Nvidia inspector equivalent for cpu

[COWZYOV]

Nvidia inspector can do things like force the gpu to render at even lower quality than the game’s lowest settings, thus reducing gpu usage.
Is there any equivalent program for reducing cpu usage (by reducing shadow quality, physics quality etc.)?

My pc is cpu bottlenecked, so it doesn’t seem to get higher framerate by reducing quality using Nvidia inspector...

[Snow]

No.

[COWZYOV]

It just doesn’t exist, or it’s impossible to make?

[Snow]

It's impossible to make. NVidia Inspector only changes the quality of certain things graphics card does, it doesn't do any changes to the actual game. If you've got weak CPU - your best bet it RTSS framerate limiting to increase overall smoothness.

[InfinityJosh]

Publicado originalmente por Snow:

It's impossible to make. NVidia Inspector only changes the quality of certain things graphics card does, it doesn't do any changes to the actual game. If you've got weak CPU - your best bet it RTSS framerate limiting to increase overall smoothness.

He better play on Ubuntu at 1024x768p since he can't afford an upgrade.
Limiting fps increases delay and shows no benefits at all.
Capping framerates is useful only with 60 or more fps.

[Snow]

Publicado originalmente por Infinity Josh:

He better play on Ubuntu at 1024x768p since he can't afford an upgrade.
Limiting fps increases delay and shows no benefits at all.
Capping framerates is useful only with 60 or more fps.

I don't see how compatibility layer is going to increase performance. I'm not even talking GNOME 3 which is definitely not the best idea for low-end hardware.
Limiting FPS can decrease input delay compared to 99% GPU usage. It also can provide smoother gameplay than unlimited framerate due to correct frame pacing. It seems you don't understand framerate limiting, so I'll give you a couple of videos with explanations, examples and tests. I hope you're a smart guy and you'll understand how frame pacing works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CKnJ5ujL_Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsXFUVYPIx4
If limiting was only useful with 60 fps or more, then millions upon millions of console players wouldn't have most of their games capped on 30fps. Capped 30 is way better than uncapped variable, but sure capped 60 is always better, no denying that.

[InfinityJosh]

Publicado originalmente por Snow:

Publicado originalmente por Infinity Josh:

He better play on Ubuntu at 1024x768p since he can't afford an upgrade.
Limiting fps increases delay and shows no benefits at all.
Capping framerates is useful only with 60 or more fps.

I don't see how compatibility layer is going to increase performance. I'm not even talking GNOME 3 which is definitely not the best idea for low-end hardware.
Limiting FPS can decrease input delay compared to 99% GPU usage. It also can provide smoother gameplay than unlimited framerate due to correct frame pacing. It seems you don't understand framerate limiting, so I'll give you a couple of videos with explanations, examples and tests. I hope you're a smart guy and you'll understand how frame pacing works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CKnJ5ujL_Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsXFUVYPIx4
If limiting was only useful with 60 fps or more, then millions upon millions of console players wouldn't have most of their games capped on 30fps. Capped 30 is way better than uncapped variable, but sure capped 60 is always better, no denying that.

Poor men cap fps at 30.

[Autumn_]

Publicado originalmente por Infinity Josh:

Publicado originalmente por Snow:

It's impossible to make. NVidia Inspector only changes the quality of certain things graphics card does, it doesn't do any changes to the actual game. If you've got weak CPU - your best bet it RTSS framerate limiting to increase overall smoothness.

He better play on Ubuntu at 1024x768p since he can't afford an upgrade.
Limiting fps increases delay and shows no benefits at all.
Capping framerates is useful only with 60 or more fps.

No, it doesn't, if you do it right, and will (often) improve smoothness.
Capping framerates is important at all times, I do it in almost every game that I play. And, I'm hyper sensitive about latency.

Under GPU bound conditions, you can reduce input lag by ~3 frames if you limit it so that it reduces GPU load to <95%.
And, RTSS increases latency by <1 frame. But the above number includes RTSS latency.
So, in this instance, capping FPS REDUCES latency.

But, in terms of smoothness, it's better, because every frame is displayed at exact times, so that can aid with any delay you may see, whereas if it's variable, you'll notice it more, since, you know, you have more delay on some movements than others.

Though, I doubt you'd notice an extra delay of limiting by a few FPS - Do you notice the 4-10ms on your mouse clicks? How about the ~5ms of processing delay? What about the ~2-10ms on your monitor? Or the 16.6ms per update on a 60hz monitor? How about the delay on your keyboard presses too? What about the delay on your headphones audio?
And, remember, latency stacks, so do you notice all of that? Surely if you knew about latency you'd know and feel the latency of most of what I've said?

But, while typing that last paragraph out, I realised something, if you're limiting FPS via RTSS, you're not going to get any delay on frames, like V-sync would produce, they're still displayed as soon as they're drawn.

[COWZYOV]

Publicado originalmente por Infinity Josh:

Publicado originalmente por Snow:

It's impossible to make. NVidia Inspector only changes the quality of certain things graphics card does, it doesn't do any changes to the actual game. If you've got weak CPU - your best bet it RTSS framerate limiting to increase overall smoothness.

He better play on Ubuntu at 1024x768p since he can't afford an upgrade.
Limiting fps increases delay and shows no benefits at all.
Capping framerates is useful only with 60 or more fps.

My fps is always over 60, except in Destiny 2 (even at lowest settings, I get drops to about 57). I’m just trying to squeeze out a bit more performance for pvp (I’m fine with my current framerate for pve).

Ubuntu operating system is known to have better performance?

[Snow]

Publicado originalmente por AÀÁÂÄÆÃÅĀ:

My fps is always over 60, except in Destiny 2 (even at lowest settings, I get drops to about 57). I’m just trying to squeeze out a bit more performance for pvp (I’m fine with my current framerate for pve).

Ubuntu operating system is known to have better performance?

Unix and Unix-like OS are indeed known to have better performance than Windows. The issue is, to get most of your Windows game run you'll have to use compatibility layers, dx to vulkan translators etc. So a native app might indeed work better, but most of the games don't have native ports for Unix and Unix-like, thus this is likely to hurt performance instead.

Publicado originalmente por Infinity Josh:

Poor men cap fps at 30.

Isn't that the point? Also - please, don't insult OP. Person might have other reasons to use low-end hardware, not just being poor.

[Omega]

Not possible, you can't just tell the CPU to do less accurate calculations.

Publicado originalmente por Snow:

Publicado originalmente por AÀÁÂÄÆÃÅĀ:

My fps is always over 60, except in Destiny 2 (even at lowest settings, I get drops to about 57). I’m just trying to squeeze out a bit more performance for pvp (I’m fine with my current framerate for pve).

Ubuntu operating system is known to have better performance?

Unix and Unix-like OS are indeed know to have better performance than Windows. The issue is, to get most of your Windows game run you'll have to use compatibility layers, dx to vulkan translators etc. So a native app might indeed work better, but most of the games don't have native ports for Unix and Unix-like, thus this is likely to hurt performance instead.

Most of these ports use a compatibility layer.

Usually the Windows version running under WINE/Proton with DXVK performs better then the port does. I think that not having Windows chugging your system resources while doing a horrible job at managing the hardware will make enough of a difference to make up for the compatibility layer.

This mainly applies to the older ports, new ports from Feral use Vulkan and run significantly better, often they run better then the Windows version of the game on Windows. See their experimental Vulkan Beta build of Shadow of Mordor as a recent example.

Publicado originalmente por AÀÁÂÄÆÃÅĀ:

Publicado originalmente por Infinity Josh:

He better play on Ubuntu at 1024x768p since he can't afford an upgrade.
Limiting fps increases delay and shows no benefits at all.
Capping framerates is useful only with 60 or more fps.

My fps is always over 60, except in Destiny 2 (even at lowest settings, I get drops to about 57). I’m just trying to squeeze out a bit more performance for pvp (I’m fine with my current framerate for pve).

Ubuntu operating system is known to have better performance?

I am not even sure why Josh brough up Linux.. I don't see how it's relevant here.

Sure you can try Linux. Will it make any meangfull difference? Probably not. And you will need relatively recent (from the last 5-ish years) graphics hardware to do proper gaming on Linux since it heavily relies on the Vulkan graphics API which is quite new.

[InfinityJosh]

Publicado originalmente por Omega:

Publicado originalmente por Snow:

Unix and Unix-like OS are indeed know to have better performance than Windows. The issue is, to get most of your Windows game run you'll have to use compatibility layers, dx to vulkan translators etc. So a native app might indeed work better, but most of the games don't have native ports for Unix and Unix-like, thus this is likely to hurt performance instead.

Most of these ports use a compatibility layer.

Usually the Windows version running under WINE/Proton with DXVK performs better then the port does. I think that not having Windows chugging your system resources while doing a horrible job at managing the hardware will make enough of a difference to make up for the compatibility layer.

This mainly applies to the older ports, new ports from Feral use Vulkan and run significantly better, often they run better then the Windows version of the game on Windows. See their experimental Vulkan Beta build of Shadow of Mordor as a recent example.

Publicado originalmente por AÀÁÂÄÆÃÅĀ:

My fps is always over 60, except in Destiny 2 (even at lowest settings, I get drops to about 57). I’m just trying to squeeze out a bit more performance for pvp (I’m fine with my current framerate for pve).

Ubuntu operating system is known to have better performance?

I am not even sure why Josh brough up Linux.. I don't see how it's relevant here.

Sure you can try Linux. Will it make any meangfull difference? Probably not. And you will need relatively recent (from the last 5-ish years) graphics hardware to do proper gaming on Linux since it heavily relies on the Vulkan graphics API which is quite new.

OP probably did incour in bloatwares which are very annoying with an automatic peer to peer OS like W10.
Even if you disable OS updates and all app updates it will draw at least 200/300 kb/s for system files interchange.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Publicado originalmente por AÀÁÂÄÆÃÅĀ:

Ubuntu operating system is known to have better performance?

Not really, in fact it's rather terrible to use for Steam or gaming.

Try a Linux better suited for gaming