High Detail Distant land

[12345678me]

Iv been wondering how do I get distant land to load to full detail it looks good standing on top of a hill over looking the entire map even with the low detail distant land but I want all the land I see to be full detail. I'm quite sure that my GFX can run it and that I have more RAM than I need to load most of the map but why cant I. Is there a command to make this happen iv already got all the setting to full i.e. view distant land, item fade and so on but I still get this crappy low detail land in the distance. On occasion when I am riding through the land scape I get with in range of the next "map piece and see it load" its quite annoying as I know my system is capable of doing such things.

Is there a command that I can use to set it to load the map sections around me in a greater radius or a mod that could help with this.

 

Intel 2.4ghz quad core

Nvidia 8800gt

4gb 1033 MHz ddr2

10 000rpm Raptor HDD

 

Iv posted my specks just so you know I'm not some fool who thinks his comp is the best thing even when relay its just not.

 

 

 

Thanks for any help you can offer.

[nosisab]

Iv been wondering how do I get distant land to load to full detail it looks good standing on top of a hill over looking the entire map even with the low detail distant land but I want all the land I see to be full detail. I'm quite sure that my GFX can run it and that I have more RAM than I need to load most of the map but why cant I. Is there a command to make this happen iv already got all the setting to full i.e. view distant land, item fade and so on but I still get this crappy low detail land in the distance. On occasion when I am riding through the land scape I get with in range of the next "map piece and see it load" its quite annoying as I know my system is capable of doing such things.

Is there a command that I can use to set it to load the map sections around me in a greater radius or a mod that could help with this.

 

Intel 2.4ghz quad core

Nvidia 8800gt

4gb 1033 MHz ddr2

10 000rpm Raptor HDD

 

Iv posted my specks just so you know I'm not some fool who thinks his comp is the best thing even when relay its just not.

 

 

 

Thanks for any help you can offer.

Benchmarks from reliable sources shows most nowadays games perform poorly with graphics at max in resolutions above 1280x1024 "even" in SLI/Crossfire setups ... Oblivion being among the most demanding... and "this" without mods...

 

This said we can go into your problem. No video card will better low resolution textures. You need distant land mods that does excellent job in this. And you have a rig able to it. Just care not abusing.

[Vagrant0]

In the .ini (in your mydocuments folder) there are some options related to how many grids to load.

 

uGridsToLoad=5

 

5 is the standard number. With your system, you might be able to handle as many as 7 or 8 (2-3 cells further in every direction).

 

Along with a "iPreloadSizeLimit=" of somewhere around 30-50million and "uExterior Cell Buffer=" of 45-64 should give you some of what you're looking for. You probably should start off testing these things low, and only raising them once you've used them and noticed little to no performance change.

 

In addition to that, there are a number of LOD retextures, which use an image larger than 1024x1024 (what they are now) so that you have more detail. 2084x2048 textures, combined with those .ini tweaks and having full distant trees, and everything on, should give you about as close to what you're looking for as you're going to get.

 

You will however lose some performance. Start with the larger LOD textures, then do the .ini stuff. Hopefully you have the 512 mb video memory version of your card.

[Darkarbiter]

512mb version? Why? The only other version is a 1gb version! Surely higher memory would be better? Concidering I'm just about to have a similar rig (gonna get pretty much the same cpu soon and allready have an 8800gt) I'd defeinitly like to see how this turns out.

[nosisab]

512mb version? Why? The only other version is a 1gb version! Surely higher memory would be better? Concidering I'm just about to have a similar rig (gonna get pretty much the same cpu soon and allready have an 8800gt) I'd defeinitly like to see how this turns out.

Same way low resolution textures will render poor views in any VC able to show then, the memory acts the inverse way. having enough to show the desired resolution without having to page may be deemed enough, but if there is 'step' memory the soft or the own VC will use it to store frames it expect will be shown after. Better saying, it can store the views around the player so if he turns the picture is already loaded and can be presented with no delay...

 

In VC memory is not the only factor, raw processing power have its weight, but surely more memory means better performance, aways (assuming bad memory management and/or poor design don't cripples things more than helping).

[12345678me]

I got the 512 because it has a faster clock speed and better shaders and 512 is more GDDR3 than I need.

 

But thx to everyone for the help ill have to try this and get back to you about how it runs.

:thanks:

[Darkarbiter]

512mb version? Why? The only other version is a 1gb version! Surely higher memory would be better? Concidering I'm just about to have a similar rig (gonna get pretty much the same cpu soon and allready have an 8800gt) I'd defeinitly like to see how this turns out.

Same way low resolution textures will render poor views in any VC able to show then, the memory acts the inverse way. having enough to show the desired resolution without having to page may be deemed enough, but if there is 'step' memory the soft or the own VC will use it to store frames it expect will be shown after. Better saying, it can store the views around the player so if he turns the picture is already loaded and can be presented with no delay...

 

In VC memory is not the only factor, raw processing power have its weight, but surely more memory means better performance, aways (assuming bad memory management and/or poor design don't cripples things more than helping).

Well QTP3 pretty much maxes out a 512mb card doesn't it? If you wanted to go beyond the default settings and load more higher res textures (in the background for example) than 1gb would be benificial. I know it has a lower clock speed but... is the over clock speed lower or is it the same?

[Vagrant0]

Well QTP3 pretty much maxes out a 512mb card doesn't it? If you wanted to go beyond the default settings and load more higher res textures (in the background for example) than 1gb would be benificial. I know it has a lower clock speed but... is the over clock speed lower or is it the same?

It wasn't suggested to use QTP, and actually doing so, when he is loading more cells would be a very bad idea. He wanted distant landscape to look better, not close landscape and structures to look better. Since we are talking about using the normal textures for all but the LODs, a faster clock is preferred since it can handle all the additional calculations that are taken up from the much larger active area (the usual block is a 5x5 cell area. What is being suggested is a 7x7 area, almost double normal cell count). More ram will be able to handle large textures, but not be able to process them fast enough. And it isn't unheard of for videocard manufacturers to make a card with more memory than the card can actually make use of reliably. Afterall, most gamers just look at RAM, and don't considder the clock speed. Overclocking a videocard isn't suggestable for most people since most people don't have the cooling capability to handle all that extra heat. The normal heat-sinks and fan (if you're lucky) aren't designed to handle an increased load, and these components can't be readily improved upon. There also tends to be less air flow around a videocard than a processor or power supply.

 

Regardless, the intention was to make the distant landscape look better. The suggestions offered are only valid in this case, although similar methods may be used by others, and are designed to make that point between near and far, more detailed. It is afterall, that point, far enough away that you can tell it is a LOD texture, but close enough to where you can see detail (or lack of) in the ground, that makes the standard LOD textures just look really bad.

[Darkarbiter]

Well no have you ever overclocked? It doesn't necassarily mean an increase in voltage (heat). If say for example... the cards are manufactured and they chuck extra memory on the 1gb one... and also decrease its clock speed (instead of having it as the maximum possible with a large margin of error which is common) then if you increase the core clock speed to the same as the 512mb version then thats no extra heat and likely no extra instability. Hell my 512mb 8800gt could overclock 24.7%!!! without even touching voltage. So I would highly recommend overclocking (the video card at least) contrary to what you said. Every card is slightly different however... and it'll depend a lot on what the card is to how overclockable it is. I'm just asking the question of whether there is any reason why the 1gb clock is slower apart from making the 512mb more appealing. So in other words whether at the end of the day without adding extra voltage is the 1gb going to overlcock (on average) as to as fast as the 512mb version. If the answer is yes theres no reason not to get the 1gb version.

 

Looking at a few reviews here and it appears that the difference in real world benchmarks is a little under 2%. Thats nothing... bear in mind if you want to have lots of high res textures/distant lands with default textures then the benchmarks for oblivion probably don't cater to qpt3 or custom ini files. I defenitly shoulda gotten the 1gb version :wallbash: .

[12345678me]

Iv tried the things suggested and i do have an improved view distance but its still not quite far enough, iv got my UGridsToLoad = 12 and iv had no drop in performance but i dot think its working as well as it should. From what has been suggested to me this should be very demanding and i should have double the view distance of high detail land. I just go in to the .ini and replace the 5 in UGridsToLoad to what ever number i want then save the .ini Right? Because I'm getting very confused as to why this isn't working. :wacko:

 

I thought that the 512 version not only had a faster stock clock speed but also had a more room for over clocking but after reading this I'm starting to wish that I had got the 1gb version. I'm planing to get another 8800gt 512 to SLI with current one then over clock. Hopefully that will make up for the extra 512mb that the 1gb version has got ever me.