Return of the freezing creatures!

[Legacy_Jedijax]

               I have to agree with Lord Sullivan yet again. The issue is hardly one of driver-nature, for it was present under XP and Windows 7 alike, as well as different videocards, HDD's and configurations. I thank you for your instructions, Jez, but it is most probably a thing with NWN alone, since only such program had any issue in the aforementioned systems. You really were very thorough in your instructions, and I appreciate it, but even Yoda would be scared by such a daunting task!



Anyway. hope all of you may take a look at my newest topic thread. Please, go visit "Performance: ASCII Vs Binary", and share your opinions/experience.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Lord Sullivan]

               Btw Jedijax, your ST3500418AS gets allot of mixed reviews from verified owners on NewEgg, so

it's a possibility that you happen to have one that performs miserably. You might want to check

its performance with a harddrive benchmarking software. I use the Linux Gnome disk utility for

benchmarking harddrives and checking harddrive SMART Data.



Its also always a good thing to have another harddrive to benchmark and compare to have an

idea.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jedijax]

               Good idea Lord Sullivan! Thanks for the tip; I'm right on it!
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jez_fr]

               

Jedijax wrote...
 but even Yoda would be scared by such a daunting task!

Well, that's thourough eheh, but that solve easily 90% of PC games issues (without being an expert, that's Tier 2, did a few years of games tech support, im not making things up out of the blue heh). Actually the DXdiag review alone usually show most issues.
I admit the graphic issue guess may be wrong, the method still stays and address any sorts of issues besides graphics. Unless you've done all that, you can't dismiss a driver or other software layer issue.
Im not insisting though. I don't have testicles to care about '>
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jedijax]

                and more

No, no, you are correct, I'm sure it is very useful and precise, it's just I'd rather consider it my last option, because it is time-consuming and depends on several real-life variables (Pff!...as if I had a real life!).

Don't worry about insisting! (or not having testicles, for I have already stated I may yet lose my only one left in order to get new hardware; I know just how it feels) I think everyone is allowed to (insist,... not the testicles thing...), specialy if you're right.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jedijax]

               Model conversion didn't solve the issue, so I guess it's back to the "thinking" stage... You know, I've tried lots of remedies, but I just can't seem to nail one that fixes the issue. Xenovant DID say this is the weirdest thing she's heard of...
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jedijax]

               I confirm what Lord Sullivan has mentioned before. After more and more tests, it seems the issue is related to script firing, mainly, whenever a creature spawns in an area or an encounter activates, as well as when you open a container. The more loot it carries, the more noticeable the freeze is. Following such, when merchant boxes of inventory open they usually generate a freeze-frame longer than those produced by the examples mentioned above, so, I'm posting this new findings in hopes someone has experienced something similar and knows what the cause is, and maybe I dare dream, what the solution is. Could this be resolved by changing my HDD? What do you think?
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jedijax]

               I've also noticed whenever a spell is cast, the casting creature/character freezes slightly before it/she/he begins the somatic elements. So... anyone?? Any help here would be great...
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Xenovant]

               

Jedijax wrote...
Xenovant DID say this is the weirdest thing she's heard of...

She? I'm going to kill you '>       xDDD


  What about the pagefile of windows? Try both of these tweaks: assign it more space in the hard disk  and turn it off completely so the system is forced to use the ram memory which, of course, is much faster
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jedijax]

               hehehe, I wrote that one BEFORE I learned who you were!



The pagefile thingie sounds just right, though I have no idea of how to do it. Could you elaborate on that? I'm going to surf the web for such, but if I don't find anything... well, hope you could direct me to some online instructions or something! Thanks, yet again!
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Xenovant]

               In the desktop icon of "my pc"... righclick>properties>advanced options>click in the "config" button under "performance" > advanced options > and the "change" button under "virtual memory"
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jedijax]

               I've been reading lots of articles and reviews on this issue, and opinions seem quite divided. First, there are those who say you shouldn't tweak these values; then, there are those who say you should change the pagefile size, but NOT disable it; last, there are the techie inbetweeners. These guys are even more diverse in opinions. Some say you should adjust the size in proportion to the size of your HD; others say you should do so on proportion to your RAM capacity; and there are even some who say it has to be balanced in ratios that take both into account.

So, to sum it up, I'm running on windows 7 (32 bits... yeah yeah, I have 6 gigs of RAM waiting for the 64 bits version, but I would need a new HD for a clean install...) with 4 gigs of RAM; this means, Windows only recognizes 3.3 gigs, So according to what seemed to be the most sensible explanation, I changed the pagefile size from 3.340 megabytes to 5.000 on starting, and 6.000 on maximum values, an average of 1gig RAM x 1.5 gig pagefile.

I don't know if this are convenient and efficient values for my particular system, so I hope you could give me some hints. Right now, I have loads of HD space. The system HD where the pagefile is installed has about 200 free gigs on a regular basis, and I also have another disk installed (practically empty) with 276 free gigs. Just some technicalities, so you may get a broader sense of my situation and how best to use the resources at hand...
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Jedijax, 05 décembre 2010 - 11:35 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Xenovant]

               Windows uses the page file to simulate more ram memory (so theoretically, means the bigger, the better '>) but Windows most of the time is a little stupid (surprise surprise xD) and uses the page file when you have tons of ram memory free. This is a problem because the bigger the page file is, the system will use less the ram memory. Try to imagine a balance with the ram memory and in the opposite side the page file. The page file must be used to compensate the lack of ram memory if you have little but if you have a lot... it will become useless and  almost a nuisance.

 If you disable the page file, windows will be forced to use all the ram memory which means that it will be faster (as I said in other post) BUT you must have a considerable amount of ram because if Windows runs out of ram memory the system will be much slower.

 With 3gb of ram memory I suppose that you could do it perfectly in windows 7 and if you are wrong you can always enable again the page file, isn't it?

 For example, I use windows xp, I have 2gb of ram memory and the page file disabled (I have 1TB of hdd but I don't want to waste it '>) and everything is ok.


-------
EDIT: corrected some typos (this is what happens when you are half asleep xD)
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Xenovant, 06 décembre 2010 - 01:39 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Jedijax]

               So... would you say my proportional settings are correct, or should I change them? You mentioned having a big pagefile might also affect performance negatively, which I read in other forums and articles. I would like to get it right.

After posting my previous comment, I read some more about this, and most knowledgeable users recommend one sets a single value in both the starting and maximum options, so I changed them both to 6144 megabytes, for it seems your numbers must grow in multiples or something like that. However, Windows recommends I use 4990... So, what is the "right" choice?
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Jedijax, 06 décembre 2010 - 05:47 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Xenovant]

               Well... setting different values to the starting and maximun options is almost useless because before you know it, the page file will be at it's maximum xD

 Normally leaving the "windows recomended" settings is ok but if you experience negative performance is advisable to tweak it. The best way to know the best page file size is experimenting.

 Other way to tweak it, is dividing the page file in various hard disks (if you have more than 1).

 There is a program called "speedupmypc" (the company is called "uniblue") that does everything automatically but you must pay it    *cough cough*  '>
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Xenovant, 06 décembre 2010 - 11:50 .