Huuuge Performance Boost!!! Thread - MISERY mod for S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat

I need all the performance I can get. So one of the first things I do with big mods like Misery is compress the damn textures.

Optimizer <----- CLICK IT

1. Open the program.
2. Navigate to your textures dir.
3. Select Minimum (safe) preset.
4. Click start and wait.

You should end up with around 400mb savings. It will keep the same resolution as before. You probably won't notice a difference visually but you may see a nice performance increase. It helps my stutters.

Alternatively there is a compressed texture pack in this thread.

Edited by: akkalat85

400mb? Compared to the texture pack it is weak-sauce, as the pack saves ~2GB (and bilinear filtering has been applied to the textures, so difference isn't that noticeable).

Either way, i didn't come here to gloat, i just intended to tell you, that DDSopt (originally meant for Skyrim, found here: Skyrim.nexusmods.com) also works like a charm (unless you tick the wrong options :/).

However, could anyone clarify compression to me: doesn't it just affect the textures' file size on the disk, e.g. the texture is decompressed to "native format" once loaded into memory? Asking this, because it appears to apply to some other engines, such as Construct 2: Scirra.com

Edited by: Stiivais

Stiivais wrote: 400mb? Compared to the texture pack it is weak-sauce, as the pack saves ~2GB (and bilinear filtering has been applied to the textures, so difference isn't that noticeable).

Either way, i didn't come here to gloat, i just intended to tell you, that DDSopt (originally meant for Skyrim, found here: Skyrim.nexusmods.com) also works like a charm (unless you tick the wrong options :/).

However, could anyone clarify compression to me: doesn't it just affect the textures' file size on the disk, e.g. the texture is decompressed to "native format" once loaded into memory? Asking this, because it appears to apply to some other engines, such as Construct 2: Scirra.com

But isn't there a way to compress textures without down scaling the resolution that much? my objective was to compress them a bit yet leave resolution close to the original.

Thanks i saved around 400mb aswell. My game is already running perfectly on dx10 almost maxed... but that's the thing i want to max it so this comes handy x). I'm also using SweetFx and it looks awesome so far thanks everyone!

Someone wrote: 400mb? Compared to the texture pack it is weak-sauce, as the pack saves ~2GB (and bilinear filtering has been applied to the textures, so difference isn't that noticeable).

I dunno, I think that the difference in quality is huge.
However, I tried this optimization on vanilla textures, and now I am regularly getting "out of memory" crashes (almost never happened before). I can see the memory consumption in windows task manager running on the second monitor, as soon as the xrEngine > 2GB -> out of memory crash. Not sure if its the optimization or me doing some obscure settings change late at night.

usersd wrote:

Stiivais wrote: 400mb? Compared to the texture pack it is weak-sauce, as the pack saves ~2GB (and bilinear filtering has been applied to the textures, so difference isn't that noticeable).

Either way, i didn't come here to gloat, i just intended to tell you, that DDSopt (originally meant for Skyrim, found here: Skyrim.nexusmods.com) also works like a charm (unless you tick the wrong options :/).

However, could anyone clarify compression to me: doesn't it just affect the textures' file size on the disk, e.g. the texture is decompressed to "native format" once loaded into memory? Asking this, because it appears to apply to some other engines, such as Construct 2: Scirra.com

But isn't there a way to compress textures without down scaling the resolution that much? my objective was to compress them a bit yet leave resolution close to the original.

If you follow my link in my OP, it doesn't rescale, it simply compresses. The resolution does not change

bear_grill wrote:

Someone wrote: 400mb? Compared to the texture pack it is weak-sauce, as the pack saves ~2GB (and bilinear filtering has been applied to the textures, so difference isn't that noticeable).

I dunno, I think that the difference in quality is huge.
However, I tried this optimization on vanilla textures, and now I am regularly getting "out of memory" crashes (almost never happened before). I can see the memory consumption in windows task manager running on the second monitor, as soon as the xrEngine > 2GB -> out of memory crash. Not sure if its the optimization or me doing some obscure settings change late at night.

It can't be the mod. If you selected safe mode then all it will do is compress 400mb out of your textures. It can't possibly use more memory than it did before applying this. I would advise you only compress the gamedata/textures folder. The goal is to compress the big textures that come with Misery and not those included in the original game. It's always a good idea to backup your gamedata/textures folder before running this program. I run on 1920x1080 on a 42" LCD and I don't notice any difference in quality, only a boost to performance. Remember, you aren't resizing the textures, you are just making their filesize smaller so you shouldn't notice a change in quality.

Edited by: akkalat85

Someone wrote: It can't be the mod. If you selected safe mode then all it will do is compress 400mb out of your textures. It can't possibly use more memory than it did before applying this.

I know, I think that I had low res textures installed

Stiivais wrote: 400mb? Compared to the texture pack it is weak-sauce, as the pack saves ~2GB (and bilinear filtering has been applied to the textures, so difference isn't that noticeable).

Either way, i didn't come here to gloat, i just intended to tell you, that DDSopt (originally meant for Skyrim, found here: Skyrim.nexusmods.com) also works like a charm (unless you tick the wrong options :/).

However, could anyone clarify compression to me: doesn't it just affect the textures' file size on the disk, e.g. the texture is decompressed to "native format" once loaded into memory? Asking this, because it appears to apply to some other engines, such as Construct 2: Scirra.com

Compression not only saves size on your disc, but the trickle down effect is -400mb loaded on to VRAM. If you have a 1gb gpu like me this can save you from crashes and stutters. Honestly, I have no idea what goes on behind the scenes but the effects are very real. I gain about 5 fps at all times and have 0 stutters now.

Personally I've used Optimizer Textures program in all supported games. It has been around for many many years and has a great service record. It was originally meant for Fallout 3 but works in every Bethesda game and others. You literally make 2 clicks and it's done. It's the simplest compression tool I've ever used. DDSopt does the same thing. I prefer Optimizer because of its track record. It has been around for many years and has never failed me in any game.

Edited by: akkalat85

akkalat85 wrote:

Stiivais wrote: 400mb? Compared to the texture pack it is weak-sauce, as the pack saves ~2GB (and bilinear filtering has been applied to the textures, so difference isn't that noticeable).

Either way, i didn't come here to gloat, i just intended to tell you, that DDSopt (originally meant for Skyrim, found here: Skyrim.nexusmods.com) also works like a charm (unless you tick the wrong options :/).

However, could anyone clarify compression to me: doesn't it just affect the textures' file size on the disk, e.g. the texture is decompressed to "native format" once loaded into memory? Asking this, because it appears to apply to some other engines, such as Construct 2: Scirra.com

Compression not only saves size on your disc, but the trickle down effect is -400mb loaded on to VRAM. If you have a 1gb gpu like me this will save you from crashes and stutters.

Personally I've used Optimizer Textures program in all supported games. It has been around for many many years and has a great service record. It was originally meant for Fallout 3 but works in every Bethesda game as well as every STALKER game. You literally make 2 clicks and it's done. It's the simplest compression tool I've ever used. I used DDSopt in the past and had rather unpleasant results. That's just me though, everyone's different.

And this Texture optimizer does keep textures almost same quality? I never tried it out, please PM me for this utility tool. Thanks.

akkalat85 wrote: It does not decompress in game, your textures will be forever compressed.

Source? I'd like some clarification (since most engines either selectively or fully decompress textures as needed (implying that they are loaded to VRAM in compressed format, but decompressed for rendering)), however i am not sure about read times, since it is possible that it would be quicker with compression because less space would need to be accessed, then again 3GB to 2.6GB doesn't seem that much of an improvement).

Because, in case textures are indeed decompressed, that would mean that loading actually takes more time and might actually cause the fps to drop. I am asking this, because, as i said earlier, certain engines do this, and when i was playing around with texture compression settings (after rescaling them), i actually got worse performance with higher compression. While i understand that it might have just been a certain quirk in XnView (software i used for rescaling and bilinear filtering, before plugging into DDSopt for additional optimization), i'd like some more information about the tool you linked.

Edit: after poking around, i've found that it compresses most textures to DXT5 (which is good because of the accuracy alpha channel has), however i'd suggest that you change the "no mask" setting to either DXT3 or DXT5. Also, the tool does pretty much what i did with the texture pack, except that it doesn't decrease resolution (probably slightly worse performance, but great for people with slow connections, or not a whole lot of spare time (rescaling took me 8 hours >_>)).

However, i'd like to suggest that you make an imgur gallery showcasing the changes in quality (probably none, since you'd need to be really up close, but that's not the sole reason) and improvements in framerate. For example, i did it with my texture pack (Imgur.com), so people could make up their minds about possible decrease in texture quality vs improvement in performance (didn't see much changes, you sure that there is a noticeable difference in my pack? /nitpicking).

Also, here is a post which shows how much decreasing resolution affects quality/filesize (different compression levels showcased too): Forums.nexusmods.com

Edited by: Stiivais

Stiivais wrote:

akkalat85 wrote: It does not decompress in game, your textures will be forever compressed.

Source? I'd like some clarification (since most engines either selectively or fully decompress textures as needed (implying that they are loaded to VRAM in compressed format, but decompressed for rendering)), however i am not sure about read times, since it is possible that it would be quicker with compression because less space would need to be accessed, then again 3GB to 2.6GB doesn't seem that much of an improvement).

Because, in case textures are indeed decompressed, that would mean that loading actually takes more time and might actually cause the fps to drop. I am asking this, because, as i said earlier, certain engines do this, and when i was playing around with texture compression settings (after rescaling them), i actually got worse performance with higher compression. While i understand that it might have just been a certain quirk in XnView (software i used for rescaling and bilinear filtering, before plugging into DDSopt for additional optimization), i'd like some more information about the tool you linked.

Edit: after poking around, i've found that it compresses most textures to DXT5 (which is good because of the accuracy alpha channel has), however i'd suggest that you change the "no mask" setting to either DXT3 or DXT5. Also, the tool does pretty much what i did with the texture pack, except that it doesn't decrease resolution (probably slightly worse performance, but great for people with slow connections).

However, i'd like to suggest that you make an imgur gallery showcasing the changes in quality (probably none, since you'd need to be really up close, but that's not the sole reason) and improvements in framerate. For example, i did it with my texture pack (Imgur.com), so people could make up their minds about possible decrease in texture quality vs improvement in performance (didn't see much changes, you sure that there is a noticeable difference in my pack? /nitpicking).

Also, here is a post which shows how much decreasing resolution affects quality/filesize (different compression levels showcased too): Forums.nexusmods.com

Like I said, based on my experience running safe mode compression has removed all traces of stutter that were left. My fps is higher. If you want documentation follow the link and read up on it because I am no artist, I have no idea what the differences in DXT1/DXT5 are or anything like that. I know that I gain fps and never crash after applying this to both Fallouts and Skyrim. In the 24 hours since I've compressed Misery textures I run 5-10 fps higher at all times.

Bare in mind the author is foreign so his english is a little broken, but you should be able to understand him. He has the file uploaded to FO3/FNV/Skyrim Nexus. It is generally regarded as a great program by the modding community. I'm not going to upload before and after pics because I didn't backup the originals. It's too much of a hassle for me to redownload/reinstall Misery textures. Sorry :{

Obviously only compress if your system needs it. If you are running >1080p with no lag then this program is useless. There is a small difference in texture quality, but this is only really noticeable if your idea of gaming is staring at textures at arms length haha.

This is the program author's own words:

=====================================================
Features:
-----------------------------------------------------

• Compress BMP, TGA, DDS (unoptimized) to DXT5 and DXT1
• Make mipmaps to improve performance
• Delete unnecessary files (identical BMP=TGA=DDS, thumbs.db, pspbrwse.jbf, ...)
• Fixes: Alpha Channel, Wrong Size (Ex: 100x30 => 128x32)
• Resizes: Patterns (16x16 or 4x4), Optionally resize textures
• Optimizer BSA (Compact, Merge internal Files) <------ (only for Bethesda games, ignore)
• Automatic backup changed files

consequently:

• decreases some stuttering
• fixes crash/CTD caused by bursting of VRAM <------ (this is important)
• free hard drive space / reduces the size of the MOD

Edited by: akkalat85

Did you just optimize mod textures or all textures? Also, are they in different folders? I selected maximum and selected the gamedata/textures folder yet it only shaved about 200 megs. Not bad, but maybe I frakked up somewhere.

Edited by: usersd

I must suggest that if anyone uses this, do not change resolutions of the textures!!! If you want smaller res and more fps boost download Stiivais' rescaled textures. If you try to change the resolution yourself using this program IT WILL BREAK YOUR TEXTURES. Remember, only Minimum (safe) mode preset is recommended by me, the others could hurt you.

DO NOT make mipmaps!
DO NOT resize patterns!
DO NOT resize down!

usersd wrote: Did you just optimize mod textures or all textures? Also, are they in different folders? I selected maximum and selected the gamedata/textures folder yet it only shaved about 200 megs. Not bad, but maybe I frakked up somewhere.

Maximum!? I said Minimum! Jeez, hopefully you backed up your original textures. It automatically backs up to c:\Textures Backup. You messed something up. We all downloaded the same textures, so we should all end up with around -400mb savings. Only compress "gamedata/textures" and not the entire STALKER directory.

I know exactly what you did. You select Max instead of Min. In doing so you have not only compressed the textures, you have also just created mipmaps for all the textures as well as resizing the tiles 16x16. You only saved 200mb because it created an additional 200mb of mipmaps. I suggest you start over and only select MINIMUM. I can guarantee that you will come across broken textures if left the way you have it now. I know, I tried

Edited by: akkalat85

You know, thanks for the feedback. :)

A couple of things, though:
1.) you don't necessarily have to reinstall misery, because of textures:
just rename your current textures folder inside of gamedata/,
go to the folder where misery installer is, inside of data folder, there is a gamedata folder,
MOVE the textures over to your current gamedata, voila, you have default textures!

To take screenshots get something like EVGA Precision X, that monitors your fps (Fraps works too with overlay enabled) and take screenshots in a couple of places, making savegames right after capture. Then switch your textures back, load the saves, make sure the weather is the same, take more pictures.
The it's just a matter of editing them together and uploading the results.

2.) changing sizes shouldn't mess up anything, besides:
user interface (e.g. icons), > DELETE UI FOLDER
loading screens, > DELETE INTRO FOLDER
scopes, > DELETE CERTAIN FILES IN WPN FOLDER
all skyboxes. > DELETE SKY FOLDER

However it's entirely possible that they will get TERRIBLE quality, because it is likely that the default filtering when resizing is next to none.

Cheers!

akkalat85 wrote: I must suggest that if anyone uses this, do not change resolutions of the textures!!! If you want smaller res and more fps boost download Stiivais' rescaled textures. If you try to change the resolution yourself using this program IT WILL BREAK YOUR TEXTURES. Remember, only Minimum (safe) mode preset is recommended by me, the others could hurt you.

DO NOT make mipmaps!
DO NOT resize patterns!
DO NOT resize down!

usersd wrote: Did you just optimize mod textures or all textures? Also, are they in different folders? I selected maximum and selected the gamedata/textures folder yet it only shaved about 200 megs. Not bad, but maybe I frakked up somewhere.

Maximum!? I said Minimum! Jeez, hopefully you backed up your original textures. It automatically backs up to c:\Textures Backup. You messed something up. We all downloaded the same textures, so we should all end up with around -400mb savings. Only compress "gamedata/textures" and not the entire STALKER directory.

I know exactly what you did. You select Max instead of Min. In doing so you have not only compressed the textures, you have also just created mipmaps for all the textures as well as resizing the tiles 16x16. You only saved 200mb because it created an additional 200mb of mipmaps. I suggest you start over and only select MINIMUM. I can guarantee that you will come across broken textures if left the way you have it now. I know, I tried

Makes sense. Of course I backed up the originals, i've been around for a while. The maximum was done primarily for testing. I've done minimum(safe) before, and the result was essentially the same, except for slighty reduced size. Performance is exactly the same and, curiously, i've been playing for a while and no textures were broken.

I've also tried ddsopt, but it screws up some textures such as wind and smoke. I can work around that, but performance is basically equal to non-compressed tex's.

usersd wrote:

akkalat85 wrote: I must suggest that if anyone uses this, do not change resolutions of the textures!!! If you want smaller res and more fps boost download Stiivais' rescaled textures. If you try to change the resolution yourself using this program IT WILL BREAK YOUR TEXTURES. Remember, only Minimum (safe) mode preset is recommended by me, the others could hurt you.

DO NOT make mipmaps!
DO NOT resize patterns!
DO NOT resize down!

usersd wrote: Did you just optimize mod textures or all textures? Also, are they in different folders? I selected maximum and selected the gamedata/textures folder yet it only shaved about 200 megs. Not bad, but maybe I frakked up somewhere.

Maximum!? I said Minimum! Jeez, hopefully you backed up your original textures. It automatically backs up to c:\Textures Backup. You messed something up. We all downloaded the same textures, so we should all end up with around -400mb savings. Only compress "gamedata/textures" and not the entire STALKER directory.

I know exactly what you did. You select Max instead of Min. In doing so you have not only compressed the textures, you have also just created mipmaps for all the textures as well as resizing the tiles 16x16. You only saved 200mb because it created an additional 200mb of mipmaps. I suggest you start over and only select MINIMUM. I can guarantee that you will come across broken textures if left the way you have it now. I know, I tried

Makes sense. Of course I backed up the originals, i've been around for a while. The maximum was done primarily for testing. I've done minimum(safe) before, and the result was essentially the same, except for slighty reduced size. Performance is exactly the same and, curiously, i've been playing for a while and no textures were broken.

I've also tried ddsopt, but it screws up some textures such as wind and smoke. I can work around that, but performance is basically equal to non-compressed tex's.

Strange. When I was testing the boundaries I got very bad results from creating mipmaps and rescaling. Very strange anomalies like a jumbled menu screen, missing textures, low res textures next to hi res textures, etc. I suppose everyone's mmv. I can only safely vouch for minimum compression as I'm sure it won't cause errors. Maybe my dated gpu has something to do with artifacts after max compression.

Edited by: akkalat85

Whelp, it's all in the parameters, as DDSopt changes a whole lot of parameters by default, which it shouldn't.
You have to pretty much untick everything... >_>

Edit: Also, i'm not sure that +5 fps is a huuuge boost... Just saying.
Either way, anyone up for minecraft level textures?

Edited by: Stiivais

akkalat85 wrote:

usersd wrote:

akkalat85 wrote: I must suggest that if anyone uses this, do not change resolutions of the textures!!! If you want smaller res and more fps boost download Stiivais' rescaled textures. If you try to change the resolution yourself using this program IT WILL BREAK YOUR TEXTURES. Remember, only Minimum (safe) mode preset is recommended by me, the others could hurt you.

DO NOT make mipmaps!
DO NOT resize patterns!
DO NOT resize down!

usersd wrote: Did you just optimize mod textures or all textures? Also, are they in different folders? I selected maximum and selected the gamedata/textures folder yet it only shaved about 200 megs. Not bad, but maybe I frakked up somewhere.

Maximum!? I said Minimum! Jeez, hopefully you backed up your original textures. It automatically backs up to c:\Textures Backup. You messed something up. We all downloaded the same textures, so we should all end up with around -400mb savings. Only compress "gamedata/textures" and not the entire STALKER directory.

I know exactly what you did. You select Max instead of Min. In doing so you have not only compressed the textures, you have also just created mipmaps for all the textures as well as resizing the tiles 16x16. You only saved 200mb because it created an additional 200mb of mipmaps. I suggest you start over and only select MINIMUM. I can guarantee that you will come across broken textures if left the way you have it now. I know, I tried

Makes sense. Of course I backed up the originals, i've been around for a while. The maximum was done primarily for testing. I've done minimum(safe) before, and the result was essentially the same, except for slighty reduced size. Performance is exactly the same and, curiously, i've been playing for a while and no textures were broken.

I've also tried ddsopt, but it screws up some textures such as wind and smoke. I can work around that, but performance is basically equal to non-compressed tex's.

Strange. When I was testing the boundaries I got very bad results from creating mipmaps and rescaling. Very strange anomalies like a jumbled menu screen, missing textures, low res textures next to hi res textures, etc. I suppose everyone's mmv. I can only safely vouch for minimum compression as I'm sure it won't cause errors. Maybe my dated gpu has something to do with artifacts after max compression.

Might be, as far as i know compression is made through the gpu, at least partially, so outdated parameters might be the cause. I'm on 5770 though, not exactly top of the line either. But yeah, been playing and no textures seem off, and I even compressed generally problematic ones like dynamic hud.

OK guys... I tested out all options and some. Stiivais's lowres texture gives the best performance and least stuttering on actual gameplay (moving around, firefights, big group of NPCs, etc instead of staring at one fixed place as FPS do not dictate smooth gameplay. ). Compressing textures also mean the loading screen takes a little longer. Screen shot here Imgur.com

• A) MISERY2.0.1
  Texture folder = 3.02 GB
  Indoor fps = 19 - 20
  Outdoor a fps = 41 - 42
  Outdoor b fps = 28
  Comment: Much stuttering and loading. fps drops drastically upon quick movements.

• B) MISERY2.0.1 + STIIVAIS LOWRES TEXTURE
  Texture folder = 1.05 GB
  Indoor fps = 19 - 21
  Outdoor a fps = 40 - 42
  Outdoor b fps = 28
  Comment: *Missing grass at long distance.* Stutter rarely and loading is much faster. fps is quite consistent upon quick movements. *RECOMMENDED*

• C) MISERY2.0.1 + TEXTURE COMPRESSION
  Texture folder = 2.54 GB
  Indoor fps = 20 - 21
  Outdoor a fps = 42
  Outdoor b fps = 28
  Comment: A little stuttering and some loading. fps drops upon quick movements.

• D) MISERY2.0.1 + STIIVAIS LOWRES TEXTURE + TEXTURE COMPRESSION
  Texture folder = 1.04 GB
  Indoor fps = 20 - 21
  Outdoor a fps = 42 - 43
  Outdoor b fps = 28
  Comment: *Missing grass at long distance.* Stutter rarely and loading is much faster. fps is quite consistent upon quick movements.

(All savegame are loaded twice to ensure all assets are fully loaded into memory)

Edited by: mocmocmoc

Wow, thanks for the numbers. You deserve a freakin gold star or something. I can't believe you used them both and shaved 2 gigs off your texture folder lol.

akkalat85 wrote: Wow, thanks for the numbers. You deserve a freakin gold star or something. I can't believe you used them both and shaved 2 gigs off your texture folder lol.

Compressing/optimizing the texture may reduce file size but it will also take longer to load them!

As you can see the FPS remain pretty much the same, the culprit of the stuttering (which gives us the illusion of low fps) is from decompressing and loading textures into memory and vice versa.

I decided to stick to just using Stiivai's lowres texture pack since you won't notice the difference in quality during fast actions but the performance gained is enough to make it my recommended choice. NOTE: I did not use his \trees & \vine because of the disappearing grasses from long distance (as you can see from the screenshot)

bump down the graphic sliders (from all max) to a notch or two gives me 40-60 fps outdoor and 25 fps indoor but most importantly, smooth gameplay!
My pc spec is pretty dated (i7 860 & 5770) so this makes me a happy guy.

here is my personal settings I.imgur.com

@mocmocmoc, if you're gpu bound to lower framerates, disable SSAO, wet surfaces, soft particles/water. I'd rather have AA than those features.

Also what are your system specs?

edit: reporting back with my findings

Using dx9 + stiivais's reduced textures has minimalised stuttering. FPS degredation over time also seems to be solved, however I'm not sure if this is from switching from dx10/11 to dx9, using the reduced textures, or a combination of the two. I might switch back to dx11 later tonight and see how it goes. (editx2: dx11 + reduced tex seems fine. Less fps overall obviously (30-60 outdoors), but no signs of severe degradation over time. Hooray! I assume since misery's textures are 2.9gb total and only having 2gb vram had something to do with it. If that's the case though I would assume everyone would be experiencing the same problem? Perhaps the problem is more specific than that.)

System specs:
win8 x64, misery 2.0.1
amd 7870 (2gb vram)
i5 2500k (stock)
8gb ddr3 ram

rough in-game settings:
dx9 (enhanced full dynamic lighting)
max AA, max object/tex detail, max view distance
no SSAO
pretty much everything else high

I get about ~100fps indoors, 40-60 outdoors. Can sprint for a long while before any stuttering, which is also quite small compared to pre-reduced tex/dx11 playing.

Another difference I noticed between dx11 and 9 is loading times. When you load a save (on the first startup of the game) in dx11, clicking load seems to stall the game for maybe ~20 seconds before the loading screen actually takes place. Dx9 did not have this. I'd love to know what's going on here if anyone has an idea. Also the reduced textures obviously make loading MUCH quicker. I'm probably going to revert some specific textures though, ie for the weapons and suit I use, anything that gets a lot of screen space and/or time. Some larger models (skadovsk) also are noticeably much worse due, presumably because their original texel density wasn't on par with smaller models.

Edited by: Bek

mocmocmoc wrote:

akkalat85 wrote: Wow, thanks for the numbers. You deserve a freakin gold star or something. I can't believe you used them both and shaved 2 gigs off your texture folder lol.

Compressing/optimizing the texture may reduce file size but it will also take longer to load them!
As you can see the FPS remain pretty much the same, the culprit of the stuttering (which gives us the illusion of low fps) is from decompressing and loading textures into memory and vice versa.

Not necessarily: Rigsofrods.com
Also: Jacksondunstan.com
I assume that the technology used doesn't differ much in CoP.

mocmocmoc wrote:

• B) MISERY2.0.1 + STIIVAIS LOWRES TEXTURE
  Texture folder = 2.61 GB
  Indoor fps = 19 - 21
  Outdoor a fps = 40 - 42
  Outdoor b fps = 28
  Comment: *Missing grass at long distance.* Stutter rarely and loading is much faster. fps is quite consistent upon quick movements. *RECOMMENDED

You sure you installed the whole thing + the patch?
This is how the texture folder is supposed to be (with my pack + the patch for the pack, no optimizations)...

Edited by: Stiivais

thanks.. gee what an embarrassing mistake! no idea how i got the initial number but i rechecked and I was wrong! fixed!

Does your lowres \trees screw up your grasses from a distant as it does mine? (see screenshots in my post above)

mocmocmoc wrote: thanks.. gee what an embarrassing mistake! no idea how i got the initial number but i rechecked and I was wrong! fixed!
Does your lowres \trees screw up your grasses from a distant as it does mine? (see screenshots in my post above)

Yep, i guess it's just the way LOD is handled.
However, the object detail parameter seemed to fix this a bit.

Also, as akkalat said:

For mocmocmoc - "eh is a pretty cool guy, and doesn't afraid of anything!"

Edited by: Stiivais