Zone load times - big differences

[Xerical]

What makes the biggest differences on load times? I have a good internet connection (55MB), great PC (i7 3770k , GTX 480, Samsung 840 SSD), and I run WinEQ 2.15 Lite. I still seem to load significantly slower than others. Is it my latency (100-110MS from west coast)? Is it WinEQ? Is it not using a RAM Drive? I've never had problems with other games in terms of performance or load times. With something like Heroes of Newerth which shows load times prior to game match I was always #1 or within a second. But with something like loading into Plane of Fear today... I noticed it took me nearly 15 seconds to load in. Other people claim they load within 5-6 seconds... One of which claims no ssd or ramdrive.

Any suggestions appreciated.

Thanks,
Xerical

[Swish]

Solid state drives definitely make a big difference, but that's not the only thing.

It's definitely not your latency, I'm on about 120ms in the UK and I seem to zone quicker than others. My new PC zones fast, my old laptop was slow as hell to load (versus other people).

Not sure what you can really do to improve upon it. How much other stuff do you run alongside EQ?

[Baler]

Part of the problem I believe is that the titanium client is a bit older at this point. It isn't as well optimized to allow to faster load times and optimization of new hardware. Also the server(s) has to communicate with the client when you load which can be variable despite what your latency is to the current server you're connected to.

I think all the zones are on separate servers that's all hosted on the same rack. May be wrong about this but I think that's how eq emu works?

I can say for sure that my client gos to a black screen for 5-10 seconds, then shows the eq loading screen for 1-2 seconds and finally after that it shows me the world. That's on hdd, I can cut the time in 1/2 or 1/3 if i use ramdisk. So i conclude it's just the old titanium client.

Edit: another thing I didn't think about is that when titanium came out there was no windows 7+, so it's not optimized for that either.

[Messianic]

Originally Posted by Baler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Part of the problem I believe is that the titanium client is a bit older at this point. It isn't as well optimized to allow to faster load times and optimization of new hardware. Also the server(s) has to communicate with the client when you load which can be variable despite what your latency is to the current server you're connected to.

I think all the zones are on separate servers that's all hosted on the same rack. May be wrong about this but I think that's how eq emu works?

I can say for sure that my client gos to a black screen for 5-10 seconds, then shows the eq loading screen for 1-2 seconds and finally after that it shows me the world. That's on hdd, I can cut the time in 1/2 or 1/3 if i use ramdisk. So i conclude it's just the old titanium client.

Edit: another thing I didn't think about is that when titanium came out there was no windows 7+, so it's not optimized for that either.

I noticed on one of my really old machines (still on XP) a while back that I loaded zones faster than nearly everyone else. Probably because of what you mentioned.

[Kika Maslyaka]

its just old software and not very good zoning coding that EQ uses.
On the same machine I got WoW running faster and better fps that EQ1.

[Pringles]

If you have enough memory, try a RAM drive.

[Bboboo]

I took EQ off my SSD a while back, maybe about a 5-10 sec difference.

[Xerical]

Originally Posted by Bboboo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I took EQ off my SSD a while back, maybe about a 5-10 sec difference.

Why would taking EQ off your SSD make it faster? I think everyone who has tried SSD had got faster load times in EQ. Most say its almost the same as RAM drive.

[Bboboo]

Meant 5-10 seconds longer.

[Champion_Standing]

SSD honestly doesn't make it much faster in my experience. I think GTA 5 loads up in about the same amount of time that EQ does for me.