CPU Performance in Drive

ahh, makes sense

- - - Updated - - -

just for the lols im going to see how the game runs on my PIII @ 650 MHz laptop. ill have the results for that by friday

 

Pentium 4 1.7GHz (Not sure what number) 1 D15, 4FPS physics on, 20 FPS physics off..

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

 

The game naturally takes down physics FPS once you hit 20 fps, so all of these tests have some physics throttling. I think you could just count my moonhawk results.

 

already did
edit --- wow, i thought I did....now i feel bad

 

It isn't showing up for me. :\

 

ok...*now* it's up

oh and i cant get drive running on my PIII, after i open it, it crashes instantly...does anyone know how to manually change the file that the settings are stored in? (perhaps i could preload the lowest settings possible and it might start up)
-i know its pretty much a lost cause, the processor was from '99, i just want to see it run.. --edit i think its the fact that i only have 512 MB ram on that computer, probably not even enough to load the game

 

LOLOLOL just tested my i5 2500k at 1.6Ghz xDDD Comparison i5 2500k @ 4Ghz vs i5 2500k @ 1.6Ghz

AMD HD 7950 @ 1,1Ghz
Intel i5 2500k @ 4Ghz | Intel i5 2500k @ 1.6Ghz

Physics on/off Physics on/off


1 - 288 | 940------------------1 - 24 | 480
2 - 157 | 750------------------2 - 22 | 305
3 - 105 | 524------------------3 - 17 | 212
4 - 75 | 395--------------------4 - 14 | 160
5 - 36 | 316--------------------5 - 10 | 127
6 - 22 | 262--------------------6 - 9 | 108
7 - 19 | 220--------------------7 - 7 | 91
8 - 16 | 190--------------------8 - 7 | 82
9 - 13 | 165--------------------9 - 6 | 72
10 - 13 | 148------------------10 - 5 | 62




My own conclusions from this: as each car uses 1 core to run, if that core isn't powerful enough to handle that car, then you'll experience a lot of lag. If you see the results from Junky228 and the moonhawk you can see this seems to be true. My cores at 1.6Ghz were too slow that they dropped my fps down to 24 while at 4Ghz I am above 290 fps.

 

AMD Athlon II X2 215
Nvidia 9500GT 1 GB
Both Stock

Bruckell Moonhawk

Physics on/off

1 - 18 | 200
2 - 17 | 128
3 - 7 | 92
4 - 6 | 75
5 - 4 | 62
6 - 4 | 53

 

covet?
edit -- yeah its the covet
also just realised that i never put in your 4ghz results before...im putting in both of your results now...

- - - Updated - - -

when i get the chance ill go to stock clocks and try underclocking my 8320 to see what kind of results i get
-Davidbc, did you worry about the voltage when you underclocked your i5? or did you just leave it at where it was for your overclock?

 

I used the same voltage I use at 4Ghz. If I were to use it underclocked for a long period of time then I would have lowered it, but it was just to test it in BeamNG so I didn't bother.

 

Fx-6300 @ 3.8Ghz
Radeon hd 7870 stock

Moonhawks (Physics on/off )
1. 25Fps||340fps
2. 21fps||218fps
3. 20fps||160fps
4. 16fps||125fps (did crash at this point.)
5. 12fps||105fps(crashed.)
6. 10fps||90fps
7. 8.9fps||76fps
8. 8.1fps||68fps
9. 7fps||60fps
10. 6fps||54fps

 

intel core i7 3930k stock clocks, proof of ownership: http://i.imgur.com/F9mysf3.png

measured with a gtx 680 gpu on settings described in OP with the covet, i kept all of the cars in view at all times, without doing so it really bumped the physics-off fps way high.

hyperthreading on ( 6 logical cores, 12 logical cores)

all fps measured with ctrl+f

car count: physics on | off

1: 200 | 428
2: 115 | 320
3: 85 | 300
4: 60 | 205
5: 53 | 170
6: 40 | 150
7: 30 | 130
8: 24 | 114
9: 20 | 110
10: 17 | 97

final utilization: http://i.imgur.com/17nLiHl.png

disappointing.

 

wait, whats disappointing?

 

Jealous. What clocks are you running? If it's stock 3.2 then that is your problem. Sandy bridge cores probably need ~3.6 6-turbo to smoothly run beamng. Also, what are your memory speeds?

 

i expected better performance/scaling.

 

thats stock 3.2 with a turbo to 3.8, but im just guessing it stayed at the turbo speed during testing?

- - - Updated - - -

i tested stock clocks (3.5 GHz) for the 8320 with the covet, entering in the data now...

 

Playing in window mode gives you lower fps.

 

oh...ive been doing windowed the whole time

 

3770K @4.5GHz, AMD Radeon HD6870.
Stock Covet, all lowest settings/res, pure Grid map.

Phsysics On/Off
1 303 927
2 153 587
3 102 410
4 74 330
5 53 263
6 44 216
7 25 190
8 22 160
9 19 140
10 17 127

I think something went wrong with my previous (D-Series) results, as these ones seem to be a bit higher. I would have expected the Covet to be more demanding.

I also seem to get a substantial dip in frames going from 6 to 7 cars.

 

I've been doing borderless windowed. :|

Intel has a weird turbo algorithm that I can't really explain, but I do have an example. My CPU has a core speed of 2.93Ghz with a possible turbo of 3.6. When one core is active it runs at 3.6, 2 cores pushes 3.4, and 3&4 allow 3.2Ghz. If I had bad cooling or power delivery it will throttle to 2.93.
Deject3d is running a hex-core that boosts to 3.8, but I doubt his six core speed is 3.8, it might be more like 3.2 or even 3.0. I doubt sandy bridge has the grunt to push beamng at those clocks. However, most motherboard manufacturers put "multi-core enhancement" in their overclocking boards. This allows all the cores max turbo. If he enabled that I imagine that 6 cores running at 3.8Ghz would push better frames. RAM might be the problem though.