BL2 fixed congig for amd/ati

[zanzabar]

this is a fixed and optimized cofig for use with amd cards, this may not work with DX11 (i am still on 10.1) but it makes the game play much smoother. now to find a way to make physX multithreaded in the config
bl2 AMD FIX.zip

it will also work for NV if you change the line that says check for ati to false and enable NV optimization to true.

[EniGmA1987]

I see this in the config:

[MemoryBudgets]
AnimationMB=15
AudioMB=10
CodeMB=30
LevelObjectsMB=4
TerrainMB=4
GameDataMB=3
MaterialMB=1
ParticleMB=5
PhysicsMB=10
ScaleformMB=8
ShadersMB=10
SkelMeshMB=2
StaticMeshMB=10
TextureMB=120

Looks like it adds up to around 256mb or so from a quick look. So I am guessing this means it is configured to use 256MB of RAM? Or is this for vram? Either way, I wonder if this can be increased to get better performance and/or visuals.




And the same with these under Wwise (supposed to be audio?):

IOMemoryPoolSizeMB=2.56
DefaultPoolSizeMB=6.0
DefaultPoolSizeMB_x64=8
DefaultPoolSizeMB_Uncooked=8
DefaultPoolSizeMB_Uncooked_x64=16
LowerEngineDefaultPoolSizeMB=7
LowerEngineDefaultPoolRatioThreshold=.9
MaxMemoryPools=128







EDIT: I doubled all memory values in the memory budgets and the game plays perfectly fine for me in a short test. Visually I dont notice a difference from running around for just a min, and performance seems the same too.

[zanzabar]

i had only changed the same settings that i do in all UT games, smooth frames, shader on demand, disable NV optimization, enable amd, thread compiling to 4 from 1 and other basic UT3 stuff. i am sure that there is alot that can be changed still. what i posed makes the game run like butter and stop stalling at 33fps and then jumping up randomly, now it is a solid 55-70 depending on the zone.


i am also getting about 600MB of peak vram use so i could defiant be modded to take more, i would do the cashe load personally but i will look at it latter. the budget is normally the reserve size per asset.

[EniGmA1987]

I made some of my own configs, one for AMD and one for Nvidia if anyone is interested. I mostly just increased the cache sizes everywhere I saw listed in the config, changed the AMD/Nvidia specific optimizations, enabled/disabled PhysX, lowered tessellation for AMD, and made some changes to shadows and particle LOD. I left PhysX disabled in the AMD config because people who dont have a good quad core might run into performance problems

AMD:
http://www.mediafire.com/?g9wxwwwpk6kzgob

Nvidia:
http://www.mediafire.com/?v74cw03btvaogik

[zanzabar]

did you find a way to make physX multithreaded, if not physX wont work well on any cpu.

[EniGmA1987]

No I did not, but it runs well enough on my computer. Yes it does lower FPS, but not enough to cause lag. I think the only way to enable multi-threaded PhysX on the CPU would be to replace the PhysX libraries the game pulls from. A simple ini edit wont be able to do it.

[zanzabar]

changing PhysXMeshCacheSize=8 to 16 really helped the cpu physX, it is not more threaded though.

[wez]

I found this to be somewhat amusing


http://www.techspot.com/review/577-b...nce/page5.html


Haven't played it myself yet, looking to have a small coop lan this weekend and didn't want to spoil anything before that.

[EniGmA1987]

changing PhysXMeshCacheSize=8 to 16 really helped the cpu physX, it is not more threaded though.

It is already like that in my configs.





Interesting about that picture though, that GTX680 ets less FPS when using PhysX on high than a 7970 does when using the same but on the CPU instead. They are using a 12-thead processor in that though so Im sure it has ample resources to put towards PhysX and normal game processing.

[wez]

It is already like that in my configs.





Interesting about that picture though, that GTX680 ets less FPS when using PhysX on high than a 7970 does when using the same but on the CPU instead. They are using a 12-thead processor in that though so Im sure it has ample resources to put towards PhysX and normal game processing.

Yea its a pricey CPU... But the majority of those threads will not be utilized anyway it seems, as mentioned earlier in here. On any decent i5/i7 I bet the results would follow the same pattern. Shame they only included none/high on the AMD card.

[zanzabar]

Yea its a pricey CPU... But the majority of those threads will not be utilized anyway it seems, as mentioned earlier in here. On any decent i5/i7 I bet the results would follow the same pattern. Shame they only included none/high on the AMD card.

i cannot see the difference from high and mid on my card, i am not sure that setting it to 2 on the config changes anything with amd cards.

[Chickenfeed]

The main difference from medium to high are the SPH fluids which include blood, slag, chemical and molten pools as well as water. There are more particles and they apply self shadowing. Cloth is also more dynamic and reacts to more things. I'm actually running medium as the game needs further optimizations for high to play nice. Gpu usage is also very inconsistent. Nvidia has said gearbox are working to improve performance in general with a future patch.

As it stands the game is more cpu bottlenecked than anything else and a 3960 outpaced a 3770 by a healthy margin.

[zanzabar]

if the 3960 beats out the 3770 there is some voodoo going on as it only loads 3 cores on my 1090t. for the inconsistencies in gpu usage, i do not get that since i disabled smooth frames in the config and changed the desired frame rates. doing one or the other is not good enough you have to change both.

[Chickenfeed]

The in game options allow you to disable framerate smoothing. There's the 22 - 60 smoothed setting (standard UT3 and default) and then 60, 120 caps and unlimited. I've compated them all as well as playing with the various cvars in the inis and there was no benifit on my system. Gearbox have admited the game needs some futher optimization and Nvidia and AMD obviously will keep an eye on it as well.

As far as using only 3 threads not sure there, it could be the 3960s better cache doing some magic there. It showed even a 4.5 8150 struggling to keep up with the Intel stuff so the game clearly seems to like their hardware for one reason or another. Even Nvidia had used a 3960 for their tweakguide's baseline system even though that was with a 660ti. They clearly did that for a reason as they haven't in the past.

[zanzabar]

the 1090t is quicker than the fx, but i only run 4.1ghz. the usable cashe on the 3960 is less than the 3770 though and much slower so i am really not sure what is going on. i could understand if it used 6-12 threads that it would better but it is not.