FPS issue

[JSMR]

New user. Having fun using Open Rails. Reversing cars into a siding at walking pace is super exciting haha.
However the FPS for a pretty low texture sim seems quite low. In forested areas around 8-12 which is a slide show.
All that vegetation seems to bring that FPS way down.

is there a way to reduce the texture size of trees, grass etc? Or the amount of vegetation?

Any help greatly appreciated.

[oper190]

First, I would definitely check your system specs, and see if they are up to OR requirements, as it sounds like they aren't. Even MSTS should most likely be giving you better FPS. ( what are your computer's specs?)
Second, what Route are you running the activity in, and which Activity
Third, can you post your OR Log file, attach it to a post. It should be posted onto the desktop as OpenRailsLog.txt
No one can help without more information.

[JSMR]

Sorry, forgot the obvious. Busy day.

Desktop. Windows 10. i5-10400. Integrated graphics. 16gb Ram.
BNSF Scenic Sub routes. USing the Open Rails BNSF Scenic Sub STARTER Activities Version 3. And on the Activity A02 I noted a big FPS drop.

I know the lack of GPU can hinder however I run a flight sim and a racing sim with graphic settings at the highest and I get plenty of FPS. I never would've thought a train lumbering through the country side at no more then 45mph would bring FPS down to 8-12 at times. Admittedly it can go higher if there's little scenery around (I've seen 33) but I kinda thought it may do better than that.

Apart from that I'm loving the sim.

[superheatedsteam]

In addition to the above, try turning Dynamic Shadows off in the OR Options>Video tab which should help improve performance.

Having model instancing on may improve performance.

Try lowering other values in the Video tab and comparing the FPS results.

When testing your changes, use ALT + F5 to bring up the information details, then hold SHIFT + ALT and press F5 till the debug screen appears. This may help you determine where the bottle neck in your environment is.

[JSMR]

OK thanks I'll do some more testing.

[JSMR]

Ok only thing that really helped was the AA settings. I had it on 8 MSAA which I thought would be ok. 2 MSAA gives me anything from 20-25 in heavily forested sections to 60+ FPS now. nice and smooth.
Boy those big trees suck the FPS out.
Where are the texture files kept in sim? I'm too used to flight sim folder structure and files I guess.

[baldwin]

99% of the textures are located in the Textures folders of the route. The rest, a very small number are in the Global/Textures folder

[JSMR]

Thanks.

[superheatedsteam]

Where are the texture files kept in sim?

Where the routes folder is located on your computer, there is a TEXTURES folder.

[crstagg]

'''''''''''''
Where are the texture files kept in sim? I'm too used to flight sim folder structure and files I guess.

We cannot give you an exact answer until you post the log file that was requested in post #2.

[JSMR]

Sorry, here it is. Bit of a mess at the bottom. Trying to get another route to work (unsuccessful).

[oper190]

I know the lack of GPU can hinder however I run a flight sim and a racing sim with graphic settings at the highest and I get plenty of FPS. I never would've thought a train lumbering through the country side at no more then 45mph would bring FPS down to 8-12 at times. Admittedly it can go higher if there's little scenery around (I've seen 33) but I kinda thought it may do better than that.

Just a point to make, in flight sims your are looking at terrain and object from a distance, upward of 10,000s of feet. In a train sim, you in it, so detail has to naturally be more in depth and of higher detail to look decent. Models made with more polygons, and more objects to draw.
My best guess is your video just isn't up to rendering so much. MSTS on my older XP computer yields better FPS, and my business class laptop is doing better with OR than your reporting. I'm now using a "Gamer" for OR and getting good FPS, and had lower end PCs that ran OR far better than your reporting.

[eric]

Integrated chipset video are great for YouTube and some games, but have been a known problem for XNA based games for, oh, 25 years now.

You might want to try the Monogame fork of OpenRails and see if that comes out better.

[JSMR]

Integrated chipset video are great for YouTube and some games, but have been a known problem for XNA based games for, oh, 25 years now.

You might want to try the Monogame fork of OpenRails and see if that comes out better.

Well to be fair, despite the view of oper190, I have a zillion more objects and higher res textures (double the size) in my FS9 than what's in OR. I've used plenty of GPU's thoughtout my time but currently dont have at the moment. But the integrated in the chip performs better than some older cards I had. NR2003 runs way more detail at far higher FPS. I'm guessing those sim's may be more CPU orientated as opposed to OR. Hence the ability to run more detail with more FPS.

I've lowered the viewing distance and mountain distance to 1500m and 15km which may help as well. No shadows. I did see 80 fps in open areas. I'll work on resizing those tree's and shrubs and see what happens.

Anyway, on with the show and running the same BNSF scenic routes over and over lol.

[derekmorton]

Please remember that you are comparing commercial programs that have 100's of paid programmers, with ORTS which has 10's of unpaid part time programmers.