Any Optimization tweaks for BM ?

Black Mesa Archive Help!
#1

Ok … so i played around some more with BM … i’ve decided to turn every video setting to low / disabled and play at 1280x720 , i’ve also disabled all the stuff in the visual section of the BM options tab … and i played up until the freezer area of the office complex …

Before anyone says anything please NOTE :
-I’ve disabled aero

-i’ve disabled a lot of windows 7 features

-the only thing that start’s up after my laptop boots up is the NVIDIA graphics driver , and i’ve disabled some windows services too

So Fare The first huge lag pops up at the start of unforeseen consequences where there are like … clouds and stuff going on and at that point it goes below 30 fps

another big one is at that part where you get trapped into a room and then the toom gets field with water and you have to get the hell out ! … at that point my fps drop to about 17 … witch is kind of unplayable

and i’ve had some huge lags whenever i would load a save and stuff …

i’m guessing BM is onother one of those games that loves to eat your CPU …

anyway to get rid of these ? …

Also … aren’t we missing something here ? NO UPDATES / PATCHES / FIXES ?! NO NOTHING !!! For a Mod as Good as BM you would thing that it would constantly get updated … but i guess not … and the stuff in the wiki doesn’t really help …

Any solutions about this ? PLEASE ?! I’ll do anything … Even Overclocking … if suggested / necessary …

If There are Any Updates or patches let me know … i’ve Downloaded BM From here

https://www.moddb.com/mods/black-mesa/downloads/black-mesa-torrent

Thanks Again :smiley:

MY SPECS

Processors

Number of processors 1
Number of threads 2

APICs

Processor 0
– Core 0
– Thread 0 0
– Core 1
– Thread 0 2

Timers

ACPI timer		3.580 MHz
HPET timer		14.318 MHz
Perf timer		2.144 MHz
Sys timer		1.000 KHz
BCLK timer		99.76 MHz

Processors Information

Processor 1 ID = 0
Number of cores 2 (max 8)
Number of threads 2 (max 16)
Name Intel Pentium B960
Codename Sandy Bridge
Specification Intel® Pentium® CPU B960 @ 2.20GHz
Package (platform ID) Socket 988B rPGA (0x4)
CPUID 6.A.7
Extended CPUID 6.2A
Core Stepping D2
Technology 32 nm
TDP Limit 35 Watts
Tjmax 85.0 °C
Core Speed 798.1 MHz
Multiplier x Bus Speed 8.0 x 99.8 MHz
Stock frequency 2200 MHz
Instructions sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, EM64T
L1 Data cache 2 x 32 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
L1 Instruction cache 2 x 32 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
L2 cache 2 x 256 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
L3 cache 2 MBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
FID/VID Control yes

Turbo Mode		not supported
Max non-turbo ratio	22x
Max turbo ratio		22x
Max efficiency ratio	8x
Max Power		44 Watts
Min Power		24 Watts
O/C bins		none
Ratio 1 core		22x
Ratio 2 cores		22x
Ratio 3 cores		22x
Ratio 4 cores		22x
TSC			2195.3 MHz
APERF			2195.4 MHz
MPERF			2195.2 MHz

Chipset

Northbridge Intel Sandy Bridge rev. 09
Southbridge Intel HM65 rev. B2
Graphic Interface PCI-Express
PCI-E Link Width x8
PCI-E Max Link Width x16
Memory Type DDR3
Memory Size 4 GBytes
Channels Single
Memory Frequency 665.1 MHz (1:5)
CAS# latency (CL) 9.0
RAS# to CAS# delay (tRCD) 9
RAS# Precharge (tRP) 9
Cycle Time (tRAS) 24
Command Rate (CR) 1T
MCHBAR I/O Base address 0x0FED10000
MCHBAR I/O Size 19456
MCHBAR registers

Storage

Drive 0
Device Path \?\ide#disktoshiba_mk5075gsx_______________________gt001m__#5&198ca50f&0&0.0.0#{53f56307-b6bf-11d0-94f2-00a0c91efb8b}
Type Fixed
Name TOSHIBA MK5075GSX
Capacity 465.8 GB
SMART Support Yes

Drive 1
Device Path \?\usbstor#disk&ven_generic-&prod_multi-card&rev_1.00#20090516388200000&0#{53f56307-b6bf-11d0-94f2-00a0c91efb8b}
Type Fixed
Name Generic- Multi-Card
SMART Support Yes

USB Devices

USB Device Generic USB Hub, class=0x09, subclass=0x00, vendor=0x8087, product=0x0024
USB Device USB Mass Storage Device, class=0x00, subclass=0x00, vendor=0x0BDA, product=0x0138
USB Device USB Composite Device, class=0xEF, subclass=0x02, vendor=0x058F, product=0xA009
USB Device Generic USB Hub, class=0x09, subclass=0x00, vendor=0x8087, product=0x0024
USB Device USB Input Device, class=0x00, subclass=0x00, vendor=0x1BCF, product=0x0007

Graphics

Number of adapters 1

Graphic APIs

API NVIDIA I/O
API NVIDIA NVAPI

Display Adapters

Display adapter 0
Name NVIDIA GeForce 315M
Board Manufacturer 0x1179 (0xFC90)
Revision B1
Memory size 1024 MB
PCI device bus 1 (0x1), device 0 (0x0), function 0 (0x0)
Vendor ID 0x10DE (0x1179)
Model ID 0x0A7A (0xFC90)
Performance Level Default
Core clock 135.0 MHz
Shader clock 270.0 MHz
Memory clock 135.0 MHz
Performance Level 2D Desktop
Core clock 405.0 MHz
Shader clock 810.0 MHz
Memory clock 405.0 MHz
Performance Level 3D Applications
Core clock 606.0 MHz
Shader clock 1468.0 MHz
Memory clock 790.0 MHz

Win32_VideoController AdapterRAM = 0x40000000 (1073741824)
Win32_VideoController DriverVersion = 9.18.13.3523
Win32_VideoController DriverDate = 03/04/2014

Software

Windows Version Microsoft Windows 7 (6.1) Ultimate Edition 64-bit (Build 7600)
DirectX Version 11.0

#2

I believe your specs are quite weak for the mod in the first place and it also doesn’t help that the mod is a bit more demanding than HL2 as well, so I don’t think there’s more you can do short of making the game really ugly and even then it wouldn’t help that much anyway.

Long story short: get a better computer.

#3

well … this was a midend laptop bought in december 2012 … not to mention i can run crysis 3 at low to mid settings ant it works just fine … i’ll agree my CPU is crap … but then again , games should focus more on using your GPU … Also … there’s a "MultiCore Rendering option in the advanced video tab … that should help … but i can’t find any way to enable it as there is no drop down menu … also … if there is a way to get dx11 going … let me know … and if none of this works … then i guess i’ll stick with good old HL1 , as i know of a few mods that can make it look decent enough to where it’s no longer full of pixels …

#4

Maxey’s right. You need a new system. You can try to reduce the game’s resolution and lower its settings (you can get a small boot out of it from that).

Anything else will require you to actually tear apart the system and build a new one. Your best bet would be to buy parts and build your own machine the next time you decide to upgrade. I’d suggest a budget of around 600-700 USD to start. My system cost me around 1k USD in total (plus the GPU), and I’m still using it and likely will for the next 6-7 years upgrading the system every now and then as necessary until I feel the need to do a full overhaul.

My system can run Crysis 3 on max settings in windowed mode while taking up about 3/4 of my screen. Which is 1960x1080.

#5

Oh well … i don’t have any plans for upgrading untill then next 4 years or so … i can still run most games at low to mid settings at 60 fps

I Guess i’ll go back to HL1 as i’ve never finished it … i’ve got to office complex and then i found about BM … so i was like … well … let’s give it a try … but then again … BM is more a game of it’s own right then any thing since there are so many changes here and there … it almost doesn’t feal like HL1 anymore … oh well … i guess i’ll leave BM for now … and maybe i’ll pick it up on steam when the full version is out …

#6

Oh please, for the love of god, stop with the ellipses. You have no how aggravating that is. Look at the way we write things and try to type like that.

#7

Sorry bro , a few other people told it kind of annoys them too , but i’ve always did it that way for some reason :smiley:

#8

How can you run Crysis 3 but not Black Mesa? Are you trying to use like 16x csaa or something?

#9

Source is surprisingly cpu dependent. Crysis 3 uses the gpu more efficiently.

#10

well , the answer is simple , you see , Black Mesa runs on a 7 year old engine and it uses DX9 , it’s not really optimized and it never had any updates or patches

it’s crazy , even on 1280x720 and with everything at low or disabled , in sections where there’s a lot of shit going on screen it can go below 30 fps

as for Crysis 3 , it’s far more optimized then any other game , uses DX11 and it has an engine that is faster when it comes to rendering stuff … so there :smiley:

yeah , that’s what i’m getting at , if source would use more of your gpu then BM would run just fine … not to mention BM uses the 2007 version , where as recent mods use the 2013 one , so …

#11

the Core 2 Duo CPUs that came out in 2006 were obviously more powerful than all your fancy 22nm core i7s and APUs of today :stuck_out_tongue:

#12

If you’re not planning on upgrading anytime soon, try lowering BM’s resolution. That should at least help somewhat. It will undoubtedly look worse, but that’s how I handle these things. BM goes down to 640x480, and at that resolution, the whole game generally runs smoothly, apart from some extremely smokey/particle abusing areas, eg tanks and the Unforseen Consequences elevator break. I used to refuse to play anything below 720p, but because I’ve got an integrated GPU that Game Debate appropriately gave a 2 out of 10, I play everything at 640x480 on low with textures at highest, and at least then I’m guaranteed playable to good performance.

#13

You can’t try and pull that because 2013 is literally 2007 with some additional OS support. It’s not that Source is badly optimized, Black Mesa just squeezes everything it can out of the engine. From a tech standpoint, the developers actually did an extraordinary job optimizing it.

Source is CPU dependent, but you’re definitely largely at fault for having such weak hardware to begin with. I don’t think your specs were mid-end in 2012, or even in 2009. You could learn to build a PC (it’s not as difficult as it sounds, really) and build a nice one for only a couple hundreds bucks (price doesn’t define power), though I know that’s not everyone’s cup of tea. Trust me, with that hardware, if you plan to play games you’re going to want to upgrade waaaaay sooner than 4 years from now.

#14

thanks , atleast it’s playable now , i usually always say performance over graphics :smiley:

yeah , but i don’t usually play ultra demanding games , and even then , i don’t go for ultra high stuff , let’s face it , if you are playing an FPS you are most likely gonna look at where to aim and shoot rather then how good the environment looks like … i’ll probably go back to HL:S anyway , since i don’t really like all the changes in BM …

#15

Merged your double posts again. Please try and avoid doing this.

#16

woops , sorry i haven’t figured out that i can multi quote LOL :smiley:

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.