Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Pcsx2 running slow and not using resources
#1
Hello guys, 
I was hit in a nostalgia wave here, and i wanted to play my old ace combat 4 and other ps2 games i own. So i got my cds, and copied them using imgburn to a iso file so i dont have to carry with me all my cds. 

Then i got the latest buildbot build today (23/09), configured as i think it would be light (so bios american 2.0), directx 11 (opengl reports a error in loading the plugin, idk why), checked allow 8 bit textures, interlaced = none, and texture filtering nearest. 

But i can't seem to run the games above 16-20 fps! I even tried enabling mtvu, changing the speedhack to 4, 5, with no luck.

My laptop is a lenovo g470 with a 2.2ghz intel core i3 2330m, with a intel hd3000 and 8gb of 1333mhz ddr3 ram. 
When i went to the faq and they said some really old processors like a laptop core2duo could run well this game i didnt understand anything!

I attached a print, where i am at the intro of the game, with msi afterburner opened so i can show that it inst in fact using my hardware.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Reply

Sponsored links

#2
Your CPU is struggling. Ace combat series are quite demanding, unfortunately
CPU : I7 2600K Oc'ed @ 4.2Ghz
Mobo : Intel P67 southbridge
GPU : NVIDIA Geforce GTX 750 Ti
RAM : 6 Go
Reply
#3
(09-23-2018, 10:41 PM)jesalvein Wrote: Your CPU is struggling. Ace combat series are quite demanding, unfortunately

But how? My cpu usage doesnt even pass 40% in total usage! Even looking into single cores in there, the most that it got was around 60% in the first core!


And when i use directx 11 software mode it runs 2x that speed (around 35 fps), using like 50-60% of cpu. But software renderer shouldnt use only the cpu, and not the gpu? 

Dont judge the situation just by the name of the processor, it can run cs go fine, for example.
Reply
#4
Do not compare standard pc gaming with emulating. Emulating is way heavier then any pc game would be. Also it would help if you would download passmark (Trial) and do the CPU Benchmark and tell us your Single Thread Processing value. 35 fps is not 100%. On PAL that would be 50 fps and on NTSC (US) it would be 60 fps.
Reply
#5
(09-23-2018, 11:47 PM)StriFe Wrote: Do not compare standard pc gaming with emulating. Emulating is way heavier then any pc game would be. Also it would help if you would download passmark (Trial) and do the CPU Benchmark and tell us your Single Thread Processing value. 35 fps is not 100%. On PAL that would be 50 fps and on NTSC (US) it would be 60 fps.

Yes, i know that pc gaming and emulating are quite different, but many games such as cs go are cpu hungry, while i didnt seen anytime pcsx2 pass the 60% usage mark. But i didnt mean to compare side by side gaming and emulation, it was just to give an idea of what my cpu can do.

I downloaded passmark and the result was 2998, and i attached a print. In the faq, it says that core 2 duo laptops and up would run well, and mine has a higher ipc and the same clock as many c2d from laptops from that age, and a way better integrated grpahics (intel hd3000 vs the old gmas). 

Is the i3 2330m enough?

Edit: I saw the fastest core 2 duo cpu avaiable to laptop's score, the t9900 @3.16ghz, and it scored 2128! Less than my 2998 that my i3 scored, so if the faq says a laptop core2duo should be enough, and even the fastest one is slower than my i3, that should mean i'm good?
Link: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu...Hz&id=1014


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Reply
#6
Your single threaded performance is 1177 (which is better then average for your 2330m 1057) but we recomend 1600 single threaded performance for most games and cpu heavy games we recomend 2000+ depending on the game (some require even more).

The will it run fast list of processors post is 6 or so years old at this point as well and the emultor has been updated over the years so that list is really not very representitive (it even has AMD opteron dual cores in it and those would be much worse then your laptop)

(Warning to Devs massive oversimplification of your hard work here)
As far as CPU utilization goes I am not sure which cores are your hyper-threaded ones (or more exactly which are the matched pairs on the physical cores), but the main reason why we don't particularly care about multi threaded performance and is that all of the code that a PS2 needs to run AC4 (as an example) has to be translated to code that the PC can understand before it can be executed. This is done differently in high level emultion vs low level emulation, but in the end without the PC knowing what calculations it needs to make nothing else can be done.
Reply
#7
(09-23-2018, 11:16 PM)eduaavila Wrote: And when i use directx 11 software mode it runs 2x that speed (around 35 fps), using like 50-60% of cpu. But software renderer shouldnt use only the cpu, and not the gpu? 
Dont judge the situation just by the name of the processor, it can run cs go fine, for example.
I'm not judging by the name of the CPU, but by the GS% hitting 100.
as said above, don't compare emulation to native PC gaming, it's a ridiculous nonsense.

I probably made a mistake, though. your cpu isn't the only culprit here. Your GPU is struggling too
CPU : I7 2600K Oc'ed @ 4.2Ghz
Mobo : Intel P67 southbridge
GPU : NVIDIA Geforce GTX 750 Ti
RAM : 6 Go
Reply
#8
(09-24-2018, 04:28 AM)TkSilver Wrote: Your single threaded performance is 1177 (which is better then average for your 2330m 1057) but we recomend 1600 single threaded performance for most games and cpu heavy games we recomend 2000+ depending on the game (some require even more).

The will it run fast list of processors post is 6 or so years old at this point as well and the emultor has been updated over the years so that list is really not very representitive (it even has AMD opteron dual cores in it and those would be much worse then your laptop)

(Warning to Devs massive oversimplification of your hard work here)
As far as CPU utilization goes I am not sure which cores are your hyper-threaded ones (or more exactly which are the matched pairs on the physical cores), but the main reason why we don't particularly care about multi threaded performance and is that all of the code that a PS2 needs to run AC4 (as an example) has to be translated to code that the PC can understand before it can be executed.  This is done differently in high level emultion vs low level emulation, but in the end without the PC knowing what calculations it needs to make nothing else can be done.

The real cores (if i'm not mistaken) are core 0 and core 1, cores 2 and 3 are the hypertreaded ones. 

So that means that no sandybridge laptop processor basically can run well pcsx2, except for a Core i7-2960XM that has a around 1600 passmark score? 

If i get a new laptop someday, would a i5 7500u without dedicated graphics be able to run ace combat and other ps2 games in native resolution at a decent framerate? It seems that the i5 7500u has a passmark score of 1923, link: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu...Hz&id=2863
Reply
#9
(09-24-2018, 06:58 AM)jesalvein Wrote: I'm not judging by the name of the CPU, but by the GS% hitting 100.
as said above, don't compare emulation to native PC gaming,  it's a ridiculous nonsense.

I probably made a mistake, though. your cpu isn't the only culprit here. Your GPU is struggling too
yes, from what i found after the replies, the gs actually represents the graphic chip of the ps2, and would mean that my gpu was struggling to run the emulator, but i didnt see in my system pcsx2 using all my gpu. 

So basically pcsx2 can't allocate/use more than 50-ish% of all resources in any pc? And thats why it needs such better hardware? 
I tested in a friend's laptop with a 3rd gen i5 that is suposedly more powerfull than that i3 i have, and he still was using the same % basically of the hardware but had tad bit better framerates, i even tested in my old core2duo t8300 laptop  (wich ran really slower, but still was stuck at the same % of resources usage).  

Will there be any 64bit version of pcsx2 or more optmized to multicore cpus that would use hardware fully in a future? I've seen many core i5's ans i7's from laptops in the internet that doesnt seem to fit the minimum 1600 requirement.
Reply
#10
(09-24-2018, 03:28 PM)eduaavila Wrote: yes, from what i found after the replies, the gs actually represents the graphic chip of the ps2, and would mean that my gpu was struggling to run the emulator, but i didnt see in my system pcsx2 using all my gpu.
not exactly. the GS% stands for a GS thread over the EE one.
means if your GS% only is around 100%, your GPU or your CPU may be the culprit.
if the ee% is around 100%, your CPU is likely to be the culprit.
if both are around 100%, it's likely a GPU problem.
Quote:So basically pcsx2 can't allocate/use more than 50-ish% of all resources in any pc? And thats why it needs such better hardware? 
[quote]
it basically uses 2 cores, 3 with MTVU speedhack.
[quote]
I tested in a friend's laptop with a 3rd gen i5 that is suposedly more powerfull than that i3 i have, and he still was using the same % basically of the hardware but had tad bit better framerates, i even tested in my old core2duo t8300 laptop  (wich ran really slower, but still was stuck at the same % of resources usage).  
"supposedly more powerful" doesn't mean anything since what pcsx2 needs spefically is STR.

Quote:Will there be any 64bit version of pcsx2 or more optmized to multicore cpus that would use hardware fully in a future? I've seen many core i5's ans i7's from laptops in the internet that doesnt seem to fit the minimum 1600 requirement.
64bits version-> not for the moment because it's useless. that would need a complete rewrite of the code for an overall 2-3% improvement.
more optimized to multicore cpus->maybe, but we don't know how. 1 core for the EE, another for the GS, last one for VUs, and ...
can you please tell us what we could thread on another core ? keep in mind it has to be prefectly synced with other threads to work smoothly without crashes
CPU : I7 2600K Oc'ed @ 4.2Ghz
Mobo : Intel P67 southbridge
GPU : NVIDIA Geforce GTX 750 Ti
RAM : 6 Go
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)