458 replies to this topic

[Kushiel]

Huge upgrade to my framerate. Thank you very much.

[Asatruer]

I may have seen a small increase in performance, maybe a couple of FPS at most, though it is hard to tell if it was the settings you suggested, or rolling back my drivers to the last WHQL cert (non-beta) drivers. But generally running either Medium or Low settings, I dip into the red FPS fairly regularly, and more so the faster the mech I am playing (no Jenner for me, though I could just fine in closed beta)

Specs:
WinVista 64th Ultimate
AND Phenom II X3 720 2.8GHz
4GB DDR3 1333 Dual Channel
EVGA GeForce GTX 470 (Fermi) "SuperClocked"
OCZ Vertex 3 SSD

[EternalCore]

Kushiel, on 27 November 2012 - 08:05 PM, said:

Huge upgrade to my framerate. Thank you very much.

Your Very Welcome!

[TheCaptainJZ]

Improved about 5 fps or so

[Leshy3007]

It helps, but stil have huge fps drops on turning

[skud789]

Went from around 10-15 fps to sometimes 15-20 fps. So it did just about work. But I think I'll still be hoping that the next patch will sort this out and going back to the dreaded Xbox for another week!

Thanks for trying though.

[GvM]

playing 1280x720 @ low, 30fps, drops to 10 in combat - not playable at all (I remember both crysis were fine at ultra... srsly)
specs: c2d e7500 3ghz, 4gb ram, gtx 560 1gb, w7

[Zero Neutral]

EternalCore, on 26 November 2012 - 01:01 AM, said:

If your using AMD's FX series then yes it won't work because AMD Messed up BIG TIME on their FX Series. Even I a Long time AMD fan am soon switching to Intel if AMD doesn't get their act together...

Spoiler

...I already Switched to Nvidia And I'm not going back Because AMD Destroys their cards with bad drivers...

What problem are you having with you FX cpu? I have a quad core FX series... only cost me 109$.... it is the best CPU I've owned thus far, (because it is the most modern.) No issues here.

GvM, on 28 November 2012 - 03:05 AM, said:

playing 1280x720 @ low, 30fps, drops to 10 in combat - not playable at all (I remember both crysis were fine at ultra... srsly)
specs: c2d e7500 3ghz, 4gb ram, gtx 560 1gb, w7

The game is running on old and unoptimized DirectX9 so your performance, along with everyone else, is not where it is intended to be.

[EternalCore]

Zero Neutral, on 28 November 2012 - 03:10 AM, said:

What problem are you having with you FX cpu? I have a quad core FX series... only cost me 109$.... it is the best CPU I've owned thus far, (because it is the most modern.) No issues here.

I Don't have the Fx chip series, nore do I want them. But click here and read up: https://www.google.c...s+game+issues and add any game to it you'll see that ALL Games Are Running Poorly on them compared to the Phenom II's.

P.S. I have one of the Best, still being made and selling AMD CPU's ever built, I Have This one: AMD Phenom™ II X4 965 Processor (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz

Edited by EternalCore, 28 November 2012 - 03:20 AM.

[Zero Neutral]

EternalCore, on 28 November 2012 - 03:18 AM, said:

I Don't have the Fx chip series, nore do I want them. But click here and read up: https://www.google.c...s+games+reviews and add any game to it you'll see that ALL Games Are Running Poorly on them compaired to the Phenom II's.

P.S. I have one of the Best AMD CPU's ever built, I Have This one: AMD Phenom™ II X4 965 Processor (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz

I guess that I am lucky and never have any issue with any game thus far...

I dunno it seems like the phenom is running older tech and worse specs than the FX 4100 that I have... Your chip consumes more power and has less cache *shrug.* I would recommend the FX to friends, since it is very inexpensive, fast, runs on AM3+, and overall gets the job done nicely.

My chip overclocked via motherboard to 3.9ghz and does not run very hot averaging about 55C. (Max recommended 83C)

AMD FX 4100 CPU

Edited by Zero Neutral, 28 November 2012 - 03:45 AM.

[Denimdemon]

EternalCore, on 28 November 2012 - 03:18 AM, said:

P.S. I have one of the Best, still being made and selling AMD CPU's ever built, I Have This one: AMD Phenom™ II X4 965 Processor (4 CPUs), ~3.4GHz

i completely agree with you, its a very solid proc. are you running it at stock frequencies or did you do some overclocking to it?
if yes i would be rely interested in your settings


Edit: just checked your signature, if its still current then nevermind

Edited by Denimdemon, 28 November 2012 - 03:58 AM.

[EternalCore]

Denimdemon, on 28 November 2012 - 03:56 AM, said:

i completely agree with you, its a very solid proc. are you running it at stock frequencies or did you do some overclocking to it?
if yes i would be rely interested in your settings


Edit: just checked your signature, if its still current then nevermind

I Just bumped it up, Using EazyTune6, again from Stock 3.4GHZ x17 to 3.7GHZ x18.5 to make match the speeds and power of my recently of my recently bought Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Ti OC'd Edition

Edit: Updated my Sig now too.

P.S. Any higher then x18.5 and the performance starts to become unstable.

Edited by EternalCore, 28 November 2012 - 04:44 AM.

[Apoc1138]

EternalCore, on 28 November 2012 - 04:25 AM, said:

I Just bumped it up, Using EazyTune6, again from Stock 3.4GHZ x17 to 3.7GHZ x18.5 to make match the speeds and power of my recently of my recently bought Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Ti OC'd Edition Edit: Updated my Sig now too. P.S. Any higher then x18.5 and the performance starts to become unstable.

I hope you mean the manual settings within easytune6 and not the auto settings... the auto on easytune and gigabyte motherboards has a tendency to overdo the core voltage and not adjust any other settings... if you are using auto then I seriously suggest you read some overclocking guides and do it manually... you will achieve much better overclocks with much lower voltages than easytune does

[EternalCore]

Apoc1138, on 28 November 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

I hope you mean the manual settings within easytune6 and not the auto settings... the auto on easytune and gigabyte motherboards has a tendency to overdo the core voltage and not adjust any other settings... if you are using auto then I seriously suggest you read some overclocking guides and do it manually... you will achieve much better overclocks with much lower voltages than easytune does

Yep Manual/Advanced settings heh ya I know Auto can also break your cpu....
Here's a Pic of it:


Also My temps don't go past 45c cause of my big airflow case and my big-*** cpu heatsink.

Edited by EternalCore, 28 November 2012 - 04:55 AM.

[Carlhosan]

AMD Athlon II x3 455 / HD5850 - Now i can play (all low - textures very high - 1920x1080).
Before 20 nov patch, i was playing all very high - Motion blur low.

Thanks.

[Roheryn]

Thank you for this. I was All settings High 1680X1050 before patch at ~50 FPS. After patch I was at 30 dipping to teens and singles while turning (regardless of graphics level I tried from very high to low and many different resolutions).

After setting the Multithreading to 8 in ATI tray tools I am back to ~45-50 FPS with the same settings as I had pre patch. You definately found the issue that was affecting me.

Now if you can just fix the game to actualy use my crossfire instead of me only running off of one 6770.

System specs for me

AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition
Dual 6770's
8 gigs of corsair

[EternalCore]

Roheryn, on 28 November 2012 - 07:41 AM, said:

Thank you for this. I was All settings High 1680X1050 before patch at ~50 FPS. After patch I was at 30 dipping to teens and singles while turning (regardless of graphics level I tried from very high to low and many different resolutions).

After setting the Multithreading to 8 in ATI tray tools I am back to ~45-50 FPS with the same settings as I had pre patch. You definately found the issue that was affecting me.

Now if you can just fix the game to actualy use my crossfire instead of me only running off of one 6770.

System specs for me

AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition
Dual 6770's
8 gigs of corsair

FYI: You only have a Quad Core CPU, so you should only be using 4 threads MAX as attempting to use more then 4 can cause you system to become unstable and crash or even worse BSOD.....

[OneManWar]

A lot of people are saying it's a dual core, you need a quad core. I upgraded to a new dual core i5 in September and I was getting 50-60 FPS in combat on high settings at 1920x1080. Now in combat I go from 12-18 FPS. It is definitely an issue with the November patches, I don't want to hear **** about "Well you need an i7 quad!" It ran amazingly fine in Spetember and October.

[EternalCore]

OneManWar, on 28 November 2012 - 07:50 AM, said:

A lot of people are saying it's a dual core, you need a quad core. I upgraded to a new dual core i5 in September and I was getting 50-60 FPS in combat on high settings at 1920x1080. Now in combat I go from 12-18 FPS. It is definitely an issue with the November patches, I don't want to hear **** about "Well you need an i7 quad!" It ran amazingly fine in Spetember and October.

Instead of complaining about it...Why don't you try the Fixes that are provided to you; Like the one on the 1st post of this thread!

P.S. A Quad-Core does make a world of Difference Because it's 2x the torque of a Dual-Core! And now a days you require Torque over speed!...

Edited by EternalCore, 28 November 2012 - 08:00 AM.

[Roheryn]

EternalCore, on 28 November 2012 - 07:47 AM, said:

FYI: You only have a Quad Core CPU, so you should only be using 4 threads MAX as attempting to use more then 4 can cause you system to become unstable and crash or even worse BSOD.....

Will do. I will report back if things get worse or better. Otherwise consider me mad grateful.