No microstuttering affects all multi-GPU setups because of the frame time variation between subsequent frames in AFR. It's basically fast frame, slow frame, fast frame, slow frame, on and on. You won't notice it when FPS is high but once it gets down to 30-40 FPS most people will feel it. The difference in smoothness at 30 FPS between single GPU and multi-GPU is massive because of the microstuttering. The frame time variation and hence microstuttering is even worse in CrossFire due to the runts, drops, tearing, etc. caused by its frame pacing issues.
You are absolutely right that its an issue if fps is flying up and down, but if its somewhat stabile, then its not an issue. Look at the link i made to guru3d on the previous page - the added frame latency from sli is less than 2 ms (and usually not even 1 ms)... aka not something you could register at all. It was noticable in the old days, where it took frame latency from 16.6 at 60 fps, to 33.3, but today sli microstutter is really a thing of the past.
The GTX 770 SLI in that test is rendering well in excess of 60 FPS. Like I said, microstuttering isn't noticeable when FPS is high, and at what FPS you start feeling it also depends on how sensitive you are to that sort of thing. I definitely start noticing it around 40 FPS, but others may not feel it until 30 FPS or even lower. The point is, if single GPU and SLI both get you 30-40 FPS, single GPU is preferable since it's obviously going to feel much smoother. And if SLI gets you the exact same FPS as single GPU does, how can you say that SLI is truly working?
You are absolutely right, that if your cpu cant render more than 40 fps, then you are better off with disabling sli... but you can easily see if sli actually works. Set render quality to 1.41 or 2, and try it with sli on/off, and see what feels the smoothest / has the highest fps. It only seems to you like sli isnt working, because youre are in a situation, where the cpu stress is alot higher than the gpu stress... but by doing the above, youll swap that around
What? Um just no. It's like we're not even playing the same game. Great FPS at Warp Gate: http://www.mediafire.com/view/bi1a6go5bxti4xi/PlanetSide2_2014_02_07_17_44_47_933.bmp BS during Tech Plant Zerg: http://www.mediafire.com/view/1yy98bk2099k801/PlanetSide2_2014_02_07_18_09_42_615.bmp Even more BS while flying ESF: http://www.mediafire.com/view/40r6e11c1cktozr/PlanetSide2_2014_02_07_18_08_10_578.bmp I have Smoothing on, so capped at 56-58 FPS. Doesn't make a damn difference though when I'm getting 10 FPS.
That screenshot doesn't tell me anything about your CPU and how the game was working it. Look at what sensors are in my OSD. Sure, your GPU usage is very low and your FPS is kinda low (I would still kill for 40 FPS), but was CPU really the bottleneck there? Correlation does not imply causation, especially given how screwed up the optimization in this game is. I get 30% GPU and CPU usage and <20 FPS and the game still tells me I'm bottlenecked by the GPU? What the flying ****?!?
Microstutter is a thing of the past? If you're using SLI in a game that supports it. If you're using CrossFire in any DX9 game, it's still very much a thing of the present, even on their latest GPU's.
Blackdove - i was specifically talking about current nvidia cards here - amd isnt a part of this thread, as its about sli Octiceps - woa, yeah that is like we arent playing the same game... im 100% certain that the reason for your very low fps isnt sli. Have you looked at every sensor in hwinfo64, to see if something is reaching its limits? Im thinking like the memory controller on the gpu orsomething like that. Im guessing you have already unparked your cpu cores. Thats right, i dont have anything but gpu info on my old screenshots, but ill take some new ones for you today but it was an obvious cpu bottleneck back then, as my old i7 920 wasnt really 100 % up for driving my 680 sli... and the issue is completly gone now that i have my 4930k
Okay, i just took this at Indar bay point, with 48+ vs 48+ http://imageshack.com/a/img593/9863/dvxc.jpg As you can see, my gpu usage is pretty much the same as on non-action screenshots (with v-sync enabled), cause the fps is locked at 59.9, but the cpu usuage is WAY higher. In addition, i can tell you, that if i werent using sli while in combat, id be getting sliiightly lower fps... something like 55... but ill take a screenshot of that later
Another screenshot, this time from an Amp station http://imageshack.com/a/img690/567/lwa9.jpg Same case as before... 48+ vs 48+... gpu usage pretty much the same, and very high cpu usage.
GPU Memory Controller Load? Never went above 50% according to HWiNFO64. Nothing else was close to reaching its limits either. Cores are unparked by default. Total CPU usage at 16.4% and 19% counts as "very high CPU usage?" Are you looking at the right number here? Again, hard to tell what's going on with your CPU. Not enough granularity in the CPU readout in the OSD.
Octiceps - yes and no... the cores are unparked, but the hyperthreads are not, and will slow your system, if you dont make sure everything is unparked. Well this game is notorious for bottlenecking on core 1, on which you can see load is very high, on the high populated area screenshots... youll never get high overall cpu usage in this game. If you look at the screenie i took at warpgate, where the fps was about 60, core 1 was at 20% load... at the amp station core 1 was at roughly 70% load. I find that core 1 and overall usage, along with temperature, is all you need to know about the cpu, which are the 3 numbers youll find below the gpu info
Trust me, my cores are unparked. I can verify it in Resource Monitor and I would know if they were parked. I've manually unparked cores by altering the Windows Registry values on other systems. Do my screenshots suggest in any way that CPU core 1 is bottlenecking? I don't think so.
I dont claim that you are bottlenecking on core 1 - i honestly have no idea what your issue is, for getting that kind of fps... even if your cpu is slightly slower, you shouldnt get below like 40 fps. But do share if you figure it out
Trust me, if I knew what the problem was I would've fixed it yesterday. But between the OS reformats, reinstalling the game (both Steam and standalone versions) countless times, overclocking, trying every optimization trick and hack in the book, and testing it all out on my four other computers, I've just about given up on trying to diagnose and solve the game-breaking performance issues with PS2. More than anything else, game updates seem to make-it-or-break-it for me. PU01 uglified the game while halving my frame rate and introducing regular FPS drops to almost zero, which made me stop playing for two months. After some patches in January, the drastic FPS drops are gone but average frame rate is still half of what it was before PU01. And I'm sure this has been said time and again by every single person on here who's suffered poor performance, but every other game I own runs flawlessly at much higher settings and with arguably much better graphical quality than this game. It's just PlanetSide 2 that is extremely problematic. It's by far the worst-optimized game I've ever played.
I know, same here. Maybe you need to be posting on reddit, if you want an actual answer from SOE though.
It truely is strange that what people experience, though having fairly similar equipement, can be so different... as you can see on my screenshots, i dont suffer from any perfomance issues what so ever. Have you tried running the game with win7 ?
No I'm not gonna post on Reddit. There's no excuse for the devs paying more attention to Reddit than to the game's official forums and I'm not gonna perpetuate that. Not that I expect them to be of any help regardless. All my other computers except this one have Windows 7. It makes no difference. If anything, some games actually run a little faster in Windows 8 since it's a lower-overhead, Aero-less version of Windows 7 with under-the-hood optimizations for tablets and smartphones. Basically slightly better for games but absolutely asinine for everything else.
Octiceps : yeah, i have both win7 and win8... and i agree - aside from being slightly faster, i dislike win8 ALOT... so i only use win8 for my old laptop, which really benefits from the OS being faster... but on my stationary there is no chance in hell that ill swap to win8, unless they make an update, which makes it exactly like 7, except for performance.
