18 replies to this topic

[Propellanttech]

For those of us who are running 32 bit or DX9 and having trouble with Last Eco, could you make the server exclude us from the map_

Every time, but once, Last Eco has crashed on my computer. I have a video memory over run, and it crashed the game. Some times it crashes my video driver requiring a total computer reboot.

Can this map be taken out of rotation or at least exclude us lower Direct X users from ever being loaded into it_

I have only successfully played this map one time. I can not tell you why that one time my computer loaded it and allowed me to play the map. Every other time (50 or more times) the map upon loading crashed Hawken.

I hope this isn't too much to ask....for I'm a bit concerned how I would hate to quit playing this game due to restarts.

PT

[EliteShooter]

I mostly quit the server when it's last eco , or should say LAG EGO just like what vily says ...

[caduceus26]

Don't know if it is feasible but adding an option in Settings or possibly the appropriate .INI to select maps to exclude would be great.

[Rexal]

The best option is get a better PC or not play Hawken i know which one i would go for.

[hendman]

Rexal, on March 11 2014 - 06:55 AM, said:

The best option is get a better PC or not play Hawken i know which one i would go for.

No, the option is for the map developer to fix the memory issue or to take the map off the roster. When people have computers that meet the minimum requirements for playing the game, they should at the least be able to play the game


Apart from the memory issue, there are some other issues as well, that need some attention. The design is not really suited for siege mode (don't have experience with other modes on that map), and you literally get stuck on everything on that map. Overall it is a horrible design that never should have been released in the state it is in.

[Propellanttech]

Rexal, on March 11 2014 - 06:55 AM, said:

The best option is get a better PC or not play Hawken i know which one i would go for.

Listen....I play all the maps perfectly fine on medium quality graphics settings except for Last Eco. I don't see where your suggestions gets any closer to a solution. Sure I could upgrade to Win 7 pro and go with some uber expensive new graphics card, or possibly build yet another computer (since I built this one), but that doesn't fix the problem for the other people who are also having problems with video memory overuns from a memory leak on this map.

Maybe you should learn some information on what causes memory leaks on maps which cause crashes, and quit making stupid suggestions.

I suggested a solution where everyone wins. The people who do not want to crash on the map are excluded, and those who have no problem can go ahead and get stuck on every little item that is a problem in it.

Edited by Propellanttech, March 11 2014 - 01:05 PM.

[nokari]

I would suggest you try changing your settings from Medium to Low and turn off any other extra lighting and rendering effects you might have turned on. I have a system that I'm sure is probably older than yours and with a low-end processor and GPUs by today's standards, yet I have no problem playing as long as I use low settings.

But hendman is also right. There are memory issues affecting performance for a lot of people, though I wouldn't say it's just Last Eco. Until last night, Origin was the map that crashed my game constantly and I've never had issues with Last Eco.

[RunaPanda]

Propellanttech, on March 11 2014 - 01:02 PM, said:

Rexal, on March 11 2014 - 06:55 AM, said:

The best option is get a better PC or not play Hawken i know which one i would go for.

Listen....I play all the maps perfectly fine on medium quality graphics settings except for Last Eco. I don't see where your suggestions gets any closer to a solution. Sure I could upgrade to Win 7 pro and go with some uber expensive new graphics card, or possibly build yet another computer (since I built this one), but that doesn't fix the problem for the other people who are also having problems with video memory overuns from a memory leak on this map.

Maybe you should learn some information on what causes memory leaks on maps which cause crashes, and quit making stupid suggestions.

I suggested a solution where everyone wins. The people who do not want to crash on the map are excluded, and those who have no problem can go ahead and get stuck on every little item that is a problem in it.

The "Video Memory Leak" your claiming is on that map doesn't actually exist. At 1080p medium settings, no physX Last Eco takes about 1066MB or roughly 1.06GB, on ultra settings same resolution, it takes around 1.5GB. I'm speaking in terms of VRAM not system memory, most intigrated graphics cannot handle this, sure it may say it uses up to 2GB, but sad to say the virtual memory controller for your IGP just isn't fast enough, nor is it's virtualized bus wide enough. It's good for 512MB tops, maybe if it's an AMD A series up to maybe a gig but thats pushing it. Hawken needs a decent dedicated graphics card to play smoothly, either a R9 280, or a GTX 760 or w/e variant going back to maybe the HD 6000 and GTX 500 series, anything older will probably have problems. I've played hawken for a rather long time, and haven't had any kind of issues with crashing and what not. The system requirements posted a long time ago are in serious revision, hence why people are having problems. After playing for 3~4 hours, my VRAM use is around 2.7GB with system ram usage around 5~5.5GB thats with a tri monitor setup,

The problem isn't with the client, it functions as it should, the problem is your outdated graphics card/system ram. My old system with 8 gigs and a 660 Ti powered by an old Athlon 2 X4 @ 3Ghz runs the game fine, zero crashes.

[Propellanttech]

RunaPanda, on March 11 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

The "Video Memory Leak" your claiming is on that map doesn't actually exist. At 1080p medium settings, no physX Last Eco takes about 1066MB or roughly 1.06GB, on ultra settings same resolution, it takes around 1.5GB. I'm speaking in terms of VRAM not system memory, most intigrated graphics cannot handle this, sure it may say it uses up to 2GB, but sad to say the virtual memory controller for your IGP just isn't fast enough, nor is it's virtualized bus wide enough. It's good for 512MB tops, maybe if it's an AMD A series up to maybe a gig but thats pushing it. Hawken needs a decent dedicated graphics card to play smoothly, either a R9 280, or a GTX 760 or w/e variant going back to maybe the HD 6000 and GTX 500 series, anything older will probably have problems. I've played hawken for a rather long time, and haven't had any kind of issues with crashing and what not. The system requirements posted a long time ago are in serious revision, hence why people are having problems. After playing for 3~4 hours, my VRAM use is around 2.7GB with system ram usage around 5~5.5GB thats with a tri monitor setup,

The problem isn't with the client, it functions as it should, the problem is your outdated graphics card/system ram. My old system with 8 gigs and a 660 Ti powered by an old Athlon 2 X4 @ 3Ghz runs the game fine, zero crashes.

Well considering I never said my graphics interface was built on board, you make many assumptions. First I'm running a pci-ex 16 slot with a Nvidia GTX 460 with 1 gb of ddrr video memory.  It has a 256 bit width interface. Second I'm running 8 gigs of ddr3 of system ram, with an AMD 4 core 2.8 GHz processor. Also with that I'm running a Raid 10 system so I don't worry about any vitual memory, and that system is 1 terabyte of storage with another terabyte of backup. The game is also not on the primary drive of the computer of which windows is installed.


I may be slightly out of date, but when I can run every map but that one, it's pretty much stated that they either need to go full DX10 or possibly redo the map to prevent being able to see across it's entirety.

Also since I'm limited with my LCD monitor (the limitation for resolution),  I'm only pushing 1280 x 1024.

I'm not using a tri monitor setup...it's not needed.

So please reinsert your foot into your mouth, and possibly ask next time without assuming you know anything about my system.

Edited by Propellanttech, March 11 2014 - 03:15 PM.

[caduceus26]

Last Eco and Bunker are the latest map releases, and the most problematic. IMO.  Map collisions, memory leaks, and such issues aside these maps have problems in the design that make them less desirable to play on.

Edited by caduceus26, March 11 2014 - 06:55 PM.

[RunaPanda]

Propellanttech, on March 11 2014 - 03:06 PM, said:

RunaPanda, on March 11 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

The "Video Memory Leak" your claiming is on that map doesn't actually exist. At 1080p medium settings, no physX Last Eco takes about 1066MB or roughly 1.06GB, on ultra settings same resolution, it takes around 1.5GB. I'm speaking in terms of VRAM not system memory, most intigrated graphics cannot handle this, sure it may say it uses up to 2GB, but sad to say the virtual memory controller for your IGP just isn't fast enough, nor is it's virtualized bus wide enough. It's good for 512MB tops, maybe if it's an AMD A series up to maybe a gig but thats pushing it. Hawken needs a decent dedicated graphics card to play smoothly, either a R9 280, or a GTX 760 or w/e variant going back to maybe the HD 6000 and GTX 500 series, anything older will probably have problems. I've played hawken for a rather long time, and haven't had any kind of issues with crashing and what not. The system requirements posted a long time ago are in serious revision, hence why people are having problems. After playing for 3~4 hours, my VRAM use is around 2.7GB with system ram usage around 5~5.5GB thats with a tri monitor setup,

The problem isn't with the client, it functions as it should, the problem is your outdated graphics card/system ram. My old system with 8 gigs and a 660 Ti powered by an old Athlon 2 X4 @ 3Ghz runs the game fine, zero crashes.

Well considering I never said my graphics interface was built on board, you make many assumptions. First I'm running a pci-ex 16 slot with a Nvidia GTX 460 with 1 gb of ddrr video memory.  It has a 256 bit width interface. Second I'm running 8 gigs of ddr3 of system ram, with an AMD 4 core 2.8 GHz processor. Also with that I'm running a Raid 10 system so I don't worry about any vitual memory, and that system is 1 terabyte of storage with another terabyte of backup. The game is also not on the primary drive of the computer of which windows is installed.


I may be slightly out of date, but when I can run every map but that one, it's pretty much stated that they either need to go full DX10 or possibly redo the map to prevent being able to see across it's entirety.

Also since I'm limited with my LCD monitor (the limitation for resolution),  I'm only pushing 1280 x 1024.

I'm not using a tri monitor setup...it's not needed.

So please reinsert your foot into your mouth, and possibly ask next time without assuming you know anything about my system.

Lol really_ RAID 10_ Do you even know how RAID works_ RAID 10 is purely for data continuity and is a mirroring of all the other disk, so thats really stupid to even brag about. Now 10 SSDs in RAID 0 then I'd bow but not HDDs in RAID 10.

Also the 460 is horribly slow compared to the 460 Ti, and FYI the lower end cards are known for their lack of DX9 shader speed, since the main selling point is DX10/11 for cheap. It hurts it even more than it only has a gig of ram, If this is a blant attempt to mock me just look at my sig.

If anything it's that AMD proc thats causing the problems, 2.8 isn't fast enough for most of the built in physics the game uses, not the actual PhysX. I'm gonna guess since Hawken uses PhysX as GPU accelerated physics it also uses Apex for CPU physics but thats just a guess. Which is pretty demanding on the processor, since most Apex powered games want at least 3GHz or more.

That is of course if you wanna stay on topic not try to bash me for having a better system.

[nokari]

RunaPanda, on March 11 2014 - 07:11 PM, said:

Also the 460 is horribly slow compared to the 460 Ti, and FYI the lower end cards are known for their lack of DX9 shader speed, since the main selling point is DX10/11 for cheap. It hurts it even more than it only has a gig of ram, If this is a blant attempt to mock me just look at my sig.

*tries to read purple on dark gray sig*

*eyes bleed*

[RunaPanda]

nokari, on March 11 2014 - 07:15 PM, said:

RunaPanda, on March 11 2014 - 07:11 PM, said:

Also the 460 is horribly slow compared to the 460 Ti, and FYI the lower end cards are known for their lack of DX9 shader speed, since the main selling point is DX10/11 for cheap. It hurts it even more than it only has a gig of ram, If this is a blant attempt to mock me just look at my sig.

*tries to read purple on dark gray sig*

*eyes bleed*

xD Quad Titan Blacks vs a solo 460 non Ti edition lol.
*edit*
Updated siggy so it should be turning pink with updated parts since I last stopped by, been playing Titanfall beta to much in that 1800p ;D

Edited by RunaPanda, March 11 2014 - 07:28 PM.

[Beefsweat]

Propellanttech, on March 11 2014 - 03:06 PM, said:

Also with that I'm running a Raid 10 system so I don't worry about any vitual memory

[ticklemyiguana]

I entered this thread because I was all "What the hell_ This is a damn good map." But after reading the post, I support this. I haven't had the issue, but I feel the option takes marginal effort and allows for greater user utility of the game, so why not_

[Propellanttech]

RunaPanda, on March 11 2014 - 07:11 PM, said:

Lol really_ RAID 10_ Do you even know how RAID works_ RAID 10 is purely for data continuity and is a mirroring of all the other disk, so thats really stupid to even brag about. Now 10 SSDs in RAID 0 then I'd bow but not HDDs in RAID 10.

Also the 460 is horribly slow compared to the 460 Ti, and FYI the lower end cards are known for their lack of DX9 shader speed, since the main selling point is DX10/11 for cheap. It hurts it even more than it only has a gig of ram, If this is a blant attempt to mock me just look at my sig.

If anything it's that AMD proc thats causing the problems, 2.8 isn't fast enough for most of the built in physics the game uses, not the actual PhysX. I'm gonna guess since Hawken uses PhysX as GPU accelerated physics it also uses Apex for CPU physics but thats just a guess. Which is pretty demanding on the processor, since most Apex powered games want at least 3GHz or more.

That is of course if you wanna stay on topic not try to bash me for having a better system.

Of course I know how raid 10 works, evidently you do not. I've had a raid system on my computers since 1996. Raid 10 is a raid 0 backed up with additional storage raid 1. It is both a 0 and a 1. Maybe you should do more studying on what you are talking about. It has best of both worlds with twice the cost (speed of raid 0 with the security of raid 1).

Also using SSD's in a raid system is a great way to waste money considering how fast you would burn out the transistor junctions contained on the solid state drives. If you don't understand that, I'm not surprised.

The specifications of the developers state the 460 GTX is the optimum level of hardware to run the game,  but you state those specifications are below the minimums. I figure you need to contact the developers and tell them they are mis-selling a game and can have people asking for refunds when their specifications are bogus and lies.

I don't give a rats ass about your signature. You came on a tread that I created and started spouting information you know nothing about. I don't care if you are cooling your system with liquid helium, for that doesn't solve the problem the game makers have created.

I ask for a simple solution of allowing some users to exclude certain maps to help the community. I didn't come on some ones thread and insult them about what equipement I thought they had, and had no clue, they know what they are talking about.

Keep spouting irrelevant information about what you know....it only makes you look petty and stupid.

Edited by Propellanttech, March 12 2014 - 11:18 AM.

[RunaPanda]

Propellanttech, on March 12 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

RunaPanda, on March 11 2014 - 07:11 PM, said:

Lol really_ RAID 10_ Do you even know how RAID works_ RAID 10 is purely for data continuity and is a mirroring of all the other disk, so thats really stupid to even brag about. Now 10 SSDs in RAID 0 then I'd bow but not HDDs in RAID 10.

Also the 460 is horribly slow compared to the 460 Ti, and FYI the lower end cards are known for their lack of DX9 shader speed, since the main selling point is DX10/11 for cheap. It hurts it even more than it only has a gig of ram, If this is a blant attempt to mock me just look at my sig.

If anything it's that AMD proc thats causing the problems, 2.8 isn't fast enough for most of the built in physics the game uses, not the actual PhysX. I'm gonna guess since Hawken uses PhysX as GPU accelerated physics it also uses Apex for CPU physics but thats just a guess. Which is pretty demanding on the processor, since most Apex powered games want at least 3GHz or more.

That is of course if you wanna stay on topic not try to bash me for having a better system.

Of course I know how raid 10 works, evidently you do not. I've had a raid system on my computers since 1996. Raid 10 is a raid 0 backed up with additional storage raid 1. It is both a 0 and a 1. Maybe you should do more studying on what you are talking about. It has best of both worlds with twice the cost (speed of raid 0 with the security of raid 1).

Also using SSD's in a raid system is a great way to waste money considering how fast you would burn out the transistor junctions contained on the solid state drives. If you don't understand that, I'm not surprised.

The specifications of the developers state the 460 GTX is the optimum level of hardware to run the game,  but you state those specifications are below the minimums. I figure you need to contact the developers and tell them they are mis-selling a game and can have people asking for refunds when their specifications are bogus and lies.

#1. Raid 10 is only useful in enterprise situations, it's cost ineffective for the home user. Standard non-RAIDed arrays are perfectly fine for mass storage. Sure you threw away $1000 on 10 HDDs, that get the speed of a SATAII SSD, Where as I spent $799 and got an SSD that gets at least quadrouple the speed of a single SATAIII SSD.

#2. If RAIDing SSDs is so bad, why do some companies make PCIe SSDs which are hardware RAIDed_ Yet have the same life span as a typical SSD. Or is it you don't realize that RAID0 which is the common form of these PCIe SSDs, uses the collective read and write speed of all disks to accelerate performance, and the data is evenly leveled across all SSDs so theres no "extra stress" put on any of them.

#3a. Games especially online games, go through graphical updates and what not often increasing fidelity and luster. This means increase in requirements. A perfect example of this is World of Warcraft, before the DirectX 11 update, a GTX 8800 ran the game like a champ, then the update happened, and suddenly performance fell people complained, so Blizzard rewrote the system requirements, and low and behold they changed. What was good X amount of years ago now wasn't up to snuff. Same thing happened here, they added a few new things. primarily a AA post filter(Guessing this is either FXAA or SMAA someone from ADH could clarify this). There's also been an LOD adjustment added (Level of Detail), they've also tweaked the DOF and Ambient Occlusion as well along with the two other post process effects I forget the name of at the end. All this adds on to GPU load, no GPU ram persay, but it stresses the GPU more.

#3b. Refunds_ Last time I checked Hawken was Free to Play, the so called DLC and Meteor Credit purchases in game work just like they do in any other game. All sales are final I think you honestly need to reread the EULA if you even read it. Pay specific attention to Section 5, subsection G and I part 7 as well we section 14.

[Opicron]

RunaPanda, on March 11 2014 - 07:11 PM, said:

Silly rant

@RunaPanda: after reading some of your comments in various threads I am convinced. You sir, are an forum troll. It seems, from the tone of your comments, that your knowledge is absolute and not a single person can be right if his or her opinion differs from yours.

The statements you are trying to lay out as facts are clearly opinions, and ill-informed self-centered ones at best. You go out of your way to bend statements and are blind to actually see their worth.

Congratulations, I know who I will be ignoring from now on, as you just made it to my ignore list. Stop feeding the trollolol.

Edited by Opicron, March 13 2014 - 05:14 AM.

[Propellanttech]

RunaPanda, on March 12 2014 - 06:19 PM, said:

Irrelevant rant snipped

You post wasn't on topic, had nothing to do with fixing the problem or implementing the solution.

I'm glad you like to look at penises to see if yours is bigger.

Now I'll move on to someone who will actually give some ideas to implement or achieve the desired effect.

Edited by Propellanttech, March 13 2014 - 04:33 AM.