Any Performance Patch update coming for AMD CPU's?

[Gunuko]

This is silly, I just got an AMD Fx-8350 (8 core 4.0ghz). It still lags, and yet it's as good as i5's in other games.

ScoreP4671 with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti(1x) and AMD FX-8350

Graphics Score
4409

Physics Score
7069

Combined Score
4396


Every other game I play, there's no lag, except this one. :(

[AThreatToYou]

1.
Reduce the size of your signature.
2.
Probably in January.
3.
Quit complaining, I doubt you get any less than 30 frames, and wait. Oh, actually you weren't complaining, just asking. Sorry. I'd just like to let you know that my Phenom II X4 plays the game at a very stable FPS, but it isn't 60.
4.
Overclocking your rig to at least 3.5 GHz would go a long way for performance.

[Gunuko]

1.
Reduce the size of your signature.
2.
Probably in January.
3.
Quit complaining, I doubt you get any less than 30 frames, and wait. Oh, actually you weren't complaining, just asking. Sorry. I'd just like to let you know that my Phenom II X4 plays the game at a very stable FPS, but it isn't 60.
4.
Overclocking your rig to at least 3.5 GHz would go a long way for performance.

Can you tell me what your setup is like (settings/bios) for your system. I'm getting massive lag even on low settings with 8 core cpu, this is silly.

[AThreatToYou]

Can you tell me what your setup is like (settings/bios) for your system. I'm getting massive lag even on low settings with 8 core cpu, this is silly.

Firstly, so long as you have an adequate video card, your video settings should not matter. About the only thing you should have on low is shadows. Turn off ambient occlusion, shaders, fancy things like that.

The issue with PS2 is solely your processor, and your video settings, for the most part, should not effect that.
Secondly, there was one point during the beta where PlanetSide 2 could use 8 cores, but I don't think it does anymore. I can't be too sure as my processor only has four cores.
A Phenom II X4 is also much different from a FX-series processor. Someone should have forewarned you that the FX series of AMD processors are most definitely not a good choice for gaming, especially PlanetSide 2.
If you have any other audio applications open while playing PlanetSide 2, such as Steam voice, teamspeak, winamp, or Skype, close them before playing. I believe disabling in-game VOIP will also improve performance.
Lowering the in-game audio channels (voice channels) to a number like 64 or 128 should also improve your performance greatly.
As far as my settings go, I've changed so much over the years I'm not sure what all is important anymore. I just did a clean wipe of my drivers today, and then updated to the latest version, and the game runs just as well as it did before. Like I said, your video shouldn't matter for PlanetSide 2.

system:
Windows 7 64bit
8 GB of DDR3 RAM (fastest available for this motherboard, 1866 i believe, but it's not running at that speed!)
3.53 GHz AMD Phenom II X4 970 BE
EVGA GTX 460
runs on average 30-40 FPS


(i have a number of services disabled and have trimmed my boot, all through msconfig. I'm sure many readers would call me a computer n00b for it, but if you don't need it, don't run it. run --> msconfig.exe)

[Miffy]

Not any time soon, the game isn't multithreaded which AMD CPUs really need because their single core performance sucks.

Sadly in 2012 SOE make a Direct x9, 32bit non multi threaded game..........

Like we're in 2005 or something.

[AThreatToYou]

Not any time soon, the game isn't multithreaded which AMD CPUs really need because their single core performance sucks.

Sadly in 2012 SOE make a Direct x9, 32bit non multi threaded game..........

Like we're in 2005 or something.

yeah that is kind of stupid.

[xXArsisXx]

Google CPU Unparker.
It upped my FPS by 30.

E:
Basically unless a program tells your CPU to activate all cores, they will be in the "Parked" status as to save power.
This program forces them all to the on position, thus spreading the load over all 4 cores.

[kingjameo]

they will be in the "Parked" status as to save power.http://www.wengmj.com/a128.jpg

[Gunuko]

Could Windows 8 64 bit be the issue? I recently upgrade to Windows 8 Pro 64 Bit from Windows 7 64 bit. Could that be the issue?

[Tatwi]

Due to the design of the new AMD processors, for every two "cores" there is only one floating point unit. AMD calls these pairs of "cores" that share an FPU (and other resources), a "module". So for floating point heavy applications, your Octo-core CPU is actually a Quad-core CPU, which would be just fine if Windows knew how to use them properly. Sadly, Windows will send data to the first available "core", which works fine for Intel CPUs, because every Intel "core" has a FPU. For the new AMD CPUs this is problematic, because what is considered a "core" by Windows is physically an Integer Processing Unit on the AMD CPU. Pretty stupid scheduling for AMD Bulldozer/Piledriver cores, but that's Microsoft.

As an example, if the Core 0 is working on FPU data then Core 1's FPU is already occupied, because they are the same physical part. Unfortunately, rather than sending FPU data the perhaps unused Core 2, Windows sends it to Core 1 where it then has to wait for Core 0 to complete its FPU work. Some call this a limitation to the AMD CPUs, but realistically, Windows could make smarter use of the available resources and avoid the bottleneck completely for most programs.

I read that one way to get around this issue on an Octo-core CPU is to disable one "core" per module, effectively making it a quad-core CPU with one IPU and one FPU per "core". This way Windows will always schedule tasks to hardware that is actually available, be it floating point activities or integer activities. Games are heavy on float, while media encoding is heavy on int, so some cases it would be better to limit your CPU to 4 cores (one per module - very important distinction here!) and in others it would be way better to use it as a full 8 core CPU.

Off go ye to Google.

[Mayhemon]

Ugh... no, please stop, the "dumb scheduler" was patched a year ago.
"Parked status" is only a Windows 7 thing and was also patched.
Forgelight is MULTI threaded and large address aware 32-bit application, same as Frostbite 2, Unreal 4, and Crysis 3 engines.
There is a large, VERY LARGE, optimization and bug fix patch coming in January according to Smedley's tweets.

Before AMD's Bulldozer architecture was even made public, our editor-in-chief was in Austin, TX asking AMD's engineers how Microsoft's Windows 7 would react to this module concept, which clearly needed smart scheduling in order to utilize on-die resources in the most effective way possible. After all, it'd be fairly easy for a "dumb" scheduler to have two threads run on one module, tying up shared resources as other modules say idle. AMD didn't have a good answer at the time, replying only that it was working with Microsoft to address the software side of its hardware dilemma. And at launch, we still had no solution.

Not long after, though, Microsoft introduced a pair of patches that, first, properly recognized Bulldozer-based FX and Opteron CPUs, spreading one thread to each module before back-filling a second thread to already-utilized modules. The second patch selectively disabled Core Parking in Windows 7 and Server 2008 R2, keeping the modules from entering a C6 sleep state.

Windows 7 patches 11 months ago, benchmark results (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-7-hotfix-bulldozer-performance,3119.html)

Windows 8 performance on Bulldozer (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-bulldozer-performance,3289.html)

Go to your useroptions.ini file and find "Renderdistance", lower it to 2000, see if it makes a difference after a few hours of play. If not, return it to it's old value. This setting seems to affect CPU performance the most.

[dotcom]

The game is unoptimize and has many more months down the road before it is goin to run well on systems. We were in beta for "MONTHS" and I still get 25-30 fps on LOW settings.

System Specs:
i7-950 stock clock
2 GTX 580 SLI mode
6 gigs of ram.

Learn to deal with if you can. This is the main reason what draws me away from the game besides had a hard time getting into it during beta. Cheers!

[Mriswith]

The game is unoptimize and has many more months down the road before it is goin to run well on systems. We were in beta for "MONTHS" and I still get 25-30 fps on LOW settings.

System Specs:
i7-950 stock clock
2 GTX 580 SLI mode
6 gigs of ram.

Learn to deal with if you can. This is the main reason what draws me away from the game besides had a hard time getting into it during beta. Cheers!
I've got an i7 2600k @ 4.2 and a single GTX 580 and 16 gigs of ram and I'm stable on 60-70 fps in combat (and this with everything except graphic quality on medium with graphic quality being high). (drops to 40-50 in very very big battles with 200 playersish)
I don't really see how you don't get more out of that setup since only the cpu speed is the major difference (and I've got turbo turned off, and I would've thought double gtx 580 cards would at least make up for that)

[dotcom]

I've got an i7 2600k @ 4.2 and a single GTX 580 and 16 gigs of ram and I'm stable on 60-70 fps in combat (and this with everything except graphic quality on medium with graphic quality being high). (drops to 40-50 in very very big battles with 200 playersish)
I don't really see how you don't get more out of that setup since only the cpu speed is the major difference (and I've got turbo turned off, and I would've thought double gtx 580 cards with at least make up for that)

Bingo! Shows you that the game is unoptimize!

[AThreatToYou]

The game is unoptimize and has many more months down the road before it is goin to run well on systems. We were in beta for "MONTHS" and I still get 25-30 fps on LOW settings.

System Specs:
i7-950 stock clock
2 GTX 580 SLI mode
6 gigs of ram.

Learn to deal with if you can. This is the main reason what draws me away from the game besides had a hard time getting into it during beta. Cheers!

Turn your settings back up. It won't hurt anything.
I don't understand how I can have inferior hardware than you, and get superior performance on high settings.

[Hamma]

Haven't heard any mention of AMD optimizations.

But I'm sure there is something coming.

[EVILoHOMER]

Haven't heard any mention of AMD optimizations.

But I'm sure there is something coming.

It'll never be good.

AMD single core performance is poor, Intels is much better and you see the impact of that in games as most games aren't multithreaded. As soon as you run multithreaded programs you see the gap between Intel and AMD balance and in a lot of cases AMDs 8 core CPUs out perform intels Quad cores which are more expensive. So using like archiving, encoding or stuff like photoshop or whatever, AMDS CPUs always do well... just games seem to be in the dark ages. I can only think of BF3, Crysis and Civ 5 that are multithreaded.

I have an I7 970 the 6 core version and the game uses 90% of 1 core, barely anything of the rest which one sits at 40% and the other 4 at nothing, HT isn't even touched........

Yet the game tells me my CPU is the bottleneck, if I play BF3 all cores are at like 80% lol.


SOE will never fix the issue, they never have done in any of their past games.

[foobar]

seems something is in the pipeline (in reverse order)

http://techreport.com/news/24136/driver-software-to-be-tweaked-to-reduce-radeon-frame-latencies-in-series-of-updates

http://techreport.com/review/24051/geforce-versus-radeon-captured-on-high-speed-video

http://techreport.com/review/24022/does-the-radeon-hd-7950-stumble-in-windows-8

http://techreport.com/review/23981/radeon-hd-7950-vs-geforce-gtx-660-ti-revisited

Start at the bottom and work up if you're that interested !

Rgds

f00