Comments on: Improving FPS and latency

By: Gravity

Gravity — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 10:39:08 +0000

I found that it does not make any improvement on lowerping.com's already very zippy service. So you can get a gateway like theirs (paid for) or use Leatrix; you don't need both. Lowerping's better though.

By: Melder

Melder — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 07:37:42 +0000

I been using Leatrix for quite awhile now and i agreed that it does works great.

By: Shimidori

Shimidori — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 03:47:48 +0000

I recently came across the “Leatrix Latency Fix” @ wowinterface.com

It works great. My latency was hanging around 250 before and now sits around 96. A vast improvement.

By: Gravity

Gravity — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:32:56 +0000

Just in the last few days, I’ve gone back to Recount because (a) Skada didn’t show my misses, which was annoying when tuning my melee to-hit (b) I wanted to do some charting. Will re-test the CPU issue, but so far, overall FPS has remained exactly the same thanks to TweakWOW, I’d say.

By: Gravity

Gravity — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:16:31 +0000

I agree on the idle CPU. I had to eliminate every variable for myself because of a really weird FPS issue I had when zoning out of Dalaran into Ice Crown. I had no single root cause, unfortunately, so couldn’t just fix it. Instead, I went for every optimisation I could.

Fair point on idle CPU in general though, if it’s like 1 to 4% you should be fine.

By: Myria

Myria — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:49:32 +0000

To be honest, unless it’s insanely high idle CPU utilization is pretty meaningless. If you want a meaningful test you need to run your profiler over the length of a 30 minute BG or (less likely, because the profiler will probably kill performance) Raid.

As for Pitbull/Dogtags, Dogtags does have a rep for being pretty CPU hungry, but recent builds of PitBull4 have included a Lua text option that is considerably faster. Probably not as light as Ouf, to be sure, but also not nearly as limited.