Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PTTG??]

You think XP is bad, try Vista. That program is the biggest failure since the electric denture.
Anyway, if you want DF to run well, possibly the biggest change you can make is adding RAM. After that, get a better CPU, but don't bother with a graphics card. These new Physics accelerator cards might work for you if you get slowdowns when something gets fligified.(not really)

[Javewa]

Try disabling Hyperthreading in BIOS if you're flexible enough to reboot if you want to do something processor intensive. DF uses only one core and gave me a huge FPS boost (and saved LOTS of power consumption).

Also, move up to Win Advanced Server 2003 or XP 64-bit Edition. Way more stable, compatible and faster than 2kpro. Never crashed ONCE in a year of service, except for the obvious overclocking hang-ups. But even there XP64 outshines every other OS; runs stable at 3,4@4,1 Ghz, where Ubuntu (yeah, not a proper Linux, I know), XP32 and Vista64 give up at ~3,6Ghz.

Basically, it's a question of faith, isn't it?  

But OSX? Seriously?  

[qwertyuiopas]

Does all that matter?
Couldn't you get at least part of that with the priority init.cs or task manager setting?

It still is nice to laugh at windows though.

[Eagle of Fire]

I've had this version of Win XP Home Edition installed for almost 4 years, and never had a problem. I think it's more because I know what I'm doing that it's still working fine.

I don't use Java. I don't use Flash. I don't go to untrusted sites and never accept their cookies (most big companies site are not trusted in MY list). I have a firewall up and running at all time, and of course I don't use IE...

Been running XP for 4 years straight, got it to crash something like 2 or three times at most and it's usually running several days straight. Works fine.

DF is a little slow though, but I don't mind that. I even lowered my max FPS to 45 'cause I find it's easier and more interesting to play at a slower speed. And I usually run gazillions of other applications at the same time as DF, which may be a reason why it's so slow. I guess I need more memory.

[Core Xii]

quote:Originally posted by PTTG??:
<STRONG>nyway, if you want DF to run well, possibly the biggest change you can make is adding RAM. After that, get a better CPU</STRONG>

Reverse that. The largest amount of memory I've gotten DF to consume was like 700 MiBs. Unless you have less than a GiB, there's little reason to get more. (for the sake of DF, that is)

[BurnedToast]

quote:Originally posted by herrbdog:
<STRONG>yaya it's incomplete, i was being a smartass. basically, i hate macs and xp. =p the cutesy bubbly crap and all the annoying layers of wizards and crap just to tweak some settings makes me *&@$#(^#@%$(*#@^%(*#^%
</STRONG>

You do realize in XP the 'cutesy bubbly crap' and 'annoying layers of wizards' can be turned off very, very easily right?

There is no way any sane person can say DOS (any version) is a better OS then XP. Yes it uses less system resources and... uh, well that's it really. I guess you could argue that if DOS was updated and overhauled it would be better, but it would basically have to be rewritten from scratch and wouldn't really be DOS anymore.

Also, yes, Vista is a steaming turd which I plan on avoiding for as long as is possible.

[Mithaldu]

Actually, XP has a considerable performance advantage over 2k on certain processors, like the AMD Athlon 3000+ XP.

[herrbdog]

in regards to superiority of OS's:

I. WAS. BEING. A. SMARTASS.

but if you turn off that cutesey bubbly crap, you pretty much have 2k... so i save time. =p

[Tormy]

quote:Originally posted by herrbdog:
<STRONG>Only variable was explorer. P'haps in 2k explorer uses more resources? (I have been doing this for years for most games, never had a problem.)

Then again, this install is running on 3 years. But I don't install anything but direct applications. I don't keep any resident programs running. I'll make & post a screenie of my process list.

  :eek:

[herrbdog]

My idle counter has been over 2500 hours before. That is over 100 days of IDLE time without rebooting.

[Lightning4]

Nothing I do can seem to improve my poor forts FPS from 15-17. I think it's my 14.5k stone. Even copying the save and reclaiming one of them with only 35 dwarves still only hovered around 30-35.

Temperature off? 5 fps gain.
Weather off? 1 fps gain.
Kill all unecessary processes (including explorer)? No change.
Put DF on one core and put everything else on the other? 2 fps loss.

[Fedor]

quote:Originally posted by Lightning4:
<STRONG>Nothing I do can seem to improve my poor forts FPS from 15-17. I think it's my 14.5k stone. Even copying the save and reclaiming one of them with only 35 dwarves still only hovered around 30-35.

Temperature off? 5 fps gain.
Weather off? 1 fps gain.
Kill all unecessary processes (including explorer)? No change.
Put DF on one core and put everything else on the other? 2 fps loss.</STRONG>

If you get that kind of framerate with

1. no magma (this is key!) and no running water (less critical),
2. a seven-dwarf fort in a small (preferably 4x4 or less) map with no huge cliffs,
3. and a decent computer (at least 2 GHz)

then I'd be looking into how OpenGL plays with your graphics card.  Some people have had real trouble getting a decent framerate until they updated their drivers and/or fiddled with various OpenGL settings in their graphics card software.

You may also find the wiki helpful.

[Wiles]

I updated my drivers awhile ago, I believe it gave me a 10fps boost.

[Teldin]

The only thing that's ever really made a huge difference for FPS for me was the VSYNC settings. Turned that off and boom, went from 4-10 fps to 40-50 even on big maps with lots of creatures around. Everything else just adds ~10 or so here and there.

[Tormy]

quote:Originally posted by herrbdog:
<STRONG>My idle counter has been over 2500 hours before. That is over 100 days of IDLE time without rebooting.</STRONG>

I am..shocked. My record must be like 10 hours.