S.C.A.R.S slow as crap or is it just me?

[jvolel]

THis game runs at like 4 fps for me for some reason everyother game runs at 50-60fps can't be my comp if everything else other then this game runs fine

[rickianblaster]

Hey! Scars runs fine on my system, check if you're using poor plug-ins... I have a pretty crappy system, and it runs fine for me...

[jvolel]

nt

[rickianblaster]

I never even tried it on 1.3, it's fine on 1.4, you really should check your configuration...

[jvolel]

what setting do you have

[rickianblaster]

Jabo's Direct3D
Direct Sound
NRage's Direct input 8.0

These SHOULD work fine.
It might help if you tell me your os.

Also, something that may help performance:

Check how much ram(not VRam) and set windows to use 2.5 times that number for Virtual Memory, use a minimum of 256 and a maximum of 512, unless WindowsXP suggests more.
For example: If you have 128Mb of ram, set the min. and max. to 320Mb Virtual Memory. Make sure you've defragged that drive recently, also use your fastest hard drive.

I doubt this will help much, but being PJ1.4 is structured slightly differently, the extra simulated ram may help signifigantly.:colgate:

[jvolel]

am using winme i have 256 ram pc133, pIII 933 21 gig hard drive

[jvolel]

Originally posted by rickianblaster
Jabo's Direct3D
Direct Sound
NRage's Direct input 8.0

These SHOULD work fine.
It might help if you tell me your os.

Also, something that may help performance:

Check how much ram(not VRam) and set windows to use 2.5 times that number for Virtual Memory, use a minimum of 256 and a maximum of 512, unless WindowsXP suggests more.
For example: If you have 128Mb of ram, set the min. and max. to 320Mb Virtual Memory. Make sure you've defragged that drive recently, also use your fastest hard drive.

I doubt this will help much, but being PJ1.4 is structured slightly differently, the extra simulated ram may help signifigantly.:colgate:

um how do i change the ram settings exactly?

[moviecut]

maybe it`s a bad rom...if all other roms just run fine...try downloading another. i think it isn`t that much work, cause its the rom with the smallest size (i guess it is...) ;-)

moviecut

[EdgeBlade]

Originally posted by jvolel
...it can't be if it was a bad rom it wouldn't run at all it would crash right on the spot...

That's not true, just ask around.

[jvolel]

Originally posted by moviecut
maybe it`s a bad rom...if all other roms just run fine...try downloading another. i think it isn`t that much work, cause its the rom with the smallest size (i guess it is...) ;-)

moviecut


nah it can't be if it was a bad rom it wouldn't run at all it would crash right on the spot or the emu would say how its running from unmapped surface or something

[Trotterwatch]

btw, just thought I would add to this. Setting swapfile to 2.5 times your system ram is complete and utter bullcrap.

Why?
~~~~

It stands to reason that the more RAM you have, the less swapfile you need. Using this logic states that someone with 512mb ram will need a 1.256 gig swap file?

Whereas someone with 64mb ram would need a 196 swapfile (or as in your interpretation the minimum swapfile)?

-
Think about it, the person with the least ram will need a bigger swapfile. Also if you are using XP then don't even bother limiting your swapfile - the memory management in XP is much better than it was in a non NT OS such as Win9x.
-

[rickianblaster]

Your pc swaps the file between ram, but can't access it readily from wherever on the hard drive, this keeps it open for windows to switch quicker. The more ram you use, the more swapping, the bigger swap file.

[Trotterwatch]

The more RAM you have, the lesser swapfile you need. If you had 2 gigs worth of ram for example then the swapfile can be eliminated.

This is what happens with your computer:

Your computer will look for the instruction it needs first in the level 1 cache, then in the level 2, then it goes to ram - if it's not in any of those places it has to retrieve it from the HD where it will be.

The more ram (and cache to some effect) you have, the more instructions etc are stored within it, and thus less swapfile is needed.

If you so wish, I can get you proof that 2.5x your Ram for swapfile is just not true.

As a rule however setting a minimum amount for swapfile is good practice, setting a maximum however can leave you with an unstable system.

[Smiff]

yep Trotterwatch is correct. If you really know what you're doing you can just fix a good size file on your fastest drive so Windows wont mess around resizing it.