2.4Gb Available Physical Memory

Von Paulus · Post by **Von Paulus** » Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:38 pm

I remember that some of those "old" ATI graphic cards, used a video memory "technology" called Hypermemory.
I don't know if that might be a problem or not. It's just a thought.

[Edited on 17-10-2010 by Von Paulus]

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:30 pm

Here is an intresting article that explains all about the 3GB limit of WindowsXP and why: http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Sun Oct 17, 2010 10:08 pm

I ran a Benchmark Test on my Saphire ATI Radeon X1300 512Mb DDR2 Graphics Card, which measures the Frame rate Stability of the Graphics Card and mine scored 56.

Now the webpage of the download for the Benchmark states that if you want to play doom3 this score has to be above a 100.

So this made me think that the reason for not being able to play EM with planet detail set to medium and above is the same reason as for doom3. You need higher then 56 score on this benchmark for EM to run with planet detail set to medium and above. If so I need to know what the required Benchmark score is so I can get a new Graphics Card and use the higher planet detail settings.

Vice, my question to you is what is the required benchmark for a Graphics Card to run EM with Planet Detail set to medium or above?

The answer to this might give insight to the exit to desktop at 100% load problem even if you have the resources memory wise but not frame rate wise...

;)

Post by **Vice** » Sun Oct 17, 2010 10:31 pm

I highly doubt the problem relates to a weak graphics card. Your X1300 is plenty satisfactory for the game, in fact, many players are using the game now with weaker cards (even back to Radeon 9800 Pro's). It has the required hardware feature set and 256 MB of video memory, enough to fall well within the requirement guidelines of the game. The problems seems to be related to creating the addition camera system, which occurs right at/near 100%. Whether it's a lack of available resources or some kind of driver quirk with the 10.2 Catalysts, I don't know. But one thing you might want to try is rolling back the driver to an older version, going all the way back something in the 7.X range to see if anything changes. The mid-10 Catalysts were known to introduce problems in a variety of games, so this might be something to try. It's also a primary point of similarity between you and the other user encountering the same problem, you're both on the 10.2 Catalyst.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Sun Oct 17, 2010 11:54 pm

I installed the 10.2 Catalyst version 2 days ago. I had the same problem with the older driver which I believe was 8.0 something or the original driver that came with the Card. What is the required frame rate capability of a Graphics Card to run EM with planet detail set to medium?

Also when playing the game with Planet detail set to low I get frame rates between 10 and 30 so setting the planet detail to medium would affect frame rate by how much?

[Edited on 10-17-2010 by Maarschalk]

Post by **Vice** » Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:44 am

What is the required frame rate capability of a Graphics Card to run EM with planet detail set to medium?

There technically is no framerate requirement to run EM at a particular detail setting, it's generally either playable or not. I've tested the game on a Radeon 9600M mobile chip with only 32 MB of video memory that's about 8 years old and the game could still technically function, but the framerate was only about 1-2 per second. As long as you can maintain a minimum framerate of at least 10, the game can generally run fast enough to manage needed functions, including multiplayer.

Also when playing the game with Planet detail set to low I get frame rates between 10 and 30 so setting the planet detail to medium would affect frame rate by how much?

Too many variables there to pin down an exact figure. It may have a significant impact, it may have a very low impact. If that is the only setting you change, then it probably won't be any different until you enter the planet's atmosphere and the extra stage of detail is activated. If you change the general detail setting, then you may see a performance difference while in open space.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Mon Oct 18, 2010 3:57 am

Originally posted by Vice
Too many variables there to pin down an exact figure. It may have a significant impact, it may have a very low impact. If that is the only setting you change, then it probably won't be any different until you enter the planet's atmosphere and the extra stage of detail is activated. If you change the general detail setting, then you may see a performance difference while in open space.

I have no problem playing the game with Planet Detail set to low and all others at any settings. The only setting that does affect me to play the game is the Planet Detail Settings. As soon as I change that to medium or above it exits to Desktop at 100% Entering Universe. If I set the Planet Detail to High or Ultra it exits to Desktop at 98%...

Post by **Marvin** » Mon Oct 18, 2010 5:13 am

Maars, what are your graphics settings? Antialiasing, anisotropic filtering, screen resolution, etc. ... and audio settings?

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Mon Oct 18, 2010 11:59 pm

Originally posted by Marvin
Maars, what are your graphics settings? Antialiasing, anisotropic filtering, screen resolution, etc. ... and audio settings?

Standard settings: Balanced.
Antialiasing: Use application settings.
Adaptive Antialiasing: checkbox not checked.
anisotropic filtering: Use applicaton settings.
Catalyst A.I.: Standard.
Mipmap detail level: Quality.
Wait for vertical refresh rate: Off, unless application specifies.
OpenGL Settings: checkbox for triple buffering not checked.

I played around with all these options, there are so many...and none of the combinations I tried worked so far for Planet Detail set to medium.

I do not know what you mean by audio settings.
My motherboard has Realtek HD intergrated Audio and I'm using Windows sound apllication when playing EM. For my music production I use the Motherboard integrated Audio software some times.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 2:29 am

Vice, now when the game exits to Desktop it creates an error txt file in the EM folder and this is the content. Maybe this helps solving the issue:

[COMMON]
PathToEXE=C:\\sw3dg\\EvochronMercenary\\CrashOn_10_18_10.txt
[CEXE]
m_dwRuntimeErrorDWORD=Internal Code:12002
m_dwRuntimeErrorLineDWORD=63101

Galaxian · Post by **Galaxian** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 2:33 am

I've also tried a great number of odd settings with same results. On an earlier driver set as well. Still can't run planet detail higher than 'low'.

I wouldn't be surprised if it were a combination of XP and ATI on an older box. There have been some random DX anomalies with XP.

I can live with low detail planets until I can build a new Win7 box with modern hardware.

The depth and scope of the games along with the wide open space to play in is what got me hooked. A bit less eye candy doesn't take that away.

Post by **Vice** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 3:13 am

Maars, that's interesting. It indicates that the problem there was the game could not load the file it needed, as though out of memory, but apparently you still have memory remaining. When the customizing kit comes out later this week, one thing we can try is replacing some of the more high detailed objects for planets (such as the plants) with really simple triangles to see if that might at least allow the terrain to render with high detail. Also, just to be sure, right click on the game's desktop icon and try running as Administrator. It may indeed be some kind of driver quirk and unfortunately, it sounds like ATI has dropped further driver support/updates for that generation of cards, so any solution may have to be a work-around of some kind.

Post by **Marvin** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:52 am

Originally posted by Maarschalk

I do not know what you mean by audio settings.

Running the DX diagnostics program (dxdiag) gives you access to basic audio settings. Often, if you have it set to "Full acceleration" you can solve some problems by cranking it down to "Standard acceleration." It also doesn't hurt to test (diagnose) everything. Might not help but can't hurt.

Von Paulus · Post by **Von Paulus** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:46 am

Originally posted by Vice
Also, just to be sure, right click on the game's desktop icon and try running as Administrator.

Sorry Vice, bu he can't. He's running on XP.

Originally posted by Vice
It may indeed be some kind of driver quirk and unfortunately, it sounds like ATI has dropped further driver support/updates for that generation of cards, so any solution may have to be a work-around of some kind.

They even drop, practically, supporting/optimize 4xxx generation cards.

Mars, don't you have someone who could borrow you a graphic card for a test?

Aesir Rising · Post by **Aesir Rising** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 2:04 pm

Most of MS 32-bit OS can use 4GB just fine* (except for example XP Home Basic, Vista Starter and Windows 7 Starter editions).

But this game isn't compiled with the linker option to set the large address aware flag**, so it doesn't matter whether your OS configuration (/3GB, PAE mode, 4GT tuning) or hardware is configured to use more than 2GB per user-mode process (an app or game, for example) because the game will never get more than 2GB alloocated for its processes from the OS.

* Default 2gb for user mode processes (e.g., the game) and 2g for kernel mode processes (e.g., the OS, hardware drivers). Some 32-bit MS OS (servers) can have up to 64GB RAM installed (and yes, "used"). When someone says "32-bit XP can only use up to 2 (or 3) GB" they're over-simplifying things to the point where it's just an inaccurate statement.

** dumpbin /HEADERS EvochronMercenary.exe doesn't say "Application can handle large (>2GB) addresses"

Originally posted by Von Paulus
Originally posted by Vice
Also, just to be sure, right click on the game's desktop icon and try running as Administrator.
Sorry Vice, bu he can't. He's running on XP.

He can right-click (or shift-rt click or ctrl-rt click, I can't recall) and do "Run As..." from the context menu and pick an admin account.

[Edited on 10-19-2010 by Aesir Rising]

Post by **Marvin** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 3:20 pm

Originally posted by Aesir Rising

He can right-click (or shift-rt click or ctrl-rt click, I can't recall) and do "Run As..." from the context menu and pick an admin account.

Confirmed (right-clicking). What happens if you don't enter a password?

Von Paulus · Post by **Von Paulus** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 3:47 pm

Originally posted by Aesir Rising
He can right-click (or shift-rt click or ctrl-rt click, I can't recall) and do "Run As..." from the context menu and pick an admin account.

I'll try at home. No XP machines in my work.
But thanks for correcting me.

[Edited on 19-10-2010 by Von Paulus]

Aesir Rising · Post by **Aesir Rising** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:49 pm

Originally posted by Marvin
What happens if you don't enter a password?

It should pop the "Run as..." dialog up again with a message akin to "Logon failure: Unknown user or bad password."

My XP PC is missing some parts for about 6 months now... so this is from memory.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:52 pm

I always run my computer under my administrator account. And that is the only account I have.
My sound was set to full accelaration...LOL...it has been a while since I used dxdiag. I forgot all about that. I put it to the lowest setting and still same results.

Also I do not always get the crash txt file in the EM folder even when it exits to desktop at 100% load. And I got the above mentioned txt crash file with the info in it only once so far. And all the other times there is no crash txt file or the crash txt file is completely blank. I even moved my ship to an empty sector with out any objects to see if I would be able to enter that way with Planet detail set to medium and then fly to the planet to see what happens but still I could not enter the game even in the empty sector with planet detail set to medium.

[Edited on 10-19-2010 by Maarschalk]

Von Paulus · Post by **Von Paulus** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 11:31 pm

Originally posted by Aesir Rising

It should pop the "Run as..." dialog up again with a message akin to "Logon failure: Unknown user or bad password."

Exactly. "unknown user name or bad password.
You know, never remembered to use that option with XP in spite of having once used it with Win 2000. I must have assumed that it wasn't there. Never needed it.
With Vista and W7 is different. I use a lot.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:49 am

OK. I got my system to work with all settings on high and planet detail set to Ultra.
Beautifull Vice. I installed Windows 7 Professional 64bit with dual boot with Windows XP 32bit and just installed EM on Windows 7 and ran it with out using graphics card. Using my Motherboards integrated GPU....and I can run all settings on max. I might get better graphics with the ATI Graphics card thou since the integrated GPU does not have Anti-Aliasing or Anisotropic Filtering. So I'm going to install my ATI drivers on Windows 7 Pro to test. The only thing is I will not be able to play in Windows 7 on the Internet since there is no Windows 7 64bit driver for my Wireless net work card.
But for now at least I know my sytem can handle the graphics at their max..... I will let you all know what happens after I install the ATI drivers on Windows 7......A $200 dollars work around for single play only....LOL.....

:P

Von Paulus · Post by **Von Paulus** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 1:18 am

Maars, do you only play Evochron?
Still being a bit old, your rig, pushed at 3.6Ghz, still gives you good performance in games that needs more clock speed than multi cores. So what keeps that rig unbalanced, it's still the graphic card. It's not even shader 3.0.
You can go to a ATI 5770 which is a kind of entry level for graphic game card.
Just out of curiosity did you tried in XP your Intel graphic card?

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 3:24 am

Yes, that is basically the only game I play except for Adastra once in a while but have not played that for about 5 months. And yes my graphics card is shader 3.0. says so right on the box. and in the installed CCC. No I never tried to run Evochron on the intergrated Intel GPU in Windows XP 32 bit but I did play Falcon AF on Highest settings on the Integrated Intel GPU in Windows XP 32 and there was no difference in performance when I installed the graphics card between the 2. But the Graphics card CCC gives me more control over how the 3D graphics look in Falcon AF.

Well as for multicore processor I'm running an Intel 930D Dual Core 3.0Ghz at 3.6Ghz I can even clock it higher at 3.8Ghz~4.0Ghz. since it is pretty cool in the basement....but I just did not want to shorten its lifespan....LOL...

:P:P:P:P

[Edited on 10-22-2010 by Maarschalk]

Von Paulus · Post by **Von Paulus** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 3:49 am

I thought that x1800 wasn't shader 3.0. Sorry.
Anyway, it would be interesting to know if the problem in your XP was caused by anything related with your graphic card or not.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:48 am

It is an X1300 and not X1800 Yes I know I'm knit picking, it is just 500 in difference...LOL....
Any ways I got the ATI catalyst to work in Windows 7 64bit with EM all settings to the highest and the Catalyst settings set to max with all settings and there is a big difference in the frame rate.
With all settings to the highest possible the game runs between 5 and 10 frames in Windows 7 64 bit. In Windows 7 the Catalyst shows me the difference in rendering speed of its 3D rendering views which it did not do in Windows XP 32 bit or very slow at the lower settings. I guess running Windows XP Pro 32bit on a Very capable 64 bit computer was crippeling the power of my system. Windows 7 Pro 64 bit runs 2x as fast on my system and also ATIs Catalyst also slows the frame rate down with the Anti-Aliasing and Anisotropic filters so it is Quality against performance.....LOL....