Dark_wizzie

Yes, but I wanted to use File Time sorting to go through some mods.

I was moving data from HDD to SSD, and now sorting mods by file time in downloads tab just sorts alphabetically. The date modified data from Windows are still correct. As far as I can tell the data should be in downloads/file.meta for each archive, but they all have the same file time data. Example: [General]modID=61995fileID=1000146118url="https://filedelivery.nexusmods.com/110/1000146118/4K%20textures%20only%200-9b-61995-0-9b.rar?ttl=1439621517&ri=8192&rs=8192&setec=990116a7319d4bd2db73ba3c285fe6bf"name=4K optional textures for 0-9bdescription="Only textures. 4K roads, mountains, landscape, trees and some improved 1k to 2k textures. 9-0b optimized textures and some more added. Install after 9-0 main file and 9-0b patch."modName=Tamriel Reloaded HDversion=0.9.0.0bnewestVersion=0.9.0.0bfileTime=@Variant(\0\0\0\x10\0\0\0\0\xff\xff\xff\xff\xff) <--- Not sure what this is, but if all the mods have the same line here I'm assuming data is screwed somehow.fileCategory=1category=29repository=NexususerData="@Variant(\0\0\0\b\0\0\0\x1\0\0\0\x16\0\x64\0o\0w\0n\0l\0o\0\x61\0\x64\0M\0\x61\0p\0\0\0\t\0\0\0\x1\0\0\0\b\0\0\0\x5\0\0\0\x6\0U\0R\0I\0\0\0\n\0\0\x1\x42\0h\0t\0t\0p\0:\0/\0/\0\x66\0i\0l\0\x65\0\x64\0\x65\0l\0i\0v\0\x65\0r\0y\0.\0n\0\x65\0x\0u\0s\0m\0o\0\x64\0s\0.\0\x63\0o\0m\0/\0\x31\0\x31\0\x30\0/\0\x31\0\x30\0\x30\0\x30\0\x31\0\x34\0\x36\0\x31\0\x31\0\x38\0/\0\x34\0K\0%\0\x32\0\x30\0t\0\x65\0x\0t\0u\0r\0\x65\0s\0%\0\x32\0\x30\0o\0n\0l\0y\0%\0\x32\0\x30\0\x30\0-\0\x39\0\x62\0-\0\x36\0\x31\0\x39\0\x39\0\x35\0-\0\x30\0-\0\x39\0\x62\0.\0r\0\x61\0r\0?\0t\0t\0l\0=\0\x31\0\x34\0\x33\0\x39\0\x36\0\x32\0\x31\0\x35\0\x31\0\x37\0&\0r\0i\0=\0\x38\0\x31\0\x39\0\x32\0&\0r\0s\0=\0\x38\0\x31\0\x39\0\x32\0&\0s\0\x65\0t\0\x65\0\x63\0=\0\x39\0\x39\0\x30\0\x31\0\x31\0\x36\0\x61\0\x37\0\x33\0\x31\0\x39\0\x64\0\x34\0\x62\0\x64\0\x32\0\x64\0\x62\0\x37\0\x33\0\x62\0\x61\0\x33\0\x63\0\x32\0\x38\0\x35\0\x66\0\x65\0\x36\0\x62\0\x66\0\0\0\b\0N\0\x61\0m\0\x65\0\0\0\n\0\0\0\x6\0\x43\0\x44\0N\0\0\0\x12\0I\0s\0P\0r\0\x65\0m\0i\0u\0m\0\0\0\x1\0\0\0\0\xe\0\x43\0o\0u\0n\0t\0r\0y\0\0\0\n\xff\xff\xff\xff\0\0\0\x1c\0\x43\0o\0n\0n\0\x65\0\x63\0t\0\x65\0\x64\0U\0s\0\x65\0r\0s\0\0\0\x3\0\0\0\0)"installed=trueuninstalled=falsepaused=falseremoved=false Maybe I should'ved copied intead of cut paste when migrating?

Haswell outpwerforming Skylake? The only time I've ever heard of people saying that is with sketchy Passmark data. The PC building community and all of the review sites (along with my own Skyrim benchmarks) show that Skylake is faster. A 4.8ghz Skylake would be 6.66% higher clockspeed than a 4.5ghz Haswell, combine that with a 5% increase in IPC would be 11%+ difference. (Then maybe 15%? 18%? 20%? For Kaby lake vs Haswell.) As far as CPU performance improvements go, that's pretty big. Skyrim for the most part runs fine for me but I want to minimize the worst 1% or allow myself to push for crazier things in Skyrim. And of course, Oblivion is even worse... I get down to like 35 FPS in the mage place in the Imperial City because the CPU is way too slow. I want to try Kaby Lake with some DDR4 4000 to see how it goes. So yea, in terms of actual CPU performance of Haswell vs Skylake or Haswell vs Kaby Lake I'd have to totally disagree there. The more interesting question is why Skyrim struggles when it does. Of course it's relatively old code now, but surely the game will respond to better hardware? Or maybe not, or too little to matter, depending on what's going on under the hood. But surely if I got higher FPS in my Skyrim benchmark it will translate somewhat to actual gameplay.

Apparently Kaby Lake and future processors will not officially support Windows 7 anymore. Hopefully nothing bad happens. I paid a lot for my PC to try to minimize every stutter and I don't want it to be limited to Microsoft's DX9 bug and their unwillingness to support 7.

That is what https://wiki.step-project.com/Guide:SkyrimPrefs_INI/Display#bTransparencyMultisampling says. It seems to have no effect on my game. My GPU usage doesn't change either. Can somebody show me a comparison shot where there is a visible difference?

Hope the powers that be don't get too mad for the necro. For one, it's a realism/immersion thing. I have fire in my hands, why does everything around me still look pitch black? It is a nice effect to be casting flames and have the ground underneath the line of fire light up. It's nice to spot NPCs in the dark due to their spells, and have the player have the same penalty for having spells out. At least with vanilla spells, the light is very harsh and there is no easy way to toggle it on or off. The problem with Immersive Spells and Light is that the light comes from the ground, not the hands. The problem with Spells Give Off Light is that it can cause serious shadow problems (so I'm assuming it can tax the engine with shadows) and do not affect fire/ice/electric hazard or decals. Right now it looks like there may be no perfect solution here. One guy in the comments said he found a mod that "fixes meshes" so that the light originates from the hands, not the ground, but refused to give links and forgot the name of it.

I followed the Step guide, downloading the SMAA injector. Menus get turned white, fog in loading screen turned into milk, and graphics got changed. It's not clear enough to me... Speedhackwithoutgraphics=true still allowed for anisotrophic filtering via enb, but it doesn't look like it works for aa. Was the assumption all along that Speedhackwithoutgraphics was supposed to be off for any ENB AA to work at all, even through that one injector from mrhaandi?

Alright guys. I've made an update to my Reddit post. FRAPS FPS: https://i.imgur.com/sXY8lMc.png FRAPS Frame Times: https://i.imgur.com/Hsc2mnt.png SPM Data Averaged: https://i.imgur.com/AFKHNuD.png This is data from 10-11 runs without TR. I think FRAPS FPS data is more accurate than SPM's. I don't understand the frame time data, it's as if the data switched sides. Just for you guys, I've updated my Windows to the 3/8/2016 version. I just spent the entire day benching Skyrim and dealing with Excel.

10.0.10586.122 Version 1511 March 2nd version. Exactly as one would expect: 4064/11680 for DX9/DX11. So, when the soft cap is reached, Skyrim will try to purge data from Vram as we can see in the Vram curve on the Win 10 picture w/ TR. Around that time, FPS drops. IO usage does not seem to increase. CPU usage elevated slightly. The major Vram staircase problem can be seen both in 3/3 runs w/ TR on Win 10, but also in practice when I was testing. Also note that in all runs on Windows 10, with or without TR, there is a Vram drop at the end of the run, with a corresponding drop in FPS. This Vram drop does not occur with Windows 7. However, w/o TR in 2/3 runs Windows 7 had a stutter a bit before where all Win 10 runs would have the Vram drop. It's unclear why it happens without TR and doesn't with TR. This caused TR FPS on 7 to be actually marginally higher than without. Hopefully further testing will give us finer details.

Hello guys. I have conducted a test of the 4gb vram cap. Details here: https://www.reddit.com/r/skyrimmods/comments/49t0tf/testing_of_4gb_vram_soft_cap_w_windows_8_10/ Quick pictures here: My setup + Tamriel Reloaded w10: Above, Win 7: My setup + Win 10: My setup + Win 7: Final Graph:

Don't want to derail this thread, but it's not that simple. I've spent 3 entire days, asked multiple people, and brought a friend along to figure it out. First, a working 64bit ISO must be used, then some file tweaks need to be done to boot in UEFI mode. UEFI needs to be configured, CSM enabled. Download 950 Pro NVMe drivers and paste it in one of the HDD, then select it in install so it can proceed. Microsoft says not to install a newer OS and then install an older OS, it should be the other way around. There were some computer STDs contracted, so I decided to reinstall Windows 10. I couldn't get 7 to work on GPT, I got 225 error which I couldn't fix with repair DVD or command prompt. This is after many, many hours of trying to get stuff working with Rufus and other utilities. Now it's Thursday, 4 in the morning, and I'm trying to reinstall programs in Windows 10 because my image isn't being recognized. And now here's a part that's relevant to the thread: The compromise I went with is to install Windows 10 on 950 Pro (along with all my normal files, including Skyrim and mods), and Windows 7 on my 850 Pro. Since game files are on 950 Pro, I think it's still a fair test when looking for vram caps/stuttering. EDIT: I pinged Boris and he responded.

I would like to test the behavior of ENBoost/Skyrim with my texture packs on Windows 7 vs 10. Unfortunately, getting 7 onto a seperate partition of my drive when the drive is GPT is causing a motherlode of problems. I've been at it for over 12 hours now (basically after I posted my last post here). I could go back to MBR, but I really don't want to go back to old tech. Then again, that's what Windows 7 is. The guy I linked via Reddit links, he did a test, but he used textures more akin to something you'd see in STEP. My texture pack is heavier and textures more things, so if I could end up doing my test, I think my test would be more revealing. I'm not buying another 950 Pro just so I can do the test though.

Hmm. I would have assumed that since ram typically mirrors vram, if vram usage is at 6gb, then ram usage would be at 6gb as well. Guess not. I checked and only got 2.1gb usage from ENBHost, and 600mb from Skyrim. In order to hit 6gb of vram usage I had to do some pretty ridiculous things. So, let's ignore videomemeorysizeMB then. Boris' vram tool tool clearly says 4gb of usuable vram, not ram. MOTHER OF GOD. I know Boris is a pain to deal with when he's annoyed, but some of the guys in that Nvidia thread are downright cancerous. They respond to his attitude by multiplying his attitude tenfold and spewing it back to the thread. A reddit user has responded with this: https://www.reddit.com/r/skyrimmods/comments/45h1fd/clarifying_enbenboost_on_windows_7_and_an_apology/ https://www.reddit.com/r/skyrimmods/comments/45so6k/skyrim_system_ram_vram_comparison_between_windows/

Thank you for the reply. In the ENBLocal ini STEP page, under VideoMemorySizeMB setting it states: "Windows 8/10 users: Microsoft has, unintentionally, introduced a memory limit for DirectX 9 games/software. This limit is 4GBs (4096) and there is nothing which can be done to circumvent this limit. For users seeing the VRamSizeTest tool reporting 4064 or similar, this is not a mistake. This is actually the limit for the OS in use and the maximum value you can set the VideoMemorySizeMb to." Boris' vram tool reads 4gb max for DX9, 6gb for DX11. It seems to me what you are saying and what the guide is saying (along with Boris' tool) are contradictory.

If Windows 10 has a bug that limits ENBoost to only 4gb of vram in Skyrim, why am I using 6gb of vram in Skyrim? Specs: 6600k @ 4.84/4.84 ghz GTX 980 ti @ 1494/3891 16gb DDR4 3131 16-16-16-35 Samsung 950 Pro 512gb Windows 10 Pro 64bit (Drivers: Latest one, from 2/15/2016) ENB version 2.79 The ridiculous Vram usage was done by Nvidia Geforce Experience DSR, @ 1440p x 2 resolution, x8 msaa in launcher, x4 msaa in Inspector, AO on in Inspector, my own personal texture mod overwritten by Tamriel Reloaded. Started in Whiterun, coc to Riverwood, run around, coc to Windhelm, go outside in the snow. VideoMemorySizeMb=9860.