Loading [MathJax]/extensions/Safe.js

Special Aircraft Service

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Performance comparison between versions  (Read 3397 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dimlee

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1406
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #12 on: December 15, 2023, 08:14:34 AM »

I was busy with the mission-making in BAT and UP recently and got a feeling that UP was more "FPS friendly". It was felt in the game and while playing track records with different speeds: BAT records began to stutter at x4-x8 while UP records ran smoothly at x32 and higher.
Saying that those were different missions on different maps between the versions. I did not make a proper experiment with the apple-to-apple comparison.

By the way, the map choice in BAT matters a lot, in JTW for sure. For example, the TAM_Donbass map was a real pain for me in terms of FPS and loading time. I had to change a/c skins back to default ones and delete many objects to make the mission playable. It was easier to work with other maps.

PC: i7-7700 @ 3.60GHz, RAM 16 GB, GTX 1060 3GB. All Il2 variants are on HDD.
Logged

WhiteSnake1976

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 218
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #13 on: December 15, 2023, 08:58:55 AM »

If you have an up-to-date version of Windows 10 or 11, there isn't much of a reason to have an antivirus outside of the default Windows Defender. Most of them do exactly the same things, and the ones that do extra are almost all paid.

Sorry, but i encounter so many systems from people who think that that are infected with malware, keylogers, viruses etc. i just can not disagrea more.

P0r# sites, some less legit software or game sites (where you can easly end up on looking for a solution for a not so common problem) and files someone else sends trough email, or being not to bright with scam mails and still opening the mails (you do not need to download a actual file to get infected, they can just packadge it in a image or any other thing you computer stores into its history.

And the worst ones are where someone buys add on a for example a online market place, and the gif images of the adds (wich wil be stored in your history) contain a malware/virus code.

This actualy happened (a trojan) on a Benelux Only Ebay market place, almost no antivirus detected it, only Bullguard and Norton, and with in a week or so the other could detect it also after a virus definition update, but by that time they migh have already stollen your passwords etc.


So if it is your Antivirus wich is eating up a lot of resources, just disable it wen gaming and see if it actualy causes the problem, if so, just temporary disable it wen gaming.
Logged

Froge

  • Pacman Frog
  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 367
  • How often should a pfp change?
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #14 on: December 15, 2023, 09:07:57 AM »

Same here, 4.1 runs like silk, 4.2.2 much heavier
So that means I should have another version but downgraded?
Logged
Mmmm myes pet froge (She/Her)

WhiteSnake1976

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 218
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #15 on: December 15, 2023, 09:16:13 AM »

What kind of specs does "Froge"'s PC have?
I have an I5-4670k & GTX970. Before, I played BAT 4.1.3 with a GTX660 with the same CPU. That might account to the performance difference though.
Which package are you using?

]cheers[
Mike
Mostly WAW & JTW.


In the past i dit see with some other older games that sometimes the newer cards (in my Nvidia days) or even the newer drivers also caused a performance drop.
I had it with Nvidia drivers (GTX 460 1TB card) and IL-2 back in the Battle-Fields.com days that newer drivers had a noticable performance impact on the game but some new games got better performance from the new drivers.

Same thing now, the AMD RX 7000 series do not like this game, and with older cards the 2019 drivers work best for this game. (12-2022 drivers and later really mess things up with AMD cards for this game, but if you got a RX 7000 card you can only use those and later)
Logged

WhiteSnake1976

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 218
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2023, 09:17:14 AM »

Same here, 4.1 runs like silk, 4.2.2 much heavier
So that means I should have another version but downgraded?

Get Ultra Pack  :D
Logged

Froge

  • Pacman Frog
  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 367
  • How often should a pfp change?
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #17 on: December 15, 2023, 10:56:15 AM »

Same here, 4.1 runs like silk, 4.2.2 much heavier
So that means I should have another version but downgraded?

Get Ultra Pack  :D
Bold to assume I don't have another version with UP3.4  :D
Logged
Mmmm myes pet froge (She/Her)

GOA_Topo

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #18 on: December 15, 2023, 04:26:46 PM »

With 4.1 it's enough for me to fly some DCG campaigns... I'll try the UP, I have the VP Modpack and it works very well too ;)
Logged

SAS~Storebror

  • Editor
  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24064
  • Taking a timeout
    • STFU
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2023, 12:28:05 AM »

I know it's fun to ignore simple questions that might lead to real conclusions, while instead plastering threads with red herrings, still...

Question stays: How's the TGA performance of BAT 4.2.2 HF 4 for those who report 4.2 related issues?

]cheers[
Mike
Logged
Don't split your mentality without thinking twice.

Froge

  • Pacman Frog
  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 367
  • How often should a pfp change?
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2023, 09:50:58 AM »

Excuse the late response, but TGA runs alright for me. The only time the FPS dropped was when something was loading in, but that happens in every module.
Logged
Mmmm myes pet froge (She/Her)

WhiteSnake1976

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 218
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #21 on: December 16, 2023, 10:49:32 AM »

Excuse the late response, but TGA runs alright for me. The only time the FPS dropped was when something was loading in, but that happens in every module.

Putting the game on a SSD could solve that.
Logged

Froge

  • Pacman Frog
  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 367
  • How often should a pfp change?
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2023, 11:44:36 AM »

Excuse the late response, but TGA runs alright for me. The only time the FPS dropped was when something was loading in, but that happens in every module.

Putting the game on a SSD could solve that.
Unfortunately, my PC right now doesn't support SSDs. But I'm due for an upgrade anyways.
Logged
Mmmm myes pet froge (She/Her)

Dimlee

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1406
Re: Performance comparison between versions
« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2023, 02:21:58 PM »

Probably, we can not find the right answer without testing the same mission on the same map with the same objects in TGA and WAW. Maybe I will have time for that next week.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.045 seconds with 19 queries.