

Dx11 Performance Hit
#101
Posted 06 March 2014 - 02:28 PM
core i7 3770 @ 4.2 GHz
ASUS build GTX 560ti
ASUS Sabertooth mobo
16GB ram @ 1600 MHz
Win 7 64 bit
#102
Posted 06 March 2014 - 03:03 PM
GTV Zeratul, on 06 March 2014 - 02:28 PM, said:
core i7 3770 @ 4.2 GHz
ASUS build GTX 560ti
ASUS Sabertooth mobo
16GB ram @ 1600 MHz
Win 7 64 bit
My sample size is really low, but I've seen guys with cards on either side of yours experiencing issues. However, the 560ti has had at least three players claim they've seen speedups even while lower-level 500 series and higher-level 700 series users have expressed performance concerns.
#103
Posted 06 March 2014 - 03:13 PM
#104
Posted 06 March 2014 - 03:15 PM
Matthew Craig, on 04 March 2014 - 04:11 PM, said:
What does that have to do with what he said?
Clearly this was rushed out the door to make the patch look better, but it certainly hasn't had any development go into it, nor optimization or testing. The weapons fire looks shockingly bad, there is no visual feedback for hit indication visible, effects are missing, and the rendering of the terrain and AA looks way worse than DX9 does. PostAA looks worse and MSAA is causing nausea there's so much flickering. The edges of buildings and other hard structures shimmer and look like they have a marquee (AKA marching ants) moving around them when you move. In the UI, the entire background where the selected mech should be, along with where the interior of the mechbay would normally be, is black.
Game play is pretty much impossible as the frame rates on this machine have dropped from 60-70 fps down to 20-30 fps with lots of stuttering. This is a pretty decent rig that can push games like BF4 to 140 FPS with everything maxed out.
So yeah, the question Ecrof asked was perfectly valid. It's pretty clear to me that, like UI 2.0, you just stuck this out there way before its time. Way before it was ready for the public's consumption, and you've blown your chance to make what should have been a good first impression, again.
The specs on this machine are:
i7-3820 @ 3.6 GHz
16 GB 2400 MHz RAM
Asus P9X79 Deluxe
EVGA GTX 670 4 GB @ 1920 x 1080 w/ latest drivers
Edited by Fatbat, 06 March 2014 - 03:23 PM.
#105
Posted 06 March 2014 - 03:18 PM
so what ever this patch made it droped performance on both direct x version
its not just a bad implementation of dx 11
which is supposed to give you better performance,NOT WORSE
btw i played both cry engine 3 games (crysis 2 and 3) and both of them look better and have better frame rates on my computer
so i suggest: pgi to go and ask crytek how to implement dx9 and 11 support into the engine correctly (without lowering the performance of both of them)
#106
Posted 06 March 2014 - 03:29 PM
Fastwind, on 06 March 2014 - 03:18 PM, said:
so what ever this patch made it droped performance on both direct x version
You know, I could have sworn my DX9 FPS was higher too, sometimes tipping into the 100+ range. I'm pretty sure I'm down at least 20 FPS in DX9 too.
#107
Posted 06 March 2014 - 03:42 PM
Quote
While i agree with you in general, this particular description sounds like you are using a custom user.cfg file because i had the exact same problems when i was using the cfg by Colonel Pada Vinson he released before the dx11 patch, he updated it to work with the new patch, look here for the updated version which should fix your problems, or at least some of them. He is still tweaking it tho, so don't expect it to be perfect.
#108
Posted 06 March 2014 - 04:45 PM
#109
Posted 08 March 2014 - 07:49 AM
El Rizzo, on 06 March 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:
While i agree with you in general, this particular description sounds like you are using a custom user.cfg file because i had the exact same problems when i was using the cfg by Colonel Pada Vinson he released before the dx11 patch, he updated it to work with the new patch, look here for the updated version which should fix your problems, or at least some of them. He is still tweaking it tho, so don't expect it to be perfect.
You are correct. I removed the cfg setting and things are much better now. Thanks a lot for pointing that out!
#110
Posted 08 March 2014 - 07:59 AM

#111
Posted 08 March 2014 - 05:05 PM
If I have SLI on, I get a FPS increase but missing parts on friendly and enemy Mechs.
If I disable SLI, everything looks normal and I get a FPS increase over DX9, but as soon as I hit a heavy close in fire fight or lots of smoke around my FPS drops to the low 20s.
I have all game graphic settings on highest cept for AA which I have as Post AA, not MSAA, MSAA just kills FPS right off the bat.
I really don't know why its taking them so long to implement SLI properly in this game.
System specs.
-------------------
Intel i7 3820
Gigabyte X79-UP4
16 gig 1866 Dominator ram
2x Gigabyte GTX 680's with latest 334.89 drivers
Win 7 Ultimate
Dell 3008 WFP @ 2560x1600
#112
Posted 11 March 2014 - 09:55 AM
But I have another problem: When I go into fullscreen mode with DX11 enabled my game minimizes itself and I've no way of coming back to it. ALT+Tab or clicking on the actual game on my taskbar doesn't do anything, so I'm always left with no choice but to force-close the game via Task Manager. I don't experience this on DX9.
System Specs
-------------------
Windows 8.1 Pro (64-bit)
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 6950
CPU: AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 3.31 GHz
RAM: 8 Gb
#113
Posted 18 March 2014 - 01:16 AM
/edit
Or I could be wrong...
From the upcoming patch notes.
"Fixed a bug that was impacting performance with some stuttering for both DX9 and 11"
Edited by Caezael, 18 March 2014 - 01:22 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users