458 replies to this topic

[Freeride Forever]

My specs are in my sig, so it obviously doesn't apply to me. The game plays OK on my system, but it is definitely pi$$ poor for how it looks & the amount of work that needs to be done compared to so many other, better games.

How did you figure this out? Maybe PGI should hire you to fix the problems they don't seem to be able to?

[EternalCore]

Freeride Forever, on 26 November 2012 - 09:49 AM, said:

My specs are in my sig, so it obviously doesn't apply to me. The game plays OK on my system, but it is definitely pi$$ poor for how it looks & the amount of work that needs to be done compared to so many other, better games.

How did you figure this out? Maybe PGI should hire you to fix the problems they don't seem to be able to?

I Figured it out by troubleshooting every Possible Cause and crossing things off one by one until I found the root cause. It's way Too many steps and too technical to explain it all though.

Psss..I'm a Computer Whisperer.

Edited by EternalCore, 26 November 2012 - 10:07 AM.

[MavRCK]

Tested.

Worked for me - especially smoothed out forest colony for me - 29fps to 40 fps.

Thank you.

Q6600 at 3.1gig
4 gig DDR2 memory
460GTX 1gig with latest drivers - DX11
Windows 7

[Herr Vorragend]

Hi all,

i´ve maybe found the reason, why the performance on my computer went down so much. Before the latest patch was released I decided to reinstall the game on my second harddisk (not the boot-disk).

I don´t know, wether my bootdisk has more cache or something like that, but after reinstalling MWO onto my primary HD it runs a little smoother. I didn´t suffer from overall bad fps, but increased fps drops. It felt like the puter had to load something from disk...

I just played one single game (forest colony) and it was much smoother. I´ll test on and keep you guys informed



Edit: okay, the fps still could be better, but those drops might have come from that HD-caching. I´m still not sure. Played a second map (city) and things ran definitly better. At least I got the same setup again like playing MWO for the first time. But still i´m lacking some fps that I had before the last couple of patches.

Edited by Herr Vorragend, 26 November 2012 - 10:48 AM.

[Gun Tuv]

Sorry to say my game remains unplayable even with updated nvidea drivers and the threading set from auto to on. It ran smoothly before the 20th (well Forrest Colony was aways a touch choppy but not unplayably so).

Win7 64bit
Core2Duo E8400 @ 3.00GHz
4gb RAM
Geforce 650ti

[Coolant]

I knew about it awhile ago, changed it and it didn't make much of a difference if at all...i've kept it there for weeks...still get a range of 16-50 FPS depending on map...

Nvidia Geoforce 550TI 1 GB
AMD Quad core

[T a z z]

Change made no difference on my system. I didn't expect a huge difference, but I figured more info might be helpful.

Loki
Asus P8Z68 Gen3 Mobo
Intel 2500k OC @ 5.0ghz (1.38v)
8gb DDR3 1333 (9-9-9-24@ 666MHz)
Corsair Force GT (SATA III) SSD
Nvidia GTX 570
Creative Audigy SE

Edited by T a z z, 26 November 2012 - 11:19 AM.

[RiceyFighter]

Fixed help, but now the game stutters every 2 minutes. Get 35 fps then go to 10 for like 30 second.

I7 2670QM
8GB of 1600Mhz Ram
GT 555m Nvidia

Edited by RiceyFighter, 26 November 2012 - 11:58 AM.

[WithSilentWings]

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...

Why do you have to "switch" rather than just getting what's good at the time? It's like you're saying you NEED to be a fanboy of one side or the other.

AMD will always at least be competitive from a price perspective on the low-end. It's hard to imagine them catching up to Intel ever again at this point which is extremely unfortunate. Talking CPUs here exclusively.

For GPUs AMD's drivers are excellent and their GPUs are excellent. nVidia and AMD appear to be fighting back and forth about who can write the worse software

[silentD11]

Relic1701, on 26 November 2012 - 09:38 AM, said:

No appreciable difference to be honest

Will carry on using it to see if things sort of equal out over time (i.e. get more than a few games in)

System:

• AMD Athlon II x4 @ 3.0 Ghz (4 cores)
  
• GeForce 660 GTX 2gb
  
• 8gb Ram
  
• Windows 7 64 bit

When I posted these specs back in CB, somebody pointed out that my CPU was a bottleneck, something to do with the cache, no idea what that means, I'm a truck driver not a computer programmer or engineer (unlike the rest of the forum dwellers it seems! )


Like yourself, plan on upgrading to Intel later in the year...think an i7 should see me through a few years .

You could use to upgrade your CPU as quadcore AMD isn't all that much anymore, but don't expect miracles. The Athalon x4 variants have lower cache than the Phenom II x4.

I play with people on LAN at home and the PC's all have 8-32 gb memory and range from older AMD Phenom II x4 procs all the way up to fairly new skt 1155 2600k and skt 2011 systems. They have all suffered from frame rate issues at various points in the beta. So called "performance tweaks" don't really change anything. Worse yet any large new patch runs the chance of completely screwing things up and driving FPS into the single number range unless I uninstall the client and nvidia driver completely and then reinstall it.

I can tell you that while my skt 2011 system that sports an octacore xeon and 32gb ram with 470 SLI often has better baseline performance than an old Phenom II x4 940 BE system with 8gb ram and 470 SLI it's just as prone to frame rate issues post patching. Both of them plummet on forest colony, and both of them will crap out to single FPS at times. Those systems are the two largest gaps I have, but the mid range ones also have problems.

You should upgrade, you need to. Just be aware that no amount of hardware you throw at this is going to change the fact that some things just seem to be buggy, and the fixes are random. It may help you now, and then that fix may not work at all once the next patch comes out.

[Sorho]

I usually get pretty good performance, but i'm going to check this out to see if it squeezes out a few more fps.

[AvatarofWhat]

no FPS increase, but less dips in fps. +1

[TheUnderking]

This worked for me. GJ original poster!

[Vlad Ward]

i7-930 Bloomfield, unlocked multiplier @ 2.93Ghz hyperthreaded
ATI HD5750, most likely slightly above stock settings (I can't remember what stock was on this card)
6GB Triple Channel RAM @ 1333Mhz (gotta love those LGA1366 boards)
Catalyst 12.1, 1360x768 full window

30~40 FPS on low settings with very high textures, ~50 FPS on full low settings

No discernible changes after enabling multi-thread support.

Will be upgrading to an HD6870 in a couple of days, so I can test that out as well.

[Daimonos]

Works for me - thank you, After two games, one on caustic, one in frozen city, I think I'm getting at least another 5fps as a result; maybe a few more.

Quad Core i5 750@2.67GHz, 4Gb RAM, GeForce GTX 260.

[OneManWar]

Well, got home, treid it, and these settings make me go from 60fps to about 35-30 so it's a definite improvement compared to 10-15 fps in firefights. Good stuff brother!

[yashmack]

this still doesnt work for me
I uninstalled beta drivers and used most recent WHQL driver
switched on the threading setting and still get in the teens for FPS

specs:
core 2 duo E8400 @ 3.0 GHz
8GB DDR 2
Raptor SATA HDD
Geforce GTS 250

I see you telling others with similar specs they need to upgrade
Have you read the minimum system requirements?
my PC exceeds minimum requirements so I shouldnt be at 9 to 19 FPS in the game
I can play Skyrim on high settings as well as Portal 2 and star trek online
I can also Play Aion Online at full settings, I should be able to play this game on freakin low

there is something jacked up since last patch and I hope they fix it

besides that the developers have said that the core 2 duo and dual core crowd are one of their top concerns, they are going to make sure that those with dual cores can play the game
not everyone can drop 500 bucks on new hardware, especially when my hardware is still relevant and should be for another couple years

[silentD11]

yashmack, on 26 November 2012 - 03:52 PM, said:

this still doesnt work for me
I uninstalled beta drivers and used most recent WHQL driver
switched on the threading setting and still get in the teens for FPS

specs:
core 2 duo E8400 @ 3.0 GHz
8GB DDR 2
Raptor SATA HDD
Geforce GTS 250

I see you telling others with similar specs they need to upgrade
Have you read the minimum system requirements?
my PC exceeds minimum requirements so I shouldnt be at 9 to 19 FPS in the game
I can play Skyrim on high settings as well as Portal 2 and star trek online
I can also Play Aion Online at full settings, I should be able to play this game on freakin low

there is something jacked up since last patch and I hope they fix it

besides that the developers have said that the core 2 duo and dual core crowd are one of their top concerns, they are going to make sure that those with dual cores can play the game
not everyone can drop 500 bucks on new hardware, especially when my hardware is still relevant and should be for another couple years

You don't understand what "minimum" requirements often mean. Any time you see "minimum" you should think "will run like a ******* single digit slide show at all low details and 480p" because that's what it has often meant. It'll start the program and get into a game with those parts at all low details, but you aren't getting more than 5fps, but it will start. I'd actually say 19 fps is high for being around min specs on the CPU, generous even. Read the minimum specs for Windows for a laugh... that means it will boot... eventually, not that you can actually do anything in Windows or you can even run all the services for it. Click IE and go to lunch, it might be up when you get back.

It needs a quadcore. The games you listed use much older engines. Sorry but any sort of AMD Athalon 64 x2 or core 2 duo is beyond ancient right now.

Also your GTS 250 card is the same GPU as a 9800gt and 8800gts, nvidia just kept reselling them and changing the name. So it does not have the proper performance of a 260/280/285 geforce era card, it still has 8800 geforce performance and is the same card just rebadged (some of them they didn't even bother with that LOL) That's minimum spec here, so you have a minimum level GPU.

Edited by silentD11, 26 November 2012 - 04:38 PM.

[Runz]

Improved my framerate by about 5fps (was at 12fps now at 17fps).

Running on a Sony Vaio gaming laptop with an Intel i7 Core, 8gb Ram and a nVidia GeForce GT 330M

PS and before anyone mentions that this is less than ideal, I know but I travel a lot so need mah laptop and I lost my man cave to my second child so no desktop for me. I'm merely posting so the OP knows the result for his own data collation.

Edited by Runz, 26 November 2012 - 04:36 PM.

[TehArgz]

Effect, if any, was not noticable. Forest colony is still almost unplayable.
You don't need to tell me my system specs are low, I know. These specs are supposed to be playable, I would like more ram to be fair to my system; but for the most part it is quite playable. I have tweaked my system somewhat to get the most out of it, and it has performed a quite a bit better earlier in the beta.

GeForce GTX460
Core2Duo E8500 oc'd@ 3.7g
4g ram
Win7 64
1600 x 900 windowed