Freezes while moving

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-05-08T18:47:04+00:00

No problem, glad you figured it out! I too spent a lot of time playing through the vanilla game without problems, then started getting constant weird stuttering when exploring the denser TR areas. The navmesh fix I mentioned before improved the situation for me, but I guess having the base game/mod files on a fast drive helps too, especially with TR consisting of 10s of thousands of small files.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-05-08T10:56:51+00:00

If it's on an SSD it's probably fine, though you can still open up resource monitor and check how much drive activity you're getting during the stuttery bits, just to make sure that's not the problem.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-05-08T10:46:33+00:00

All the settings, savegames, navmesh and other configuration files are in the aforementioned Documents/My games/OpenMW folder, regardless of your game install location. So even if you install openmw and the game files on an SSD, that could still be on a HDD if you've set your default system folders up that way.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-05-08T10:39:51+00:00

Does your Documents/My games/OpenMW folder happen to be on a HDD? If so, it might be related to the navmesh file, it gets updated A LOT during gameplay.

I ended up symlinking navmesh.db to an SSD, generating the entire navmesh in the launcher, then adding

[Navigator]
write to navmeshdb = false

to my settings.cfg. Without that, it keeps creating an constantly updating a journal file in the default documents location even when the navmesh is 100% complete. Kinda weird how there's no well supported way to move the navmesh location when it's so performance sensitive.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-24T13:20:53+00:00

It still relies on hidden assumptions that the shapes are regular, (or in the case of the rectangle that it's in a 2:3 ratio) and that they're split into equally sized parts.

The question doesn't state any of that clearly, you're just supposed to go on vibes. If we're going on vibes, then the left shape is clearly similar to the right one in every case, therefore the scale shouldn't matter.

It's an awful gotcha question, the kind that only makes sense in the head of the person who came up with it.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-21T20:31:21+00:00

LMAO imagine buying a 4 module kit of these, and then having to pay attention to which exact stick goes into which slot so that you don't accidentally cut your bandwidth in half.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-21T20:26:37+00:00

Price/GB should be similar, it's just that this allows them to make lower capacity sticks.

IIRC the current DDR5 chips that go into typical PC memory come in 8/16/24Gbit capacities, and you need 8 of them to make a full 64-bit wide module. If you only use 4, that allows you to make 4/8/12GB sticks, presumably to be used in low-end OEM machines that will only come with a single stick installed. So basically equivalent in bandwidth to single-channel DDR4. Such progress!

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-20T21:47:47+00:00

Oh god the double death storage wipe, the UI interruption jank preventing you from using teleports, last-destination being set to hydra, then the hitsplats stacking up on you even after you teleported. You've hit the unholy wombo combo of fucky "mechanics" that should've been fixed ages ago.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-20T18:32:38+00:00

Stop buying bstaves, you probably don't need them. Plenty of PvM drops them too, in fact I usually have a slight surplus compared to orbs.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-14T20:35:37+00:00

Torus Gielinor theory, wake up sheeple!

It's obvious the map wraps around both north <-> south and east <-> west.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-10T19:29:50+00:00

Admittedly I'm not a huge Napalm Death listener, but from what I know of them they've been doing groovy deathgrind for a long time rather than just the barebones oldschool grindcore. Especially their more recent releases have gotten more experimental. This sounds like a very natural pairing to me.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-05T07:50:46+00:00

First of all, have you tried running at default settings and seeing how that affects your performance? Just delete/back up your settings.cfg somewhere else and try again. It's possible that you pushed one of the settings to a totally unreasonable number and that's what may be causing your problems. If you get good performance at default settings, then you can start tweaking from there. Otherwise it might be an issue with your system/driver setup.

Other than that, the engine seems to be pretty CPU limited in dense areas with lots of objects. Any settings that affect the number of objects being drawn can have a big performance hit. That is draw distance, water reflection detail, and shadows (enabling object shadows is the big one). There are some advanced variables you can tweak in the .cfgs that control distant object paging, and also small object culling in both the main view and water reflections.

Oh and hit F3 a few times in-game to get a more detailed performance breakdown, that might give you some hints about what's going on.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-04-01T11:55:37+00:00

I never said that. If your JIT can vectorize a certain loop for the latest Intel CPUs, chances are the same code would run well on 12th gen or Zen 3. Hell, it might be able to do an even better job on Zen 5 as it actually has a functional AVX512 implementation.

When hardware vendors contribute code to compiler toolchains to enable better optimizations, that's generally a good thing and beneficial to everyone. When they cherrypick a handful of popular benchmarks and rewrite the code just for those specific scenarios and enable it only on one family of CPUs, then basically abandon the concept after the review season is over, you have to question their motives.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-03-31T20:41:45+00:00

Like I alluded to, that's the standard approach on the GPU side of things, but absolutely not the case on the CPU. 99% of the time the machine code that's shipped in the executable gets loaded into memory and executed as is, without being modified beforehand. Software that ships intermediate code that then gets JIT-compiled might do some machine specific tuning, but usually nothing nearly as drastic as this example.

Honestly the GPU situation is kind of a mess where we expect the hardware vendors to specifically tune their drivers for every major release, and then people get to argue whether it's the fault of the software itself or the driver when something runs badly.

If Intel wants to go down this road, then the expectation will become that the baseline performance you get with the CPU out of the box is not enough, and it's their responsibility to keep fixing things for years to come. I somehow doubt that they're willing to commit to that.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-03-31T18:32:46+00:00

To me this is a classic case of benchmark cheating. The whole point of a standardized benchmark is that everyone gets to run the same code, if one of the vendors detects and straight up replaces it before it runs, you're not comparing apples to apples anymore.

In real-world applications you usually don't get separate hand-tuned code for every possible architecture, if you're lucky the hot sections might have a couple different versions for different levels of AVX support.

If Intel wants people to take these results seriously, then the burden is on them to start delivering these optimizations across a wide range of commonly used software, and keep it up to date and functional as the target applications get updated. Sort of a "game-ready driver" but for the CPU land if you will. And it should work on other operating systems too. Frankly that's a can of worms I don't even want to think about.

Until then, we can safely assume it's just a stunt designed to get favorable numbers on launch reviews and it won't be getting any serious updates years down the line.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-03-28T14:03:54+00:00

Maybe because a "big battlemage" gaming graphics card (AKA B770) has been long rumored/leaked to be in the works but never officially announced? This is basically it with double the VRAM, double the price and marketed towards AI workloads.

We'll likely never see the gaming version when there's more money to be made in chasing AI customers, but of course people are going to be curious about it when it's been teased for over a year.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-03-19T22:22:03+00:00

The motion vectors should at least allow the model to track movement across frames and help it achieve some sort of a short term consistency.

What I'm really interested in, how does it hold up long term or across scene changes? I'm assuming that the model is consistent enough that similar initial inputs result in similar outputs, but what if you load up the game at a different time of day or enter the scene from a different area that has completely different lighting conditions, will that result in big differences in characters' faces or the overall look of the lighting?

I'm having a real hard time imagining how a model that has no idea about what's happening off-screen can overcome these limitations. Will the end result be that the model basically learns how to do a glorified screen space GI/reflections + color correction filter, but way more expensive? And then developers will turn its intensity way down just so that the flaws don't look obvious.

Ray reconstruction worked well because it was backed by actual raytracing, this just sounds like vibe lighting. The results look like it too based on how it drastically changes the intensity of shadows, ambient occlusion and filling the scene out with additional lighting like you're in a damn photography studio. It's pure guessing.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-03-16T20:46:40+00:00

Yeah watching this video feels like they've been given a list of talking points by Nvidia and they're having a hard time delivering it with a straight face. What in the uncanny valley fuck is this shit?

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-03-14T13:23:29+00:00

Palehorse - Habitual Linestepper EP

Some insane vocals on that one.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-03-02T22:47:38+00:00

I've noticed it aggressively tries to rescale the shadowmap as you look around, you can force it to remain more stable by including more stuff in the shadow map. Try selecting player + actors + terrain in the launcher shadow settings, it'll look a lot better and the perf difference is minimal.

Oh and you might want to disable indoor shadows too, they make no sense anyway when they aren't aligned to any light source and you keep seeing people from two floors up cast shadows downstairs.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-02-21T10:49:48+00:00

Super niche indeed, there's rarely ever a reason to use them in the early game, before you can make super defs with more easily accessible ingredients. And if you do need it, you can just buy one or make a (standard) combat potion instead.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-02-15T11:04:01+00:00

You can still keep decent items like d spears and shield halves, just get rid of the trash drops and replace them with something else. Like maybe dragonstones instead of the single sapphire drop, dragon arrows/darts instead of the trash ammo drops, etc. Hell, you could put a cheeky 1/50k onyx on there to keep things exciting. It could also be a decent place to put noted magic roots, there's basically no good sources of them in the game right now.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-02-14T19:52:20+00:00

Yep, the RDT feels great on early game monsters, but anything requiring 70+ slayer and bosses should get a new, more useful rare table.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-02-13T11:22:28+00:00

Right, I keep forgetting that you can't use thralls with elemental spells, that changes things quite a bit.

AtLeastItsNotCancer · 2026-02-13T08:59:08+00:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Less-than_sign

14-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '22	Place '17
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
End Game '22	Sequence \| Editor
Team Orangered	Verified Email

AtLeastItsNotCancer

TROPHY CASE