance?
Battlefield 4 gets consistently higher FPS on my machine.
I can't for the life of me figure out why a Quake3 mod gets lower FPS than everything else.
It gets the same low FPS at 640x480, at 2560x1440, and even DSR-cranked to 5120x2880. The same performance.
...why?
Same thing here, I can get most modern games to play (insanely) smoother than UrT. Thing has gotten progressively worse since 4.2 was introduced, now I barely ever get more than 60fps when shooting someone, which is a huge discouragement from playing, as things become more a matter of luck and cursor pre-placement than skill.
Frankie V, on 08 January 2015 - 10:21 AM, said:
Idtech3 uses a 15 year old openGL wrapper and more or less zero hardware rendering. Still very much CPU bound and higher frams rates is more about CPU scaling than improvements in video card tech.
Fstech1 used “some†hardware rendering released in 2004 and GrandHall caped out at 500k and was still able to achieve better than 125 fps.
More or less a high end card is a waste due to CPU being the bottle neck.
It still uses glBegin() and glEnd() functions, from the fixed pipeline 1.x OpenGL. Which is pretty much the most primitive/slow form of rendering on OGL.
At least the bumpy client used VBOs, thus not getting all those glitches and stutters when someone gets inside the frustum and needs to be fetched and rendered that the "old" renderer suffers. Talking of which, at least alleviated some performance issues, even if not all of them.
KarlMariaSeeberg, on 09 January 2015 - 01:00 AM, said:
oh i get that but that's not what i am talking about, the game is not slower the whole time but the dragging effect is something that turns up from time to time...
it's the same feeling like fps drops
e.g. i was annoyed how the game felt on uptown, when i was walking at sky and looking over to garden (street) .. i blamed it on the fps drops i had when i tried to run urt at 125..
so i thought i'd settle for 60 fps and i have 60 fps stable now at that specfic spot on uptown but the game still feels the same slowed down way it did before..
so the feeling is not caused by my graphics card performance but by something else.. it does not make any difference how low my settings are, i have changed them a lot but there never has been any significant change...
That dragging effect is either adding new models to the scene or increasing the number of draw calls. In any event, on a FPS, getting lower FPS when action is going on should be a no-no. More reason to use VAO or VBO rendering/offloading stuff to the GPU, even though for some of those techniques to really shine, maps would need to be redone.
beautifulNihilist, on 09 January 2015 - 02:03 AM, said:
I don't get any drag I just get 125FPS when a server is empty, but 60, sometimes as low as 45; when people are there.
Battlefield 4 has projectiles, dynamic explosions, vehicles... SO much more going on, and not a dip in FPS.
It's also not just a single machine doing this. I have yet to try a computer that does not drop FPS in Urban Terror since 4.2.8 (or so) once players are on the field.
Many computers, high and low end.
I can't be the only one.
I have experienced a drag kind of feeling on some machines, where it says 60+fps but plays like 20. This is far less common, and I haven't found this in a while, at least with any of my machines.
This seems like what Frankie posted earlier about micro-stuttering.
4.1 ALSO has a dip in FPS, but only from 125 to 80 or so, and only on 30+ player servers.
Battlefield4 is orders of magnitude more complex than UrT, but it is heavily optimized for current-generation hardware, whereas UrT/Q3 wasn't extremely optimized on release date - and it sure as hell is not targeted at current architectures.
There are reasons why as FS adds features to the game, it becomes slightly slower, as well as reasons why it should work faster than it currently does if some work was done on it.
However, I guess it's not much on FS's interests to improve the renderer or the game logic, working on a new version on a new engine, even though I am sure it would be worth it for someone willing to learn.
I do agree with you though that the performance of UrT is rather sketchy as it stands.
KroniK, on 14 March 2015 - 10:47 PM, said:
Is there any reason why you guys cant include the bumpy renderer into the 4.3 build? I know that r00t and mitsubishi made that build of the client which enables the bumpy renderer. I have always hoped that it would be compiled into the default client because it takes maps to the next level to be able to use bump maps and the awesome water shaders for the more realistic water.
Anyway, Thats about the only thing I was hoping for in 4.3
TwentySeven made the bumpy renderer.
And yes, it was an interesting experiment.
sn4ke, on 16 March 2015 - 07:42 PM, said:
Indeed. Actually, why that build doesn't come as default? It really improves the game, I guess everyone should have it :D
Markinho, on 17 March 2015 - 10:26 AM, said:
Except it doesn't work for everyone, gave me tons of problems on my old computer
Mr.Yeah, on 17 March 2015 - 01:05 PM, said:
This.
The new shaders messed up bad with my system and UrT just wouldn't start anymore.
It's as easy as putting a switch and letting the player alternate between renderers.
Or writing the shaders in an older GLSL version, so they are compatible with older cards.
Or ship the game with two different executables. After all, if the renderer is not touched, the only modified files on updates will be peripheral and won't really change the rendering part. It's double work to maintain, but I guess it's well worth it and hell of a lot easier to do than adding a cvar to switch rendering modes, which would be the most comfortable way for users.
KroniK 
FS chief admin
Advertisement
We can only hope #CantWaitNoLonger 
QA member
MultiQuote
