Wakers Posted May 4, 2009 Share Posted May 4, 2009 A little bit more misunderstanding here I think From end of match to inbox is under 5 seconds, although occasionally it gets to 8 seconds or there abouts but never much longer. You have to understand that playing FM08 on my desktop was like lightning. If I hadn't played FM08, i would have said the processing on 09 is fast. I also had a feeling that it was down to lots of code not being optimised as well as it could have been, because if you think about it rationally, the database isn't that much bigger than 08, and the way that the processing is done in game hasn't changed that much since 8.0.2. Initially I put it down to the games issues with dual core machines, which I'm still sure is what causes the random freezes that are another major reason as to why i've been so disappointed with this release. However, I'm also aware that my pc has a very cheap asus mobo in there that causes dwm.exe crashes in vista and windows 7 frequently, so I'm beginning to think that might be causing some issues too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebedee77 Posted May 5, 2009 Share Posted May 5, 2009 Initially I put it down to the games issues with dual core machines, which I'm still sure is what causes the random freezes that are another major reason as to why i've been so disappointed with this release. However, I'm also aware that my pc has a very cheap asus mobo in there that causes dwm.exe crashes in vista and windows 7 frequently, so I'm beginning to think that might be causing some issues too. Isn't one of the 'fixes' for slowdowns to turn off 'multi-threading'? If so, that indicates some issues with the code which might be resolvable. Random freezes? Eep. I've not had that with 09 yet. You've not overclocked your CPU have you? Although there were rumours that AMD got the performance upgrade from that CPU just by overclocking the previous version I'm sure that was a tad unfair. I've always found Asus to be good value to be honest, but not had a true lower end one to experience their economy versions. Vista sucks monkey nuts full stop (resource hog too) and Windows 7 I've not used because there's no way in hell I'm ever going to risk a beta MS product Personally, I'm running a dual OS with XP for stuff which demands it and Ubuntu for everything else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
khriztian Posted May 5, 2009 Share Posted May 5, 2009 I have a pc with better stats that the minimum specs and still it doesn't run smoothly. However running FM in vista is much slower than in xp or 7. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakers Posted May 5, 2009 Share Posted May 5, 2009 Isn't one of the 'fixes' for slowdowns to turn off 'multi-threading'? If so, that indicates some issues with the code which might be resolvable.Random freezes? Eep. I've not had that with 09 yet. You've not overclocked your CPU have you? Although there were rumours that AMD got the performance upgrade from that CPU just by overclocking the previous version I'm sure that was a tad unfair. I've always found Asus to be good value to be honest, but not had a true lower end one to experience their economy versions. Vista sucks monkey nuts full stop (resource hog too) and Windows 7 I've not used because there's no way in hell I'm ever going to risk a beta MS product Personally, I'm running a dual OS with XP for stuff which demands it and Ubuntu for everything else. Its actually server 08- i could get that free because I'm a student, and you can slim it down so its like a lightweight version of Vista, and I have no problems with it - compared with a friend of mine who hsa Vista home on a similar spec, its lightyears faster. The CPU isn't overclocked, its not a general issue i have with other apps, just fm09, so it leads me to think that there's something wrong with the code. I did try turning off threading in the options but it made little difference. The ASUS mobo is pretty old, its a generation behind the rest of my components, and the reason I upgraded to the processor I have now is because its the fastest that it could handle, while still looking like good value for money. with regards to Windows 7, the RC is brilliant. I've been running it on my laptop for 2 weeks now, and it hasn't crashed once, all the hardware (even wireless) installed automagically without any hunting around for drivers, every program I need works flawlessly, and the new taskbar and Aero features are so useful, I have problems going back to a system without them. Gaming performance is better on 7 than Vista by quite a distance, and its more stable than XP i've found - although I haven't actively used XP for about 8 months now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysafc Posted May 5, 2009 Share Posted May 5, 2009 Actually the OP has a valid point. The match graphics were taken from a PS One game. Now if you consider that the PS One is 12 years old, should it really be asking to much for a 5 year old PC to be able to run it? It's been mentioned plenty of times already that FM is merely a painted over spreadsheet. So why does it need so much power? Look at the graphics available for the Xbox 360. That is a 3 year old machine and has some amazing graphics, now FM09 is hardly that and nor does it need to be, so again why does it need all that power? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakers Posted May 5, 2009 Share Posted May 5, 2009 well, actually, if you have all of FM's data in a spreadsheet and got it to run through some scenarios, then it would need a lot of processing power, a lot of memory, and reasonable components to complete quickly and successfully. Sure the average idea of a spreadsheet is a couple of worksheets of not very complex calculations, but if you get a truly complex spreadsheet with dozens of interacting worksheets, then it will be more taxing to a system than most games. Then add to that the 3d view, and a reasonable spec is foreseeable. The requirements for the game at the moment though are not, in any way, reasonable, and there's a lot of optimisation and refining that needs to be done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeltmurrayuk Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 MM - I've actually run some tests on my system and found that FM09 is at least 50% slower on my machine when compared to FM09. That is a holiday test through one season of game time with the same settings and also the average time it takes me to actually play a match on the same settings (two separate tests). C. So your right, FM09 does seem to be slower for some reason just ran one year in holiday in both FM08 and FM09 (Ran both games on holiday for 370 days from the start day in England, telling it to save after one year, loaded the save and took the game time from the status screen) - ran all English Leagues, Large database both versions patched to 8.0.2 and 9.0.3 and left detail level on default. My Specs are Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.10GHz, 4GB RAM, ATI 4850, Vista x64 (Home Premium SP1) FM08 took 43 minutes. (According to Genie Scout At Start: 12,632 Players, 4906 Staff, 2,849 Clubs. After One Year: 14,013 Players, 5,501 Non-Players, 2,849 Clubs) FM09 took 1 hour 6 minutes (1 hour 12 minutes in XP Combatability mode) (According to Genie Scout at Start: 12,329 Players, 4,056 Staff and 2,985 clubs. At End: 13,346 Players, 4,823 Staff and 2,985 Clubs). So FM09 is about 50% slower than FM08, not sure why but could be due to the new transfer module as the FM09 world is a lot more active than FM08, not sure what kind of difference those extra 150 clubs would make either, though the database size on FM09 is slightly smaller. I would test it on a system with intergrated graphics to see if there is any difference, but FM09 won't work on my laptop, whilst my brothers computer won't read the disk for some reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouchaldinho Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 Interesting findings MM and you've gone into quite a bit of detail too. Particularly interesting that it is actually slower with less players and staff in the game. Also curious to see that XP compatibility mode slowed down the processing time just that little bit more. What you will find on FM09, or at least what I found, was that the more you add the slower the processing time gets when compared to the same level of detail on 08. In addition to this, I found database size made far more difference to processing times compared to 08. My tests actually took slightly longer than yours (as would be expected as my PC spec is just a little lower) but the difference between 08 and 09 was greater on my machine, possibly suggesting that there will be a greater difference between the two versions on lower spec machines. As I said on another thread, comparatively speaking, my laptop eats FM08 for breakfast but can barely manage a bite of FM09 for afternoon tea. Would be interested to see if the graphics business actually makes any difference to the processing times but I would guess that it won't. C. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeltmurrayuk Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 Managed to test my brothers computer (networking my DVD Drive to his computer - we'll see whether that works for FM08 aswell) I ran small database this time; My Computer with FM08 took 36mins - compared to 43mins for Large Database. My Computer with FM09 took 56mins - compared to 66mins for Large Database. The difference in time small-Large is about the same for both games (small runs ~20% quicker) My Brothers computer took 88mins for FM09 (FM08's running now) though his computer is quite a bit worse than mine - P4 2.93GHz (Single-core, not even with HyperThreading) 504MB RAM (not sure what happened to the other 8MB RAM) and a Intel onboard graphics card 910GL I think. (My brothers computer has never been great it's a Gateway eMachines one from PC World and is likely to be build with budget parts, whilst I build my own computer and have only myself to blame). So it took his computer 32 minutes longer to process the season, which is about 60% slower. (That's slightly disapointing would have expected mine to be close to twice as fast, the higher clockspeed of the P4 obviously making up a bit). So it should take about an hour to get through FM08. I also tested a match on his computer (World Club Final) and 3D worked but looked rather poor and jittery. 2D was jittery until I disabled 3D, then it seemed fine. (Though watching a match back is different than matching a match in progress, as other games will be being processed in the background normally). Another thing that may affect the processing speed is the amount of matches played - if someone has the time they can calculate how many matches are played in the first season, and howmany were in full-detail or low-detail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eshaan Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 The thing that disappointed me was that SI had said that if your game could play FM08 then it would play FM09. And my PC played FM08 perfectly. Super smooth and super fast but when it comes to FM 09 it just refuses to be anything close to quick. It's been very disappointing. I hope for FM2010 they come out with a 3D and a Non 3D option or maybe in installation they can give us a option to install with or without 3d because i have no problem playing 2D but even that is miserably slow. FM 09 on just 2D is basically FM 08 only with some new features so why it should it suddenly lose all speed? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouchaldinho Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 Yes, I have the same frustrations eshaan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakers Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 The thing that disappointed me was that SI had said that if your game could play FM08 then it would play FM09. And my PC played FM08 perfectly. Super smooth and super fast but when it comes to FM 09 it just refuses to be anything close to quick. It's been very disappointing. I hope for FM2010 they come out with a 3D and a Non 3D option or maybe in installation they can give us a option to install with or without 3d because i have no problem playing 2D but even that is miserably slow. FM 09 on just 2D is basically FM 08 only with some new features so why it should it suddenly lose all speed? This was this year's foot in mouth blunder from SI. They make one with every release. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eshaan Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 Yeah but i just hope they can make smaller blunders next year! I was so looking forward to this and now im playing FM07! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakers Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 to be fair, if 09 doesn't work, I can't see the next version working either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouchaldinho Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 Well, to be fair, SI optimised 08 so that it was faster than 07, so the same thing could happen with FM10. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakers Posted May 6, 2009 Share Posted May 6, 2009 Faster, but there wasn't a reduction in recommended specs, which is what eshaan would need Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eshaan Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Well if there is a non 3D version im sure it would work preety well on my PC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouchaldinho Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Yes eshaan - bring back the dots! I love the dots! What I want for FM10 is a basic 2D classic dot mode without all the flashy stuff! Dots!!!!!!! C. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakers Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 i think they're closer to circles than dots Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouchaldinho Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Circles or dots, I don't mind! I love them! I don't want 3D players, I want circle dots! C. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eshaan Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Totally I hate the 3D. Fifa 99 had better graphics. The 3D won't look great unless they add environment,crowd,stadiums and when Champions league games actually feel like Champons league game. All the games feel the same until it gets monotonous. And i love the circles My FM 05 to 08 worked Brilliantly with the beautiful dots! FM 10 should have a circle only version Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouchaldinho Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 eshaan - you must come to my other thread called 'CAMRAD'. You would really fit in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eshaan Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 You bet im in that thread now! Ilove the CAMRAD thread Dots are the way forward! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eshaan Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Maybe we can get James Blunt to sing Beautiful Dots instead of Beautiful Dawn? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincedimalta Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 im thinking about getting a tiny atom laptop, does anyone know if it will run well on that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakers Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 If you post the specs on here of the atom laptop we'll see But i doubt it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Shanahan Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Has anyone tried using Game Booster, it is a free app from IoBit software. It has really stopped the jerkiness of the ME, and it does speed up the processing a nice bit. I am running off a 2.4GHZ quad-core with 3G ram. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebedee77 Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Has anyone tried using Game Booster, it is a free app from IoBit software. It has really stopped the jerkiness of the ME, and it does speed up the processing a nice bit. I am running off a 2.4GHZ quad-core with 3G ram. It's a nice little utility but all it does is free up system resources for people who don't have the time/understand how to do it themselves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.