Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Two performance questions
First simple question: can the use of savestates and/or frameskipping be bad for overall emu speed? I notice lags that don't seem to be directly CPU related (cause they weren't there from the beginning, and I rarely see values for EE/GS above 60%), but started after a long while playing and using a lot of savestates and frameskipping for battles in rpgs. Could this have a permanent effect for the rest of a particular game or should it suffice to reload from mem and be a little more spareful with the mentioned "tools"? I was worried if it even could harm my computer, so I am thinking about not using it at all, which would be a pity. Yes, it might seem stupid...

Then I have a question concerning the optimal resolution setting for a game. I read somewhere that custom resolution (in my case 1920 x 1080) could result in glitches, and that therefore scaling is preferable. But well, I don't notice any kind of glitch or slowdown in custom, while if I, for example in Xenosaga I, use the next higher scaled res (x4), slowdowns start to happen (stuttering movements, and a particular nasty slo-mo effect with the "thermal blast" attack). That said, I can apply 6x scaling without problems in any less demanding game than xenosaga. But is there an accurate way of knowing which internal res is better for which game, or is it only a matter of cpu (mine is i5-2400 OC to 3.8 Ghz)? Thanks!

Sponsored links

Savestates can not damage your hardware. No worries there. Smile

If you load from a memory card save,
there will be no remaining negative effects from state uses.

Think of it this way:
Savestates are not always gonna work perfect.
Sometimes when one is loaded,
there can be something(s) that are not captured by the state,
and therefor not loaded by the state.

I'm not too sure about it actually effecting performance,
since it usually means something is missing.
If it's not enough to completely break the game,
I could almost imagine the possibility of performance being better first.
(think skipdraw)

Either way--
If you're using a state to load, but you encounter a new problem,
you should definitely consider loading from a memory card save.
If the issue is gone, then it's fairly clear what was the cause.

With the internal resolution,
there are just some titles that will have little (or rather big) issues with either imputing a custom res, using scaling, or in some few cases, both.

You simply try another method if one presents a problem with a game.

The accurate way of knowing which method for upscaling works best for which game is simply trying it. You could also try searching the forums for others' experience with the given game. At some point, someone has to do the trial and error thing. Wink

Your CPU has very little to do with upscaling.
That's your GPU's job.
You can also expect a limitation to your upscaling,
varying between games, but ultimately determined by your GPU.

You can easily cause slow downs throughout various moments in a game if you've upscaled the internal res.
That was a nice and clear response!
Does the same apply to frameskipping (F4)? My main worries came from this side, imagining that the reiterative use of it could "tire out" my pc and thus making it less effective permanently (slower). Is this also handled by gpu? I always thought that slowdowns were exclusively due to cpu limitations (therefore everybody going nuts upgrading and overclocking), but this way I could consider upgrading my graphic card instead, currently 560 gtx ti. So, which card could handle the scaling better?
F4 is actually the framelimiter.
It's what keeps your game running at normal speed,
even when your system could push out more.

If you disable the limiter,
your CPU will put out it's max potential,
assuming PCSX2 can fully utilize it.
Compatibility dictates everything eventually, of course.

Your processor would go through no worse than a stability stress test.
This will not hurt a system that is not already faulty.
Processors are made to withstand their max output,
since that is what they were made for.

According to Intel:

"Within functional operation limits, functionality and long-term reliability can be expected."

This actually covers OCing,
so long as it's within Intel's specifications for the chip.
If you're at stock voltage still,
and there's no reason you shouldn't be,
then you can certainly expect "long-term reliability".

The GPU will be used for rendering.
If upscaling is applied, that's additional rendering.
If the task is too much for the GPU, and it becomes a bottleneck,
it won't matter how fast the processor is.

You already have a pretty damn good GPU.
If you want more up-scaling, consider some of the highest-end,
and expensive graphics units out there.

You could also face the fact.
Even the greatest GPU out now could not always handle 6x scaling.
Yours should already handle at least 3x scaling in about every case.
Coming from 640x480, that's already a little better than 1920x1080.
(03-13-2012, 09:29 PM)Rezard Wrote: You could also face the fact.
Even the greatest GPU out now could not always handle 6x scaling.
Yours should already handle at least 3x scaling in about every case.
Coming from 640x480, that's already a little better than 1920x1080.
A 6990 or a 590 might manage it, depending on the game in question.

If you aren't using a display running at really high resolutions, visual gains are going to be marginal past a certain point.
Right, but the GTX 590 and HD 6990 aren't even the best choice here.
The most powerful single GPU is what I refer to,
since duals don't apply with PCSX2.

In actuality,
the 6970 beats the 6990,
and the 580 beats the 590 as a single GPU.
The stats of each individual in a dual are reduced in comparison.

A higher internal res than your screen is basically super sampling.
It's nice, but not near the effect of catching up to the res of your screen.
Alright, alright, this is high-level complaining. I don't think I'll spend a huge amount of money in detail improvement, according to what has been explained before. After all, this makes pcsx2 great, giving you so many choices: want the original thing, play native or try software mode, want a high end product with astonishing visuals, yet punctually glitchy or slow, put 6x scaling and enjoy, want a balanced experience, take middle values (it still can look prettier than PS3 sometimes or at least Wii). Only thing I notice in the visual aspect is a slight more shallow texturing compared to the better shadow-shaped original (I lastly observed it in Star Ocean 3, as well as SMT games on console -didn't test this games in software mode, though) -but, well, this was the 4th big choice, no?: play the real thingWink

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)