458 replies to this topic

[F lan Ker]

S!

Do not play BD2 Will try this multithread thing when home and see how it affects FPS.

[SirLANsalot]

right now the difference between ATI or Nvidia is null because were running DX9. We will see a BIG change in performances between the two card types once DX11 comes in (and by extension DX10). The Nividia cards will be able to handle the DX11 far better as it naturally has SLI support in it and as it was stated before the drivers for ATI are crap and as such there "crossfire" runs very poorly.


As for your fix....worked fairly well, I gained a few frames but it defiantly made the game run better on high. I still run on med settings tho just to avoid bugs as it seems less buggy on med then on any other setting. I run a SLI system so I have multiple GPU's to work with already even if it isn't using SLI, my system is.


Specs.

Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.66 ghz (1st gen i7)
12 gb DDR 3 ram @ 1333mhz (its all my mobo can do time for an upgrade lol)
SSD drive (love it)
2x EVGA gforce 460 GTX's 795mb in SLI
Logitech G930 wireless headset (its USB I know, and i hate using USB sound cards but this ones been good so far).





Note: If your going to buy Nvidia, buy from EVGA, there prices are the best around and there cards are great, and the support is even better. Theres a reason there #1.

[yashmack]

Lantan57ua, on 26 November 2012 - 11:54 PM, said:

Didn't help. I think, if you have 2 cores - you will suffer in all new games as PlanetSide 2 (huge frezes and lags, unplayable in fight), MWO (20-25 fps in piece, drops to 10-15, 6-15 in fight), even old Arma 2 and so on...=)
AMD Athlon x2 6000+ 3.0 Mhz
6 GB DDR2
ASUS M2L-SLI
SONIC 260 GTX 216 cores 896 mb, driver 310.61 beta

I just installed Planetside 2 and so far havent had any problems running the game
Medium is probably best setting but it can play on my PC on high settings at around 19 fps
no lag spikes, nothing stupid running nice and smooth

Playing planetside my CPU usuage is usually less than 100%, stays aright around 98% on both cores and 97% on the GPU

in MWO both cores on the CPU are pegged 100% and the GPU at 50%
my card is not the problem on lowest settings
something int he game is overusing the CPU, at least when compared to games like Skyrim, STO, and now Planetside 2

[Kaijin]

Q6600
8 GB DDR2 800 (max my MOBO will support)
GTX 560 1 GB (replaced a fried 8800 GT)
Windows 7 Home 64bit

This configuration improved my framerate from average 25 to average 35

Thanks!

[Imagine Dragons]

Thanks OP!

[GrimlockONE]

SirLANsalot, on 27 November 2012 - 05:11 AM, said:

right now the difference between ATI or Nvidia is null because were running DX9. We will see a BIG change in performances between the two card types once DX11 comes in (and by extension DX10). The Nividia cards will be able to handle the DX11 far better as it naturally has SLI support in it and as it was stated before the drivers for ATI are crap and as such there "crossfire" runs very poorly.

Just what any fan boy would say. I do hope you realize that simply spewing opinion does not make you sound intelligent but actually moronic.

Nvidia and Radeon cards each have their own pros and cons. MWO will run a little bit better on Nvidia cards but not enough to say that Radeon will be so far behind. Some games prefer Nvidia or Radeon and tend to run a little better on those cards, especially when they are paired in SLI or Crossfire.

Just to let you know also how crappy the drivers are for my Radeon, made by AMD. In Crysis 2, a Nvidia preferred game like this one, I can run all Ultra Settings with Hi-Res Texture pak and get 80+FPS. Minimum in hairy situations would be 35 FPS.

HIS Radeon 6970 2GB
AMD Thuban 3.2Ghz x 6
8GB RAM

Love both companies and plan to go Intel and Nvidia next build but your fanboyism was too ignorant to ignore.

[Mike LeCoq]

I'm voting no, because it had no significant effect on my performance. The game ran good before the latest patch and this fix regained me a few fps but it's still unplayable as the fps frequently drops from the 35-40 at the start, to 10-15 as I start moving or looking around. Before this fix though, I had around 35-60fps in the menu and after the fix it stays at a steady 60.

My specs:

Intel Core2Duo E7200 @2.53GHz
Geforce 9600GT
6Gb RAM

[EternalCore]

Mike LeCoq, on 27 November 2012 - 07:34 AM, said:

I'm voting no, because it had no significant effect on my performance. The game ran good before the latest patch and this fix regained me a few fps but it's still unplayable as the fps frequently drops from the 35-40 at the start, to 10-15 as I start moving or looking around. Before this fix though, I had around 35-60fps in the menu and after the fix it stays at a steady 60.

My specs:

Intel Core2Duo E7200 @2.53GHz
Geforce 9600GT
6Gb RAM

Your whole Computer is quite old and below the minimum requirements; which is why it's not working for you. You should take some Time to think about upgrading.

Edited by EternalCore, 27 November 2012 - 07:57 AM.

[SteelPaladin]

No love. FPS still sits at 18-30.

Phenom X4 9650 @2.3GHz
8 GB DDR2 SysRAM
GTX 670 w/2 GB VRAM

The CPU is old, but it doesn't bottleneck literally ANY other game that I play. The GTX 670 is overclocked and MWO never pushes it past 60% (rarely even past 50%). No idea why this game is so in love w/smacking the hell out of my CPU and letting a killer GPU just coast.

[valrond]

Not working here. I get the same FPS with high or low detail.

AMD Phenom II 965
8 GB DDR3 1600
GTX 480. Drivers 310.61
128 GB SSD

Running at 1920x1080. I get around 20-40 fps. Before last patch, it was 40-60 fps.

[ihateharriers]

Average FPS is about 25, dropping below 20 when things get ugly on the max settings.

Specs:

AMD FX-8150 8-core, OC'ed to 4.0Ghz
16GB DDR3
nVidia GTX 560 Ti, 2GB GDDR5

[Mechalomania]

ATI Tray tool messes up my system in a very bad way.
(I think the developer has stopped working on it for a good while now)
unless anyone has a better working alternative, I vote NO.
intel QX9770
X48 Motherboard
16GB Ram
AMD HD 6990 (12.10)
Windows 7 64Bit

[Zynk]

Yes, BUT the 4-5 FPS bug is still there and have to reboot game to get rid of it.

When bug is not present I get 40-60 FPS, basically 60 but will drop to 40 FPS in a furball.

[AllOuttaBubbleGum]

this seemed to really help me. Thanks!

[J4ckInthebox]

sigh, my FPS count have gone down the toilet since the patch. nearly unplaybable.

[Red squirrel]

OK here comes a gamers nightmare:

Core2Duo @ 3GHz
4GB RAM
NVIDIA GTX 570 1280MB 320bit
Samsung 1TB HDD (almost completely full and not defraged for years)

And you know what? The GTX 570 rocks. Even with this ancient (6 years) PC
before the patch I could play on high settings with AA on and got between 20-30FPS
Since the Nov patch I am down to ~15FPS even on minimum settings. So something is seriously wrong with this patch.

Edited by Red squirrel, 27 November 2012 - 03:17 PM.

[silentD11]

Vassago Rain, on 27 November 2012 - 02:57 AM, said:

Both those features are pretty pointless.

This is quasi correct.

PhysX is pretty much crap and will remain crap. Largely because if you fully took advantage of it, all those people with AMD cards out there wouldn't be able to use it. So it's left to superficial junk that doesn't improve gameplay at all. So physx, yeah oh well.

CUDA on the other hand is a big ******* deal (tm Joe Biden) in some areas. It's a huge selling point for people who can leverage it. All the workstations where I work are specifically quadro/telsa because of it (and some quadro stuff, but CUDA is the big one). GPU computing is a big deal. One of the reasons nvidias "goofs" like the GTX 480 were so off is because when it comes to GPU computing they are much better, so trade offs must be made. Plus CUDA has been around longer than some alternatives, has better support behind it, and a slew of other items.

You might not care about CUDA, but for the market it's trying to reach it's the gold standard.

[silentD11]

Red squirrel, on 27 November 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

OK here comes a gamers nightmare:

Core2Duo @ 3GHz
4GB RAM
NVIDIA GTX 570 1280MB 320bit
Samsung 1TB HDD (almost completely full and not defraged for years)

And you know what? The GTX 570 rocks. Even with this ancient (6 years) PC
before the patch I could play on high settings with AA on and got between 20-30FPS
Since the Nov patch I am down to ~15FPS even on minimum settings. So something is seriously wrong with this patch.

Look on the bright side, you're $45 or so away from a used q6600 that will turn that box into a quadcore.

[M T]

Didn't try it out yet, but I'm pretty sure that neither my CPU nor GPU is fully utilized in this game.
Already optimized everything to the best of my extend in Nvidia inspector etc. GPU / CPU both working on full clock.

Specs;
i7 3770K @ 4.5GHz
Nvidia 670GTX

Even on lowest graphics quality, drops to 35fps are observed, not bad for a movie, bad for a game. (I can clearly notice it when my fps drops below 50. (From a fixed 60 limit)

[daPaule]

Followed the steps regarding AMD / ATI Cards.
It feels quicker, pre pre patch, so before the big fps drops arrived. I still have a very low spec system so running into 16fps seems natural but at least it's not stuck @8 or something during combat anymore.

For those interested:

Spoiler

C2D 6400
4GB RAM
ATI 5770

Anyhow 3770k is already being shipped ;-)

Edited by daPaule, 27 November 2012 - 05:28 PM.