well, the difference on my system between the 13xx and 14xx revisions is over 33% (51->33), seems that my ati doesn't like some of your improvements
but i have to add, that ffx seems to be the exception. many other games run at equal or higher fps with later gsdx revsions.
another thing: the last revision seems to break the intro fmv of ff12 completely (software mode works), regardless of the "allow 8-bit textures" option or chosen internal resolution, the game itself seems to run fine though:
(r1538/r1549/r1549 .gs)
Well just tried rev1551, with gsdx9.
Im using a
[email protected] and a GMA 3100 on Win7.
I tried running the Bios, and got and error saying pcsx2 encoutered and error and would close. The output was this:
Code:
Bios Version 2.0
Framelimiter rate updated (UpdateVSyncRate): 59.94 fps
MTGS > Thread Started, Opening GS Plugin...
MTGS > GSopen Finished, return code: 0xffffffff
Using rev1474, pcsx2 wouldnt crash, it would run, but only with a black screen, and the console output would be this:
Code:
Bios Version 2.0
Framelimiter rate updated (UpdateVSyncRate): 59.94 fps
MTGS > Thread Started, Opening GS Plugin...
D:\Emu\Pcsx2-r1474\memory(169,53): error X4502: invalid ps_2_0 input semantic 'VPOS'
D:\Emu\Pcsx2-r1474\memory(177,53): error X4502: invalid ps_2_0 input semantic 'VPOS'
MTGS > GSopen Finished, return code: 0x0
No accelerated IMDCT transform found
Boot Error > SYSTEM.CNF not found
XML Loader returned an error. Trying to load a pnach...
No patch found.Resuming execution without a patch (this is NOT an error).
patchnumber: 0
Boot Error > SYSTEM.CNF not found
Issuing EE/iR5900-32 Recompiler Reset [mem/structure cleanup]
Running the PS2 BIOS...
Boot Error > SYSTEM.CNF not found
XML Loader returned an error. Trying to load a pnach...
No patch found.Resuming execution without a patch (this is NOT an error).
patchnumber: 0
# Initialize memory (rev:3.70, ctm:393Mhz, cpuclk:295Mhz detected)
# Total accessable memory size: 32 MB (B:2:8:0) (370:2:7c30)
# TLB spad=0 kernel=1:12 default=13:30 extended=31:38
# Initialize Start.
PAL Display Mode Initialized.
Framelimiter rate updated (UpdateVSyncRate): 50.0 fps
# Initialize GS ...
# Initialize INTC ...
# Initialize TIMER ...
# Initialize DMAC ...
# Initialize VU1 ...
# Initialize VIF1 ...
# Initialize GIF ...
# Initialize VU0 ...
# Initialize VIF0 ...
# Initialize IPU ...
# Initialize FPU ...
# Initialize User Memory ...
# Initialize Scratch Pad ...
# Initialize Done.
EE DECI2 Manager version 0.06 Feb 6 2003 08:38:48
CPUID=2e20, BoardID=0, ROMGEN=2004-0614, 32M
# Restart Without Memory Clear.
NTSC Display Mode Initialized.
Framelimiter rate updated (UpdateVSyncRate): 59.94 fps
PAL Display Mode Initialized.
Framelimiter rate updated (UpdateVSyncRate): 50.0 fps
# Initialize GS ...
# Initialize INTC ...
# Initialize TIMER ...
# Initialize DMAC ...
# Initialize VU1 ...
# Initialize VIF1 ...
# Initialize GIF ...
# Initialize VU0 ...
# Initialize VIF0 ...
# Initialize IPU ...
# Initialize FPU ...
# Initialize Scratch Pad ...
# Restart Without Memory Clear Done.
# Restart Without Memory Clear.
NTSC Display Mode Initialized.
Framelimiter rate updated (UpdateVSyncRate): 59.94 fps
PAL Display Mode Initialized.
Framelimiter rate updated (UpdateVSyncRate): 50.0 fps
# Initialize GS ...
# Initialize INTC ...
# Initialize TIMER ...
# Initialize DMAC ...
# Initialize VU1 ...
# Initialize VIF1 ...
# Initialize GIF ...
# Initialize VU0 ...
# Initialize VIF0 ...
# Initialize IPU ...
# Initialize FPU ...
# Initialize Scratch Pad ...
# Restart Without Memory Clear Done.
REGION PARAMS = Oceania EEengEE
(07-22-2009, 02:48 PM)zero29 Wrote: [ -> ]well, the difference on my system between the 13xx and 14xx revisions is over 33% (51->33), seems that my ati doesn't like some of your improvements but i have to add, that ffx seems to be the exception. many other games run at equal or higher fps with later gsdx revsions.
ATI problem was reintroduced in r1439. None of the following commits fixed that. In some games there is more than 200% difference. "8 bit textures" never worked well on ATI. All games I've tested with it runs on very low fps. It's impossible to play almost all games on ATI now.
I am a glad I have an nvidia card
(07-22-2009, 04:27 PM)Dr.J Wrote: [ -> ]ATI problem was reintroduced in r1439. None of the following commits fixed that. In some games there is more than 200% difference. "8 bit textures" never worked well on ATI. All games I've tested with it runs on very low fps. It's impossible to play almost all games on ATI now.
now that's a bit harsh, dq8 e.g. is ca. 15% (50 vs. 43) slower on newer revisions, mgs3 almost exactly the same (60 vs. 60), gow1 seems to even gain some fps (45 vs. 48) with the later revisions on my system (all@1600x1200, no speed hacks). it's definitely not the case that gsdx is currently unusable for owners of ati cards, but of course, it would be great if the reason(s) for the fps differences between r1398 and r1439 could be found and fixed
(07-22-2009, 07:27 PM)zero29 Wrote: [ -> ]now that's a bit harsh, dq8 e.g. is ca. 15% (50 vs. 43) slower on newer revisions, mgs3 almost exactly the same (60 vs. 60)
I have HD4850 and for me it's absolutlely unusable.
MGS3 slowed down from 80+ to 30 fps
I was able to run Jak and Daxter in 1680x1680 fullspeed with absolutely no problem, but now it's hard to reach even 40 fps in native!
GoW 1 and 2 was never gpu-limited for me.
P.S. Please tell me you aren't talking about DX10 mode! feal87 suggested a fix, wich made DX9 a lot... I mean A LOT faster than dx10. At least for ATI. r1439 ruined this optimization.
(07-22-2009, 08:32 PM)Dr.J Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2009, 07:27 PM)zero29 Wrote: [ -> ]now that's a bit harsh, dq8 e.g. is ca. 15% (50 vs. 43) slower on newer revisions, mgs3 almost exactly the same (60 vs. 60)
I have HD4850 and for me it's absolutlely unusable.
MGS3 slowed down from 80+ to 30 fps
I was able to run Jak and Daxter in 1680x1680 fullspeed with absolutely no problem, but now it's hard to reach even 40 fps in native!
GoW 1 and 2 was never gpu-limited for me.
P.S. Please tell me you aren't talking about DX10 mode! feal87 suggested a fix, wich made DX9 a lot... I mean A LOT faster than dx10. At least for ATI. r1439 ruined this optimization.
I just tested r1398 vs, r1551 both in X10 and X9 mode, same settings.
FF-XII NTSC no difference at all, 107FPS - 112FPS
Kingdom Hearts 2, no difference 145FPS X9 on both and 120FPS X10 on both
Wrong choice for testing.
(07-22-2009, 09:40 PM)Dr.J Wrote: [ -> ]Wrong choice for testing.
What do you recommend to test?
I have hundreds of games
(07-22-2009, 09:40 PM)Dr.J Wrote: [ -> ]Wrong choice for testing.
well, that's easy to say. if you don't like our results, you just claim that we tested the wrong games. what about benchmarking your system with the .gs shot of
this post so that we have some comparison values? or you could provide some .gs files yourself, which show huge differences between dx9 and dx10 or between r1398 and r1439 on your system, what about that?
(07-22-2009, 10:02 PM)Karas Wrote: [ -> ]What do you recommend to test?
I have hundreds of games
you know, i was about to ask the same question, but i'm getting the impression that this discussion tends to focus more and more on myths than on facts. which helps neither gabest nor us.