250 replies to this topic

[Sayeko]

This patch is even worse than the one before! Now its unplayable for me even at minimum settings (1280x1024 all minimum)
frame drops below 8 FPs while moving, 27+ when standing still.
Im going to deinstall MWO. this game is just frustrating.

Cure2Duo 3,15GHz, Ati 6950, Samsung SSD,

[Demonic]

PGI said perfomance is one of the most important things right now so they are working hard on it, well...
...first we had poor perfomance on dual cores, now, we have poor perfomance in quad cores as well...and every patch they release is perfomance killer, explain it to me plz.

I spent 600€ updating the computer and now I have the same problems, I understand that the game is in development, but I am disappointed, a lot.

Edited by Demonic, 30 November 2012 - 10:39 AM.

[Balls of Steele]

How had the patch generally affected your performance?

Performance is significantly more worse than last patch. Last patch was absolutely fine, I had very few problems except for some network issues. FPS is poor and changing system specification from very high to low made no perceivable difference. Performance is worst on Caustic Valley and both Forest Colony maps. It is slighty less bad on River City and is at the same level it was before the patch for Frozen City, strangely enough. Turning anti-alias off and other various settings does not help the issue.

Whether there are specific points in the game when your performance changes.

Whenever heavy fighting begins between multiple Mechs with multiple weapons being fired. There is freezing when moving at high speed too.

What are your video settings, did you change them since last patch?

1440X900 Resolution, Very High settings changed to Low and switched off Anti-Aliasing after performance issues started.

Average FPS ingame and in the menus for previous patch and latest patch (Press F9 to see your FPS)

FPS for previous patch and latest patch remains steady at 60 in menus. FPS ingame for the previous patch was around 60 (90 while sitting still), went down to something like 45-50 depending on intensity of the fight. FPS ingame for latest patch is around 40-30 and goes down to 10-15 during a fight. For Frozen City however it remains at 60 and goes down to 45-50 during a fight.

System specs

Spoiler

Intel Core i5-2400 @ 3.1GHz (never had the need to OC)
Nvidia Geforce GTX 460
8GB RAM
Windows 7 64bit

Your advertised internet connection speed / Geographic location

54 Mbps/Glasgow, Scotland

Best of luck getting all this sorted and don't pay any attention to all the whingy griefers on here, they're simply too stupid to understand this is a Beta.

Edited by Balls of Steele, 30 November 2012 - 10:42 AM.

[Marshael]

The FPS issue is the main one for me, I will not play period until this issue is fixed. I would love to be able to play the game I paid $60 for but you have broken the game with the last patch. Right now I am spending my gaming money on Planetside 2, its a fun game with lots of ways to play.

[Conraire]

Redshift2k5, on 30 November 2012 - 05:33 AM, said:

In particular, this game is stupidly stenuous on the CPU where other games are not; this is something being worked on

Not really, I watch CPU utilization and it never goes very high, not much above 30-40% on my Ph II x6 1090T. I could see it capping out a dual core, until the switch to DX10/11, but a quad, even an older one shouldn't have problems, especially on lower res or lower settings. I think the biggest problem with most of the maps, especially with forest colony and caustic are the terrain particles. Swaying tree's, leaves, fumarole vents, etc.

And to reply to someone else. The Core2 Duo didn't come out till 2006. Making them 6 years old at the oldest. Most people still using Core2 are either on quads or using the 45nm Penryn versions which came out in 07-08. If you make games and want them to be successful they need to run on a wide range of hardware. Meaning they need to support lower end systems to draw more people in. Sorry, games are not limited to only the 1337 few that can afford 1500+ for a new computer ever year. The problem is, CryEngine is one that tends to be very hard on any hardware, because of heavy use of physics, etc. The thing that confuses me, is I can play FarCry 1 and 2, and have no FPS issues, even maxed out, both of those games have higher detail on a lot of things that this does. I can even play Civ5 on max settings and it doesn't give me a problem.

And I think it was one of the Older SiSoft Sandra versions that had a hardware monitor console, at least on WinXP, that did a screen overlay on the right side. But not sure, I know I can't get the newest ones to do that.

Edited by Conraire, 30 November 2012 - 11:04 AM.

[Smokin Dragon]

average FPS in game after patch 10-15 in combat, 30 idle

average CPU temp in match - 90 C

downloaded fan speed control software - cranked fans to 100%

now average CPU temp - 85 C

average FPS in match 35-40
average fps in combat 15-25

seems to have been melting my CPU...

Intel Core 2 Quad CPU - Q6700@2.66GHz

its old, this might be my particular problem. If PGI are enabling lots of CPU heavy features, then my chances of playing this for another 3-4 years are out the window.

[cbo73]

Every update come from bad to more bad,on caustic valey y have all the time crash to desktop or no hud or yellow screen.Hope for the best.

[NomadicCanuck]

Q1. How has the patch generally affected your performance?
A1. It has made the frame rates volatile and has overall made them decline into an "unplayable" state.

Q2. Are there specific points where the frame rates change?
A2. Yes... but it's hard to tell when. After this patch, the frame rates are spiking and dropping very often. Mostly when there is movement; i.e. I move or I see something else move on the screen.

Q3. What is the average FPS in game and in the menu?
A3.
In the menu is around 60FPS in this patchand was about the same in the last patch.
In the game, it's hard to pick an average since it's all over the map, but I would say the range is from 7-17FPS in this patch where in the previous patch the range was about 14-25 in game.

Q4. What are your system specs?
A4. E8400@3.0GHz w/ 6GB DDR2 memory. ATI HD5770 video. All on Windows Vista.

Q5. Advertised internet connection and geography?
A6. 28Mbps / 1Mbps (down/up) in Ontario.

[MD9445]

Having a lot more video issues, and client crashing issues.

[Thorqemada]

It may be that people with an AMD FX Vishera/Pildedriver CP'U have a more smooth performance not using the Win7-Bulldozer patches as to me it works that way that my system runs better, smoother using the FX 8350 without them.

[RonanFrost]

Child3k, on 30 November 2012 - 06:29 AM, said:

I do understand your point.

But ... the performance of this game contradicts everything that's been happening in the last couple of years in the gaming world when it comes to performance. Somehow MWO manages to run a lot worse than any comparable game - be it dual cores or quads. Games like Far Cry 3, Crysis 2 (same engine) or ones like Assassins Creed 3 and the new Hitman - all those look a lot better than MWO and at the same time deliver a lot more fps.

Are you really comparing the load of a beta to finished games? This is your first beta test, isn't it? Beta code is Always more intensive. FireFall used to KILL my computer, in terms of processor load. Now, a few iterations later, I can play the game with this rig just fine. We're here to help the devs see what happens on a broader sample of machinery than they can put together in their own labs. Unfortunate truth.

All that said, please PGI, It's been 4 days, and I'm already having withdrawl symptoms. The shakes are killing me here.
...on a more serious note, any word of any kind would be nice.

[WM Doddster Vajda]

With this last patch I am seeing a drop in FPS in game. Dropped from 22-30 fps down to 5-17 fps. My guess is the new camo paint schemes are doing it since it would mean more for my system to render. The game plays more like a fast slide show than a smooth action game.

Has the game been optimized for video yet? I still only show DX9 as the option.

My system is older. AN AMD Athlon 64+ dual core, 8 gigs ram, SB X-fi sound card and an Nvidia gt 430 video card. All settings on low. Been that way since I started playing.

[Tethyss]

I've 'disconnected' twice now, once the client hung up and once just a black screen after I clicked Launch. Never had that happen before.

And of course, video is grainy and, gets way too dark when you're being hit a lot.

[MorbidGamer]

Specs...

CPU: 2600k @ 4.2 GHz
RAM: 16 GB 1866 MHz @ 1333 MHz 7-7-7-20 1T
GPU: GTX 690 @ 135% Power, 150 MHz Core and 500 MHz Memory.
PSU: 860 Watts Platinum
Mobo: Z68XP-UD3P
SSD: 240 GB Intel 520

C states disabled, EIST disabled, HPET disabled... In bios.

System info.







Game runs like poop... Audio pops and cracks, frame rate from 20's-60 (max settings in game). Frame drops constant and stuttering.

No DPC issues. This is running MWO.



Processor nice and cool. Fresh MWO run.



GPU usage... Fresh MWO run.




Drivers are all up todate.

[iller]

• patch affected your performance: WORSE (Choppy FPS & UNPLAYABLE now)
  
• specific points performance changes: Everywhere, esp at startup.
  
• video settings: LOW/1024x768 -- No change
  
• Average FPS ingame: 20(combat)/40(startup)/60(menu) Previously -- 8/24/63 now.
  
• System specs: http://home.comcast....peccy_iller.txt
  
• connection / location: Cable / CO, usa

[Imp Mcsmackens]

Getting really tired of the random matches with the fps bug. frames around 4-8, smoke puffs/explosions replaced with huge block textures. Seems more frequent since last patch.

[Dagger6T6]

please for the love of all that is holy and mechanical... optimize something... anything... the HUD... whatever... so we can get just another 15 fps out this to actually be able to play on the next patch

please! i promise never to use a StreakCat ever again if you do

[voltron1984]

This patch blows worse than the last one. More CTD's slightly lower FPS and yes I've tried playing it on all sorts of settings... The ironic thing is - pre 11/20 my game ran GREAT and all my friends/teammates crashed... Now its REVERSED and my system is WAY better than the crappy laptop my buddy plays on... FIX THE CTD ISSUES.

[yashmack]

MorbidGamer, on 30 November 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

Specs...

CPU: 2600k @ 4.2 GHz
RAM: 16 GB 1866 MHz @ 1333 MHz 7-7-7-20 1T
GPU: GTX 690 @ 135% Power, 150 MHz Core and 500 MHz Memory.
PSU: 860 Watts Platinum
Mobo: Z68XP-UD3P
SSD: 240 GB Intel 520

~TRUNCATED for space...

interesting that a core i7 has the exact same issues as my core 2 duo

I submitted a ticket for the poor performance and was told they beleive the issue is somewhere int he code and that they think they have found it and are working on nailing down and getting rid of the problem

The core 2 series chips are old and near the end of their useful life but I guarantee there is another year or more of gaming available to these chips on low to medium settings...
The performance issues making the game near unplayable are not the result of old hardware, they are the result of bad code and old hardware
fix the code and it can run on the old hardware
PGI has even stated that dual core systems are their minimum spec and should be able to run at 30fps

Edited by yashmack, 30 November 2012 - 07:43 PM.

[Carmaga]

To update my previous posts:

Spoiler

First post (overall performance)
Second post (observations +videos)

With some luck I got my hands on Q9550 cpu. Running it @default 2.83ghz with the same system configuration I had. The performance difference compared to Core 2 Duo E8500 is phenomenal. I went in-to game just to notice the performance difference and that I have lost my touch with MWO gameplay. Been away for so long time due the performance issues.

With Q9550 game doesn't stutter any-more while pressing a key on your keyboard. Playback is smooth with average fps of 30. Here's the benchmark:
2012-11-30 20:56:05 - MWOClient Frozen City Night
1280x1024 (v-sync off, motion blur: off, AA: off, PP: very high, other settings: high)
Frames: 12092 - Time: 381219ms - Avg: 31.719 - Min: 17 - Max: 66

Sound cracking an popping is nearly absent - but they are still there. Disabling Betty does not affect it much. Running the game in windows gives more smoother playback compared to full screen. And changing in-game settings do not affect much for fps (average frame rates shift only by 2-5 frames per second).

At this state - the game isn't compatible with Core2Duo machines - at least It's not compatible with my C2D system. And I feel sad when I have return the Q9550 back to it's rightful owner. I might buy one for myself (cheaper than to buy a new rig and go through the installation hassle), thought now-days Q9550 cpu's are relatively hard to find. You can't purchase them from a market so you need to hunt a used one. There are plenty Q6600 available, but Q9550 with 12 MB L2 cache and OC capabilities nearly to 4.0ghz (google) feels more attractive.

Yes, the game is playable (1.1.155 patch) with LGA 775 systems that do have QuadCore processor. The minimum system requirements announced by developers are at the moment incorrect. But hopefully it will change in the near future. Lets all wish that they give us a performance-boost for X-mas =^.^=

Edited by Carmaga, 30 November 2012 - 09:08 PM.