Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

why do I have Abysmal FPS now in vista X64

Last response: in Video Games
Share
June 3, 2008 8:31:58 PM

Just got it, "upgraded" from XP pro X86. I use to get 30-50 FPS in oblivion w/ all settings maxed out with HDR and 2xAA enabled.

Now in vista x64 my frames drop to the teens sometimes while outside. Do I need to install direct X 9 or something?

Or is it because I just don't have enough memory. Here is what I am running:

*edit* yeah, I have the latest driver's from Nvidia, I did not even bother w/ the ones on the disk when I installed drivers.

Guess I should have mentioned my Res, 1920x1080 (30 FPS does not sound so offal now does it). The FPS dropping to 15 is what pisses me off though. That never happened in XP unless there were a lot of enemies on screen.

Oh, and this is a gaming PC exclusively so I never have anything else running.

I will take this all into account, thats guys.

E8400
EVGA 8800GT superclocked edition
2 gigs pc 800 ram dual channel mode
Seagate 7200.8 (yeah I know its old)

More about : abysmal fps vista x64

June 3, 2008 9:03:24 PM

Turn off AA. Oblivion was not initially designed to use AA and HDR together, at least not with GeForce cards. Driver updates eventually allowed it to be forced but drivers are still not fully matured in Vista. This doesn't guarantee you'll get better performance but it's the first thing I would try. I also play Oblivion with the system in my sig and I easily get 40+ fps even in the more intense enviroments, but usually 50-60 (with Vsync on, with it off I'll got 200+ in doors sometimes).
June 4, 2008 12:53:08 PM

one word, "VISTA"
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
June 4, 2008 3:23:09 PM

Flakes said:
one word, "VISTA"

Incredibly helpful Flakes. One of the biggest issues of using Vista is the fact that half of the responses you'll get when looking for help will be "Vista Suckz!". While I'm not entirely sure why you would have switched if XP wasn't giving you an issue, there's no reason why you should be getting that low of frame rates on Oblivion with the hardware you have. Besides my above advice, have you fully updated everything? If you just installed Vista and haven't run every update and went out and got every updated driver chances are you may have some Nov. 2006 dated drivers or files that could be holding you back. Also try scaling back the settings to see when you start to get more reasonable frame rates. Even if that's not how you want to play the game it will give you an idea of how far off you are. If turning down one setting makes a noticeable difference (like turning off AA) you may not be far off and just need a little tweaking. If you really have to dial it down then there is most likely bigger issues.
June 4, 2008 3:50:27 PM

Try forcing DX9 only? if you can in oblivion.
June 4, 2008 4:08:30 PM

Oblivion doesn't use any DX10 features so it is automatically DX9.
June 4, 2008 8:24:47 PM

theres no easy way to explain this
but here 3 reasons why you may have the sudden slowness
sry for the image quality, the forum software is being dumb and resizing the images by a few pixels making it hard to read, just click to zoom







what is bringing about these higher requirements, all they really did was add direct x 10, some eye candy and a side bar what is causing the insane requirements for a OS, (seems to be poor programming. in terms of functionality and features, nothing was really added to the os beside eye candy. the problem is that is is so inefficient that it runs slower. (based on what was added to the os, the requirements don't add up)

you may have a pretty good gaming pc but that doesnt stop vista from being inefficient.

you can have a 1001 horsepower car but if you add a trailer (aka vista) onto the back of it, it wont be breaking any speed records anytime soon, it will still go highway speeds but who spends over a million dollars to go highway speeds ?

PS the op is not interested in turning down the settings, if he was, he wouldn't have posted this topic. he mainly wants to know why it ran smooth in xp but slow in vista.


June 4, 2008 8:53:10 PM

Razor did you even look at those minimum specs? He's so far beyond it that it shouldn't even matter. Also those charts are somewhat misleading. '95-XP = 6 years, XP-Vista - 6 years. Also XP mins are 2001 mins, not 2008 mins with years of updates. Do a little research and you'll see that with the specs he has Vista should not account for more than a 10% decrease. What he is experiancing is far beyond that. As with any time you install a fresh copy of ANY OS, or really any software some configuration my be required.
I'm not telling him to lower settings so that he'll get better FPS and live with it. What I'm saying is to lower settings until you get a good FPS then work your way back up slowly while tweaking settings/the system to see where you are losing performance.
BTW I'll take Vista with 800mhz/15GB/512MB over XP with 233/1.5/64.
June 4, 2008 9:52:10 PM

theres no such thing as higher requirements not mattering, get a car that has twice the horse poerr of your current car, then get a hitch and attach your old car to the new one and tow it, tell me how your new car seems to perform

he can have 4 trillion GHZ gaming PC and vista will still benchmark lower on it than with xp.

look at people who do racing with their cars.

even though they get better engines and tweak them for max speed, they still do weight reduction mods to their car because you cant say that the engine is so powerful that the weight wont matter

generally with a OS you want to os to use at little as possible so there will be more left over for actual work

if you get paid 170 billion a year because you quadrupled your oil prices. i bet you would still get pissed off if i stole $5 from you

just because computers are faster, doesn't mean they need to make the os exponentially harder to run while adding only a few tiny things that have nothing to do with productivity

if cars and planes followed the windows vista method, cars would weigh over 30 tons and planes would weigh more than an apartment building

but instead, cars today are much more powerful and weigh much less than cars from 60 years ago


look at professional programs like MAYA requirements can actually be lower than previous versions, each new version of maya benchmarks higher than older versions because they were able to understand what upgrade really means. in the professional world, time is money. no one wants to loose money because the programmers decided to add meaningless eye candy to the UI. photoshop cs3 is faster than photoshop CS2

and if you look at the upcomming CS4, it will be what seems to be up to 1000 times faster because it will be more efficient and they will be using the nvidia CUDA technology



vista has had a lot of poor drivers but most major companies have got their act together but still vista has lower gaming performance
June 4, 2008 9:54:59 PM

100% sure it is drivers as purplerat already identified (the Nvidia x64 drivers that shipped with Vista were fairly horrible!). Just head over to www.nvidia.com, slap on the latest driver and all should be sweet. Probably worth ensuring you have Vista SP1 as well as there are a few tweaks to file / network performance, but these wont make much difference in Oblivion.

I've been running Vista x64 since it first came out, and after a few teething issues it has been absolutely rock solid and performs well. Vista makes much better use of modern hardware (particularly machines with lots of RAM, contrary to some common misconceptions) although gaming is lagging slightly behind XP. There are also a lot of technical improvements in Vista to make it more manageble, stable and secure. And, no, I don't work for Microsoft!

There, first post on this forum after being a regular visitor to this site since around 2001. I'll go to bed before the flames start!

June 5, 2008 2:08:59 AM

Quote:
theres no such thing as higher requirements not mattering, get a car that has twice the horse poerr of your current car, then get a hitch and attach your old car to the new one and tow it, tell me how your new car seems to perform
he can have 4 trillion GHZ gaming PC and vista will still benchmark lower on it than with xp.

Razor, I know how fond you are of your off the wall nonsense analogies, but PCs are not cars. And yes when it comes to PCs there is a point where hardware will surpass the difference between two OSs or any two versions of software for any practical purpose, and many times improvements in software will allow for better performance of hardware (ie. 16bit ->32bit ->64bit, single threaded -> multi-threaded).
Anyways I'm not going to get into a Vista VS XP debate. It is clear to anybody with half a brain about the differences between Vista and XP that the amount of performance loss the OP describes based on the hardware and software he is using is not due to the difference in OSs. Both based on the link I provided as a reference and my own experience with a very similar system before I upgraded (actually a lesser system) I know that fps in the teens on Oblivion is too low for his specs regardless. So I’m trying to offer real help so that he can enjoy his game the way he wants without having to dump an OS which I’m sure wasn’t cheap. If you have any better suggestions - rather than just flinging rhetoric like a monkey does it’s feces - please feel free to chime in.
June 5, 2008 6:02:53 AM

his fps are defenantly too low but if he gets all latest drivers and still has some performance problems then it is the os mostly


also you brought up going from 16 bit to 32 bit. that was a welcome change because it allowed for more performance, but vista did not do anything like that, all they really did was add more eye candy and a few other features that do nothing in terms of productivity.

I will only call a new OS an upgrade when it actually improves speed and performance (and time shifting doesn't count )

PS even the latest 64 bit drivers have problems with some games, (for example of a game that is painful to run 64 bit, second life. bad drivers + bad game engine = hell )

so he may get some improvement by getting the latest ones but theres still a chance that he wont get the best performance he can get from from a game running in vista

PS every new windows release except vista added something new in terms of speed and performance.

(most newer versions of windows, increased max supported memory, added support for multiple cores, and added new file systems which allowed for support for larger filesizes and other things that improved productivity, vista did none of this, and don't say it is safer because if that was true, I wouldn't be making twice as much money than i did before vista came out, with all of the people having problems with vista (mainly spyware and trojans if there is any added security, it is so small that nothing can detect it )

and crazy analogies are fun lol
June 5, 2008 1:26:06 PM

OK Razor, go right ahead and keep arguing Vista VS XP by yourself. Enjoy! But the question was about game performance in a particular game, not about what OS is better. The truth is that 50% performance loss is not acceptable and Vista is not the excuse.
Now back to the OPs question. Another driver related issue could be reflected in whether or not you are using Vsync and what happens when you turn it on or off?
June 5, 2008 2:52:27 PM

Turn off AA is a good bet since you have to force it in drivers, plus Oblivion doesn't need it, IMO. I get some performance drop in Vista compared to XP, but I only notice it in Quake Wars.
June 5, 2008 3:30:20 PM

I was not arguing which os was better, I was talking about vista as being demanding as ONE of the reasons why he has lag, not the only reason, just one of the reasons (basically means it can be a number of things, but thats just one of the many reasons )

make something thats harder to run, and it will run slower, add that with bad drivers since 64 bit is not a main focus of nvidia and you can end up with a laggy game
June 5, 2008 5:03:18 PM

Razor just amazes me with every new post. Just some crazy German guy talking to himself off in a dark corner at the bar, while everyone else is just kind of staring at him, watching him occasionally flail his arm shouting "NO! You're wrong!"

How often are you wearing pants when you post, Razor?
June 5, 2008 5:13:11 PM

Oh Snap said:
Razor just amazes me with every new post. Just some crazy German guy talking to himself off in a dark corner at the bar, while everyone else is just kind of staring at him, watching him occasionally flail his arm shouting "NO! You're wrong!"

How often are you wearing pants when you post, Razor?


lol

I'm not German,

But if you need i can give some crazy analogies (even though they are sometimes a little crazy, they do hold some truth, make something harder to run, then it will run slower. unless they do something major like increasing supported memory, allowing more cpu cores, better multi threading and other things that will improve performance ) :) 
June 5, 2008 5:25:20 PM

Quantum computer. Vista hurts its performance while Vista doesn't affect performance. Oh Snap!
June 5, 2008 6:20:20 PM

I do wonder why you'd bother installing 64-bit Vista with only 2gb of RAM, but even so you shouldn't be having the problems you're seeing now, assuming you have SP1 installed.

If you really did an upgrade and not a fresh install then that may be part of the problem. Will Vista64 even upgrade an XP32 install? If that's what happened then there are probably some driver problems. I would never recommend doing an upgrade install of any OS.

This article contradicts the theory that XP outperforms Vista. It doesn't review Oblivion but it does benchmark Crysis, Supreme Commander, and World in Conflict. Thanks to scotteq for linking it in another post.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302495,00.a...

Quote:
If you were expecting a huge drop in performance as your eyes scanned from the XP to the Vista results, well, surprise! As many a tech analyst predicted, Windows Vista's gaming performance conundrum has largely been solved, and it was mainly due to early graphics drivers.

In fact, I'd been planning to run a few other gaming tests, but the results from these were so uninteresting that further work didn't seem merited. Love it or hate it, Vista is performing far better than it used to.

Game performance, it seems, has been exorcised from your concern when choosing a Microsoft operating system. That leaves a few other factors, of course: stability, responsiveness, eye candy, price, DirectX version, and a few other odds and ends.

It took about a year and a half, but the performance gap between Vista and its forerunner has finally evaporated.
June 5, 2008 7:48:23 PM

victordilorenzo said:

E8400
EVGA 8800GT superclocked edition
2 gigs pc 800 ram dual channel mode
Seagate 7200.8 (yeah I know its old)


One thing I am noticing in your specs is that you are only running 2gigs of ram. I would suggest getting another 2gigs. Vista seems to use alot of ram. Plus I am pretty sure a game like Oblivion is using alot as well. I am running Vista Ultimate 64bit and it seems to sit around 1gig or a little bit more just running windows.


June 5, 2008 8:50:36 PM

vista is able to unload some of that memory into pagefile to allow more for the game to use, while it does help the game a bit, it does cause problems for when closing really large programs.

on vista, large programs will take much longer to close due to all of the hard drive activity when it us unloading the large program and then shoving it's crap back into memory

also after running a very large program for a while, the superfetch becomes almost useless

I tried oblivion on my vista install and it ran fine for me

the only way for me to tell it was any slower was to use the tdt command to show the frame rates

while it was slower for me, it was only a little bit slower. I am using the 32 bit version of vista, most startup items and services disabled,

Motherboard:
CPU Type DualCore AMD Opteron 170, 2726 MHz (9.5 x 287)
Motherboard Name Asus A8V (5 PCI, 1 AGP, 4 DDR DIMM, Audio, Gigabit LAN)
Motherboard Chipset VIA K8T800Pro, AMD Hammer
System Memory 2048 MB (PC3200 DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (03/15/06)

Display:
Video Adapter NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra (256 MB)
3D Accelerator nVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra
Monitor Plug and Play Monitor [NoDB] (L950B0293914)

not sure what oblivion has against 64 bit

it may be a mixture of bad drivers and the problem with 32 bit apps being slower when run on a 64 bit OS (or he may have like 70 running processes )

while higher end games may have trouble with vista (when the videocard is not a bottleneck like in the benchmark of that article that the other user posted), lower end games seem to run ok when the system is not as stressed by the game
June 6, 2008 6:22:39 PM

Hmmm... Pretty graphs... Think one could be made showing the relative IQ of posters in the Internet over the last 10 years??? Might be enlightening...



Anyways - I agree with our Rodent friend: Check to make sure your drivers are up to date, especially the video. The newest is something like a month old, so if you'rs are older than that.

The other thing I would point out - You 'Upgraded' your installation instead of a fresh install. No telling what kind of trash remains...


Some things you can do:

Speed boot times:
http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/131758-speed-up-compu...

and

Some general performance tips:
http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/81176-speed-up-perfor...


Get a GOOD Defragger - One that does system files when the system starts up.

Also, if you're more advanced, check the registry that your CPU cache size is set correctly. If it's not, correcting that can sometimes make a noticable difference:
http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/75681-cpu-l2-cache-me...
June 7, 2008 8:47:08 AM

razor512 said:
vista is able to unload some of that memory into pagefile to allow more for the game to use, while it does help the game a bit, it does cause problems for when closing really large programs..........



.....it may be a mixture of bad drivers and the problem with 32 bit apps being slower when run on a 64 bit OS (or he may have like 70 running processes )


I'm not saying your wrong, but i have found that Crysis runs better in 32bit mode versus 64bit.

64bit DX9 vs 32bit DX9
Average FPS: 41.13 Average FPS: 44.43

Its not an earth shattering difference but shouldn't 64bit Native run better?

And when using DX10 the Results are pretty much the same, 38FPS with a difference of .21 in favor of 32bit.

I will join those saying Driver issues or Upgrade vs Fresh Install issues.
With a hint of 2gig w/64bit hurting him some(big maybe)
June 7, 2008 5:08:56 PM

I'm running Vista 64 with much of the same spec hardware - it runs wonderfully on my system. What gives me about a 20 FPS boost is a wonderful tweakguide by the master of gaming tweakguides @ www.tweakguides.com. Go there, and you'll see Oblivion on the left hand side of the page. It has great tweaks for memory handling (takes better advantage of your good amount of RAM). The tweaks that enable the use of multi-threading really, really help with rendering of trees and grass.
Take some time and follow the advanced .ini tweaks - invaluable for this great game! I will NEVER play this game without tweaking it. Night and Day, Brother!
Take Care All!
!