Flashing textures, anyone have a cure?

[+paulopanz 2,853]

 

just started having this issue after overclocking my laptops gpu and running a stress test with sf2  that gave me a blue screen. after rebooting updates installed on its own. and even detuning. im having this tearing and floating object thing.

 

EDIT: Rolling back drivers isnt an option for me as the new drivers works well with my other programs and had a thought. I opened the Nvidia Control panel and changed some of the setting for SF2. Manually setting the values to something i thought was appropriate for my GPU and allowing application controlled settings on some of them removed the problems and gave me a much better render of the 3d objects than just leaving them on the default global settings set by Nvidia.

 

 

 

Could you share the settings?

 

I tried some days with almost all the settings but no luck ....

I ran into the same problems with everything past 353.30.  I'm running a GTX 970G1.  Once I rolled back to 353.30, it all started working again.

 

Same here!

[saisran 84]

My inkling is that you have to let the GPU Do everything instead of allowing the "application" to handle them. and V-sync should be off i think. Anyway here's mine. Hope it works.

 

 

Driver Version 355.98 notebook Win10 64bit international

 

Anisotropic Filtering = 8X

Antialiasing FXAA = On

Antialiasing Mode = Override any App Setting

Antialiasing Setting = 8X

Antialiasing Transparency = 2x supersample

CUDA - GPUs = All

Maximum pre-rendered frames = 1

Multi-display/mixed GPU Acceleration = Compatible performance mode

Power Management mode = Prefer consistent performance

Shader Cache = On

Texture filtering-Anisotropic sample optimi = On

Texture filtering-Neggative LOD Bias=Allow

Texture filtering-Quality = High Performance

Texture filtering-Trilinear optimization = on

Threaded optimization = On

Vertical Sync = Off

Virtual Reality pre-rendered frames =1

Edited September 26, 2015 by saisran

[+paulopanz 2,853]

No way for me. Only roll back. Thank you.

[saisran 84]

No way for me. Only roll back. Thank you.

 

That's unfortunate. Anyway, whatever works. Guess i'm lucky i can get away with just some modifications.

[Svetlin 478]

saisran, thank you so much, your settings fixed the problem on my machine.

Thanks a million. 

[bubu 38]

wow that makes perfect sense, why let a "vintage" application control and new card. one last question, in the options.ini, are these settings OK or should they be changed?

 

AntiAliasing=4
ForceDX9=FALSE
ForceVSyncOff=FALSE
Use32BitZBuffer=TRUE

[saisran 84]

wow that makes perfect sense, why let a "vintage" application control and new card. one last question, in the options.ini, are these settings OK or should they be changed?

 

AntiAliasing=4

ForceDX9=FALSE

ForceVSyncOff=FALSE

Use32BitZBuffer=TRUE

Not sure that it'll make any effect as you're overriding the game settings by giving the card full control. But wont hurt if you try it.

 

Also i forgot that i used a program that cleans out GPU drivers before installing a new one or rolling back to an old driver. its a personal thing but i believe having a clean install kinda removes a lot of conflict with the junk accumulated from old drivers and stuff.

 

PS. program runs in safe mode.

Guru3D.com-DDU.zip

Edited September 27, 2015 by saisran

[+Gunrunner 313]

From my experimentations it seems video RAM related, I've tried the following, all with exactly the same settings, all using a mission that gives me a VRAM usage around 1.9GB with the 353 drivers.

 

353 Drivers :

 

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 760 2GB : No bugs.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 960 4GB : No bugs.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 970 4GB : No bugs.

 

355 Drivers :

 

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 760 2GB : Bugs, VRAM swapping.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 950 2GB : Bugs, VRAM swapping.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 960 4GB : No bugs, VRAM usage around 2.3GB.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 970 4GB : No bugs, VRAM usage around 2.3GB.

 

That led to three things to test :

 

1) What happens with 353 drivers when you use more than 2GB on a 2GB card.

2) What happens with 355 drivers when you use less than 2GB on a 2GB card.

3) What happens with 355 drivers when you use more than 4GB on a 4GB card.

 

So I tailored my install and missions to test these...

 

I only have a small sample because swapping cards and drivers is time consuming but so far :

 

1) Degraded performances, stuttering and similar bugs.

2) No bugs.

3) This is where things became interesting, for a variety of reasons I didn't manage to consistently have more than 4GB VRAM usage (varied between 3.5GB and 4.2GB depending on the run). However it showed something interesting; Above 4GB, both the GTX960 and GTX970 displayed the same bugs as the GTX760 and GTX950, at 3.5GB however, the GTX960 had no bugs while the GTX970 displayed them intermittently (there for a few dozen frames then gone, then some more appears and so on).

 

It would seem that for some reason (frame buffer increase I'll guess) :

 

a) 355 drivers lead to an increased VRAM consumption with Strike Fighters 2 with settings left to default.

b) 355 drivers implement a different way to deal with VRAM when the card reaches full usage, favoring the conservation of framerate over texture display (with 353 drivers you slow down to a slideshow before having texture problems, with 355 you lose textures first).

 

Anyone can try reproducing, confirming or discrediting that hypothesis (if true it would mean that stock installs should not have display problems on a 2GB card) ?

[saisran 84]

From my experimentations it seems video RAM related, I've tried the following, all with exactly the same settings, all using a mission that gives me a VRAM usage around 1.9GB with the 353 drivers.

 

353 Drivers :

 

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 760 2GB : No bugs.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 960 4GB : No bugs.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 970 4GB : No bugs.

 

355 Drivers :

 

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 760 2GB : Bugs, VRAM swapping.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 950 2GB : Bugs, VRAM swapping.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 960 4GB : No bugs, VRAM usage around 2.3GB.

Windows 7 x64, GeForce GTX 970 4GB : No bugs, VRAM usage around 2.3GB.

 

That led to three things to test :

 

1) What happens with 353 drivers when you use more than 2GB on a 2GB card.

2) What happens with 355 drivers when you use less than 2GB on a 2GB card.

3) What happens with 355 drivers when you use more than 4GB on a 4GB card.

 

So I tailored my install and missions to test these...

 

I only have a small sample because swapping cards and drivers is time consuming but so far :

 

1) Degraded performances, stuttering and similar bugs.

2) No bugs.

3) This is where things became interesting, for a variety of reasons I didn't manage to consistently have more than 4GB VRAM usage (varied between 3.5GB and 4.2GB depending on the run). However it showed something interesting; Above 4GB, both the GTX960 and GTX970 displayed the same bugs as the GTX760 and GTX950, at 3.5GB however, the GTX960 had no bugs while the GTX970 displayed them intermittently (there for a few dozen frames then gone, then some more appears and so on).

 

It would seem that for some reason (frame buffer increase I'll guess) :

 

a) 355 drivers lead to an increased VRAM consumption with Strike Fighters 2 with settings left to default.

b) 355 drivers implement a different way to deal with VRAM when the card reaches full usage, favoring the conservation of framerate over texture display (with 353 drivers you slow down to a slideshow before having texture problems, with 355 you lose textures first).

 

Anyone can try reproducing, confirming or discrediting that hypothesis (if true it would mean that stock installs should not have display problems on a 2GB card) ?

 

Cool Experiments Gunrunner. You might be on something here. As it turns out my fix wasn't that great either. The game ran fine up until i had a SEAD Mission on a high overcast weather and started to have blinking terrain and detaching objects inside the cockpit. If the VRAM hypothesis could be explained due to the sheer number of objects being rendered compared to doing fighter sweeps and intercepts as rendering ground textures, hundreds of ground objects, water, and overcast clouds and planes can stress the VRAM( i think).

 

 

[Canadair 16]

I openede a topic on the same subject.

 

I have to do more test but with drivers 355.98 on W8.1, the problem is hihgly mitigated

 

http://combatace.com/topic/87272-terrain-and-texture-and-lod-problem-on-sf2-dx10/

[+Gunrunner 313]

After "having" to run the thing on a GTX 950, I found a few things that made the bug not so game breaking with moderately modded installs :

 

- remove any custom shader

- set ObjectsFade=TRUE in your OPTIONS.INI

- if/when the bug occurs nonetheless, go to map view for a few seconds (changing to other views doesn't seem to have the same effect), get out of it and it will be fixed in most, but not all, cases (doing it too quick doesn't seem to work for some reason)

[+Viper63a 651]

You have to get the windows 10 version of the driver. I used 353.62 for windows 10 to resolve the issue before going back to windows 7 for other (not graphics related) reasons.

[+baffmeister 1,203]

Found what I think is a very good article explaining the Nvidia graphic card settings. Here is a link: http://www.tweakguides.com/NVFORCE_6.html

 

My new Zotac GTX 750 is working "OK" now but the overall picture quality is less than I got with the GT-240, even with slightly higher screen resolution. Also, I had to resort to some other software to get improvements. Here's a brief explanation of some problems I had and the fixes.

 

PROBLEM: Random frame rate stutters. This was really annoying as I would sometimes get stutters even when there was next to nothing going on in game. After some internet research it seems to be an issue for some people with the newer Nvidia cards. It probably has something to do with the way the drivers throttle the cards operating frequency depending on graphics load. I think Nvidia has been making some adjustments with the newer drivers to try and fix the issues but I'm stuck with old drivers so had to try a different approach.

SOLUTION: Installed EVGA's Precision X overclock utility.[free] It has an easy one button feature that will activate K-Boost. K-Boost will override the Nvidia software and allow the card to run at the maximum frequency all the time. This will increase the power consumption and temperatures a bit but I haven't seen temps over 55degC after exiting the game. [not sure if I can moniter temps in game with that utility]

 

PROBLEM: Really crappy anti-aliasing. The old GT-240 was way better in this regard and actually had better picture quality even with a lower screen resolution.

SOLUTION: Downloaded another utility called Nvidia Inspector. [free] With Inspector it's possible to access some graphic settings that Nvidia doesn't include in their normal selection screen. With Inspector, I was able to access something called Sparse Grid Supersampling within the Transparency Supersampling field. Sparse Grid Supersampling seens to require a lot of resources but when set only to 2x, it still looks better than the regular Supersampling at 4X. Even with that set, the picture quality is still a bit less than what I had with the GT-240.

 

The Zotac GTX 750 Zone card I have is passive cooled and I think it's been downclocked a bit compared to other GTX 750 cards. From what I've seen, I think there is room to upclock the card to more typical GTX 750 settings. For anyone interested, the free utilities mentioned are available from multiple sources so just do a search and download from your prefered site.

[+paulopanz 2,853]

NEW NVIDIA 358.91 drivers seems to be the cure !!!

   Allahu Akbar

[stingray77 4]

CANNOT confirm - repeat: CANNOT confirm! Issues remain...

Rolling back to 353.62

[stingray77 4]

additional details: updated to 358.91 and checked SF2NA - same artefacts/flashing shadows in the cockpit and on shadows outside of plane as with the previous drivers... Still no joy!

Back to 353.62 and everything is a-okay....... Sorry to spoil the "good news"...

[MigBuster 2,861]

additional details: updated to 358.91 and checked SF2NA - same artefacts/flashing shadows in the cockpit and on shadows outside of plane as with the previous drivers... Still no joy!

Back to 353.62 and everything is a-okay....... Sorry to spoil the "good news"...

 

Thanks for the news...haven't updated myself because I'm currently okay

[saisran 84]

I think  353.62 deserve to be Uploaded to the tools section as currently talks of NVIDIA locking the updates though Ge Force Experience only.

[+russouk2004 6,951]

Get an Amd card..,no issues with any games at all

Edited November 21, 2015 by russouk2004

[+baffmeister 1,203]

Get an Amd card..,no issues with any games at all

 

Things change, in the past an Nvidia card seemed to be the best way to go with the SF game. From my recent experience with a new GTX-750 and some internet info, Russouks' comments might  be worth considering for any SF players shopping for a new card. [my previous Nvidia card was very impressive, considering the lightweight system I run.]

Edited November 22, 2015 by baffmeister

[Zola25 3]

This is quite worrying for the future of the series. I suspect I am in the same position as many others in that I need to run newer NVidia drivers for other games.

I'll post a thread on the TW forums, not that I expect a response or even an acknowledgement.

 

 

[Fubar512 1,350]

I'm running the 353.30 drivers and have absolutely zero issues.  

 

My GTX750 ti is also a vast improvement over my prior GTS250, both in terms of frame rate and temperature.  Whereas I was running as low as 16-19 fps over the stock Iceland terrain with the 250 (while flying over Iceland itself), I am now rarely dipping below 30-35 fps at the exact same resolution, and more often than not averaging the maximum frame rate (of 60 FPS) with V-sync switched on, at 1680 x 1050.

[+Major Bloodnok 463]

I'm running the 353.30 drivers and have absolutely zero issues.  

 

My GTX750 ti is also a vast improvement over my prior GTS250, both in terms of frame rate and temperature.  Whereas I was running as low as 16-19 fps over the stock Iceland terrain with the 250 (while flying over Iceland itself), I am now rarely dipping below 30-35 fps at the exact same resolution, and more often than not averaging the maximum frame rate (of 60 FPS) with V-sync switched on, at 1680 x 1050.

Yep, same with me.

 

Same card, same drivers, no problems.

[+baffmeister 1,203]

I'm running the 353.30 drivers and have absolutely zero issues.  

 

My GTX750 ti is also a vast improvement over my prior GTS250, both in terms of frame rate and temperature.  Whereas I was running as low as 16-19 fps over the stock Iceland terrain with the 250 (while flying over Iceland itself), I am now rarely dipping below 30-35 fps at the exact same resolution, and more often than not averaging the maximum frame rate (of 60 FPS) with V-sync switched on, at 1680 x 1050.

 

I would be interested in knowing your game settings and Nvidia settings. My last attempt at optimizing some settings for my GTX 750 had some suprising results. Still mainly testing with the Centurion F-5E package which, when in cockpit view, seems a bit more resource intensive than the Mirage F-1. At this point the stock ThirdWire aircraft are working very well. Anyway, the suprising thing is I seem to be getting improved performance by INCREASING some of the in game settings. Setting the horizon distance to unlimited seems to be too much but setting object texture to unlimited seems to have improved performance somewhat. Other in Game settings:

 

Object Detail=High

Cockpit Texture=High

Cockpit Mirror=On

Cockpit Reflection=Off

Shadow=Low

Effects Detail=High

Terrain Detail=High

Terrain Texture=High

Ground Objects=Unlimited

Water Detail=High [it shimmers]

 

Regarding the Nvidia settings, some more surprises. I use V-sync to reduce cockpit frame "jaggies" and it may prevent texture tearing as well although that doesn't seem to be a big issue with the older 340 series driver I'm using. The big surprise with the Nvidia settings was the behavior of some of the additional filtering settings that are intended to improve performance. They appeared to make things worse! With Trilinear Optimization and Anisotropic Sample Optimization set to off I get smoother performance and a higher quality picture. Anisotropic filtering is set at 16X and Antiailiasing mode at Application Controlled.[4X?] I'm still using Nvidia Inspector to access the Sparse Grid super sampling but, with things looking good at this point, I may experiment a bit with the conventional Nvidia Antiailiasing-Transparency settings to see if I can get equivalent picture quality with better frame rates.

 

Any thoughts?

[Fubar512 1,350]

I have everything maxed out in the SF2 graphics options, with the exception of horizon distance, which I've set at "far".  I am also running Stary's recommended settings in the options.ini.  In the Nvidia control panel, I have all the aniso settings at or close to their max settings, but not running tri-linear filtering, as it is really not something that works in concert with anisotropic filtering.  I am using a value of "1" for pre-rendered frames, as per Brian Easy's recommendations.

 

My system is rather modest, a G3258 OC'd to 4 gHz (a speed that's obtainable at stock voltage) and I'm running the XMP settings on my 1600 mHz memory.