v2.2.9.2 Development

[MissShaoHuan]

Well then, looks like I've been running a STEP Extended build all this time without removing the plugins that aren't needed when using Extended 

 

Thank you so much for explaining that to me, makes so much more sense now.

[EssArrBee]

Please tell me if I am being dumb, but I see no Core patch in this thread? Slightly baffled.

 

I can also never find the guide to install the S.T.E.P. Extended, but that's another matter.

I may have put the Core patch in the STEP Patches thread.

[TechAngel85]

Ess, we decided that ELE shouldn't be in the patches. Unless you just want to do the extra work, all patches going forward can skip the ELE stuff.

[EssArrBee]

Not having ELE in the patches is probably not the right choice. To many records that conflict between RWT, ELE, and AOS I think. Can't remember which ones exactly. Removing ELE from a patch is simple enough. Just delete 10 or so records. That's why I also want to move to the installer that has an optional for it. 

[TechAngel85]

Okay, that's cool. I'll double check the ELE forwards when I can. I remember that there were some interiors that ELE wasn't winning that it should have for the lighting and interior effects like fog. Surprised there are conflicts with RWT since ELE is just interiors....dungeons possibly.

[EssArrBee]

Okay, that's cool. I'll double check the ELE forwards when I can. I remember that there were some interiors that ELE wasn't winning that it should have for the lighting and interior effects like fog. Surprised there are conflicts with RWT since ELE is just interiors....dungeons possibly.

Any where that had water indoors might have a RWT sound or effect that conflicted. I think most the ELE effects that didn't 'win' were the ones that conflicted with CRF. I don't always know what CRF is doing, but because it adds new stuff I always let it 'win' conflicts.

[TechAngel85]

I only recognized some of it due to having tested ELE winning all conflicts in my setup and some of the interiors not looking quite the same. Think I might have mentioned that when we were discussion a non-ELE version for more compatibility. I've been using the non-ELE version myself since you made them so I don't even remember the locations that looked different.

[DoubleYou]

INI tweaks I think that would be great to add to the STEP recommended changes. See here for details: https://wiki.step-project.com/Guide:Skyrim_Configuration_Settings 
 
 
Skyrim INI

[Camera]
fMouseWheelZoomSpeed=10

[Display]
bAllowScreenShot=0
fLightLODRange=50000

[General]
iNumHWThreads=4
;Set this to the number of CPU cores, multiplied by 2 if hyperthreaded

[Grass]
fGrassFadeRange=10000
iMinGrassSize=40

[MapMenu]
fMapWorldYawRange=400
fMapWorldMinPitch=0
fMapWorldMaxPitch=90
 
[Water]
bReflectLODLand=1
bReflectLODObjects=1
bReflectLODTrees=1

 
SkyrimPrefs.ini

[Display]
fMeshLODLevel1FadeTreeDistance=6144
fMeshLODLevel2FadeTreeDistance=4096
fTreesMidLODSwitchDist=8192
 
[Trees]
uiMaxSkinnedTreesToRender=200
 
[Water]
iWaterReflectHeight=1024
iWaterReflectWidth=1024

[CorneliusC]

Thank you very much for the beta patches. I noticed that the (extended) patch lists "Immersive Citizens - CRF patch" as a master (which can be sorted away by cleaning masters). Is this something to worry about?

[TechAngel85]

Why disable the ability to take screenshots?

 

iNumHWThreads=4

I didn't think Skyrim could use more that 4 cores nor could it use hyperthreading? Also, is that INI not set correctly when the launcher detects your hardware?

 

What does adding water reflections do to performance?

[DoubleYou]

Because ENBoost screenshots should be used.

 

There is no evidence to confirm or deny that Skyrim can use more than 4 threads. It is true that it detects the number of threads your cpu has in rendererinfo.txt but it doesn't appear to change this setting accordingly.

 

There is a small performance impact ime with the water reflections tweak.

[TechAngel85]

Fair enough. I use FRAPS.

 

iNumHWThreads=4

I can see this being controversial without any evidence to back it up on why we'd be recommending to change this parameter. Might I suggest a few runs with SPM to see if there is any noticeable difference before we recommend changing such things. I have a Core i5 that is not overclocked which I could test out, but I don't have SPM set up for testing this right now.

 

I asked about performance because I can't tell any difference on my system. It's hard to benchmark some of these settings on a decent system. I could do this much better with my old laptop.

[DoubleYou]

There would be no difference unless you have more than 4 threads, as 4 is the default value. It would need to be tested on both a legitimate quad-core with hyperthreading and a legitimate 6 or more core processor to confirm.

 

I guess we might as well leave it out, since most users don't have more than 4 threads.

[TechAngel85]

I agree that would be best until we can really test it out. I'm fine with the rest of the suggestions.

[DoubleYou]

I asked about performance because I can't tell any difference on my system. It's hard to benchmark some of these settings on a decent system. I could do this much better with my old laptop.

My laptop is definitely on the low side of things, and it isn't a big deal.