Performance Issues Official Thread [Archive]

Goku

2013-03-17, 05:46 PM

I have been noticing a number of performance issue threads popping up due to the recent patches that have come out for the game. However I don't think these are really contributing towards getting the actual problem solved. Instead keep to this thread and avoid making other threads.

In order to help the developers get down and fix the issue please do the following:

1. Give your system specs (CPU, GPU, RAM, and so on)
2. Your performance prior to the game update causing you issues (Give setting/Resolution)
3. Your performance currently in game now with the recent updates (Give setting/Resolution)

Its worthwhile doing this even if you aren't experiencing issues, so the devs can see the kind system that aren't.

Doing this the developers that do read this forum can get better feedback on the issue. This is a lot better than just saying "my computer has bad FPS please fix it", which does nothing to help.

almalino

2013-03-17, 05:55 PM

No performance issues.

Intel i2500k 4.3 GHz
Radeon 5870 1GB
RAM 8GB
SSD 128GB
High settings

I feel game plays even faster now.

p0intman

2013-03-17, 05:55 PM

NOT experiencing issues:
win7 64 bit
intel i5-3570 (4 cores at ~3.4ghz
8gb ram (pny manufactured)
dx11
nvidia geforce gtx 550 ti
high settings EXCEPT for lighting quality, which is at medium, running ps2 at a resolution of 1848/1116 in windowed mode on display running at roughly 1920/1200
2TB hdd storage with roughly two thirds still available.

Goku

2013-03-17, 06:28 PM

Performance isn't an issue unless you are trying to play this game on a system that can't reasonably support the game's intended scope.

Hell if you are complaining about performance you're the reason why this game is actually unplayable with invisible god mode being the dominant feature on the battlefield due to render distance.

This isn't a thread about bad performance due to have a Intel P4 and 9800 XT trying to play the game. The recent game update crippled performance for people even with higher end rigs. Doesn't seem like its effecting everyone, but the intended purpose of this thread is to collect information that will be useful for the developers. A post like yours isn't contributing at all, so please avoid making such posts in this thread.

Snydenthur

2013-03-17, 06:31 PM

Problems with fps and a lot of stuttering. Before gu4, I had 99% of the time over 30fps and it was much smoother. Now fps seems to drop under 30 even in smaller and medium fights. And after it drops under 40, I begin to see a lot of stuttering. Flying seems to stutter even more.

i3-2130, gtx 660, 8gb ddr3. Win 7 64bit.

Fps drops to around the same amount with any settings. Shadows and flora are always off though.

Red Ketchup

2013-03-17, 06:51 PM

i5 3570, HD7950, 8gb ram, 256gb Corsair M4 SSD, Windows 7 64 bits.

Lots of stuttering after about an hour since GU4. No problem whatsoever during the first hour. The stuttering is especially noticeable when flying an aircraft; looking at a major facility results in the worst stuttering.
All graphic settings are set to high.
Exiting the game and relaunching it fixes the problem (for an hour).

I also noticed that after an hour, when the stuttering appears, the game takes much longer to exit. As if it was unloading a lot of stuff in memory or something.

UPDATE: Played 4 and a half hours yesterday (March 23rd) without problems. The fix is working in my case.

SternLX

2013-03-17, 06:53 PM

No performance issues for me, just a bit of server lag here and there.

Windows 7 x64 - High Performance Power Plan
Click My CPU-Z Validation below for hardware.

seerss

2013-03-17, 06:56 PM

AMD A6-3400M Overclocking 2.4GHZ
AMD HD6650M
2G+4G RAM
500GB HDD
128GB SSD
1366*768

home 40~50fps
battlefield low 30~40
battlefield high 20~30

today15！！！！，on the home 23！！ wtf！！

CraigX

2013-03-17, 06:59 PM

Patch increased performance a little bit especially on the ground in medium to large battles. My fps still drops from 60-70 in warpgates down to low 20s in medium to large battles. Additionally, there is humongous stuttering while flying even with light activity in an area.

Windows 7 64 Bit
Intel Core i5 3570K CPU @3.4 Ghz
8 GB Ram
Nvidia Geforce GT 640
Playing Medium settings with high effects @ 1280 x 768
75% Render with 1500 render distance.
GPU PhysX on

I don't know if this makes a difference or not but I'm playing using the steam client.

GreyFu

2013-03-17, 08:03 PM

I'm running on 2 setups frequently

On my desktop its improved
i7 - 930 @4.5ghz
24 GB Ram
nVidia GTX 670 2GB
Running from a Ramdisk setup of 12gb
Ultra Config@1080p

home Now - 70~100fps
Hot battle Now - 45~90FPS

On my laptop its gotten worse
i7 3630QM @3.5ghz
16GB
nVidia GTX 660M
Running from a mSata SSD
Ultra textures (plenty of memory)
Shadows off
Lighting low
Graphics Quality High
1080p

Home Now - 35~60FPS
Home Before - 45~70FPS

Hot battle now - 18~40FPS
Hot Battle before - 35~60FPS

It's a shame the GPU never seems to be a limit on the game (something we all already knew), I had the settings tweaked to a point of optimal quality with no performance hit to the 660m but as mentioned the desktop is running amazing so it's a bit of an odd one. Hope they get some things straightened out, really looking forward to bigger utilization's then steps back.

I like most am curious to know what rigs are being used to showcase the game out and about FNO etc. An answer I never expect to get but I have a dreadful feeling that the name of the processor begins with an X. :/

Hmr85

2013-03-17, 08:24 PM

I have two PC builds.

AMD FX-4100 OC to 4ghz
16GB Ram
EVGA GTX 580
Windows 7 64 bit.
resolution 1680x1050

I run the game on all High settings.

Prior to GU04 I was getting 70+ FPS in small skirmishes (Half a Platoon). 30 FPS in major fights.

So for me it was a huge performance hit that hopefully gets fixed here soon.
Come GU04 I was getting 40+FPS in small skirmishes (Half a Platoon). 18 FPS in major fights.

Second build.
Win 7 - x64
16 GB Ram
AMD FX - 8120
EVGA GTX 580 x2 SLI
resolution 1680x1050

Prior GU04 I was getting 120+ FPS in small skirmishes (Half a platoon) In Major fights I was getting 40ish+ FPS.

GU04 I was getting 80+ FPS in small skirmishes (Half a Platoon) In major fights I was getting 25+ FPS.

So all in all this new update took a big hit on both my systems.

camycamera

2013-03-17, 09:35 PM

specs (yes, slightly the same version of the pc you reccomended for me, thnx for that btw :D)
i5 3570
ASUS GTX 650ti
8gb RAM
windows 7 64 bit (if this is of any help...)
resolution: 1280x1024

i run the game with all settings on high, always have.

prior to patch:

i would almost always get above 30 fps in all types of battles, never below. when there were a large amount of people around, obviously it was CPU bound, but when there was no-one or a group of people around, it was Gpu bound obviously.

after patch (and also obviously after this so called "hotfix" that claimed to fix the problem):

fine when just walking around in open spaces with a couple of people, about 30 fps (but i remember it would get something like 40 prior). i also realised that i would get about 20-28 frames in i think both tech plants and amp stations, no matter how many people there was on my screen, it boggled my mind, especially when prior it ran fine, especially in those areas. i also had found problems with large groups of people, like enemy/friendly tank zergs, etc (you get my point, lots of poeple), that prior, i wouldn't get any problems with, it ran fine, above 30. now, it drops to 20. i was stunned. furthermore, i have realised that i am almost ALWAYS CPU bound. i dont get it. at one stage there was nobody on my screen (and i think i was at a tech plant, if that is of any help), it was CPU bound. seriously, i think the only time it was GPU bound was when i was looking at the ground or the sky, and that has never happened before.

it kinda sucked that these performance issues occurred during the double xp weekend, because i would have had a much better experience than i would have (although i had a much better time than most multiplayer FPS's anyway).

but, i am used to low FPS anyway, because of mah old PC i have had for so many years... and i get better fps in PS2 now than my old pc anyway :D.

but still, FIX PLEX

Simo

2013-03-17, 10:50 PM

i5 2500k
GTX 570
8gb RAM
Win 7 64bit
25mbs connection

Sporadic issues. Primarily lag/delay since GU4. Lots of getting taking hits well after the encounter ended, needing 3 or 4 attempts to get out of vehicles, getting a kill credit long after the fact, random xp values for repairs, etc.

But sometimes it seems to play fine.

Pronam

2013-03-18, 12:49 AM

AMD 8350 8core 4.0ghz
16gb 2133MHZ
AMD HD7870 2gb 1ghz
256 SSD
1080p
28mbs
100ms (EU->Waterson) {Yup as EU servers make no difference for me in lag}

Graphics/Terrain/Texture Quality High
All others on low
Shadows Off

Dramatic game setting changes do little, disabling shadows in the ini used to help a lot but not after GU4. I'm randomly changing it from ultra/high/medium. Low usually does more worse than good, which makes sense after their talk of cpu->gpu division.

These are semi-biased due to the current server lag but are still pretty accurate.
30~90 randomly in air but the high end never in any player to player situations.
40~50 in quiet situations (120 when facing the ground lol)
25~50 warpgate
20~35fps in platoon battle
15~30 platoons
7~20 platoonz (crazy big dramatic war scenes)

Before the update, which did bring a lot of new and old players to the game, I averaged between 25-50 all the time, which was perfectly fine for me. Though the lag is more an annoyance than the fps. I used multiple setups, cleaned ini's, reinstalled the game, used with/without steam. nope.avi.difference. Ironically I have had almost no crashes since gu4.

Pella

2013-03-18, 04:57 AM

While there's no point in me posting my stats as SOE wont/cant replicate my setup.

Let it be known. That the problem exists. And its some form of Memory leak again which we experienced just after Launch.

If it was just me i wouldn't complain. I have to relog every 30mins for my FPS to get back to normal.

90% Of my outfit which is about 25 People, All wtih different set up's are experiencing exaclty the same problem. Where the FPS drop below -30fps and doesnt come back until you relog. And you can even look at the floor with noone around and it wont move above.

Some have said its something todo with Debris hanging in the air or the ground for a long period of time.

INDAR at prime time [MILLER] Is impossible to play on.

Echor

2013-03-18, 07:11 AM

While there's no point in me posting my stats as SOE wont/cant replicate my setup.

Let it be known. That the problem exists. And its some form of Memory leak again which we experienced just after Launch. snipExactly the same here, fine to start with, deteriorates with time.

I don't know if its the same problem as others, but the whole game play loses its fluidity, feels like low fps, but that's still high enough. For instance if I turn, the display feels like 5fps, but might be over 100fps.

As for server lag on Miller, please retire Hammy, he's too old and tired!

Everyone in the platoon complains about the same problem with current game play, its not down to specific hardware! The only difference is how soon it affects you. A couple of patches back, just before the desynching issues, the whole game was fluid for hours.

The knock on effects are poor accuracy, and instgib deaths.

PredatorFour

2013-03-18, 08:16 AM

Exactly the same here, fine to start with, deteriorates with time.

I don't know if its the same problem as others, but the whole game play loses its fluidity, feels like low fps, but that's still high enough. For instance if I turn, the display feels like 5fps, but might be over 100fps.

As for server lag on Miller, please retire Hammy, he's too old and tired!

Everyone in the platoon complains about the same problem with current game play, its not down to specific hardware! The only difference is how soon it affects you. A couple of patches back, just before the desynching issues, the whole game was fluid for hours.

The knock on effects are poor accuracy, and instgib deaths.

I'll add myself to the same boat as these guys are in above. Can play for a few mins get a few kills then it goes tits up and the lag continues to get worse. I play everything on high and before was getting around 57 FPS on average i'd say. Now it says i still get that but also fluctuates down to 20/ 15 rapidly. So its going down to 20 then up to 60 and back again constantly.

Snydenthur

2013-03-18, 08:18 AM

I don't know if its the same problem as others, but the whole game play loses its fluidity, feels like low fps, but that's still high enough. For instance if I turn, the display feels like 5fps, but might be over 100fps.

That is the stuttering I mentioned. Although my game feels fine when I'm around 40+ fps, but after that fps feels a lot lower than it is. And it started with gu4 or the hotfix, I don't really know since haven't played much because of it. I don't see the deteriorating fps though, but that might also be because of low playtimes. Doesn't happen inside an hour for me.

almalino

2013-03-18, 08:29 AM

I had no issues this weekend. Now FPS slowdowns even if I played for 4 hours in a row.

The only problem was severe server lag on miller whenScertain acxtions didn't register in time like cloaking decloaking etc :) but FPS was fine. I could play without slowdowns.

Sir B Smythe

2013-03-18, 10:16 AM

AMD 955 3.8
ATI 7850 2Gb
OCZ Vertex4 64Gb SSD
8Gb Crucial 1600

Pre patch 30 to 60 fps
Post patch 10 to 25 fps

All in average fps ranging from nothing to large encounters. User option set to 60 fps max. Flora off, shadows off, rest high.

Wouldn't mind but redeploy, crash! Instant action, crash! Various bugs on different characters ie TR Medic gun - no sight, even though its certed and available.

Praying for some kind of optimisation which will sort the game out. Premium membership cancelled after the debacle of this weekend.

Assist

2013-03-18, 10:49 AM

1. Give your system specs (CPU, GPU, RAM, and so on)
i7 960 @ 3.5
GeForce 680 GTX 2GB
12 gb DDR 1600
Win7 64

2. Your performance prior to the game update causing you issues (Give setting/Resolution)
Prior to this specific update:
~100+ standing in Warpgate. ~40 in "Platoons vs. Platoons" fights. Spikes down to 20
Settings were all "High", with Blur, Ambient thinger, and Fog Shadows unchecked. Shadows were on Medium. Resolution 1920 x 1080

3. Your performance currently in game now with the recent updates (Give setting/Resolution)
Same settings as above
~45 in Warpgate. ~17 in "Platoons vs. Platoons" fights. Spikes down to 4!

Also can't really tell, but it seems I'm getting like 10 FPS on the new Map screen.

maradine

2013-03-18, 10:54 AM

Stick this puppy to the wall.

Fishy

2013-03-18, 12:08 PM

Intel i5 3750K
16 GB RAM
GeForce 670 GTX 2 GB

Before GU4: 40-60 FPS
After GU04: 20-50 FPS

Chaff

2013-03-18, 02:34 PM

.
3770K 4.5 oc
4 X SSD (Raid-0)
1 GALAXY nVidia 670 4GB
32GB 1600 RAM

Server lag this weekend was bad.

Definite stuttering issues.
FPS down more than 50% many times over weekend. My std FPS had been 70-90+ anywhere in-game. This weekend I often found myself in the 20's. Also, I did not fall through the world, but all of the walls & structure disappeared in a base for 20 minutes. Also, got black & white game screen. Had to log in and out of game multiple times due to lag or other glitches.

Another "glitch"......Never could be sure if my vehicle or Max armor was healthy or not. Never seemed to register properly all weekend.

Game was never like this (for me). Added newest nVidia drivers I could find Sunday night, and it seemed to help, but not as good frame rates and stability as earlier this year.

PS >>>>> I hope the devs work with AMD & nVidia to develop optimum drivers for PS2.
.

VaderShake

2013-03-18, 02:38 PM

If my wife finds this "Performance Issues" thread be prepared for a WALL OF TEXT lol....

Sturmhardt

2013-03-18, 04:06 PM

Sounds like she has a lot to talk about on that topic, you should lend her the keyboard for a few hours...we won't mind :3

Silent Thunder

2013-03-19, 12:43 AM

This tweet just went live, hopefully higby's right about this.

EDIT: Cant figure out how to imbed tweets so I'll just copy the text.

"Hey all, @tomslick42 found the bug after working ALL WEEKEND LONG on it. He fixed it. We're testing the fix now and will get it out ASAP."

DirtyBird

2013-03-19, 01:13 AM

https://twitter.com/mhigby/status/313867312006574080

Falcon_br

2013-03-19, 02:11 AM

I noticed lots of frozen grenades in the air in Bio Labs.
Asked to my outfit members if they could see it and they confirmed that everyone could see it, almost 5 grenades frozen in the air, probably giving server lag to everyone.

CyclesMcHurtz

2013-03-19, 02:23 AM

https://twitter.com/mhigby/status/313867312006574080

I just want to point out that this one potential fix is for a client-side FPS problem. I didn't fix ALL.THE.THINGS ... yet?

Assist

2013-03-19, 07:31 AM

I just want to point out that this one potential fix is for a client-side FPS problem. I didn't fix ALL.THE.THINGS ... yet?

So you're telling me there's a chance........

CrimsonTemplar

2013-03-19, 12:23 PM

I just want to point out that this one potential fix is for a client-side FPS problem. I didn't fix ALL.THE.THINGS ... yet?

Indeed one thing a time and the fact you're doing your best helps. Yet once you do fix them all...why then you'll be unstoppable!

@Assist: There's always a chance.

camycamera

2013-03-20, 08:43 PM

FPS is fine now, thnx :D

now next time, dont do that again when there is another double XP weekend. lol

TartarosCZ

2013-03-23, 08:18 PM

Don't know how about you guys, but I still have to keep restarting the client, otherwise flying at bases is unbearable. It's now low FPS per se, it's stuttering (the speed of the game itself is constantly changing)

Silent Thunder

2013-03-23, 08:20 PM

poxon

2013-03-23, 08:25 PM

Well Im getting much, much better FPS now, but Im not sure if it was because of the fixes, or the fact that I ditched the Bulldozer for an Ivy bridge. Probably the latter, since I'm doing much better in other games as well.

There still seems to be an issue. im running 2x680's and I'm getting terrible frames. That's not even in a big base with a big battle, that's in the smaller base's just to the west of TR warpgate on indar!

Silent Thunder

2013-03-23, 08:32 PM

There still seems to be an issue. im running 2x680's and I'm getting terrible frames. That's not even in a big base with a big battle, that's in the smaller base's just to the west of TR warpgate on indar!

The 2x680s is wholly irrelevant, since PS2 almost always bottlenecks at the CPU, not the GPU. Whats your processor and clock speeds?

poxon

2013-03-24, 02:51 PM

The 2x680s is wholly irrelevant, since PS2 almost always bottlenecks at the CPU, not the GPU. Whats your processor and clock speeds?

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3930K CPU @ 3.20GHz (12 CPUs), ~3.2GHz.

Before the update i was getting the CPU display in the alt+f FPS overlay more, but it seems to be showing GPU more then CPU.

Sledgecrushr

2013-03-24, 03:58 PM

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3930K CPU @ 3.20GHz (12 CPUs), ~3.2GHz.

Before the update i was getting the CPU display in the alt+f FPS overlay more, but it seems to be showing GPU more then CPU.

I heard that if you OC to 4.5 ghz or better your fps will go up to about 45 in large battles.

dethred

2013-03-24, 07:56 PM

I found a bug which is downright fucking shameful.

Turning on Fog Shadows now lowers GPU usage on my SLI setup to ~50% (+/- 5% at any given time). Literally changing the fog shadows setting will take me from 120+fps down to 30, and its all in GPU usage. The game still registers the GPUs as being the limiting factor, and I'd hope my 4.5ghz 2600K isn't the issue just to have a setting that once worked fine.

2600k @ 4.5ghz
GTX 580 3GB SLI
16GB ram
Corsair SSD
etc.

Never had this problem before, and its pathetic that it even exists.

EDIT: So I did some more testing.

WHQL driver from November, current, and newest Beta=FAIL

Disabling SLI and running the second card as a physx card gets me acceptable framerates, but its still a massive waste.

99% usage on GPU1 with EVERYTHING turned to maximum settings, Physx on, Fog Shadows on.
25% maximum usage on GPU2, presumably for physx. Usually this stays in the 5-10% range.
35-60FPS with everything maxed out, even with a multi-platoon Zerg.

Sturmhardt

2013-03-25, 05:01 AM

That's why I don't use SLI/Crossfire. Costs a lot and there are lots of problems with it....
One highend card is the better choice.

Fimconte

2013-03-25, 06:28 AM

2600k @ 4.6ghz
7950 CF
16gb Ram
PS2 on a OCZ Agility 3 SSD.
Win 7 - 64-bit

Pre-GU4 FPS:
Warp-gate: 150-180fps
In heavy combat: 60-70fps

Post-GU4 FPS:
Warp-gate: 75-80fps
In heavy combat: 55-65fps, after 1-2hrs of gameplay this deteriorates to ~45fps+, restarting the client returns it to 55-65fps

coconut

2013-03-25, 06:50 AM

Fimconte

2013-03-25, 11:20 AM

I wonder about all those reports of FPS dropping after 1 hour. I don't see it.
My setup:
Intel core i7 950 @3Ghz
6GB RAM
Win7 64
ATI Radeon HD 5850 with 1GB GDR5

Running the game from an SSD.

Might be relevant: I never fly. Ever.

My guess: a problem with NVidia drivers. Those days GPU drivers have become quite big and complex, they are operating systems of their own. I wouldn't be surprised if they had leaks.

It's 2-3 hours usually, sometimes longer. Alt-tabbing a lot seems to compound the problem.

I do fly almost exclusively though, so maybe there's some truth to that.

And using AMD 7950s so can't be Nvidia drivers.

dethred

2013-03-27, 11:35 PM

That's why I don't use SLI/Crossfire. Costs a lot and there are lots of problems with it....
One highend card is the better choice.

Obviously spending less money is better, but you will never ever get near the performance of two cards.

Honestly, games that aren't made by incompetent programmers generally see excellent benefits from SLI. The problem is that with the developer in this case, I'm afraid.

Sledgecrushr

2013-03-28, 12:00 AM

So this is what I got right now, Im saving for an upgrade.
Core 2 quad @2.4 ghz
Radeon 5750 1 gig
4 gig ram
Win vista 32 bit
Running on ultra low

Just got done playing for three hours. I didnt get the flicker bug at all and my framerate hovered around 18 fps at a big crown fight. This is pretty outstanding results considering my computer was out of date three years ago.

Fimconte

2013-04-01, 10:32 PM

Obviously spending less money is better, but you will never ever get near the performance of two cards.

Honestly, games that aren't made by incompetent programmers generally see excellent benefits from SLI. The problem is that with the developer in this case, I'm afraid.
You can't offload most of the things that cause PS2 to be CPU bound onto the CPU.

And you can't really blame the Developers for the lack of Clock Speed increases over the last few years.

Multi-threading is great, but it's difficult to code for. Hopefully we'll see a steady increase in the future and maybe more offloading to other cores.

Palerion

2013-04-01, 11:40 PM

ringring

2013-04-02, 05:24 AM

Experiencing issues when I'd say I wasn't (much) several weeks ago.

i7 2600k @ 3.4
8 Gb RAM
GTX650Ti 1Gb

I normally get 35-45 it can dip as low as 25 momentarily or as high as 60-70 but normal is 35-45.

My issue is that 35-45 feels worse than it did a couple of months ago. Although I get FPS numbers which felt good enough now everything feels so laggy.

In addition I get:
- repairs that don't work properly
- map lag
- information not appearing on the map or mini-map, specifically squad and - platoon mates are entirely missing.
- Claymores and mines no longer do damage (fairly recent one that)
- Claymores and mines deconstructing

Snydenthur

2013-04-02, 08:55 AM

Judging by a quick testing, changing a new cpu helped a lot. With i3-2130 I had about 30 minimum with biggest battles taking it down to about 25 occasionally. The problem with that i3 was that there was some sort of microstutter or something, that made even that 30fps feel a lot lower. Microstutter usually started around 60fps, when there were people near, but 60fps with less people was smooth.

Now I have i5-2500k. I'm running it stock, since I didn't upgrade my motherboard to a one that allows overclocking yet. There weren't any massive battles yet, but with enemy platoon detected fps seemed to be around 50 with a few dips below it. Microstutter was completely gone though and that was the main reason for this upgrade anyway (+ quad core is much better for other games too).

Edit. Oh yeah, I did change maxvoices from 30 to 96. Don't really know if that really helped me with i3, but at least now I don't lose the sound of my weapon when there are a lot of other sounds nearby.

Assist

2013-04-02, 09:05 AM

1. I'm running a 3570k processor with a GTX 660ti card. 8gb ram
2. Ran on all settings maxed (high, not ultra) 1080p at a constant 80+ out of battle, dropped to 50-60, occasionally in the 40s during extremely intensive battles.
3. Running all settings maxed 1080p at a constant 60fps out of battle, sometimes dipping into the 50s. In intense battles I run at 40-50 and occasionally dip even into the high 30s.

Just an fyi, when I switched to running Ultra settings I gained FPS in large battles. I used the settings stickied in the tech forums here(2nd post by Ailos in that thread) and up'd most stuff to ultra while dropping some stuff to low, but I'm running a lot older processor than you and my performance was never that good to begin with. I run a GTX 680 though, which I think has allowed me to run some ultra settings without taking any impact on my FPS.
Specifically these settings didn't drop my FPS at all, and actually increased my FPS in large battles. Game looks quite a bit nicer than High as well, really notice it on the texture/graphics detail on the weapons.

OverallQuality=-1
LightingQuality=4
EffectsQuality=4
TerrainQuality=4
GraphicsQuality=4
TextureQuality=0

Snydenthur

2013-04-02, 09:41 AM

Just an fyi, when I switched to running Ultra settings I gained FPS in large battles. I used the settings stickied in the tech forums here(2nd post by Ailos in that thread) and up'd most stuff to ultra while dropping some stuff to low, but I'm running a lot older processor than you and my performance was never that good to begin with. I run a GTX 680 though, which I think has allowed me to run some ultra settings without taking any impact on my FPS.
Specifically these settings didn't drop my FPS at all, and actually increased my FPS in large battles. Game looks quite a bit nicer than High as well, really notice it on the texture/graphics detail on the weapons.

A lot of people are saying this, but I don't really see a reason why this would up the minimum fps. Cpu does the same amount of work. It's true that if you're cpu bound, you can up the settings to make the game look better, but it should not have any effect on minimum fps. This is my understanding of it. I might be wrong or forgelight is different from other engines in that case.

I don't really like using ultra myself, since they make it harder to see enemies. Ultra for textures, medium for the graphics quality, high for model quality, everything else is low or off. I have tried ultra settings, but only thing I saw different was the max fps.

Hamma

2013-04-02, 09:48 AM

That is strange that Ultra would INCREASE FPS :confused:

wasdie

2013-04-02, 10:29 AM

PhysX still destroys my performance with my 2x GTX 570s. I've tried everything too. Updating drivers, dedicating the 2nd GPU to physx. Nothing works.

wasdie

2013-04-02, 10:37 AM

That is strange that Ultra would INCREASE FPS :confused:

Not really. A steady load on a processor will always out perform inconsistent loads. Dropping your graphics down means the GPU isn't working as consistently hard thus it has times where there is a very light load on it and other times where it needs to be increased.

Even if you turn on the "prefer maximum performance" setting in your GPU's control panel doesn't mean this problem goes away.

If you have a modern GPU (2011+) then running high/ultra settings should run better for you. It seems that ultra even uses a bit different rendering algorithms that are more efficient on modern hardware, thus look better and run better compared to high/medium/low.

The problem with this game's performance is actually all CPU based. When I'm out alone looking over an empty terrain with ultra settings I can pull in over 100 fps. Even when there are some friendlies and vehicles around me to be rendered. If the VR area is empty of players I still get 80+ even when looking at all of the spawned vehicles and infantry while I'm causing explosions. The actual graphical renderer of this engine is really efficient and very well optimized. It literally all falls onto the CPU with this game and that's going to be tough for them.

CPU utilization cannot magically increase in a network-heavy game such as this. You cannot just thread up your network processing if you want to keep sync with the server. It becomes much more difficult. Things in the engine are threaded up but the vast majority of the processing comes from your CPU interpreting all of the data it gets from the server for player movement, vehicles, and ballistics. The more you feed through that pipe, the slow it's going to go.

They could have made more design decisions to decrease CPU load, but it would have made it even easier for hackers and would have ruined the game. For example they could have made every weapon in the game pure hitscan greatly reducing the amount of data that the server and clients need to track. However that would really ruin the game.

Snydenthur

2013-04-02, 10:52 AM

Not really. A steady load on a processor will always out perform inconsistent loads. Dropping your graphics down means the GPU isn't working as consistently hard thus it has times where there is a very light load on it and other times where it needs to be increased

This doesn't have anything to do with minimum fps, which is the problem in the game. It's true that if you use ultra, you get a more stable fps. But your minimum fps will still be the same, since your cpu is limiting it.

Let's say that you'll get 30-250 fps with everything on low. Then you put on ultra settings. Your fps is now 30-60fps. Of course, you can limit fps on low settings to the same 30-60, so it's more of a personal thing. Do you want to have a simpler view or do you prefer graphics.

Palerion

2013-04-02, 11:10 AM

Just an fyi, when I switched to running Ultra settings I gained FPS in large battles. I used the settings stickied in the tech forums here(2nd post by Ailos in that thread) and up'd most stuff to ultra while dropping some stuff to low, but I'm running a lot older processor than you and my performance was never that good to begin with. I run a GTX 680 though, which I think has allowed me to run some ultra settings without taking any impact on my FPS.
Specifically these settings didn't drop my FPS at all, and actually increased my FPS in large battles. Game looks quite a bit nicer than High as well, really notice it on the texture/graphics detail on the weapons.

OverallQuality=-1
LightingQuality=4
EffectsQuality=4
TerrainQuality=4
GraphicsQuality=4
TextureQuality=0

Thanks, I'll give that a try. I had tried to use ultra settings previously, and noticed about a 10-20fps drop, but these settings look like they could work.

EDIT: Wow, thanks! Brought me back up to my previous 70-80 out-of-battle framerate.

Dragonskin

2013-04-02, 11:19 AM

AMD Phenom X6 1055T 2.8ghz
8gb ram
AMD HD Radeon 7970 3gb

I get roughly 30-40 no matter what setting I use. Sometimes I get slightly higher on high going into the 40-50 range. I might try the adjustments to see if Ultra does anything.

wasdie

2013-04-02, 11:34 AM

This doesn't have anything to do with minimum fps, which is the problem in the game. It's true that if you use ultra, you get a more stable fps. But your minimum fps will still be the same, since your cpu is limiting it.

Let's say that you'll get 30-250 fps with everything on low. Then you put on ultra settings. Your fps is now 30-60fps. Of course, you can limit fps on low settings to the same 30-60, so it's more of a personal thing. Do you want to have a simpler view or do you prefer graphics.
That's exactly why I said the real bottleneck of this game is your CPU.