Spock

The most prominent problem I found with pre-assembled rigs is that they often don't use quality components. They advertise with the amount of RAM, the cpu clock speed and HDD/SSD space. But a motherboard name (very important), ram manufacturer or PSU manufacturer don't mean anything for the average PC customer. About 50% of the pre assembled rigs I saw showed severe problems when pushed.

Thanks a lot for your detailed troubleshooting post. The limiting factor might indeed be particle animations. I did install the reduced resolution version recommended by STEP:Extended, I cannot tell for sure if that's it (fps should drop when uninstalling it, I will try that).I also did deactivate auto detect memory shortly after my post, should have updated it. If I remember right Torminator or Aiyen gave some advice on ENBoost memory settings. About the "stuttering": From what I perceive my game doesn't really stutter. It seems like normal frame behavior if vsync fps drop below 30. My current theory is that Jafin is right about SSAO and the frame rate is limited by the post processing time required to render each frame. The fact that this is so prominent in foliage areas could be explained by the vast amount of edges/joints/angles produced in such an environment (trees HD and flora overhaul might exacerbate this). It would also explain why going from ugrids 5 to 7 only cost me 0.4 fps in that area (my SSAO area is limited below ugrids 5). About half a year ago I tried radeon pro with my 280x, it was version 1.1 back then and some required process wouldn't start after some time (seemed to be a more common issue). I will have to check for a new version. "Free Sync", the dynamic vsync option interests me, dunno if it will work with my monitor though. And from back in the day I remember enabling the triple buffer was a bad thing. I will have to test these things when my card is back from RMA. Thanks again for your detailed post!

Boris recently optimized his SSAO shader.

Just a quick suggestion: could you try it with the new SSAO optimizations? Jafin told me he didn't see any performance difference from 7870 to 290 until he tried them. I cannot try myself atm because I had to RMA my card.

This is probably pre Memory Patch 3.0. I honestly don't know how the game behaves with higher res textures and the new memory patch because I'm stuck without a graphics card again (had to RMA mine because of coil whine).1024 as the max size for exterior textures and normals is still recommended by STEP though but I think it isn't as much of a problem as it were. I'm actually thinking about upping resolutions of textures you might see up close more often to 2048. Things like doors for example.

This analogy is flawed. It's not like you are a customer, Boris is developping his ENB for free.The better analogy would be this: Boris' Red Lobster is free on Thursday nights. Some people with obscure allergies have problems after eating there. They compain to him and demand their allergies to be diagnosed so they can continue eating free fish. He gets annoyed and puts out a sign: No people with fish allergies! I like his attitude :)

I think STEP handles Audio Overhaul very well, I do prefer the AOS bow sounds though.

Maybe someone should make a BBW mod, maybe call it project gamer reality - ultra realistic immersive women :P

I did a little reading on PCI-E lanes, the most recent I found was this: https://www.overclock.net/t/1440974/anyone-have-real-world-performance-with-an-r9-290-or-290x-crossfire-on-pcie-2-0-and-eyefinity-5670x1080-rez It seems like PCI-E normally only becomes a problem if you use xfire and 4k resolutions, if you got 2.0 x16 that is. But modded TES is known to do strange things in the past... Yes, by modded foliage I mean Trees HD and SFO :) But like I said this is a shot in the blue. It might also be a driver bug or some other bogus thing.

That fps gain depends on how much PCI-E bandwidth the card needs for a certain scene. Maybe rendering the modded foliage needs a lot of bandwidth, but I cannot tell for sure. Usually games are streamlined to not stress such bottlenecks, maybe adding all those texture and mesh mods is too much. This is speculation by me though, just trying to find a reason. Allsunday what is your PCI-E version?

Interesting, maybe some areas of Skyrim just drop you to a certain FPS regardless of how powerful your GPU is. That's why I thought about bandwidth limits... I would really like to know what fps people with a 780 TI, full step setup, medium demanding ENB and 1440p get in the Riften forest.

I merely meant that the issue I posted in the OP wasn't present in all areas around Skyrim. I didn't get the slightest fps improvement on that foliage savegame but that's not true for all areas. There are other savegames where my 280x struggled with 25 fps and my 290 gets me ~38. Sadly I couldn't do anything about the foliage fps till now, I would have told you if I did! :(

After testing some more areas yesterday I found that I got a significant fps improvement in other areas, this might indeed be the foliage for me too. Sadly I will not be able to do much more testing in the near future as I have to RMA my card due to coil whining :/ Hopefully I get a card with Hynix Vram next time! @Allsunday: I just tried that tool, it didn't change anything at all for me :(

Hey people, I know this is the kind of question techies hate but I will ask it anyway. My Skyrim Setup is STEP:Extended modded (1024 textures for exteriors) and runs Opethfeldt ENB 7 beta 3. Today my new GPU arrived, Powercolor r9 290 pcs+. But I was very surprised I did get exact same fps (27.5) on a very low fps savegame I made near Riften (with lots of trees, no water visible) as with my 280x. The things I checked are: CPU: I7 920 @ 3.8 GHz (windows doesn't show full cpu usage, on no core) RAM: 6 GB @ 1.5 GHz triple channel CL 7 (windows doesn't show full physical ram usage) I thought the 290 should at least get me slightly more fps then the 280x so I'm thinking something else might hold my system back. Could it be the PCI-E 2.0 bandwidth? Ugrids=7 costs me roughly 0.4 fps which encourages me to think this is really not geometry or shader limited but has something to do with bandwidth. Resolution is pretty much the only thing that has a huge impact on my fps, I'm currently at 1440p. My ENBoost settings: Thanks in advance for any input on this!

To my knowledge The Choice is Yours works with Requiem, it has a file conflict though. Requiem disables Faendal as follower in the Faendal & Sven quest. You have to choose if you want the Requiem or The Choice is Yours functionality in that quest. Whatever mod you install last (file conflict, not an esp conflict) will win. (information from The Choice is Yours nexus discussion)

Thanks a lot!Sure... just make sure to let me know how it goes. Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk I'm sorry for this lame feedback but I don't want to be impolite and ignore your request. Thanks again for the patch and update. My GPU will (hopefully) be shipped tomorrow so I can only see this in T5E. My knowledge of Requiem loot is too limited to give adequate feedback based on T5E alone. I pointed this out to Azirok, dunno if he got time to look at it (probably takes a while as this isn't trivial).From what I saw in T5E some changes Skyrim Coin Replacer Redux makes, in particular to leveled lists, are subjective regarding Requiem compatibility. Azirok is probably the man to see for this as he has spend a lot of time with Requiem loot balance.

Thanks a lot!

That's exactly what I had in mind with "specific pack related mod page" :)

Mod pages are not tied to Packs, nor do we want them to be in the current paradigm, as this would cause a lot of redundancy. We may look at a potential solution in the future ... a possible solution would be to add a Pack reference section to existing mod pages that would house links to pack-specific mod info. We could also use mod subpages, but that is an arbitrary hierarchical org structure with only one single 'branch'. We could use sub-properties or sub-categories, but it all requires more dev, which is not something we can do at the moment. I'm just saying that would really be helpful because some mods require quite some installation instruction if used with Requiem, especially if you want everything to be modular. If we put all that on the guide it can get really cluttered (essentially the same reason the STEP guide outsources that information). If someone joins Smile and me in development of our new Requiem pack there might be quite some development talk coming up that cannot be handled by PM alone. It might clutter up the thread. But like I said I'm not sure this is needed at all, it was just a thought.The way most packs are structured: One man project with input from other users, the current structure is probably better.

Would it be possible to have a specific pack related mod page for certain mods? It would really help if we could store Requiem related installation and compatibility information for some mods on a separate page. Another thing that might be desirable would be a pack development sub forum. If more packs pop up, are WIP or people collaborate, it could clean things up a little.

There is a Trade and Barter patch by Azirok :)

A general question about good practice in packs. Regarding a Requiem pack you have to uninstall certain incompatible or redundant mods from core (or other packs if you want to make it compatible). What do you think would be the best practice of providing that information?

Thanks for the info!

Every information in the pack description is designed for the version numbers provided. But like I said, a new pack is in the making :)

What load order is required for Convenient Horses to work with Requiem? I'd assume Convenient Horses has to be loaded after Requiem?Some features of Convenient Horses are really convenient, do you guys think it fits the more purist hardcore scheme of Requiem?