FPS ,the Great FO4 Myth?

[mashup47]

52 minutes ago, Invictaxe said:

same, on an external hard drive I have a backup of my loose files which totaled 136 GB with 107,786 files

heh I just checked my current fallout 4 folder and it totaled 201 GB and 128,280 files

I think I need a major(MAJOR) clean up

 

however AA LMSE is bit different because I build the facegen and textures all of the faces but it is still slow

and I reconfigured the leveled NPC's to lists of 20 or so instead of the 200 it originally had.

Hmm looks like I got some catching up to do! My game improved so much when I put fallout onto a separate ssd. but you can only do so much cus it's the game engine at the end of day that needs improving as it is over 10years old or better yet they need to make a new one but that's an easy $100 million..

[Invictusblade]

34 minutes ago, mashup47 said:

Hmm looks like I got some catching up to do! My game improved so much when I put fallout onto a separate ssd. but you can only do so much cus it's the game engine at the end of day that needs improving as it is over 10years old or better yet they need to make a new one but that's an easy $100 million..

I agree, my system drive is a samsung m2 drive and my games drive is a samsung SSD.

so I noticed it is a lot faster on a SSD but I keep slowing it down with a heap of mods

my(and ours) problem with fallout 4 is the Mods and we do love our mods.

 

I often refer to fallout 4 as a spreadsheet game because I am often in FO4Edit playing around with something

 

I put it this way, I preordered the game in 2015 and finally finished the game in 2017 with god knows how many hours at the time. (and it is currently at 1102 hours)

[EgoBallistic]

Fallout 4 is very CPU bound (a more cynical person might say "poorly optimized").  As long as your video card meets a certain level (which a GTX745 definitely does not) your FPS is almost entirely dependent on CPU.  I recently upgraded from a I7-4930K @ 4.3ghz with a 1080ti to a i7-9700K @ 4.7ghz with a 2080  Super and the performance improvement was pretty surprising.  the 2080 Super isn't much faster than a 1080ti, but the CPU difference is significant, and the game shows it.  I never drop below 60FPS almost anywhere on the map now, whereas before it would drag down to 45 or so in some places like near Goodneighbor or going around the outside of Bunker Hill. 

[maddadicusrex]

1 hour ago, EgoBallistic said:

Fallout 4 is very CPU bound (a more cynical person might say "poorly optimized").  As long as your video card meets a certain level (which a GTX745 definitely does not) your FPS is almost entirely dependent on CPU.  I recently upgraded from a I7-4930K @ 4.3ghz with a 1080ti to a i7-9700K @ 4.7ghz with a 2080  Super and the performance improvement was pretty surprising.  the 2080 Super isn't much faster than a 1080ti, but the CPU difference is significant, and the game shows it.  I never drop below 60FPS almost anywhere on the map now, whereas before it would drag down to 45 or so in some places like near Goodneighbor or going around the outside of Bunker Hill. 

I know that you are a #1 Tech-head, but I am not. I play perfectly well at 16-20 FPS because I love my 2560x1440 resolution. Is my GTX745 limiting me to not getting better numbers? Are there any performance mods that you like that are out of box and do not require changing INI lines or other internal files? Thanks

[EgoBallistic]

39 minutes ago, maddadicusrex said:

I know that you are a #1 Tech-head, but I am not. I play perfectly well at 16-20 FPS because I love my 2560x1440 resolution. Is my GTX745 limiting me to not getting better numbers? Are there any performance mods that you like that are out of box and do not require changing INI lines or other internal files? Thanks

Yes, your GTX745 is definitely limiting you.  Offhand I think Boston FPS Fix and Insignificant Object Remover would help your FPS.  However, if you have mods that significantly change the landscape in Boston, Boston FPS Fix could cause visual glitches due to the precombined meshes not matching the modified landscape.  But if your exteriors are pretty vanilla I would give it a try.

 

I don't know what kind of computer you have so I can't say whether it would be able to handle a video card upgrade.  But replacing that 745 with a 1060 would give you an enormous boost in performance and wouldn't cost an arm and a leg.

[maddadicusrex]

18 minutes ago, EgoBallistic said:

Yes, your GTX745 is definitely limiting you.  Offhand I think Boston FPS Fix and Insignificant Object Remover would help your FPS.  However, if you have mods that significantly change the landscape in Boston, Boston FPS Fix could cause visual glitches due to the precombined meshes not matching the modified landscape.  But if your exteriors are pretty vanilla I would give it a try.

 

I don't know what kind of computer you have so I can't say whether it would be able to handle a video card upgrade.  But replacing that 745 with a 1060 would give you an enormous boost in performance and wouldn't cost an arm and a leg.

[maddadicusrex]

Just now, maddadicusrex said:

[phillout]

17 hours ago, arcatwelve said:

Your last two posts highlight exactly WHY I know you have no idea what you are talking about. The only thing a higher FPS does is make the picture and the details within more clear.

 

While in some games (like Bethesda titles, and Unreal engine titles) there are some engine components that are tied to the fps and thus some things get wonky in it input lag has NOTHING to do with your FPS and everything to do with WHY your FPS may be low.

 

 

That's some serious bullshit there.

 

I know I've downloaded a couple of ENB presets that locked my FPS at 30 and knew instantly something was wrong and the game was laggy. And it's while staying in QASmoke, where FPS always hits the limit. You're just talking out of your ass, just as any other from the "you can't notice FPS higher than 25" crowd.

 

 

 

[arcatwelve]

So not only are you full of it, you can't even read since I never said THAT at all.

 

The game being "laggy" (how did you get network latency in a single player game anyway, thats not even possible, must be some millenial that doesn't know what the term means) is NOT  function of FPS. While lower FPS might be a symptom of the same problem it is NOT what is causing your problem.

[phillout]

36 minutes ago, arcatwelve said:

So not only are you full of it, you can't even read since I never said THAT at all.

 

The game being "laggy" (how did you get network latency in a single player game anyway, thats not even possible, must be some millenial that doesn't know what the term means) is NOT  function of FPS. While lower FPS might be a symptom of the same problem it is NOT what is causing your problem.

 

Who was saying anything about network latency, are you a complete idiot? Network latency is just one of the cases with input latency, go do some reading at least before opening your mouth. The idea that no one can spot a lag 30ms and higher is completely idiotic, since measured human reactions time sometimes drops to 100 ms - meaning the time it takes to both notice the event and take an action. 

 

And lower FPS in case of frame-rate lock is not a sign of a problem. The game stays at 30 FPS because it's locked at 30 FPS.

[arcatwelve]

I see you still haven't actually read my posts. But you go ahead and just keep ranting. The FPs isn't your issue but hey you keep crying about it.

[phillout]

2 minutes ago, arcatwelve said:

I see you still haven't actually read my posts. But you go ahead and just keep ranting. The FPs isn't your issue but hey you keep crying about it.

I'm not crying about anything, my FPS is fine. It's just that some morons can't understand that everyone's perception is different. Some can hear the tones others can not. Some people have problems seeing some colors. Some people's perception of the motion is more precise than the average . It's that simple.

[EgoBallistic]

22 hours ago, arcatwelve said:

 

You can force Fallout 4 to run at 15 fps even if your hardware can handle it at 60 at your chosen resolution and still suffer no change in input rate. You only see input lag when you suffer FPS drops due to some other hardware issue, and stuttering and screentearing having nothing to do with your fps either.

Fallout 4 processes everything on a per-frame basis, so yes, FPS can definitely affect input rate and a host of other things if FPS is too low.  The script engine runs in a timeslice on every frame, and if it's only running 30 times a second instead of 60, events that take more than one frame to process will literally take twice as long.

 

22 hours ago, arcatwelve said:

The simple fact is that there is so little difference between 60fps and 30fps that most people can't see the difference, period. While the human eye stops seeing ANY difference in a moving picture at about 150fps (studies proved) and we "can" perceive things that flash at up to a rate of 1/1000th of a second (effectively 1000 fps) the FUNCTIONAL difference between disappears on the curve at around 40 frames per second. 

I can immediately tell when a game is 30 or 45 fps versus 60fps, and I suspect most other people can as well.  The higher the FPS, the smoother everything moves.  It's not about picture quality but about smoothness of motion.

[SilverPerv]

I've been playing this game on a 120hz monitor from the start.

I have limited the games maximum fps to 115 using Nvidia Inspector, because keeping it at 120 or above will somehow cause the game's speed to run faster then the audio, which causes lip-syncing issues and radio songs to cut out just before the song actually is supposed to end.

Before i knew these 2 issues where being caused by having my FPS capped to 120 or uncapped, i noticed a HUGE difference in responsiveness when walking through Sanctuary @120 fps compared to walking through downtown Boston @ 60-70 fps. (Even when i capped my FPS to 60 fps input lag was noticeably worse then at 120 fps)

 

Because of this i was not really happy with the performance in downtown Boston on my then brand new flagship GPU, i searched through most of the settings of Fo4, and found out that Shadow Distance (not quality) is by far the largest FPS drain. (Lowering FPS by 50% in downtown Boston all by itself)

God Rays are probably the 2nd largest FPS drain, and Ambient Occlusion is the third largest. (This can change depending on a system by system basis)

 

When i changed Shadow Distance in fallout4prefs.ini like i have below i noticed an immediate major boost in fps, without a noticeable decrease in visual quality.

The presets you get in the Fallout Launcher either sets it way to high or way to low for just about any system, which is why i recommend manually editing the ini.

fDirShadowDistance=5000.0000
fShadowDistance=5000.0000

These settings are for my system running at a resolution of 1080p@115fps. Adjust them according to your liking.

CPU: 7700k @4.5ghz

Ram: 16GB @3200mhz

GPU: GTX 1080

Quote

Bottom line is that my game does not stutter or crash and burn

Stuttering will be more pronounced and noticeable when your bottleneck is the CPU and not the GPU like in your case.

A GPU bottleneck will (usually) just lower your average FPS but still keep it somewhat steady, while a CPU bottleneck not only lowers your average fps but will cause the Frames Per Second to vary wildly. These major differences can cause noticeable stuttering, or in extreme cases where the game is waiting for CPU for a long time, can even cause the game to hang/pause for a couple of seconds until the CPU catches up. This is also where crashes due to low system specs are most likely, since not all applications can handle system timeouts that well.

Quote

My issue with G-Force is that it really downgrades my gaming experiance with recomended settings that underplay the specs of my computer

Are you talking about GeForce Experience?

Because if so, yeah its garbage. Try not to use it.

Settings in the Nvidia Control Panel under "Manage 3D settings" can be very important however.

These settings here can overwrite those defined in the Fallout4 ini files.

So make sure these are set to default (Green Restore Button), Since some ini settings might not work/change if Nvidia Control Panel is set to override it.

[bajs11]

On 11/30/2019 at 1:10 PM, EgoBallistic said:

Fallout 4 is very CPU bound (a more cynical person might say "poorly optimized").  As long as your video card meets a certain level (which a GTX745 definitely does not) your FPS is almost entirely dependent on CPU.  I recently upgraded from a I7-4930K @ 4.3ghz with a 1080ti to a i7-9700K @ 4.7ghz with a 2080  Super and the performance improvement was pretty surprising.  the 2080 Super isn't much faster than a 1080ti, but the CPU difference is significant, and the game shows it.  I never drop below 60FPS almost anywhere on the map now, whereas before it would drag down to 45 or so in some places like near Goodneighbor or going around the outside of Bunker Hill. 

as long as he has a Haswell or newer 4c8t cpu he should be fine

It's mainly his crappy GPU. Even the 750Ti is considered bad for demanding tripleA titles 4yrs ago

 

You should try running games at 4K and compare your Ivy Bridge i7 with the 9700K

[EgoBallistic]

20 hours ago, bajs11 said:

It's mainly his crappy GPU. Even the 750Ti is considered bad for demanding tripleA titles 4yrs ago

Like I said, as long as your video card meets a certain level (which a GTX745 definitely does not) your FPS is almost entirely dependent on CPU.

 

20 hours ago, bajs11 said:

You should try running games at 4K and compare your Ivy Bridge i7 with the 9700K

The results would depend on whether 4K is enough to make the 1080ti and 2080 Super the performance bottleneck again.  I have a 4K TV but I play Fallout on a 2560x1080 monitor so for me the video cards aren't even breaking a sweat.
 

Anyway that chart is interesting.  They only tested in Diamond City, but it still makes the point that the CPU pretty much determines FPS once you eliminate the video card as a bottleneck (they used a 980ti for those tests since it was 2015).

[maddadicusrex]

I started this mess of a thread but I really have learned alot.  That there are limits to my GTX745. I have also learned that FPS cannot be so cut and dry as to how well a game functions. I have learned that I can run with 2560 x 1440 resolution, have great graphics and play my game without hiccups at a fairly steady 15 FPS with no stutters, tearing, or CTDs anywhere. And no matter how many Performance mods or tweaks I use (running 5 now), the FPS remains the same. So I will take what I have and be satisfied and to those running 60 or more FPS, good for you..

[bajs11]

5 hours ago, EgoBallistic said:

Like I said, as long as your video card meets a certain level (which a GTX745 definitely does not) your FPS is almost entirely dependent on CPU.

 

The results would depend on whether 4K is enough to make the 1080ti and 2080 Super the performance bottleneck again.  I have a 4K TV but I play Fallout on a 2560x1080 monitor so for me the video cards aren't even breaking a sweat.
 

Anyway that chart is interesting.  They only tested in Diamond City, but it still makes the point that the CPU pretty much determines FPS once you eliminate the video card as a bottleneck (they used a 980ti for those tests since it was 2015).

my point is at higher resolutions like 4K or in most cases even at 1440p

it's usually the GPU that is the bottleneck as long as you have a fairly recent cpu like the i7 4790

Even a very demanding game like Shadow of the Tomb Raider only really require a 4c/8t cpu at 1440p

if you want your gpu to work more then you just need to install some 4K/8K textures

 

 

[EgoBallistic]

44 minutes ago, bajs11 said:

my point is at higher resolutions like 4K or in most cases even at 1440p

it's usually the GPU that is the bottleneck as long as you have a fairly recent cpu like the i7 4790

Yes, it it trivially obvious that if you raise the resolution such that the GPU becomes the bottleneck, the CPU will no longer be the bottleneck.  However, that is not what this thread is about.

 

My point is that Fallout 4 actually has very low GPU requirements, and that even with a high end video card like a 1080ti, you still need a high end CPU in order to achieve consistent 60fps at 1080p.  This is because the engine relies on the CPU for things like shadows, which is simply poor optimization.

 

There are many games with more advanced graphics that will run at much higher framerates, at the same resolution, without putting significant load on the CPU.

[SilverPerv]

7 minutes ago, EgoBallistic said:

This is because the engine relies on the CPU for things like shadows

Aside from lettings the CPU handle it, what makes it worse it that the game seems to handle shadows really bad anyway.

From what i have read, the game even renders/loads in shadows that are out of sight of the player (Like behind a building).

And because boston has lots of high buildings/overpasses that are casting lots of large shadows, the game fps really suffers.

 

Hence why i put shadow distance on 5000 in the ini file.

[EgoBallistic]

3 minutes ago, SilverPerv said:

Hence why i put shadow distance on 5000 in the ini file.

The parameter that has the most impact is fDirShadowDistance.  I have mine at 7000.  Anything above the 5000-7000 range is useless because, as you point out, most of the shadows it creates won't be visible anyway.

[SilverPerv]

23 minutes ago, EgoBallistic said:

The parameter that has the most impact is fDirShadowDistance.  I have mine at 7000.  Anything above the 5000-7000 range is useless because, as you point out, most of the shadows it creates won't be visible anyway.

Yeah it gave me massive frame rate improvement, especially downtown boston.

But do you happen to know the difference between fShadowDistance and fDirShadowDistance?

Is one for inside and the other outside shadows? I am having difficulty finding out.

[bajs11]

1 hour ago, EgoBallistic said:

Yes, it it trivially obvious that if you raise the resolution such that the GPU becomes the bottleneck, the CPU will no longer be the bottleneck.  However, that is not what this thread is about.

 

My point is that Fallout 4 actually has very low GPU requirements, and that even with a high end video card like a 1080ti, you still need a high end CPU in order to achieve consistent 60fps at 1080p.  This is because the engine relies on the CPU for things like shadows, which is simply poor optimization.

 

There are many games with more advanced graphics that will run at much higher framerates, at the same resolution, without putting significant load on the CPU.

if you put it that way

the author said that he is getting low fps playing this game with a i7 4790 non K and a gtx 745

so which do you think is giving those 30fps?

 

I can tell you that my current pc is i7 4790K and Asus gtx 1080 Strix and i get close to 60fps at 1440p with about 390 mods

Also if you have a gtx 1080Ti or 2080Super you should be gaming at at least 1440p unless you are really into esport games

 

please dont tell this poor guy to get a i9 9900K because he will still get 30fps with that crappy gtx 745

[EgoBallistic]

40 minutes ago, SilverPerv said:

Yeah it gave me massive frame rate improvement, especially downtown boston.

But do you happen to know the difference between fShadowDistance and fDirShadowDistance?

Is one for inside and the other outside shadows? I am having difficulty finding out.

fDirShadowDistance controls the shadows that are dynamically cast by objects, which is why it has so much impact on performance.  fShadowDistance controls decorative fake shadows, things like whether windows on big buildings appear dark or are just sort of building-colored.

[EgoBallistic]

12 minutes ago, bajs11 said:

please dont tell this poor guy to get a i9 9900K because he will still get 30fps with that crappy gtx 745

At the risk of repeating myself yet again: as long as your video card meets a certain level (which a GTX745 definitely does not) your FPS is almost entirely dependent on CPU.