Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
0.9.7 using way more CPU than 0.9.6?
#1
Hey all; this isn't really a problem, more just a matter of curiousity. I recently switched from 0.9.6 to 0.9.7, and I can see a lot of improvements, but I did notice that CPU use (since i'm assuming that's what the EE % is) on most games is significantly higher than it was in 0.9.6. Persona 3 for example, which would run at around 25% CPU in 096 now runs beteen 50 and 90% (and vsync still isn't on). Similarly Fatal Frame now runs around the 90% area too.

Like I say it's not really a "problem"; my computer has no shortage of power (quad core, so I realise that % isn't anything like the ACTUAL power) and FPS isn't affected, i'm really just curious as to what's causing such a big difference. Could it be anything to do with DX11? I noticed that DX10, which I was using previously, is removed from the GSDX settings now.

Thanks for any input; it'd be cool to know it's not using power it doesn't need to because of some obscure settings or whatever.
Reply

Sponsored links

#2
Firstly: Quad cores ≠ Power
Individual core performance x core number + ability to use those cores = power.

some of the differences between older and later versions is a removal of hacks, and improvements to execution / cycle accuracy which improves game compatibility in the process.
Reply
#3
The CPU% number in 0.9.6 represented the GS thread, which you now see in 0.9.7 as the GS% value.
Core i5 3570k -- Geforce GTX 670  --  Windows 7 x64
Reply
#4
(04-22-2011, 06:10 PM)Shadow Lady Wrote: The CPU% number in 0.9.6 represented the GS thread, which you now see in 0.9.7 as the GS% value.

Thanks a lot Shadow Lady, I suspected it might be something like that.

And Squall, i'm aware PCSX2 doesn't use all four cores; just bad phrasing I guess.

Anyway problem solved and curiosity sated, thanks all, feel free to close thread.
Reply
#5
Leonhart touched the critical point. It's almost a miracle PCSX2 devs manage to keep performance close to near past all the while improving overall accuracy (which theoretically should hit hard that performance).

So, just by keeping near the 0.96 performance is a greater feat for 0.97, let alone it gained actual performance in some games. At this point I would bet in relying in crescent raw hardware power which could allow more freedom in that accuracy pursuit instead hopping for performance gain for older machines.

PS: But... time will say.
Imagination is where we are truly real
Reply
#6
(04-22-2011, 06:10 PM)Shadow Lady Wrote: The CPU% number in 0.9.6 represented the GS thread, which you now see in 0.9.7 as the GS% value.

i always thought that was the Graphics Synthesizor load
Reply
#7
She meant before 0.97 GS load was calculated from the overall demand, now it has it's own dedicated core...

Notice as this is a bless and allowed to enhance accuracy without noticeable performance lowering, but can't do any good if EE is saturating and can't provide enough output to load GS, the greater pain of trying to branch a pipeline without losing too much that pipeline model...
Imagination is where we are truly real
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)