Grimrock

Shame! Well, looks like I'll be switching back to the wine. Thank you.

Dr.Disaster wrote:

badhabit wrote:Question, has someone else more FPS in this spot?

In a 1024x768 window and all setting maxed i get 90 fps and with all settings low i get 116.

Thanks, for the "all low" setup I guess we are both CPU bound, 84 fps vs 116 fps (+38%). AMD x2 280 3.6GHz vs Intel 4x i7-950 3.06GHz ...hmmm.

What this tells us? Well, per clock wise Intel beats AMD still pretty hard (62% more performance per cycle...puhh)... and the LOG2 engine is pretty CPU limited, even a significantly beefier system doesn't hit the FPS limit of 120 FPS with everything low in this spot.

Hello guys.

Sorry for necroposting but I have solved (I hope at last) my stuttering/irresponsive input issues with LoG2.

Some days ago I learnt about FPS cappers, i.e, software that allow capping your frames per second in games.

I have also learnt that using VSYNC + FPS capper (a few fps behind your real physical monitor refresh rate) help things a lot.

Using this + a combination of prerenderred frames ahead of 1 makes LoG2 running real sweet and with almost no noticeable lag.

Better late than never I guess.

In a nutshell: I am running LoG2 at 1440x900 on high, fps capped at 73fps, while my monitor refresh rate is 75Hz for that resolution.

OBVIOUSLY, your system must be beefy enough to render that fps without losing frames. There is also some option in graphic card control panel to cut refresh rate syncing in half (it would be 30fps for a 60Hz display). This is to mimic a steady console-like fps ratio.

eLPuSHeR wrote:Hello guys.

Sorry for necroposting but I have solved (I hope at last) my stuttering/irresponsive input issues with LoG2.

Some days ago I learnt about FPS cappers, i.e, software that allow capping your frames per second in games.

I have also learnt that using VSYNC + FPS capper (a few fps behind your real physical monitor refresh rate) help things a lot.

Using this + a combination of prerenderred frames ahead of 1 makes LoG2 running real sweet and with almost no noticeable lag.

Better late than never I guess.

In a nutshell: I am running LoG2 at 1440x900 on high, fps capped at 73fps, while my monitor refresh rate is 75Hz for that resolution.

OBVIOUSLY, your system must be beefy enough to render that fps without losing frames. There is also some option in graphic card control panel to cut refresh rate syncing in half (it would be 30fps for a 60Hz display). This is to mimic a steady console-like fps ratio.

interesting. The latest update 2.2.4 was not helping by itself for your case?

I wasn't aware there was an update. I think I am still under 2.1.8ß

Thanks for the heads up.

eLPuSHeR wrote:I wasn't aware there was an update. I think I am still under 2.1.8ß

Thanks for the heads up.

I strongly suggest that you update to 2.2.4!
Petry did serious updates on the performance (~+20%) and reduced the input lag dependency on the framerate. Also, LOG1/2 supports FPS capping internally, you can set values in the grimrock.cfg.
2.2.1:
- optimized CPU usage of the graphics engine
- added draw distance to graphics options
- optimized input latency especially when frame rate drops below 60 fps

Looking forward to your results!

Yes. I was wrong. I am running 2.2.4ß.

And yes, I have set the frame cap internally by editting the config file.

Is it 2.2.4 still beta?

Thank you for your replies.

eLPuSHeR wrote:Is it 2.2.4 still beta?

It's the official PC version since late March.
btw: the official Mac version is 2.2.6 due to an editor issue with Yosemite that needed fixing.