fps "cycle" periodically

[stingray77]

As the title sais: when I turn on the fps-display (Alt+D) I am seeing the fps cycling from 3 to 6 to 20 back to 3 and so on... And all this within parts of a second...

At the end of the day I have a pretty much bumpy "show".

 

I checked turning down all graphic settings to "low", which results in great "top" score (40 50 something), but there remains a cycle with 3 the lowest and the "bumpy".

 

Does anybody of you encounter this "cycling", too?

 

 

Don't know if this info might be of help:

I had my notebook (Pavilion DV9787EG with 2.5 GHz, 4 GB RAM and GeForce 8600M GS) repaired just recently; I got graphic problems which were the graphics chip getting too hot and coming off the mainboard (not too uncommon on that rig - that's what I learnt from googleing and what the repair shop told me - unfortunately). The shop resoldered the chip to the mb and every checked out fine.

But after that I saw a drop in graphics performance in the "Vista performance overview" - from 4.8 down to 3.2. Don't know if there's a correllation...

When asking on a Vista-forum I received some reply stating that the soldering might be done too thick, dragging on performance. Does that sound serious to you??? (Sth to go back with to the repair shop?)

Btw: before the repair the game (SF2V with the XP and all settings high/unlimited except for shadow and effects remaining normal) ran smoothly while at 12 fps or so, only... But no bumps...

 

Might DirectX have sth. to do with that? I know that I once downloaded and applied 9.29 to my system, although the chip is capable of (and now running on) 10. That's at least sth I might try this evening.......

[Gunrunner]

I'd say, in doubt, update everything (Windows, DirectX, your graphic card driver), if the problem persists try to keep an eye on CPU and GPU occupation, frequency and temperature during gameplay.

 

Both CPU and GPU have a thermal protection mode (or at least should, I haven't checked your particular parts) where, when the temperature reaches a certain point, they would lower their multiplier (and thus frequency and in turn heat generation and more importantly to you, performances) until the temperature drops to an appropriate level.

This might well be your problem.

 

One thing to bear in mind is that notebooks are designed very tightly for a target usage, yours was not designed for gaming but rather for productivity and multimedia (requiring very little power for long periods with occasional peaks, think walking for kilometers with brief running period for meters) and thus such problems can occur when gaming (requiring far more power for long periods of time, think running Carl Lewis-style for kilometers) as the chassis was never meant to deal with such heat generation over long periods.

 

If it's a problem with heat generation, a simple fix might be the use of one of those notebook stands with integrated fans to cool down the laptop's bottom.

 

And yes, soldering could influence performances but it's not the first hypotheses I'd try to eliminate.

[stingray77]

Hm, okay - thanks for your input.

 

Actually, I bought one of those fan-stands AFTERWARDS right away... (Wish, I had had one before the "meltdown".)

 

Win Vista and NVIDIA drivers are on the most current drivers (NVIDIA just put out a new one yesterday) - what do you think with DirectX? Going from 10 to 11? Or back to 9.29?

 

Yes, I understand the limitations with notebooks, and was happy with the Pavilion's specs from the beginning. Actually everything WAS running smoothly before - that's what puzzles me. Then again, It may well be that I screwed something when trying to find out about the graphics problem before surrendering and taking it in to have the hardware fixed (at first I thought it would be some software/settings-prob) - say de-installing/re-installing drivers of different stages and so on.

After getting the notebook back, I updated Win and the graphics drivers immediately - maybe something is missing somewhere else. So, when that only leaves DirectX, that narrows in what to look for.

 

Checking CPU is easy - but where can I check GPU performance? Somewhere in the NVIDIA-settings?

Well, and by checking you mean, if I still have bumps with CPU and/or GPU not running to their limits, that might look like something with the soldering?

 

Thanks again for your feedback. It helps a lot getting closer to all this

[+Fubar512]

CPU-Z has a graphics tab that provides information about the graphics adapter. Make sure that it reports the following:

 

Core Clock (MHz) 600

Shader Clock (MHz) 1200

Memory Clock (MHz) 700

Memory Size 512MB

Memory Interface 128-bit

[Bossco82]

If this problem arose after you had the chip resoldered on the mainboard. And you had the chip resoldered onto the mainboard because it was overheating I would say that is your culprit. Either the solder to repair the problem is untidy, or the chip could have been damaged and could have degraded.

 

Unfortunately your using a laptop so you cant swap out parts to find the problem easily. I would take it back to the shop you had it repaired. If SF2V worked fine before the repair and the files wern't altered during the repair. Then something to do with this repair is at fault.

 

I've heard of fps being slow, stuttering and dropping but I havn't heard of cycling like you describe. Its almost like the gpu is getting power and losing it then getting it back again and so on, sounds like a voltage drop thats fluctuating to me causing the gpu's performance to stall.

 

Sorry I cant be of more help but if it was me i'd be going back to the shop.

[+Gr.Viper]

Actually fps jumping up and down several times per second in 2nd gen has been mentioned previously a few times, in FE2 forums as well.

[Bossco82]

Actually fps jumping up and down several times per second in 2nd gen has been mentioned previously a few times, in FE2 forums as well.

 

Sorry mate I stand corrected wasn't aware of that one. I still think its too convenient it started after the repair.

[malibu43]

Sorry mate I stand corrected wasn't aware of that one. I still think its too convenient it started after the repair.

 

It does that on my laptop, so I don't think it has anything to do with the repair. I'll see mins as low as 2 or 3 and a max as high as 50, but the avg always stays put (20-25 for me depending on the mission, settings, terrain, and weather.).

[stingray77]

From hot to cold and back......

 

First: thanks, Fubar - I'll look and check for those values (those are the stock values of the 8600M GS, I guess?)

 

Then: okay, I saw those fps-jumps before, too - but not with 3 the lowest value (or do I just not remember and am searching for clues as the game is stuttering NOW??? As said, before the repair I had the game running smoothly - even with fps around 12 "only"...)

Malibu, does you game run smoothly with 2 or 3 the lowest? Then I'd skip looking at that value...

 

Anyway, hopefully tonight I will be able to run GPUZ* and RivaTuner and come back with values to check back with you.

 

BIG THANKS everybody for helping me (once again - what would I do without your support?)

 

 

* just added CPUZ to the list of tools to try out...

Edited October 21, 2010 by stingray77

[malibu43]

From hot to cold and back......

 

First: thanks, Fubar - I'll look and check for those values (those are the stock values of the 8600M GS, I guess?)

 

Then: okay, I saw those fps-jumps before, too - but not with 3 the lowest value (or do I just not remember and am searching for clues as the game is stuttering NOW??? As said, before the repair I had the game running smoothly - even with fps around 12 "only"...)

Malibu, does you game run smoothly with 2 or 3 the lowest? Then I'd skip looking at that value...

 

Anyway, hopefully tonight I will be able to run GPUZ* and RivaTuner and come back with values to check back with you.

 

BIG THANKS everybody for helping me (once again - what would I do without your support?)

 

 

* just added CPUZ to the list of tools to try out...

 

Seems pretty smooth to me...

[stingray77]

Okay, now here's what GPUZ spits out for my rig:

 

NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GS

GPU G86M

Revision A2

Technology 80nm

Die Size 115 mm²

Release May 09 2007

Transistors 210M

BIOS unknown

Device ID 10DE - 0425

Subvendor HP (103C)

ROPs 4

Bus Interface PCI-E x16 @ x16

(----all unimportant up to here I guess...)

Shaders 16 Unified

DirectX Support 10.0 / SM4.0

Pixel Fillrate 2.0 GPixel/s

Texture Fillrate 4.0 G Texel/s

Memory Type DDR2

Bus Width 64 Bit

Memory Size 256 MB

Bandwidth 6.4 GB/s

Diver Version nvlddmkm 8.17.12.6089 (ForceWare 260.89) / Vista

GPU Clock 500 MHz

Memory 400 MHz

Shader 1000MHz

Default Clock 500 MHz

Memory 400 MHz

Shader 1000 MHz

NVIDIA SLI Disabled

Computing: Open CL checked, CUDA checked, PhysX NOT checked, DirectCompute 4.0 checked

The clock MHz's are all far away from what Fubar posted - but that looks like other specs then my 8600M GS'...

 

And what is very interesting, when just installing the latest NVIDIA-driver (260.89) at the end I got a message like

"PhysX System software Error - installation failed"

But the driver version 260.89 gets displayed in the GPUZ and the NVIDIA-control panel.

 

Does THAT lead to something?

 

By the way, does GPUZ measure the graphics or does it only list the spec "as per the book"?

 

Next I'll list what CPUZ provides... Stay tuned...

 

 

PS: Malibu - thanks for your confirmation... Looks pretty much like my set-up BEFORE.

Edited October 21, 2010 by stingray77

[stingray77]

Okay, here what CPUZ shows - the graphics tab first:

 

NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GS

 

Perf Level Current:

Clocks

Core 169 MHz

Shaders 338 MHz

Memory 100 MHz

Memory

Size 256 MBytes

Type DDR2

Bus Widthe 64 bits

 

Perf Level 3D Applications:

Clocks

Core 500 MHz

Shaders 1000 MHz

Memory 400 MHz

Memory

Size 256 MBytes

Type DDR2

Bus Width 64 bits

 

Perf Level 2D Desktop:

Clocks

Core 275 MHz

Shaders 550 MHz

Memory 2400 MHz

Memory

Size 256 MBytes

Type DDR2

Bus Width 64 bits

 

Perf Level Default:

Clocks

Core 169 MHz

Shaders 338 MHz

Memory 100 MHz

Memory

Size 256 MBytes

Type DDR2

Bus Width 64 bits

 

and the CPU-tab (what I think might be useful):

Intel Core 2 Duo CPU T9300 @2,50GHz

Clocks (Core #0)

Core Speed 2494.2 MHz (but changing constantly - of course)

Multiplier x12.5 (changing, too)

Bus Speed 199,5 MHz

Rated FSB 798.2 MHz

Cache

L1 Data 2x32 KBytes 8-way

L1 Inst. 2x32 KBytes 8-way

Level2 6144 KBytes 24-way

 

Something to learn from this? More info needed?

 

Help!!!

[stingray77]

I just downloaded and installed the latest PhysX software from NVIDIA... Let's see what that changes...

 

 

Hum, no - noth'n.

 

I installed the NVIDIA Software first, without that changing something in the GPUZ (Computing: PhysX still NOT checked) and re-installed the driver set - this time at least the a.m. error-message did not appear and the full set (with the PhysX software) was able to be installed...

Edited October 21, 2010 by stingray77

[xclusiv8]

I just downloaded and installed the latest PhysX software from NVIDIA... Let's see what that changes...

 

I dont think PhysX is supported in the game.

[+Fubar512]

What that tells me, is that your graphics adapter is downclocked from the Nvidia reference design.

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_8600M.html

[stingray77]

Right, Fubar - interesting...

Possible that this was done intentionally to keep the chip from overheating. Say: when I had my notebook repaired, the people put a new "downclocked" graphics-chip into my machine to avoid future damage?

I can hardly imagine that NVIDIA has several sets of chips around - "normal" and downclocked...

 

And that PhysX-thing - should that one be checked in the GPUZ? Or doesn't that matter (if not needed by a game)?

[+Fubar512]

Nvidia produces a recommended reference design, though it's up to the individual hardware vendors to set memory and core clock speeds, as they're the ones that are responsible for any warranty issues. For example, my graphics card is a factory (EVGA) "superclocked" version, that has 20% higher clock speeds than the Nvidia reference design.

[stingray77]

I just had a GPU log running in the background while opening SF2V and starting to fly... (Was clouldless sky so the fps were 5 min / 50 max - still bumpy...)

 

Here it is - can somebody read sth from that?

GPU-Z Sensor Log.txt

[stingray77]

Saw your answer after my post, Fubar. Thanks for the explanation...

 

I read of "overclocking" recently, but I must admit, I am a greenhorn in things like that. But that is sth that can be done (oneself) with the RivaTuner (going back to the NVIDIA specs)!? Should that be done on a notebook - bearing in mind there are known problems with the chip heating up too much?

 

So, I might ask the repair shop if they replaced the graphics chip with the old one (or same specs) - respectively, to me it looks like they did NOT!?

 

Where do I go from here? I'm still disappointed that everything was a-okay before the "meltdown" (okay, THAT was a VERY bad experience!) and now I am seeing my fave game spitting into my face......... :mega_shok:

[Bossco82]

HI Mate,

 

I've looked at your GPU log, if you scroll across to gpu load, then follow it down you can see a solid block of a few minutes where your gpu is operating at 99%. Your gpu's processing power is being maxed out.

 

Either way your fps problem seems to be because your chip no longer has the processing power to run SF2 anymore.

Edited October 22, 2010 by Boostjunky

[stingray77]

Hum - what do you think, can THAT be changed with/by overclocking (actually bringing the values to the NVIDIA-specs and not overshooting them) the GPU?

 

Am going to try that (OC'ing) over the weekend but talked to the repair-shop parallely to learn that they are willing to replace the chip another time... At least I have more than one thing to try.....

 

 

Btw: checked MS Flightsimulator 9, too, yestarday. Although that one not seems to be as hungry as SF2V, even there I don't get a smoothly running screen... Not as abd as in SF2V, still no joy!

Edited October 22, 2010 by stingray77

[stingray77]

I just tried the RivaTuner - but I don't even get that "Enable low-level hardware overclocking" checkbox (a totally different screen under the graphics). I can only tweak the clock on the driver-level. And I guess that doesn't take me anywhere, right?

 

Btw, from sbdy else with an HP-9000-notebook (9500 unlike my 9700 though) with 8600M graphics, I learnt that his setting, too, are 500/1000/400. That looks like my problen not being some "underclocking"......

But what then???

 

I'm lost!

[+Fubar512]

I just tried the RivaTuner - but I don't even get that "Enable low-level hardware overclocking" checkbox (a totally different screen under the graphics). I can only tweak the clock on the driver-level. And I guess that doesn't take me anywhere, right?

 

Btw, from sbdy else with an HP-9000-notebook (9500 unlike my 9700 though) with 8600M graphics, I learnt that his setting, too, are 500/1000/400. That looks like my problen not being some "underclocking"......

But what then???

 

I'm lost!

 

The data provided by Nvidia says otherwise. As I mentioned before, some notebook manufacturers underclock graphics adapters for a variety of reasons:

 

A) to ensure longevity

B) to reduce the likelihood of warranty claims

C) to save battery power

D) to reduce heat

 

Graphics adapters have their clock speeds set in their BIOS. This is where your's is downclocked. Short of flashing the adapter's BIOS to the Nvidia reference values (which I do not recommend) there is NOTHING that you can really do on the hardware level.

 

Once upon a time, some graphics tweaking apps (like the aforementioned Riva Tuner) were able to directly access some settings directly on the hardware level, bypassing driver and abstraction-layer settings. To the best of my knowledge, this ended with the introduction of the NV3x clock control code...and that predates the FX-series adapters and their associated drivers.

 

What you can do, is set clock speeds on a DRIVER level. I only recommend that you try this (only) if you are confident that you won't screw anything up.

 

BTW, are you running the aero-desktop in Vista? If so, turn it off, and adjust the graphics settings for "best performance".

[Bossco82]

Hum - what do you think, can THAT be changed with/by overclocking (actually bringing the values to the NVIDIA-specs and not overshooting them) the GPU?

 

Am going to try that (OC'ing) over the weekend but talked to the repair-shop parallely to learn that they are willing to replace the chip another time... At least I have more than one thing to try.....

 

 

Btw: checked MS Flightsimulator 9, too, yestarday. Although that one not seems to be as hungry as SF2V, even there I don't get a smoothly running screen... Not as abd as in SF2V, still no joy!

 

If the shop are willing to replace the chip then they must know something is wrong with what they did, repair shops dont just offer a free service. I'd take them up on it and see what happens.

[stingray77]

Fubar, this (confidence that I don't screw up) ist sth. that I don't have...

 

So, I'll end up with giving them a chance to re-repair.

 

Cross your fingers that they can do better then.....

 

Thanks again for all your input.

 

 

PS: I tried turning off Aero but (if I remember correctly) that didn't change much if anything to the besser..... (But I'll try again to make sure...)