68 replies to this topic

[Corvin Reinhardt]

Does anyone know if MWO will ever be optimised for AMD chips? I have a pretty powerful machine but only get about 10-15 FPS even on the lowest settings. It's a shame because I really enjoy playing this game

[wolf74]

many thing can effect the FPS

What is your:
CPU:
Video Model:
Screen resolution:


If your Running your Monitor Native Screen Resolution make sure your Anti-Aliasing is off due to the fact it is not doing you any good.

[Summon3r]

Nitzol, on 09 May 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

Does anyone know if MWO will ever be optimised for AMD chips? I have a pretty powerful machine but only get about 10-15 FPS even on the lowest settings. It's a shame because I really enjoy playing this game

exactly what does "pretty powerful machine" mean?

[Lil Cthulhu]

I'm pretty skeptical about the whole "pretty powerful machine" statement because I have a 7950 with a i5 2500K and I get well over 60 fps on high settings at 1920X1080

[Lord Ralex]

I run a less than recommended build GPU wise and I get 15FPS, so something is not right with your settings it sounds like.

(compasion to an i7 740M clocking at 1.5GHz and a Radeon HD 5450)

[Rogue Jedi]

I run on 1080p resolution at very high graphics preset, and I always get at least 40FPS

my system specs are as follows:

CPU = AMD Phenom II x6 1075t (3ghz 6 core)
RAM = 8GB DDR3 1333
GPU = nvidia geforce GTX 560
the game runs off a 120 GB SSD.

The SSD was added about 2 months ago, using a HDD I could only run on low graphics, it is possible this could be your problem.

What are your specs, do they equal or exceed those of my PC?

edit: forgot to mention FPS

Edited by Rogue Jedi, 10 May 2014 - 09:05 AM.

[Goose]

I'm not convinced we've had enough testing on AMD boxes …

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

I have an AMD phenom II black 560 dual core at 3.3 ghz, 8 gigs ram, and a Radeon 6770. I get decent FPS on mostly medium settings.

I plan on upgrading my chipset in the next couple of months. They now have a 4.0 Ghz 8 core for the same price as i paid for my current CPU.

[Goose]

Didn't we have a guy in here last month whom though 20fps was "decent?"

MOAR details, please …

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

Goose, on 10 May 2014 - 05:19 PM, said:

Didn't we have a guy in here last month whom though 20fps was "decent?"

MOAR details, please …

About 30 to 40 under movment. Some drop in intense combat. 60+ at standstill

[Lord Ralex]

Goose, on 10 May 2014 - 05:19 PM, said:

Didn't we have a guy in here last month whom though 20fps was "decent?"

MOAR details, please …

I am glad when I game at my low-FPS. Considering you adjust to it, it works. I am just used to low fps, so I am able to play like it. Of course not ideal, but it is decent when I play

[Golrar]

Check sig. 60 fps except Frozen City Day. SOme reason the fog drops me to 40 fps. Regular 40 fps in a furball.

[Krinkov]

I get a 20% to 30% boost in performance on my AMD Fx8120 by turning off cores 1,3,5 and 7. The game isn't optimized to run on those cores. Turning them off prevents the game from attempting to run code on them. I use Process Lasso so that only MWO doesn't use the cores.

[Goose]

Krinkov, on 11 May 2014 - 03:48 PM, said:

I get a 20% to 30% boost in performance on my AMD Fx8120 by turning off cores 1,3,5 and 7.

So the oddball Piledriver math co-processor thing is bad for Cryengine? As in "every thread does floating-point math?"

[Smokeyjedi]

Goose, on 11 May 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

So the oddball Piledriver math co-processor thing is bad for Cryengine? As in "every thread does floating-point math?"

Its more like when they designed the "Bulldozer" they managed to bottleneck each extra thread,per module -1,3,5,7 can't be fed while 0,2,4,6 are being used.....or saturated....there is a scheduling issue that "Piledriver" took into account and corrected.........whick added to its 15% boost in IPC

Edited by Smokeyjedi, 12 May 2014 - 03:37 AM.

[Nick Rarang]

Hoping for a fix on AMD FX's bad MWO performance.

[ranger233]

I am running an fx4100 oc'ed to 4.5 w/ 16 gig of ram (1600 OC'ed to 1688) a 7870 no overclock and a 240 gig ssd. I run between 50 and 60 fps.

[Goose]

Log files or it didn't happen …

[Durant Carlyle]

Nick Rarang, on 12 May 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

Hoping for a fix on AMD FX's bad MWO performance.

Keep on hopin' because it isn't just MW:O. Intel CPUs are more powerful for most games, and have been since the Athlon/Phenom days ended. AMD has been concentrating more on their integrated graphics performance. Intel has too, but they have managed to keep increasing actual CPU performance along with integrated graphics performance.

You're not going to see any jumps in AMD gaming performance until they bring out new CPU architectures that concentrate on CPU performance rather than integrated graphics performance. And who knows when that'll be...

[Golrar]

AMD processor, including the FX, actually perform better in multi-threaded applications than Intel (except for the new i7 Haswells probably). But for games designed to make use of multi-threading, an FX-8350 is superior to an i5-4670k.

http://cpuboss.com/c...-vs-AMD-FX-8350

Unfortunately, most games do not yet take good advantage of multi-threading. But with PS4 and Xbone architecture built on AMD APUs, you will see more and more of this. As many have already posted, if MWO ever takes advantage of the Mantle API, this will also boost performance for AMD FX processors.