Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
MTVU + Xenosaga = Slow down for me
#1
This will be short and sweet since I'm going to bed. On my other thread about GPU heavy games someone had mentioned Xenosaga. In fact it turned out to be limited by my CPU. I fooled around with settings but nothing helped until I turned OFF MTVU. The same battle in game, 52 FPS with MTVU, 60FPS without.

Is this normal? I tried searching combinations of "MTVU" "Xenosaga" and "Slow" and the only thing I saw is that it WOULDN'T cause slowdown.

I'm just curious.

AMD FX-6300 @ 4.1GHZ
8GB DDR1600 @ 9,9,9,27
Geforce GT 610(for now)
[Image: vwah44]
Gaming: Intel i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 | 16GB RAM | 480GB(240GB+240GB RAID0) SSD | 3 TB HDD | 1 TB HDD | 500GB HDD
Server: AMD FX 6300 @ 4.4Ghz | GTX 670 | 16GB RAM | 240GB SSD | 320GB HDD
PCSX2 General Troubleshooting FAQ
Reply

Sponsored links

#2
I don't think there is a thread dedicated to mtvu hack for xenosaga, but in about 90% of threads about Xenosaga it is said at least once in each thread. Hell, I have at least said it in 2 or 3 xenosaga threads.
MOBO - ASUS Maximus VII Hero
CPU - Intel i7 4790k 4.4GHZ
RAM - 16 Gigs DDR3 2133mhz
HDD - 3 500 Gig SSD 1 3 TB 7200 RPM
GPU - EVGA Nvidia GTX 1070 SC
OS- Windows 10.
Reply
#3
Thanks for the quick answer. Off to bed I go!
[Image: vwah44]
Gaming: Intel i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 | 16GB RAM | 480GB(240GB+240GB RAID0) SSD | 3 TB HDD | 1 TB HDD | 500GB HDD
Server: AMD FX 6300 @ 4.4Ghz | GTX 670 | 16GB RAM | 240GB SSD | 320GB HDD
PCSX2 General Troubleshooting FAQ
Reply
#4
The game has taxing GPU scenes as well as really slow CPU limited scenes. The CPU limitation is from draw call overhead
and an idle extra core helps a lot for that. I got bad slow downs in those with my dual core Intel that got fixed by upgrading to
quad.
On the GPU side it appears the ingame menu in Xenosaga 2 is very taxing.
Reply
#5
As far as I remember when MTvu was first released I guess it was Squall Leonheart who tested it in XS and noted speed increase on intel icore cpu's, but from 0 improvement to negative results on slower ones like AMD cpu's.
Reply
#6
If the GS% is high MTVU will cause a negative effect. If the EE% is high then MTVU helps a lot. My FX4300 does indeed benefit from the MTVU on most of my games.
OS: Linux Mint 17.2 64 bit (occasional Antergos/Arch user)
(I am no longer a Windows user)
CPU: Intel Pentium G3258
GPU: Nvidia GTX 650 Ti



Reply
#7
(09-24-2013, 12:32 PM)DaTankAC Wrote: If the GS% is high MTVU will cause a negative effect. If the EE% is high then MTVU helps a lot. My FX4300 does indeed benefit from the MTVU on most of my games.

This is the only game I've had anything like this happen in. I noticed this in Xenosaga too:

No MTVU: EE80%, GS50% UI0%

MTVU: EE90%, GS80%, VU99%, UI0%

Start of same battle, exact same image on screen.
[Image: vwah44]
Gaming: Intel i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 | 16GB RAM | 480GB(240GB+240GB RAID0) SSD | 3 TB HDD | 1 TB HDD | 500GB HDD
Server: AMD FX 6300 @ 4.4Ghz | GTX 670 | 16GB RAM | 240GB SSD | 320GB HDD
PCSX2 General Troubleshooting FAQ
Reply
#8
I've wondered if it's because of how my FX 6300 has 6 phyiscal cores with only three floating point units and Windows 7 seems to schedule the processor like it(windows) is on crack. For instance right now running PCSX2 my 2nd, 4th and 5th cores are showing load, if I restart it will be different cores. As I understand PCSX2 can use a max of 3 cores(not counting software rendering, right?) so wouldn't it make more sense to schedules those on cores 1,2,3 i.e. the ones with FPU?

Or, is windows task manager even showing my cores in order? Regardless, which cores get used change with rerunning the program.
[Image: vwah44]
Gaming: Intel i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 | 16GB RAM | 480GB(240GB+240GB RAID0) SSD | 3 TB HDD | 1 TB HDD | 500GB HDD
Server: AMD FX 6300 @ 4.4Ghz | GTX 670 | 16GB RAM | 240GB SSD | 320GB HDD
PCSX2 General Troubleshooting FAQ
Reply
#9
You can download one of the Microsoft hotfixes for Bulldozer-processor scheduling, it should fix that. Windows 8 doesn't need it since it already comes with better support for Bulldozer-based CPU's.

It's not so much the shared FPU which is the problem in the architecture, but the core starvation. I.e. in a single module, one core will put out max performance, while the second core in that module would only be able to put out around 70~80% of its performance. The reason of this is the decoder, it's too narrow. There is only a single fetch and decode unit in each module. This is a problem in Bulldozer and Piledriver, but Steamroller will fix it. In Steamroller, there is still a single fetch unit, but now each integer unit will get its own decoder, removing the core starvation issue.

Yeah, under normal operation in Hardware mode, PCSX2 only uses two threads, and three if the MTVU hack is enabled. In an ideal situation, Windows should have PCSX2 assigning a task to every other module, not mixing them around inside the same module. The way Windows 8 fixes this is to treat each module as a "core". I.e. if you open the Win 8 Task Manager, it would show an FX-8350 as being a "4 core, 8 thread" processor.
Reply
#10
(09-24-2013, 05:45 PM)NarooN Wrote: You can download one of the Microsoft hotfixes for Bulldozer-processor scheduling, it should fix that. Windows 8 doesn't need it since it already comes with better support for Bulldozer-based CPU's.

It's not so much the shared FPU which is the problem in the architecture, but the core starvation. I.e. in a single module, one core will put out max performance, while the second core in that module would only be able to put out around 70~80% of its performance. The reason of this is the decoder, it's too narrow. There is only a single fetch and decode unit in each module. This is a problem in Bulldozer and Piledriver, but Steamroller will fix it. In Steamroller, there is still a single fetch unit, but now each integer unit will get its own decoder, removing the core starvation issue.

Yeah, under normal operation in Hardware mode, PCSX2 only uses two threads, and three if the MTVU hack is enabled. In an ideal situation, Windows should have PCSX2 assigning a task to every other module, not mixing them around inside the same module. The way Windows 8 fixes this is to treat each module as a "core". I.e. if you open the Win 8 Task Manager, it would show an FX-8350 as being a "4 core, 8 thread" processor.

I missed this reply when you posted it and just happened across it today. I didn't know such hotfixes existed, so thanks for telling me!
[Image: vwah44]
Gaming: Intel i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 | 16GB RAM | 480GB(240GB+240GB RAID0) SSD | 3 TB HDD | 1 TB HDD | 500GB HDD
Server: AMD FX 6300 @ 4.4Ghz | GTX 670 | 16GB RAM | 240GB SSD | 320GB HDD
PCSX2 General Troubleshooting FAQ
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)