Graphics Card Issue?

[gptech]

Very true Peter, as much a case of the technology working back down the line as moving forwards, I shall look forward to hearing (reading?) the results of the 960/Gsync combination.

[antonyperks]

I must say i have never had graphics issues even om some of the busier routes and my system is a junior compared to some of the posters on here ! I run all settings on max, just with head light flare and bloom switched out.

[aussiebob]

Thanks to all who offered me advice for a new GC.
From my previous post I'm not a person who gets involved with PC's much only just having learnt to turn it on and off after 10 years [LOL]
I have learnt a lot from this forum and it's good to see that very little flaming of others occurs after all we are all here for our love of railways.
Many thanks again.

Regards to all,
Bob.

[ttjph]

st.co.uk/view/Fsx-1500-pc/
CPU Scores are here
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
GPU Scores are here
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
HardDrive Scores are here
http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/high_end_drives.html
and Memory Scores are here
http://www.memorybenchmark.net/latency_ddr3_intel.html

Can I just make a small correction?

CPU scores are here:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
Two fast cores will beat eight slow ones for TS (RW) purposes.

[gptech]

I must say i have never had graphics issues even om some of the busier routes and my system is a junior compared to some of the posters on here ! I run all settings on max, just with head light flare and bloom switched out.

Yes, you may have a 'junior' system but it's one where the components are balanced---not matched as it is often (erroneously) perceived as meaning.
Those of us who talk about balanced systems do so rather glibly, and don't fully explain that what we mean is "a system that has components balanced to complement other components' capabilities, in order to accomplish the task at hand"
Accordingly, Bob's initial configuration of an i7 utilising the integrated graphics was perfectly balanced to crunch numbers in spreadsheets all day long; adding a 730 GPU made it perfectly balanced to do just that again, but with the bonus of being able to cope with gaming that isn't too demanding. Unfortunately still just a wee bit shy of the mark for TS.
A balanced system has hardware components that don't sit around waiting for other components to finish a task before they can continue with theirs, which is why a 730 GPU falls sort when playing TS--the CPU has to wait for the GPU to finish the post processing of frames before it can send the next bunch of frames; in other words 'wait states' have been introduced. Admittedly a fair proportion of that is also attributable to the game's idiosyncrasies/quirks/faults but just as an SSD improves things by eliminating those wait states, having a system 'balanced' works in the same way.

Sorry if that reads like a sermon or a rant, but so often 'balanced' has been taken as meaning something else entirely, and the whole point is missed.

[ttjph]

Indeed, I think the term 'balanced' can be a bit misleading.

Unless I'm missing something, having one component which is much more capable than the others won't actually harm performance (which could be an interpretation) - it's just that it's then not being used to its full potential, so arguably money spent there would have been better spent somewhere else.

(One exception is possibly RAM vs CPU - if the installed RAM isn't of a speed which is close to the highest the CPU can use, then it could be viewed as slowing the CPU down.)

I prefer to think of 'limiting factors' or 'weak links', with the approach of eliminating each one as it's identified - although when it comes to spending money to do this, 'balance' may be a good approach to not spending more than necessary (but "buy cheaply, buy twice" may also apply!).

[gptech]

but "buy cheaply, buy twice" may also apply

possibly evidenced by Bob's problem here, having paid for a 730 fitting, only to find t's not really up to the task and now needing to spend again.

having one component which is much more capable than the others won't actually harm performance

as long as you expect performance related to the weakest component; a red hot CPU in an otherwise 'slower' system won't do any harm, but won't magically lift the other components to that level so as you outlined, the money spent on said CPU could have been better used elsewhere. Of course if such an upgrade was part of a phased process to bring the machine up a level or two, but spread out to make it affordable then it's a perfectly valid strategy.

[DocklandsProject]

I don't know about you lot but I'm curious to hear a happy ending to this thread Did you buy another card Bob? Threads like these are always interesting for others in similar situations.

Being a tight wad I always duck when I have to get my wallet out. Upgraded to a Radeon HD7750 which was about £65 on Amazon. Pleased to say TS2015 now runs without any judders or pauses whatsoever. Really pleased with it so there's my personal recommendation for the day. Happy train simming all

[deltic009]

was only a 270 gtx

Don't let the seemingly low number fool you; the important digits are the last two, the first just being for the revision or family.
Roughly speaking, x10 and x20 are fine for watching videos
x30 is OK for light, not too demanding games
x40 at a pinch, but without most advanced quality settings in games
x50 is where you start to have a bit of breathing space when gaming
x60, x 70 allows you to be pretty smug
and x80 and x90 is just showing off!

A 770, being 5 revisions or family levels above a 270 will bring hardware based improvements, but these usually take 2 or 3 revisions to be notable: a 550 is only marginally behind a 650 in other words, certainly not enough to make you think about upgrading.

The 750 does make that last bit *wrong* though, that particular leap forward has brought significant benefits over the 650, particularly with the Ti chip.

Gary, I'm getting mad Deja vu here when I make this post, as I seem to recall doing so previously and you wanting to borrow it LOL

Think of the Nvidia graphics cards like the BMW car series.

You have a model number at the beginning digit, and the next 2 for the engine size, just like power in a GPU.

Example, a BMW 1-series with a 5 litre engine would be 150
A BMW 5-series with a 1.8 litre engine would be 518 - the one series would be an undeniably more powerful car.

Don't get drawn in too far by the first digit of an Nvidia card, for the last 2 digits denote the relative oomph put out by the card.

[gptech]

That's a brilliant analogy Matthew.

[aussiebob]

Hi, I'm back,
In reply to the GC issue, I was going to have installed a nvidea GTX 750ti Card, but have decided to save for a bit longer and purchase a 760 card in a few weeks.
Yes I hope it is a happy ending.
Bob.

[peterfhayes]

Bob
The FTX 750TI is a later card than the 760 being part of the newer Maxwell series, a GTX 960 (Maxwell) would be a better buy and that comes with 2GB or 4GB VRAM.

Gary
The GTX 960 4GB works very well with the AOC 144 Hz VSync monitor. It will run on high AA settings in TS2015 at stable smooth frame rates but still doesn't get rid of the shimmer in OHW and Moire on the points in certain routes (with Dynamic Lighting on in TS2015).
I can't see any noticeable difference between this and my GTX 970 performance or visual quality wise wrt TS2015 both do the job OK.

pH

[aussiebob]

I'm back from the track with a new Graphics card a n'videa gtx 960 but with still the same problem with a few Routes still only loading and running on low settings.
I thought this beefier card would allow them to run on a higher setting, most Routes do with very high FPS on some Routes over 100 but still some getting the dmp file unless using the low setting on some Routes.
Is there a process to get these Routes running on higher settings without installing another card, just spent too many dollars for this card.

Regards,Bob.

[smarty2]

I still say from personal experience and experimentation over time, that the most effective way to address the issues is to run Railworks from an SSD (I don't even have my main OS on it). It simply speeds up data access and read/writing. Yes, you need a "decent" graphics setup, but the SSD seems to cure most problems and washes over graphics concerns.

Chris

I would have to disagree with this statement, I run my OS on an SSD but my massive TS folder resides on a 1TB spinner, performance is the same, I know this because I used to have TS on an SSD until it failed and there is no appreciable difference.

[smarty2]

I'm back from the track with a new Graphics card a n'videa gtx 960 but with still the same problem with a few Routes still only loading and running on low settings.
I thought this beefier card would allow them to run on a higher setting, most Routes do with very high FPS on some Routes over 100 but still some getting the dmp file unless using the low setting on some Routes.
Is there a process to get these Routes running on higher settings without installing another card, just spent too many dollars for this card.

Regards,Bob.

Hi Bob, I do not think any card no matter how good is a guaranteed magic fix, let's not forget that the game is a 32 bit dinosaur with lots of bugs still and will defeat the best of pc equipment.