0% GPU Load in game

[McArcher]

Hello.

I have a problem of low FPS in game.
I tried different settings, but every time I have 0% GPU load according to GPU-Z monitoring while I'm in game. The clock of GPU is changed to 3D clock (900 MHz in my case), so that is not a reason.
As a confirmation, when I alt-tab to the game, videocard doesn't raise fan's speed! Like no load at all! Very strange!

My H/W:

- AMD Phenom II X3 720@2.8 (now without any overclock, to be 100% sure it is not bugging)
- 4 GB DDR2-800
- MoBo with AMD 790GX chipset
- AMD/ATi Radeon HD4890 (a bit overclocked to 900/4000)

My S/W:

- Windows 7 Ultimate x64
- Catalyst 11.2

[SinbadEV]

Hello.

I have a problem of low FPS in game.
I tried different settings, but every time I have 0% GPU load according to GPU-Z monitoring while I'm in game. The clock of GPU is changed to 3D clock (900 MHz in my case), so that is not a reason.
As a confirmation, when I alt-tab to the game, videocard doesn't raise fan's speed! Like no load at all! Very strange!

My H/W:

- AMD Phenom II X3 720@2.8 (now without any overclock, to be 100% sure it is not bugging)
- 4 GB DDR2-800
- MoBo with AMD 790GX chipset
- AMD/ATi Radeon HD4890 (a bit overclocked to 900/4000)

My S/W:

- Windows 7 Ultimate x64
- Catalyst 11.2

FPS referes to "game frames per second" so; I can't say for sure but my guess is that your cpu is the bottleneck (unless you are using the "experimental" multithreaded version the whole game will be running on one of your 2.8 Ghz cores)... what's your CPU load like?

[McArcher]

FPS referes to "game frames per second" so; I can't say for sure but my guess is that your cpu is the bottleneck (unless you are using the "experimental" multithreaded version the whole game will be running on one of your 2.8 Ghz cores)... what's your CPU load like?

cpu load is 1-2% at game start as widget says.
I have just tried playing without VSync and got ~300 fps! and fan is accelerating while i am in game... omg... that was the cause ?!

P.S. Windows Task Manager says cpu usage is not 1-2%, much more. cannot tell precise figure, but all cores are working (not like 1 core works and others sleep).

[jK]

First, there are tools to see the GPU usage.
Second, Spring is CPU bound.

Edit:
Third, the ingame shown cpu usage is NOT the real cpu usage, it is the time spend on non-rendering in the engine!

[McArcher]

seems like this game doesn't like VSync switched on
and it seems like i don't see any tearing yet at such high framerate.

(i am used to switching VSync on, as switching it off creates artifacts in First Person Shooter games when moving mouse rapidly, hope in RTS genre its not a problem)

[jK]

I have just tried playing without VSync and got ~300 fps! and fan is accelerating while i am in game... omg... that was the cause ?!

Ask the internet for what vsync is ...
Tip: it must behave like this and is not spring related.

[dcore221]

i have had similar problems before on a hd 3650 the game constantly had o% video ram usage
dont know if this was just my card

[Wombat]

try to disable highlightselected units and highlight units widgets in f11. im going to lol if it gonna works

[SpliFF]

I'd say your GPU monitoring tool is busted. Look at what 0% GPU would imply. It would mean you are running entirely in software mode. I don't think Windows 7 even has software-only OpenGL. Even if it did it wouldn't support shaders or anything more advanced than OpenGL v1 which would almost certainly cause Spring to bitch about missing GL/ARB extensions and exit.

Nope, I don't buy it. I simply think the tool is misreporting your true load or your card is simply not getting hot enough or busy enough for the fan to kick in. A Radeon HD4890 is way more than Spring's minimum requirement. Depending on your Spring Settings and the onscreen action it's not entirely improbable that the card is running at less than 1%.

If you're right though, and it's related to VSync I think that would imply a fault in the driver rather than Spring. You may not see it in other games but that's probably because they use Direct3D and Spring uses OpenGL.

[McArcher]

Everybody, thanks for the help.

And one more. I'm glad that today exist projects, that use OpenGL! Somehow it reminds me of ancient games like Quake III and Half-Life that used both DirectX and OpenGL and that are popular (modified, of course) even today. It is good to see there are people who fight with M$'s DirectX monopoly.

[SpliFF]

I've always suspected MS pay kickbacks to publishers to use DirectX. After all, it's not in game developers' interests to tie their game to one platform when they could earn secondary streams with Mac and Linux ports.

[SinbadEV]

I've always suspected MS pay kickbacks to publishers to use DirectX. After all, it's not in game developers' interests to tie their game to one platform when they could earn secondary streams with Mac and Linux ports.

I think those "kick-backs" take the form of the Microsoft Developers Network... namely that the provide excellent support and documentation that makes it easier to develop for their own technologies.

[MidKnight]

Just in case you didn't read jK's post, I'll provide an explanation:

Your LCD monitor refreshes the screen 60 times every second. So, at max, it will show only 60 frames in any given second. Now, if a game could update its frames at the same time that the monitor does, it would only have to update 60 times, because the monitor can't display more than that anyway. Thus, when this option (VSync) is enabled, your game will never exceed 60 FPS.

I hope that was helpful.

[McArcher]

Just in case you didn't read jK's post, I'll provide an explanation:

Your LCD monitor refreshes the screen 60 times every second. So, at max, it will show only 60 frames in any given second. Now, if a game could update its frames at the same time that the monitor does, it would only have to update 60 times, because the monitor can't display more than that anyway. Thus, when this option (VSync) is enabled, your game will never exceed 60 FPS.

I hope that was helpful.

I know it already. But it is strange to see 0% load. If any frame is rendered, there should be at least 1% of load i think.

[SinbadEV]

I know it already. But it is strange to see 0% load. If any frame is rendered, there should be at least 1% of load i think.

...unless your video card is more then 201 times as powerful as it needs to be to render 60 frames per second.

[MidKnight]

Just in case you didn't read jK's post, I'll provide an explanation:

Your LCD monitor refreshes the screen 60 times every second. So, at max, it will show only 60 frames in any given second. Now, if a game could update its frames at the same time that the monitor does, it would only have to update 60 times, because the monitor can't display more than that anyway. Thus, when this option (VSync) is enabled, your game will never exceed 60 FPS.

I hope that was helpful.

I know it already. But it is strange to see 0% load. If any frame is rendered, there should be at least 1% of load i think.

That's why SpliFF thinks the problem is with GPU-Z.

[McArcher]

That's why SpliFF thinks the problem is with GPU-Z.

Ok. What application then it is better to use to measure GPU load level?

[SpliFF]

Don't bother! It's a stupid metric.

Unlike the CPU a GPU has a lot of discreet parts. So when you say "load" it's a huge oversimplification. Your real performance is not affected by "load", it's a combination of many factors, some of which overlap, like:

* memory size, clock speed and bandwidth
* resolution and color depth
* texture fill rate
* texture format and size
* polygon draw rate
* number and speed of shader units
* shader code complexity
* tessellation and other hardware transforms
* anti-aliasing
* overhead of SLI / Crossfire
* use and support of GL/ARB extensions
* special effects and lighting
* driver version

It's more likely any GPU monitor will slow down your framerates than provide any useful insight on how to speed them up.