[SOLVED] That Fast Card Setting

[CorinaMarie 29,574]

[SOLVED] thanks to @rsc204

So, I'm trying to follow along with How to configure SC4 to work with your new hardware by @Mysteryous.

I have two disc versions of the game. One is SC4 + RH and the other is SC4 Deluxe. My game comps are identical with the exception of the video cards. Relevant specs are:

• Dell OptiPlex GX270
• 2.8 ghz CPU
• 2 Gig Ram
• 20 Gig EIDE Hard Drive
• Windoze XP Pro

On the one I call my 1st Dell SC4 Game Comp the video card is:

And its config-log.txt:

Spoiler

Log generated on 8/21/2016, 08:48

Flags
-----
hardwareDriver = true
DXT = true
fullscreen = true
MMX = true
FPU = true
backingStore = true
forcedFSAA = false

Strings
-------
userName = Administrator
appName = SimCity 4
version = 1.1.640.0
osVersion = Windows NT 5.1
computerName = CORI-2015-01-18
CPU = GenuineIntel
sglDriverName = DirectX
sglDriverVersion = 2.0
driverName = nv4_disp.dll
driverVersion = 6.14.10.5673, GUID: D7B71E3E-4052-11CF-D277-23B10EC2CD35
cardName = NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 (Microsoft Corporation)
cardVersion = Vendor: 10de, Device: 0312, Board: 91231462, Chipset: 00a1
cardIdentity = NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 (Microsoft Corporation)
soundDriverName = smwdm.sys
soundCardName = SoundMAX Digital Audio
buildType = Release

Numbers
-------
cpuSpeed = 2793
memory = 2048
freeMemory = 1724
screenWidth = 1024
screenHeight = 768
screenBPP = 16
videoMemory = 125
textureMemory = 125
textureStages = 8
bogoFPS = 0
bogoMPPS = 0

Rules
-----
applying Sound
applying high sound detail
applying City Detail and Day/Night Settings
applying City Detail and Day/Night Settings>
applying high computer power
  option 9 = 3
  option 13 = 1
  option 15 = 3
applying Texture Quality and Building Variety Settings
applying Texture Quality and Building Variety Settings>
applying high memory
  option 3 = 3
  option 14 = 3
applying Variable Speed Automata
applying default
  option 10 = 1
applying Standard hardware
  option 0 = 1
  option 1 = 1
  option 2 = 1
  option 4 = 0
  option 5 = 1
  option 8 = 1
  option 7 = 1
  option 6 = 1
  option 11 = 0
  option 12 = 0
applying Standard hardware>
  option 1 = 2
applying Standard hardware>>
  option 0 = 2
applying Standard hardware>>>
  option 2 = 2
applying Standard hardware>>>>
  option 4 = 1
applying Standard hardware>>>>>
  option 11 = 1
applying Two stages
applying Lotsa vidmem
applying Not Slow GeForce
applying Fast card
applying Fast card>
  option 12 = 1
applying Fast card>>
  option 1 = 3
applying Fast card>>>
  option 0 = 3
applying Fast card>>>>
  option 2 = 3
applying Fast card>>>>>
  option 4 = 1

Options
-------
Visual Effects       current:   3 recommended:   3
Cars/Sims            current:   3 recommended:   3
Shadows              current:   1 recommended:   3
Atmospheric effects  current:   0 recommended:   1
Water effects        current:   1 recommended:   1
Software/Hardware    current:   1 recommended:   1
Cursor               current:   1 recommended:   1
VariableSpeedAutomata current:   1 recommended:   1
Translucent UI       current:   1 recommended:   1
Graphic Detail       current:   3 recommended:   3
Building Load Speed  current:   3 recommended:   3
Texture Quality      current:   3 recommended:   3

Properties
-------
forcesoftwaredriver = false
renderdynamicview = true
renderstaticview = true
renderwatereffects = true
rendercloudsandfog = true
forcepointsampling = false
forcebilinear = false
forcenoalphablend = false
forcenoalphatest = false
rendershadows = true
renderdecals = true
usesecondstage = true
forcedebugtexture = false
renderparticleeffects = true
renderflorashadows = true
renderterrain = true
showupdateregions = false
usecursoreffects = true
drawlottextures = true
drawlotfoundations = true
drawlotwalls = true
forcetexturerepeat = false
usescreenshake = true
renderui = true
useupdaterectclipping = true
usevertexbuffers = true
showboundingboxes = false
useoverlayculling = true
rendersnapshot = false
noaddsigned = false
nopartialbackingstorecopies = false
usescreenflash = true
renderautomata = true
preferopaque = false
displayalertborders = true
drawlotopaquetextures = true
useviewcleanup = false
doautozoomandrotationchanges = true

viewoffsety = 0
viewoffsetx = 0
texturebits = 32
lodoffset = 0
shadowdebug = 0
maxparticlestarget = 10000
particlelodoffset = 0
effectprioritylevel = 5
backingstoremaxzoomall = 5
backingstoremaxzoombuildingsprops = 5
backingstoremaxzoomterrain = 5
backingstoremaxzoomflora = 5
shadowquality = 2
minvehiclezoom = 3
minpedzoom = 4
cursortype = 1
depthoffset = 2
debugtexture = 0
dirtyrectmergeframes = 2
sounddetail = 2
buildingvariety = 2
buildingloaderspeed = 1
modellodoffset = 0
stringtexturecachesize = 1024

particleeffectslod = 5
splattexturescale = 50
texbindmaxfree = 8
particledensity = 1
particledamping = 0
particlescale = 1
lightingupdatedelta = 0.0001
shadowmodelthreshold = 12
demolishmodelthreshold = 12
rendermodelthreshold = 6
rendermodelthresholdscroll = 40
particlesizethreshold = 300
maxvehiclepct = 1
maxpedpct = 1
opaqueuialphavalue = 0.55

 

The relevant part (I believe) being:

applying Not Slow GeForce
applying Fast card
applying Fast card>
  option 12 = 1
applying Fast card>>
  option 1 = 3
applying Fast card>>>
  option 0 = 3
applying Fast card>>>>
  option 2 = 3
applying Fast card>>>>>
  option 4 = 1

 

Using the same Region in the same City Tile here's what I see when I turn the map:

On the 1st Dell with the 128 mb video card it takes 7 seconds to draw all the trees. I'm assuming that is par for this course considering the antiqueness of the comp and card. However, what has me puzzled is the 2nd Dell has a 256 mb video card and it takes 11 seconds for the same re-draw.

That card is:

 

So, I tweaked these two files like this:

 

And here's its config-log.txt

Spoiler

Log generated on 8/21/2016, 09:31

Flags
-----
hardwareDriver = true
DXT = true
fullscreen = true
MMX = true
FPU = true
backingStore = true
forcedFSAA = false

Strings
-------
userName = Administrator
appName = SimCity 4
version = 1.1.640.0
osVersion = Windows NT 5.1
computerName = CORI-2015-01-18
CPU = GenuineIntel
sglDriverName = DirectX
sglDriverVersion = 2.0
driverName = ati2dvag.dll
driverVersion = 6.14.10.7070, GUID: D7B71EE2-D784-11CF-F576-2820AFC2CD35
cardName = VisionTek Radeon HD2400 Pro AGP
cardVersion = Vendor: 1002, Device: 94c4, Board: 281545, Chipset: 0000
cardIdentity = ATI, Radeon HD2400 Pro AGP
soundDriverName = smwdm.sys
soundCardName = SoundMAX Digital Audio
buildType = Release

Numbers
-------
cpuSpeed = 2793
memory = 2048
freeMemory = 1188
screenWidth = 1024
screenHeight = 768
screenBPP = 16
videoMemory = 628
textureMemory = 628
textureStages = 8
bogoFPS = 0
bogoMPPS = 0

Rules
-----
applying Sound
applying high sound detail
applying City Detail and Day/Night Settings
applying City Detail and Day/Night Settings>
applying high computer power
  option 9 = 3
  option 13 = 1
  option 15 = 3
applying Texture Quality and Building Variety Settings
applying Texture Quality and Building Variety Settings>
applying high memory
  option 3 = 3
  option 14 = 3
applying Variable Speed Automata
applying default
  option 10 = 1
applying Standard hardware
  option 0 = 1
  option 1 = 1
  option 2 = 1
  option 4 = 0
  option 5 = 1
  option 8 = 1
  option 7 = 1
  option 6 = 1
  option 11 = 0
  option 12 = 0
applying Standard hardware>
  option 1 = 2
applying Standard hardware>>
  option 0 = 2
applying Standard hardware>>>
  option 2 = 2
applying Standard hardware>>>>
  option 4 = 1
applying Standard hardware>>>>>
  option 11 = 1
applying Two stages
applying Lotsa vidmem
applying Radeon
applying Not Slow GeForce

Options
-------
Visual Effects       current:   3 recommended:   2
Cars/Sims            current:   3 recommended:   2
Shadows              current:   1 recommended:   2
Atmospheric effects  current:   0 recommended:   1
Water effects        current:   1 recommended:   1
Software/Hardware    current:   1 recommended:   1
Cursor               current:   1 recommended:   1
VariableSpeedAutomata current:   1 recommended:   1
Translucent UI       current:   1 recommended:   1
Graphic Detail       current:   3 recommended:   3
Building Load Speed  current:   3 recommended:   3
Texture Quality      current:   3 recommended:   3

Properties
-------
forcesoftwaredriver = false
renderdynamicview = true
renderstaticview = true
renderwatereffects = true
rendercloudsandfog = true
forcepointsampling = false
forcebilinear = false
forcenoalphablend = false
forcenoalphatest = false
rendershadows = true
renderdecals = true
usesecondstage = true
forcedebugtexture = false
renderparticleeffects = true
renderflorashadows = true
renderterrain = true
showupdateregions = false
usecursoreffects = true
drawlottextures = true
drawlotfoundations = true
drawlotwalls = true
forcetexturerepeat = false
usescreenshake = true
renderui = true
useupdaterectclipping = true
usevertexbuffers = true
showboundingboxes = false
useoverlayculling = true
rendersnapshot = false
noaddsigned = false
nopartialbackingstorecopies = false
usescreenflash = true
renderautomata = true
preferopaque = false
displayalertborders = true
drawlotopaquetextures = true
useviewcleanup = false
doautozoomandrotationchanges = true

viewoffsety = 0
viewoffsetx = 0
texturebits = 32
lodoffset = 0
shadowdebug = 0
maxparticlestarget = 10000
particlelodoffset = 0
effectprioritylevel = 5
backingstoremaxzoomall = 5
backingstoremaxzoombuildingsprops = 5
backingstoremaxzoomterrain = 5
backingstoremaxzoomflora = 5
shadowquality = 2
minvehiclezoom = 3
minpedzoom = 4
cursortype = 1
depthoffset = 2
debugtexture = 0
dirtyrectmergeframes = 4
sounddetail = 2
buildingvariety = 2
buildingloaderspeed = 1
modellodoffset = 0
stringtexturecachesize = 1024

particleeffectslod = 5
splattexturescale = 50
texbindmaxfree = 8
particledensity = 1
particledamping = 0
particlescale = 1
lightingupdatedelta = 0.0001
shadowmodelthreshold = 12
demolishmodelthreshold = 12
rendermodelthreshold = 6
rendermodelthresholdscroll = 40
particlesizethreshold = 300
maxvehiclepct = 1
maxpedpct = 1
opaqueuialphavalue = 0.55

 

Which shows no Fast anything being applied and the 11 seconds re-draw did not change.

Do I have the code lines wrong or just why is the better card performing slower than the one with half the memory?

 

Edit: So, I changed the Graphics Rules.sgr line to:

stringMatch cardIdentity "ATI*HD2400*"

And the Video Cards.sgr line to:

card 0x94C4 "VisionTek Radeon HD2400 Pro AGP"

And now I get:

applying Not Slow GeForce
applying Fast card
applying Fast card>
  option 12 = 1
applying Fast card>>
  option 1 = 3
applying Fast card>>>
  option 0 = 3
applying Fast card>>>>
  option 2 = 3
applying Fast card>>>>>
  option 4 = 1

^ for the VisionTek 256 mb card.

Draw speed is now 9 seconds instead of 11, but still slower than the 128 mb card. I guess that's the best I'll get?

[rsc204 21,806]

Having more Video-RAM doesn't make the card perform better. It just means it has more memory to store things in. So the only time that's relevant with speed is when the GPU's V-RAM is maxed and it needs to borrow typically slower memory from the System RAM. Since SC4 has very meagre needs in terms of video hardware, that's probably an unlikely event here anyhow.

However, the ATI card should be vastly superior in theory, being much newer. Perhaps the drivers for the NVidia card is just working better (more compatible) with SC4? If SC4 is activating the fast card rule, there isn't really a lot you can tweak to improve things.

In terms of in-game performance, I doubt it's that noticeable. Your CPU will be giving out way before the GPU is likely to feel strained.

[CorinaMarie 29,574]

1 hour ago, rsc204 said:

In terms of in-game performance, I doubt it's that noticeable. Your CPU will be giving out way before the GPU is likely to feel strained.

Ok. If I understand this right the slow drawing of all those trees is cause the CPU is straining to tell the GPU where to show them? And the now slight difference of 2 seconds with the same map is prolly driver interaction with the game? In other words no matter what video card I'd drop in it would be my CPU that's really the limiting factor. Yes?

[rsc204 21,806]

Not necessarily. Whilst your CPU/RAM/HDD will be discussing what items are there and need displaying, it's the GPU that actually has to show them. But any of those could be causing slower performance.

The main point being, once your videocard is detected as DirectX compatible and assigned Fast Card status, that's really it in terms of the game configuration. Perhaps settings in the ATI Control Panel are holding it back. Perhaps the drivers don't play so nice with SC4. Perhaps something else is at work. If you want to be super-sure of the results, switch the GPUs between the machines and see if the results are the same. But even if you do, all it tells you is that in real terms SC4 performs worse with the ATI card. The issue won't likely be resolvable within SC4 itself.

But I was making a more general point about performance. Beyond a certain point, having a better GPU won't help at all. Generally speaking SC4's bottleneck is down to the CPU usage. You may find a better GPU improves things, but more benefit would be had from an SDD for most people, for much less cost too.

It's hard to say in this case, since a 2003 card (FX5600) may present some benefit in upgrading. But then that argument goes out of the window when a (on paper) superior card from 2007 is performing worse in real terms. The point being it's never easy to pinpoint the link in the chain causing the problem. If it's just a few seconds difference at this level, I wouldn't spend too much time thinking about it.

[NCGAIO 562]

Sorry, but only to understand ... what exactly was solved?

What was the original doubt or was about what?

A comparison between two machines with two video cards different and different generations seems a little insensate especially when based only on the amount of memory available integrated video.

With regard to greater compatibility of the old Nvidia to execute native code SC4  remember that  the card was  produced with compatibility instructions to DX7,DX8 and DX9  .
a note: the last drivers for Windows XP is 6.14.11.7540 -    08.01.2008

Now If only an attempt to justify the editing for Graphics Rules in some way then  go to small comments.

As for doubts about the data put in issue of GraphicRules:

It is noticed that in the case of Nvidia the rule was normally performed because a  string provided by the card in "cardIdentity" coincided with the partial rule  "FastCard" which is only executed if any of the strings listed in the rule is found or is ignored if not find any them . (String Match)

Quote

Graphics Rules
- Partial Rule "Fast card" "(-any)" <- If any of the conditions is satisfied. "

                                    -<< string Match  - cardIdentity  "NVidia  *  Geforce  * "  >>    <-- (*) = any text
.........................................................................................|................| 
CORI-2015-01-18Config-Log.txt <<  cardIdentity = NVidia  |   GeForce |  "FX 5600 (Microsoft Corporation)"
........................................................................... any text |               | any text 
.                                                                                                    between                     after    
                                     -<< stringMatch ...
                                    -<< stringMatch ...

For the first edition of ATI the jump of the partial rule "FastCard" happened by use the parameter "CardName" which is not utilized instead of the parameter "cardIdenty" sought by the rule

- Parameter added - "CardName" / string = VisionTek Radeon HD2400 Pro AGP

- Sought Parameter - "CardIdentity" / string = ATI Radeon HD2400 Pro AGP

So when placed  the correct parameter at string searched "CardIdenty" the  section "FastCard" was executed and here, again,  the "Videocard" file  editing is unnecessary just see what was said in final paragraph of Graphics Rules that maybe has been misunderstood.

# For figuring out what kind of card we are sinclude "Video Cards.sgr"

As for datas that were found as relevant:  ie

applying Fast card>>>
  option 0 = 3

these are described textually in own body of partial rule such as:

Quote

<<FastCard>> 
partialRule
            # Enable more Visual Effects if user has decent computing power.
            ........
            ........

The result in the Log is  treated as "Option X = X" in reference to this setting established at the beginning of GraphicRules script where options are defined as

Quote

.set VisualEffects    0 - (config-log - Option 0)
.set CarsSims           1 - (config-log - Option 1)
.set Shadows            2 - (config-log - Option 2)
.......
.......
.set CloudsFog        4 - (config-log - Option 4)
.......
.set ScreenDepth    12- (config-log - Option 12)

and their values according to other variables below defined  in the script

Quote

.set Low            1
.set Medium    2
.set High           3
......
......
.set Depth_16    0
.set Depth_32    1

The chosen values are ignored when different from those in SC4config.cfg file created by the application output in the plugins folder that registers the GUI options defined by the User. These settings take precedence over the rules while the file exists and can be observed in the << user >> Config-log.txt as one sees below:

Quote

Options
-------
Visual Effects current: 2                      recommended: 2
Cars / Sims current: 1                           recommended: 2
Shadows current: 1                               recommended: 2
Atmospheric effects current: 1         recommended: 1
.. (CloudFog)
.............
.............

So as can observed all these values can be set in the GUI regardless of card that is being used and of course the results to choose "High" values when the hardware does not support are well known

For those who are using XP and an old graphics card where both of which still retain full native compatibility DX7, another setup value 'DirtyRectMergeFrames" can be relevant if considered like here just for a test rendering of a static FrameBuffer (without dynamic movement of objects like effects, automatons, etc...  in throughout the frame)

As a simple explanation for properties DirtyRectMergeFrames  it only divides the frame into rectangles and then checks if in a given rectangle there was any change in relation to what is being displayed to choose one of two paths:

There was no visual change - then the rectangle is kept as this.
There was some visual change - then new rendering of this rectangle is processed.

Obviously that only will be  a performance gain if the frame is static or if the rate of frames displayed is greater than the modified frames

As  said above this may be relevant in this case  concerned XP + compatible card X7 already that in current hardware a copy of backbuffer is no longer  accessed in the coded manner

Specifically regarding the trees the massive amount penalizes the framework by the big amount of alpha blending calculations beyond the shadows generated specifically.

information about shadows in the game

http://www.andrewwillmott.com/tech-notes

And sorry for the comment but say that having more memory on the card does not induce better performance is at least contradictory.

[CorinaMarie 29,574]

6 hours ago, NCGAIO said:

Sorry, but only to understand ... what exactly was solved?

What was the original doubt or was about what?

My initial problem was the 256mb VisionTek card was not being recognized as fast. After I posted this thread I modified the name and then the game did see it as fast. The time for the same tree redrawing was 4 seconds slower than when using the 128mb Nvidia card. After tweaking it was then only 2 seconds slower. I said solved because of @rsc204's comment:

On 8/21/2016 at 2:58 PM, rsc204 said:

If it's just a few seconds difference at this level, I wouldn't spend too much time thinking about it.

Which implies to me I've done everything I can do to speed things up.

 

6 hours ago, NCGAIO said:

a note: the last drivers for Windows XP is 6.14.11.7540 -    08.01.2008

Running the DirectX Diagnostic Tool shows my version as  DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904). I don't see a date for it. It's the same on both comps.

[rsc204 21,806]

6 hours ago, NCGAIO said:

And sorry for the comment but say that having more memory on the card does not induce better performance is at least contradictory.

I didn't say that though did I.

For example, I bought two GPUs on the same day a few years back. A GTX 750ti for my machine with 2GB DDR5 memory and a second card for my wife's machine, an older GT630 with 4GB DDR3 memory. Are you seriously telling me that the GT630 is going to perform better, because it simply doesn't come close to the GTX 750ti.

Not all memory is the same. Not all cards are the same. Frankly a 2007 model GPU should run rings around a 2003 model. Precisely what Corina was expecting, but did not find. I agree for the most part that's probably down to better compatibility with the NVidia card. But even so, editing the very settings you say not to edit has improved performance.

Obviously you do understand a lot about DX and Graphics cards, but do we really have to once more rake up this argument?

On ‎21‎/‎08‎/‎2016 at 3:50 PM, CorinaMarie said:

Edit: So, I changed the Graphics Rules.sgr line to:

stringMatch cardIdentity "ATI*HD2400*"

And the Video Cards.sgr line to:

card 0x94C4 "VisionTek Radeon HD2400 Pro AGP"

And now I get:

applying Not Slow GeForce
applying Fast card
applying Fast card>
  option 12 = 1
applying Fast card>>
  option 1 = 3
applying Fast card>>>
  option 0 = 3
applying Fast card>>>>
  option 2 = 3
applying Fast card>>>>>
  option 4 = 1

^ for the VisionTek 256 mb card.

Draw speed is now 9 seconds instead of 11, but still slower than the 128 mb card. I guess that's the best I'll get?

If you can't accept such modifications help people, even though there are countless examples of such edits improving the end user experience, that's on you. But acting in such a way is harming users who come asking for help and often don't understand the technicalities.

Almost without exception, ATI cards are treated as if they are not capable of running as a "fast card" because at the time of launch, the ATI cards didn't play nice with SC4. Again and again modifying the Graphics Rules / Video Cards files resolves this. Many other GPU users also report only getting hardware (DirectX) rendering to work having added this information. These are facts that can be verified in the forums here quite easily, so I don't understand your continual argument against it!?

Sorry to hijack your thread Corina.

[CorinaMarie 29,574]

1 hour ago, rsc204 said:

Sorry to hijack your thread Corina.

No worries. It seems to be on topic inasmuch as it's related to the whys and wherefores of graphics cards in relation to SC4. And I learn more as these discussions go on. This is my first time trying to tweak the settings so I am definitely out of my knowledge range. I'm currently of the opinion I've done all I can with these particular setups. Tho, if I've missed something else I can do, please point that out to me.

Both you and @NCGAIO may feel free to discuss any related points here as you like.

Btw, I didn't comment on your suggestion of moving the 256mb card to the 1st comp because I've had it in that one initially and it just seemed slow. I didn't use my stopwatch at that time to test it but my game experience got better when I swapped in the 128mb card. That was before I tried any file editing. Once I got the 2nd comp going is when I wanted to see if I could make the VisionTek play nicer.

 

Edit: I've dug thru my spare video cards box and based on my limited sticky notes information I have the following I can try too:

• VisionTek Xtasy GeForce Ti 4600 - 128 mb
• GeForce FX 5500 - 256 mb
• ATI Radeon 9200 SE - 128 mb
• Nvidia GeForce MX400 - 64 mb
• Nvida GeForce FX 5200 - 128 mb

They are all AGP cards.

 

[rsc204 21,806]

I would maybe try out either the GeForce FX 5500 - 256 mb or the VisionTek Xtasy GeForce Ti 4600 - 128 mb. I have a feeling if you are getting good results from the FX5600, a FX5500 with twice the V-RAM might perform best.

Even though on paper the HD2400 should be the best card you have, that doesn't seem to apply to SC4. Although the issue that causes ATI cards not to run as fast was to my knowledge resolved in newer cards. But at the time there was some feature they didn't support that caused performance issues with SC4.

I'm really a bigger fan of ATI cards, I only bought NVidia because at the time I needed a card desperately. The ATI's R9's had just come out, but were in short supply and as a result were frankly being sold at rip off prices. Although I went for the 750ti in the end, since I was very impressed with it's minimal energy consumption to performance ratio.

[NCGAIO 562]

17 hours ago, CorinaMarie said:

Running the DirectX Diagnostic Tool shows my version as  DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904). I don't see a date for it. It's the same on both comps.

Sorry it seems that was not clear. Refers to the last "video driver" available for XP Ok!

 

Quote

 

didn't say that though did I.

.....Are you seriously telling me that the GT630 is going to perform better, because it simply doesn't come close to the GTX 750ti.

 

Well ... maybe you could explain in more detail what this means then maybe understand your point

Quote

Having more Video-RAM doesn't make the card perform better. It just means it has more memory to store things in.

 

Quote

Obviously you do understand a lot about DX and  ...

It will be ? I do not think so much, just enough, but I realized that is playing back what he read so I'm happy to have helped.

 

Quote

But acting in such a way is harming users who come asking for help...

Oppss! here became heavy! 

Maybe if seeking to do (with CorinaMarie license) a "espreitade" them about me not come to that opinion.

Am essentially very technical in  Forums  and far from omnipresent for likes up because I do not have time for this, so I really like to read people that explain the  reasons of their conclusions (Moose None is missing) then I propose the following:

These are the settings modified by "FastCard" section Graphics Rules

# Enable 32 bit graphics if user has decent computing power 
# Enable more cars and sims if user has decent computing power.
# Enable more visual effects if user has decent computing power.
# Enable more shadows if user has decent computing power
# Enable clouds and fog if user has decent computing power

So  can explain with your point of view how they affect performance?

Why vital it is if all options appear in the GUI?

How the game goes to recognize the hardware used only with edition of this options?

Honestly it seems that did not read the entire post or on maybe only failed to understand it so for  experiment with DirtyRect try - Renderprop at startup or by curiosity carefully read the script before of FastCard to see when prevents hardware initially.

Just because something becomes myth does not mean that it is true and SC4 has many of them as compatible mods over the same exemplar or use huge plugins to increase the traffic capacity etc ...

My dear friend about what I write do not make assumptions based on inaccurate tests or with "read somewhere"   because typically i spent a lot of time gathering capacity to know well the subject

Recommend the same process Ok! No hard feelings.
NC.

[rsc204 21,806]

8 hours ago, NCGAIO said:

Well ... maybe you could explain in more detail what this means then maybe understand your point

What do you think I mean? That a lower specification GPU with more RAM doesn't equate to better performance. Of course more memory is better than less. But simply having more won't help you outperform a better chip with less RAM under most normal usage scenarios.

8 hours ago, NCGAIO said:

So  can explain with your point of view how they affect performance?

Why vital it is if all options appear in the GUI?

How the game goes to recognize the hardware used only with edition of this options?

We all know for an optimal experience, DirectX hardware rendering is best. I know for a fact that sometimes that simply will not happen until you edit the Graphics Rules and VideoCards files.

Jeez, even Corina herself (sorry to drag you into this), in this very post confirmed that editing the files sped up the rendering process in-game. Another of the oft-reported benefits to this fix.

So when you say the whole thing is a myth, there is a solid fact presented against your argument. Again and again you use words to the effect of:

8 hours ago, NCGAIO said:

Honestly it seems that did not read the entire post or on maybe only failed to understand it

No I did read it, I do understand it, so please do not continually question what I do and don't know. Some people might find that rude.

I do not agree with you. Because the evidence in these forums suggests you are wrong and that there is merit in editing these files.

I have personally experienced the same issues with my previous ATI HD3870 card. I know first-hand that I had to force the Fast Card profile to improve performance. Because the game assumes all ATI cards can't do a thing which most of them post 2003 actually can. We're talking about a problem that affected up to the 9600 pro series of cards, but SC4 doesn't care, "it's an ATI card, so we must reduce performance and assume it can't run optimally".

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=simcity+4+issues+with+ati+radeon+cards  - Heck the problem has been known about for a VERY long time.

I think it's unhelpful to suggest people ignore this well-used fix, especially without any real facts to oppose those already stated here. Most users that come here are just looking for the simplest way to make their game run optimally. By suggesting that they should ignore a perfectly valid solution that's been proven, you really aren't helping anyone. I simply do not agree with you here and think you have your head in the sand. I am not going to get into a technical point-for-point discussion on something which obviously works for many. It's a waste of my time to do so.

I only take the time to rebut your comments in the hope that users will be better able to judge for themselves whether or not to apply this fix. Frankly I think you would be mad to ignore it as a valid solution, especially if your GPU has not been auto-detected by the game.

[CorinaMarie 29,574]

1 hour ago, rsc204 said:

Jeez, even Corina herself (sorry to drag you into this), in this very post confirmed that editing the files sped up the rendering process in-game.

Again, no worries. You have not misrepresented me in any way, so reiterating what I said is fine.

 

On 8/25/2016 at 11:07 PM, NCGAIO said:

For those who are using XP and an old graphics card where both of which still retain full native compatibility DX7, another setup value 'DirtyRectMergeFrames" can be relevant if considered like here just for a test rendering of a static FrameBuffer (without dynamic movement of objects like effects, automatons, etc...  in throughout the frame)

I am curious about those Dirty Rectangles. Is that something I can tweak or is that just part of what goes on and is used to understand why drawing speeds are what they are?

 

On 8/26/2016 at 7:26 AM, rsc204 said:

I would maybe try out either the GeForce FX 5500 - 256 mb or the VisionTek Xtasy GeForce Ti 4600 - 128 mb. I have a feeling if you are getting good results from the FX5600, a FX5500 with twice the V-RAM might perform best.

I'm leaning toward the 5500 as my first test. I'm currently displeased with VisionTek as a brand atm. And, btw, I wouldn't say the FX5600 results are good. Just that they are better than the HD2400 for me. I'd really like that redraw speed to be instantaneous.

 

[rsc204 21,806]

5 hours ago, CorinaMarie said:

I'd really like that redraw speed to be instantaneous.

Well, that doesn't really happen on a modern high-end machine either. It's all to do with how much work you are throwing at the processor/gpu.

So whilst your game might be capable of re-drawing on my machine instantly (I figure it would). By comparison in my game I'm using many HD trees, have about 5-6GB plugins and HD textures everywhere. Frankly I'm pushing SC4 to it's limits in some ways and such lag is sadly inevitable. This is despite running a Haswell I7, GTX 750ti paired with 16GB of very fast RAM and an SSD. Run that setup with a more vanilla experience and you'll be fine until the population gets really high.

With the restrictions of an AGP GPU, I'm not sure how much better you can expect your experience to be. Although seeing the difference between two cards in one machine tells you a better GPU will work better.

I'd hazard that an SSD will be the best price-to-performance improvement, although you'll need at least a SATA II port on your motherboard to really make use of one, SATA III would be better. But without knowing what limits your CPU and RAM are under whilst playing, again you might end up curing one bottleneck but bumping right into another.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/1180/13

Perhaps this ancient article is of some interest. They've benchmarked both the GeForce FX5600 and GeForce4 Ti4200. If those figures are right, a ATI 9800 series card (could be cheap if you can find one on eBay) should provide a performance boost. Actually I've got some 9x series ATI cards around, but I'm not sure if it's worth the international postage, but if you are interested I'd give them away at this point.

[CorinaMarie 29,574]

8 hours ago, rsc204 said:

With the restrictions of an AGP GPU, I'm not sure how much better you can expect your experience to be.

If I can just get my 2nd comp to be as fast as my first one, I'll be happy for now.

 

8 hours ago, rsc204 said:

I'd hazard that an SSD will be the best price-to-performance improvement, although you'll need at least a SATA II port on your motherboard to really make use of one

As best I've been able to determine I do have SATA I on the motherboard. My (incorrect?) understanding is that a faster hard drive would improve loading time, but would have no performance gain once the city is loaded other than save times.

 

8 hours ago, rsc204 said:

I'm not sure if it's worth the international postage, but if you are interested I'd give them away at this point.

Thanks! I appreciate the offer, but I could just pick one up off of eBay if I wanted to go that route. More likely I'd just search for a comp like you found for @Dreadnought in that other thread when I'm ready to do a serious upgrade. For now I'll limit my terrain, et. al mods to SD if I use any and the same for other plugins.

 

Edit: Ok, so I put the FX 5500 in my 2nd game comp and SC4 automatically recognizes it as fast. The identical tree draw test takes 8 seconds. So, only a wee bit slower than the 5600 in my 1st game comp and faster by the same margin over my supposedly best card. Even with twice the ram of the 5600 it shows that in and of itself ram is not a factor in this particular test.

I tried the Ti 4600 and it was just all kinds of glitchy causing my monitor to shut off while just at the desktop. My limited tests conclusion is VisionTek cards suck.

[rsc204 21,806]

1 hour ago, CorinaMarie said:

As best I've been able to determine I do have SATA I on the motherboard. My (incorrect?) understanding is that a faster hard drive would improve loading time, but would have no performance gain once the city is loaded other than save times.

If you've only SATA I, it's doubtful you could truly harness anything like the potential of even the first generation SSDs, I wouldn't bother with it. However, once in the game, not everything is stored in RAM, so some shuffling between the HDD, Bus, RAM and GPU is going on, so it makes a difference for more than just loading times, although that's the biggest performance gain.

1 hour ago, CorinaMarie said:

Thanks! I appreciate the offer, but I could just pick one up off of eBay if I wanted to go that route. More likely I'd just search for a comp like you found for @Dreadnought in that other thread when I'm ready to do a serious upgrade. For now I'll limit my terrain, et. al mods to SD if I use any and the same for other plugins.

Well as much as anything, I need to clear out all the old junk I've been hording just in case. I think it's worth noting however that the GeForce FX5xxx range was from the time of SC4 Deluxe's release. Therefore they fall into the category of OK GPUs for their time. That's why I don't understand the very poor performance of the ATI HD2400 Pro. On paper it's many years ahead, so either VisionTek borked things with the reference design or the drivers/compatibility with SC4 is simply terrible. Having done all you can in terms of setting it up for SC4, I would try it with some other driver revisions.

That's why I'm a little hesitant to recommend a new GPU. The same compatibility issues can always occur, there is no way to know for sure how a given card/driver/os combination will work with SC4, without simply trying it out.

[CorinaMarie 29,574]

1 hour ago, rsc204 said:

However, once in the game, not everything is stored in RAM, so some shuffling between the HDD, Bus, RAM and GPU is going on

Ah. Thanks for clearing that up. I hadn't picked up that bit of info in any other threads. (Or I did and forgot.)

1 hour ago, rsc204 said:

Having done all you can in terms of setting it up for SC4, I would try it with some other driver revisions.

At this point the 5500 is out performing the VisionTek so I'll relegate it to my 3rd game comp which is going to be for the Sims 1 game. In the past I've run The Sims with an old 32 mb TNT2 card and it played fine so the 4600 should be quite adequate there. Or, I might drop in one of the aforementioned other cards and just stay mad at the VisionTek cards.

1 hour ago, rsc204 said:

That's why I'm a little hesitant to recommend a new GPU.

I concur. If I'm going to spend any money I'll just get a better comp all the way around. Or, as I get more hand-me-down comps I'll check (like I always do) to see if they have any good parts that are better than my current stuff. Having grown up building and playing with comps there are a lot of dad's friends that pass stuff on to me when they upgrade and the old comp isn't sellable.

[MushyMushy 3,617]

I can agree with the whole thing about drivers not always playing nice with the game, which can obviously lead to wasted money if you're hoping to buy/build a new machine primarily for playing SC4. My old lower middle range Win7 laptop I bought about 5 years ago logically should have run the game fine based on its hardware's specs, because even though it was not a good gaming computer for its time it obviously blew most (if not all) computers from SC4's age out of the water. Despite this, it struggled with the game and was incapable of running it on hardware rendering entirely. It's Intel Integrated Graphics HD3000 was a total piece of trash and its poor compatibility didn't like SC4.

About 7 months ago I built my current Win7 rig (mostly for other things besides SC4, although I did spend a bit more on some parts specifically for modeling for the game), and thankfully my particular hardware setup got along fine with SC4. I think it's pretty much hit-or-miss once you get into hardware that's significantly newer than the game.