Savegame load performance? Typical vs. ideal times? System load?

+

Guest 3823474

Guest
Savegame load performance? Typical vs. ideal times? System load?

I'm a bit puzzled. I haven't played in a while and can't really test it on my old Intel system without major hardware juggling anymore, but I seem to remember an SSD load time of 12 seconds for a savegame, with HDD more like 30-45. Now I migrated my Win7 to a Threadripper system and am getting savegame loads of ~30 seconds from SSD, regardless of whether it's an early or late savegame. But videos I found show the same.
Also, when checking system stats, even if a load process has been system-cached, resulting in pretty much no data loaded from SSD, it still takes that long, with CPU load very low at least on my new system. Could it be that W3 savegame loading is load capped? That it only uses one thread or such and might not even make full use of it? It would be weird, since W3 is a CPU-heavy game once it has loaded into the world. I'm wondering what it is doing all the time while I'm waiting on the load screen, seeing no SSD reads and 7% (Threadripper) CPU load.
AFAIU a major part of it would be decompression of textures and other sources, but how could that not be parallelized super-easily?
Basically, a bit polemically, when loading a savegame my computer has nothing to do and nothing is happening.

(Little side note: Disabling HPET in Windows really solved some nasty DPC latency issues on my AMD system causing audio dropouts, floaty cursor, stutter in video recording and gaming and such..)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure exactly what would be causing the slowdown. I'm using Windows 7 x64 on a Samsung EVO SSD here. The game will take about 30 seconds to load by default, often lingering long after the narration for the re-cap has finished. However, by hitting the spacebar ~10 seconds after loading starts, it will interrupt the re-cap and launch directly into the game.

I don't think loading is tied to FPS (like Fallout 4) or anything like that. My guess is that, if the spacebar thing doesn't work, something in the configuration is not taking advantage of the CPU. Keep an eye on BIOS updates that specifically support AMD / Ryzen / Threadripper. How old is the mo-bo in your system?
 

Guest 3823474

Guest
SigilFey;n10649291 said:
Not sure exactly what would be causing the slowdown. I'm using Windows 7 x64 on a Samsung EVO SSD here. The game will take about 30 seconds to load by default, often lingering long after the narration for the re-cap has finished. However, by hitting the spacebar ~10 seconds after loading starts, it will interrupt the re-cap and launch directly into the game.

I don't think loading is tied to FPS (like Fallout 4) or anything like that. My guess is that, if the spacebar thing doesn't work, something in the configuration is not taking advantage of the CPU. Keep an eye on BIOS updates that specifically support AMD / Ryzen / Threadripper. How old is the mo-bo in your system?

Yes, that's my memory! But I'm using mods now that remove the story segments altogether, only showing the load animation and some background picture, and I can hammer space bar all I want, it's still 'loading'.
I also tried Star Citizen, but it's unoptimized. In any case, that one has same load times as before.
I'm using an Asrock X399 Taichi with newest BIOS (P2.00).
I do get an annoying anomaly with Windows startup, but I think that's unrelated, and no driver experiments I tried helped. Even on a fresh install the boot process would start with 23 seconds of some kind of gentle repetitive disk activity followed by nothing, and then the logo animation starts and the actual, normal, only moments lasting load process begins and I get my login screen. (I checked boot logs with Procmon and there's no driver hang or such, just tons of regular boot activity, but a lot more than normal, it seems. Hard to spot detailed differences in 100s of MB of logs.)
I'm planning to do a Win10 test install on a harddisk I got free, to learn what would be different on Win10 and what would be the same. (I'm not planning to actually switch though. It took me ages to get Win7 usability to an acceptable level. A reset would mean months of work and annoyance.)
 
I'd recommend backing up your saves and uninstalling all mods. See if beginning a new game under 100% vanilla experiences the same issue. Unique issues like this are very often mod-related. To be extra-sure it's not mods, uninstall the game, completely uninstall any mod managers you may be using, then re-install to a completely different path. This should ensure there are no "leftover" changes when beginning a new game. (The only issue with this is the real possibility of borking your save-state by removing mods during a playthrough.)


Dowlphin;n10649921 said:
I'm planning to do a Win10 test install on a harddisk I got free, to learn what would be different on Win10 and what would be the same.

Also, a worthy thought, simply because Win 10 is likely to receive far more attention for modern hardware (...and especially because support for Windows 7 is not discontinued). At the same time, it's unlikely that the OS itself is a direct cause of the issue. Rather, installing a new OS over existing software installations is prone to creating all sorts of new problems. I'd also save this as an absolute, last-ditch effort.
 

Guest 3823474

Guest
SigilFey;n10650691 said:
Also, a worthy thought, simply because Win 10 is likely to receive far more attention for modern hardware (...and especially because support for Windows 7 is not discontinued). At the same time, it's unlikely that the OS itself is a direct cause of the issue. Rather, installing a new OS over existing software installations is prone to creating all sorts of new problems. I'd also save this as an absolute, last-ditch effort.

I went though various OS tests now. Wanted to upgrade my clone copy of W7 to W10. In Windows it refuses to upgrade because it can't validate the key (because no internet connection). And on boot it doesn't offer upgrade at all. So I ended up doing a fresh W10 install with all system drivers in addition to the W7, with boot manager. Thought the boot manager might slow things down, but no, when I did a fresh, clean, solo W10 install the boot process took longer than my W7 (~70 to ~40 seconds without POST phase which in itself takes unusually long), although with much more intense harddisk activity, like actually loading stuff all over the place. Then I used MBR2GPT to convert my Win10 to UEFI, disabled compatibility mode in the BIOS, realized that for some reason I still cannot select fast boot there (only disabled or ultrafast) and then learned that loading up that UEFI took the longest of all! So either it's that missing fast boot option that would do the trick, or it's some profund issue with the system. Or maybe Win10 is just so much more effort to load up, dunno. I don't have another SSD free for tests. But it comes down to me still being bothered that this new system (admittedly with legacy boot mode emulation) causes my Win7 to 'stall' the startup process for a 23 seconds phase that was completely nonexistent on my old Intel system. And with the POST taking longer, too, and the system often even doing an extra power cycle for some reason, from pressing the power button to seeing my Windows desktop I have to wait more than a minute. On a Threadripper SSD system.

(The Witcher 3 load speed was just a side show to those experiments. Maybe I do remember wrong and the load speed is perfectly fine.)

I gathered some interesting performance data with W10 though, which I had never checked out before. For example that the Blender Gooseberry benchmark stalls Win10, too, when it goes into full load phase. But the init phase does take considerably longer on my Win7 and stalls more severely. And on the Cinebench OpenGL accuracy test it failed horribly like it did in Win7 with HPET activated. (EDIT: Now I'm also getting it on Win7 again. Gotta dig into driver settings and stuff, gah.)

Little question on the side: Does Windows only have light and dark UI mode and premade themes, not an option anymore for the user to customize crucial elements like window background color? I saw I can choose the accent color, but it's all still mostly white.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dowlphin;n10652391 said:
...causes my Win7 to 'stall' the startup process for a 23 seconds phase...

Sounds like it could be a memory test. Now, I'm at the point where not sitting in front of your system makes this hard to guess at. It sounds as if you've done quite a lot of tweaking and a couple of OS re-installs. Potentially, there could be a lot of issues here.

If fiddling some more yields no results, I would recommend not trying to ask too much of a system that's part legacy / part proprietary. I've never used UEFI myself, so I can't be of any help there. In general, I still think a good approach would be to (inherently) start over. On the new installation, I wouldn't leave the config any chance of getting "confused".

Note: Shoot. I can't remember exactly how this works. Been a while since I did 2 OS installations on the same system. I think you may have to install the older OS first to avoid trouble. I'd research this carefully. If that's the case, just do the Windows 7 install first. (Basically, what I say below but with Win 7 on the HDD first, Win 10 on the SSD second.)

1.) Wipe the SSD, but do a full reformat of any HDD. Install a clean version of Windows 10 on the SSD. Ensure the paging file is also set to the same drive, and that Windows 10 will basically operate like a standard, one-drive system.

2.) Unless your CPU is a lower-end i3 or i5 (or AMD equivalent), I'd leave HPET off. I don't remember the last time I even considered it. (I don't think it's even included as an option in my present BIOS, and Windows 7 works flawlessly with all of my legacy titles. I can still play Nox and Missionforce: Cyberstorm off the original CDs without timing issues. No HPET required.) If you do discover a need for it with some legacy titles, it's a quick stop at startup to toggle it on or off.

3.) Once Wndows 10 is working, install a separate drive (ideally a new SSD), and install Windows 7 to that, creating a completely different boot profile for it through the BIOS / UEFI). The trick here is that you'll have gotten Win 10 in working order before the system got a taste of Win 7. No chance for there to be an issue with one OS conflicting with files or configs from the other OS's prior installation (like empty Registry keys, or re-routing protected directories or paths to driver .DLLs). Now, any issue that crops up can be squarely blamed on that particular OS / installation. Most importantly, you'll also have a clean install of both OS systems on their own drives. That should avoid any issues with overwrites or partitions and make troubleshooting a lot nicer.

4.) If using the HDD for the Windows 7 installation, no problem there, just make sure that neither drive is set up as a slave to the other. If you select "Auto" for this setting, I believe most BIOS systems will assign the drive that does not contain the active OS as a slave automatically. It may be necessary to prevent the BIOS from even acknowledging the existence of the other drive (i.e. if I boot into Windows 10 on drive C:, drive E: that contains my Windows 7 installation won't even appear. And vice versa.) Personally, I prefer this over partitions so that I don't have to worry about affecting the other OS inadvertently. (Again, I have no idea how UEFI would handle this.)

Lastly, this is all preference. Many people dislike not having access to their whole system at all times. For gaming, though, I would argue that this is the best way to ensure that two different operating systems remain separated and avoid issues.


Dowlphin;n10652391 said:
Little question on the side: Does Windows only have light and dark UI mode and premade themes, not an option anymore for the user to customize crucial elements like window background color? I saw I can choose the accent color, but it's all still mostly white.

I'm not sure, but I'd be really surprised if customizing themes was not a thing. Still using Windows 7, and I'm not touching 10 until something like Cyberpunk 2077 or The Elder Scrolls VI absolutely requires it. Then...maybe...
 
Last edited:

Guest 3823474

Guest
SigilFey;n10653531 said:
As I said, I did a fresh Win10 install. I guess I could have assumed that the conversion to GPT wasn't ideal, but since it's a Microsoft tool, it should result in the same as if I had installed it as GPT.
And fresh Win7 I did, too, but only for testing, since my aim was to preserve my months of customizing effort. (Win7 fresh has the slow startup, too.)

I would assume Cyberpunk 2077 will support Vulkan.

As for themes, well I made a slightly related experience with an Aero theme for Win7 that was said to mimick non-Aero, but one of its most glaring flaws was that the window background color couldn't be changed from white in some cases, for example that Explorer column. So for me nothing can compete with non-Aero UI. Anything else has to some degree crippled customizability.
(I also tried Linux distros said to come really close to Windows, but the problem is, they ALL tried to imitate ONLY Aero.)
 
Dowlphin;n10653581 said:
As I said, I did a fresh Win10 install. I guess I could have assumed that the conversion to GPT wasn't ideal, but since it's a Microsoft tool, it should result in the same as if I had installed it as GPT. And fresh Win7 I did, too, but only for testing, since my aim was to preserve my months of customizing effort. (Win7 fresh has the slow startup, too.)

In my (very limited) experience with partitions, I've always found them to be problematic if installing different versions of Windows. Installing Windows and Linux or installing Windows on a MacOS through Bootcamp gave me no hassles if using partitions. But I did try to install XP on Vista via partition. What a nightmare. Then I tried doing Windows 8.1 and Windows 7. Not much luck.

Using separate, physical drives is what made the difference each time. Granted, I don't know much about the nuances of creating partitions, so I may have simply made a mistake somewhere, but I found using separate, physical drives was pretty much plug-and-play (for lack of a better term). The only trouble I ever had with it was switching from a RAID-0 array to independent drives, but one of them wound up as slave to the other and gave me all sorts of hassles when I tried to launch the OS from the slaved drive. It would work, but the original OS had automatically assigned the volume shadow copies to be saved on the slaved drive (not to mention the second OS also saving its own VSS on the same drive...) and I was in the red for space in a matter of weeks. It was bad. In the end, I disabled VSS completely and I keep that habit until this day. :p Now, all I need to do for super-stable performance and stability over time is...simply not make any mistakes...:rolleyes:
 

Guest 3823474

Guest
SigilFey;n10654021 said:
In my (very limited) experience with partitions, I've always found them to be problematic if installing different versions of Windows. Installing Windows and Linux or installing Windows on a MacOS through Bootcamp gave me no hassles if using partitions. But I did try to install XP on Vista via partition. What a nightmare. Then I tried doing Windows 8.1 and Windows 7. Not much luck.

Using separate, physical drives is what made the difference each time. Granted, I don't know much about the nuances of creating partitions, so I may have simply made a mistake somewhere, but I found using separate, physical drives was pretty much plug-and-play (for lack of a better term). The only trouble I ever had with it was switching from a RAID-0 array to independent drives, but one of them wound up as slave to the other and gave me all sorts of hassles when I tried to launch the OS from the slaved drive. It would work, but the original OS had automatically assigned the volume shadow copies to be saved on the slaved drive (not to mention the second OS also saving its own VSS on the same drive...) and I was in the red for space in a matter of weeks. It was bad. In the end, I disabled VSS completely and I keep that habit until this day. :p Now, all I need to do for super-stable performance and stability over time is...simply not make any mistakes...:rolleyes:

I don't remember whether I ever ran a RAID(0), maybe once, but I try to stay away from it due to all the potential complications. Got enough of those without added ones I can avoid. Same for SLI. Apart from the higher cost of such setups, I like to keep things simple. In a couple years such setups are easily trumped by simple ones.
 
Dowlphin;n10663771 said:
I don't remember whether I ever ran a RAID(0), maybe once, but I try to stay away from it due to all the potential complications.

Yup! It was nice with a couple 7200 rpm drives, but loud, and still not as fast as a single SSD. For now, SSDs are so fast on their own that a RAID is next to pointless in my opinion.


Dowlphin;n10663771 said:
Same for SLI. Apart from the higher cost of such setups, I like to keep things simple. In a couple years such setups are easily trumped by simple ones.

And bang-on statement as far as I'm concerned. I used to try to play the "Power-User" game until I finally had a long chat with a Falcon-NW rep that explained their philosophy. No overclocking, no state-of-the-art tech, no constant updating. Best bet is to find hardware that works fluently together, get it working, then never touch it unless there's a reason to. The system I bought in 2004 was still in perfect working order and able to run Skyrim in 2011. That became my philosophy ever since; it erased so many issues I used to have.
 

Guest 3823474

Guest
I realized that my natural rhythm in the last few years has been a new PC every five years, and I maintained that until today. But my last one in 2013 was a budget decision with a non-future-proof Intel 1150 socket. Total middle class. Although I guess all my PCs were more or less in that field. Now I got a 1950X. I think this one might serve me a bit longer, heh. I realized that the one thing I could have used the most even years ago is massive video render power. Now was a good point in time to get it for a sane price. Even though encoders sadly don't scale as well as I would like, and encoding that doesn't burden the CPU much can still interfere in gameplay for some reason. But perfect solutions are so rare, one cannot expect them.
(My GPU pump sounds like a very low-volume air raid siren and it defies any noise dampening. - Think twice before attempting to build a supersilent system, hah. It can become psychoacoustically vexing.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dowlphin;n10668521 said:
I realized that my natural rhythm in the last few years has been a new PC every five years, and I maintained that until today. But my last one in 2013 was a budget decision with a non-future-proof Intel 1150 socket. Total middle class. Although I guess all my PCs were more or less in that field. Now I got a 1950X. I think this one might serve me a bit longer, heh. I realized that the one thing I could have used the most even years ago is massive video render power. Now was a good point in time to get it for a sane price. Even though encoders sadly don't scale as well as I would like, and encoding that doesn't burden the CPU much can still interfere in gameplay for some reason. But perfect solutions are so rare, one cannot expect them.
(My GPU pump sounds like a very low-volume air raid siren and it defies any noise dampening. - Think twice before attempting to build a supersilent system, hah. It can become psychoacoustically vexing.)

Lols! I know the feeling of pumping dollars into something "so cool"...then looking at the final, Frankenstein's-Monster-esque result and shouting, "Why? What have I done?" You should have seen the system I built right before the Falcon. I literally had a power supply 1 size too big for the case crammed into the mount at an angle with a wad of gaffer's tape cushioning the corner that physically rested on the motherboard. (Lasted 6 years! The only piece of original hardware that remained at the end was case. :p)

Now, what I do is plan in advance. When I think I'm getting to the end of a system's lifespan, I shop around online for at-cost parts. (I still base my builds heavily on Falcon-NW, and I have never been disappointed.) If you, for example, shop on EU markets for ASUS motherboards, they're often a LOT cheaper than what can be found in the US. If you buy direct from the manufacturer or close in price, even the shipping will be cheaper than buying the parts from a vendor in another country. If you're comfy with putting it together yourself, then that's even more play money. Even if you want someone else to do it, if you provide the parts it's normally ~$200 max for a shop to build and burn it.

Back in 2014, when I gathered the specs for the system I have now, it was going for over $7,000 on the Falcon-NW website -- for the tower alone. I put the same system together, changing only the case and cooling system, for less than $1,500. And that includes a brand-new ASUS monitor with really high black/white ranges, a Razer Black Adder keyboard, Taipan mouse, and nice Logitech 2.1 speakers. To this day, I've not found a title that I cannot run comfortably at max+ settings. I believe strongly that it pays to take time. More expensive =/= "better".
 

Guest 3823474

Guest
No Title

Well, I specifically decided at some point to not drive me crazy with trying to make it as inexpensive as possible. There were so many variables. I preordered my PSU and when it should arrive it said now it takes another nine days! So I canceled and ordered somewhere else for higher price and next Monday they tell me enough supply have just gotten in to send me one and right after that the cancellation confirmation.
The most expensive part though was of course the CPU, and there I got lucky. It was so cheap on Amazon, in the 800s instead of the usual 900s, and only when I wanted to actually order I saw that it's a special price reserved for Prime customers. So since Amazon is bugging people to try Prime at every step, I accepted the free month and got the CPU for a great price. Later a delivery date for something else wasn't kept because of the mailing company and I got another months extension. (Sadly though DRM video play doesn't work and I can't be arsed to try and fix it. It's Amazon's job to present useful error messages, not let me hunt for a solution.)
I attached a picture of my system.

And here's a bootup speed comparison to my old system:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAZv4iMEHQ0
(I also got some other videos documenting my build.)
 

Attachments

  • photo202281.jpg
    photo202281.jpg
    122.7 KB · Views: 33
After watching the video, I don't believe there's a "problem", per say. What I think is that the BIOS / UEFI is simply not configured to recognize the Threadripper yet. I'd simply watch over the next few months for updates that specifically address support for AMD (or mention Threadripper directly). Either that or contact the mo-bo manufacturer directly and ask them if there's a solution.

I am 99.9% sure it will wind up being a not-perfectly-compatible BIOS / UEFI version.

If everything works correctly and "at-speed" once WIndows boots up, that's a sign that the system is solid. My only other thought is checking to see if the system is set to perform a "detailed" or "full" memory test, instead of a "quick" mem test or "skip".

Keep us posted! I'll be interested to see how the Threadripper stacks up for various games. I'd like to see AMD get a little more love in the CPU department.

EDIT: Silly -- one more "only one more" thought. :p I should have asked this first, but I didn't. (Starting in the middle...by brain needs a secretary.) Did you do a verbose boot? This will, obviously, let you watch the process that's actually causing the delay.
 
Last edited:

Guest 3823474

Guest
The mainboard is a Threadripper board. It is only for that. It was released several months ago and has received several BIOS updates, and none lately, indicating that virtually all of the early tweaking and adapting has been done.
There are no memcheck or such options in the UEFI that could make booting take longer. But at least the extra power cycle is currently not occuring, even though I have the suspected power failure recovery options set to off. What did the trick you'd never guess: I kept CSM (compatibility support manager) on but turned all its three detailed sub-options off. That made the system boot without video and I had to reset the UEFI CMOS and set all options again. So something must have gone bonkers before that. Not a promising sign.
As for the Windows 7 boot speed, maybe the BIOS legacy emulation mode is so crude that initial drive access is very slow. I generated over a GB of Procmon logs from the boot process and I couldn't find any culprit, although it's tough with such big logs. But less logging doesn't show anything peculiar. (I'll try that tiny option anyway I think, unless that's the same as the boot logging option if you press F8.)
CPU-wise I'm actually quite frustrated and try not to let it get to me how inefficient that whole technology is all the time. Tasks that can be split up aren't, instead we get some fancy convoluted multithreading logic that doesn't do much and Intel is totally playing into that.
A 7zip compression task that my old i5-4670K (4C4T) performs at 10 MB/s at 80% CPU load my 1950X performs at 30 MB/s at 60% CPU load. And that's with specifically 32 threads selected for the task. Smetimes 7zip doesn't quite get the memo and compresses with max. 5% CPU load on the TR. It's wacky.
And I tried recording Witcher 3 in 1440@60 the other day. Seems I can only do 30. @60 I can set data rate to be written to disk low enough to not burden the controller/bus in any way, I can set encoding compression very low, resulting in peak 30% CPU load, but the game still stutters from the encoding process. (I guess I can try experimenting with process priority settings, but I don't have much hope. I seem to remember it used to work without that earlier. It's all like a special needs patient.)
 

Guest 3823474

Guest
I tried everything with W3 now. Reducing details, removing the visual range mod, changing overlay capture and framerate limiter settings in OBS and some other stuff there, process priority settings. The result is always that the recorded footage has phases of stutter, some when the game dips, too, but many when the game runs in 60 fps and the recording is simply dropping frames.
I get this, to a lesser degree, even in totally simplistic games. Dunno, maybe the graphics card and the recording datastream are clashing or something.
As for Windows boot, I activated verbose mode for my new and old system and compared and that listing of the loading of the basic kernel drivers that comprises the majority of it, as well as the displaying of the OS version and hardware afterwards, all that takes a lot longer on the ripper rig. Every single driver entry takes a lot longer to finish. It's doing maybe four lines a second where on the Intel system it goes ZOOM!
I wrote about all my issues on the Asrock and AMD forums, but they're no use. And I can't write Asrock directly because they don't officially support Win7, so I can't expect any effort there. (Although I could probably inquire anyway and hope to get some basic info that helps me eliminate possibilities.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dowlphin;n10675561 said:
The mainboard is a Threadripper board.

How ironic. :)


Dowlphin;n10675561 said:
What did the trick you'd never guess: I kept CSM (compatibility support manager) on but turned all its three detailed sub-options off. That made the system boot without video and I had to reset the UEFI CMOS and set all options again. So something must have gone bonkers before that. Not a promising sign.

I doubt it. More likely that its simply wasn't set up the way that the hardware wanted. Never fear. Computers will let you know that something is wrong by spazzing out in your face.


Dowlphin;n10675561 said:
CPU-wise I'm actually quite frustrated and try not to let it get to me how inefficient that whole technology is all the time. Tasks that can be split up aren't, instead we get some fancy convoluted multithreading logic that doesn't do much and Intel is totally playing into that.

You're singing the unique song of the New-Tech Starling. It all sounds right to me. Now, it's time to use the most effective troubleshooting tool available: inexhaustible patience. The problem could well be more Windows 7 than the hardware, as the processor may be specifically built with newer OS systems in mind. And / or something may still not be set up 100% correctly. I'm at a loss, since I've never dealt with either UEFI or the hardware itself, but I'm sure you'll find a way to get it working in the end. It may even be necessary to disable some of its more advanced features on Windows 7, but it should at least perform.

I'd say the time has come to turn it over to a good, custom PC shop. Since you've done so much work on your own, I bet they won't even charge you.
 

Guest 3823474

Guest
Good custom PC shops are as rare as good astrologers or good psychotherapists. And especially where I live. And especially in light of me being an IT guy.
I've written Asrock support and I expect very little.
 
Dowlphin;n10679681 said:
Good custom PC shops are as rare as good astrologers or good psychotherapists. And especially where I live. And especially in light of me being an IT guy.
I've written Asrock support and I expect very little.

(Offers a cup of patience.) I would also contact AMD directly. Either way, the whole situation smacks of the hardware being unestablished. You will be one of the brave pioneers that forges the way ahead and gets the bloody Threadrippers running. In the end, you'll have a pretty screaming system.

Did you have any better luck getting it working on Windows 10?
 

Guest 3823474

Guest
I just learned from http://www.tomsguide.com/answers/id-...tup-issue.html that the MPC-HC load delay with mouse stutter when using Enahcned Video Renderer that I thought was the DPC latency like the other stuff was in fact the newest nVidia driver 391.01. Very annoying that a new driver causes such issues. I reverted back to 390.65 and it's fixed. I never updated to the newest driver on my old system and didn't suspect such sloppiness from nVidia.
Sadly that doesn't help me with the player's Vsync issues. Only overlay renderer seems to work with that, and in VLC that works with subtitles even, in MPC-HC it is virtually featureless. MPC-HC is generally annoying with its tons of vsync settings that sometimes simply don't do anything at all, with no discernible pattern. (I know I can probably fix some issues by using Aero, at least HTML5 vsync, but that comes with theme issues. Microsoft simply decided to remove that kind of features from non-Aero mode where it worked in previous Windows versions with the classic UI.)
The older driver also didn't help with W3 encoding in 1440@60.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top Bottom