1.31 perfomance

[thales66]

I have upgraded my pc to 4gigs ram and see some improvement. However, its not quite as good as I want it to be. I meet all the recommended specs now and am a little puzzled as to why I still can't run the game at even the lowest setting and get at least 25fps. Is the game's performance expected to improve by launch? Or are the recommended specs a little below best performance?

[gtanner]

I have upgraded my pc to 4gigs ram and see some improvement. However' date=' its not quite as good as I want it to be. I meet all the recommended specs now and am a little puzzled as to why I still can't run the game at even the lowest setting and get at least 25fps. Is the game's performance expected to improve by launch? Or are the recommended specs a little below best performance?[/quote']

There are still many performances enhancments to come apparently.

[Fallsjgr]

That's odd; I'm running a 1.86 intel duo core with 3 gigs of ram and am getting 35-45 fps+ with the offline beta. Also using windows Xp and a nvidia 9800gt. This is with the settings the offline started with; I havent changed the settings except to try it with no clutter but switched clutter back on cuz it looks so good. Still getting 35-45 fps.

-Fallsjager

Edited December 29, 2009 by fallsjager

[blipoop]

I have upgraded my pc to 4gigs ram and see some improvement. However' date=' its not quite as good as I want it to be. I meet all the recommended specs now and am a little puzzled as to why I still can't run the game at even the lowest setting and get at least 25fps. Is the game's performance expected to improve by launch? Or are the recommended specs a little below best performance?[/quote']

can you post your dxdiag? sounds like theres a bottleneck in your system, either hardware or software.

[twig]

There are still many performances enhancments to come apparently.

I sure hope there is. Remember, this Unity Graphics Engine re-write was supposed to resolve the stuttering and low frame rate problems that we have all been putting up with from day one. Ragdoll physics, weather, re-worked buildings, pretty trees and grass mean nothing if the performance issues are not resolved. Again, this was suppose to be the patch that "Fixes Performance." I hope that has not been forgotten.

If the current school of thought is that the peformance will be on par with 1.30x, but with better eye candy, then the promise has already been broken.

Regards,

Twig

[Bacon55]

I sure hope there is. Remember, this Unity Graphics Engine re-write was supposed to resolve the stuttering and low frame rate problems that we have all been putting up with from day one. Ragdoll physics, weather, re-worked buildings, pretty trees and grass mean nothing if the performance issues are not resolved. Again, this was suppose to be the patch that "Fixes Performance." I hope that has not been forgotten.

If the current school of thought is that the peformance will be on par with 1.30x, but with better eye candy, then the promise has already been broken.

Regards,

Twig

It is still a beta client.

[twig]

It is still a beta client.

You're right. There is still a lot of time to address issues. Guess I'm just a little nervous, it's been a long road.

Regards,

Twig

[xanthus]

Additional RAM doesn't improve your raw FPS; anything above 2 gigs has a marginal benefit in terms of load times and stutters, especially if texture load is high.

The actual "engines" running the game are your CPU and Video card; raw fps is directly related to how powerful they are.

If the current school of thought is that the peformance will be on par with 1.30x' date=' but with better eye candy, then the promise has already been broken.[/quote']

Wait a second....how exactly would that be possible???

Are you saying you REALLY think that you could have additional eye candy, entire cities like Antwerp filled with new buildings, and that it would be FREE; it would cost no fps?? Even if the Rats had a game engine with a multi-million dollar budget, there isn't one game on the planet that has a menu option for better graphics with no loss in framerate.

Besides, who ever said "performance will be on par with 1.30x, but with better eye candy"?

Extra eye-candy in 1.31 will cost FPS, I'm 100% absolutely positively certain of that (I wouldn't believe otherwise even if Jesus told me so); the only question is how much fps will it cost? Hopefully not much.

Edited December 30, 2009 by xanthus

[colkurts]

It is possible in some cases to get better eye candy and better performance. In those cases the game prior to the patched state was not correctly optimized. Some flaws or over sites in the programming. If they are found and fixed, it is possible, though marginally, to have an increase in visuals and performance.

To me though, performance is part of visuals. IF you running 15fps, the visuals will look like crap regardless.

[twig]

Additional RAM doesn't improve your raw FPS; anything above 2 gigs has a marginal benefit in terms of load times and stutters, especially if texture load is high.

The actual "engines" running the game are your CPU and Video card; raw fps is directly related to how powerful they are.

Wait a second....how exactly would that be possible???

Are you saying you REALLY think that you could have additional eye candy, entire cities like Antwerp filled with new buildings, and that it would be FREE; it would cost no fps??

Well, yes and no. How's that for an answer? It's a bit of a balancing act. They re-wrote the graphics engine, which has coding optimized to take advantage of newer hardware and I'm assuming incorporates efficiency improvements in the way overall graphics are rendered. Based on that increased efficiency, without adding any additional eye candy, you would expect the performance to increase. Now, you add the new eye candy into the mix and as you pointed out, it comes at a cost. So it comes down to a cost/benefit decision. How much do you put in? At what point does the performance suffer too much? Has the stutters and sudden FPS drops been fixed?

For the record, if the average FPS in this game was only 35 but was consistent across the board, that would be great!. The peformance issues that I'm referring to have to do with the stutter/FPS dips when flying and even infantry has been affected. I know a lot of pilots who quit flying and others who are taking a break from the game totally, waiting for this to be fixed.

Besides, who ever said "performance will be on par with 1.30x, but with better eye candy"?

I believe there was a similar quote in one of the recent production updates. I will try to find it for reference. However, I did use the word "If" at the beginning of my statement.

Regards,

Twig

[thales66]

can you post your dxdiag? sounds like theres a bottleneck in your system' date=' either hardware or software.[/quote']

Bud I appreciate it, but I'm a total noob on this kind of stuff. I looked up dxdiag, but I couldn't find out how to perform the diagnostic.

[thales66]

That's odd; I'm running a 1.86 intel duo core with 3 gigs of ram and am getting 35-45 fps+ with the offline beta. Also using windows Xp and a nvidia 9800gt. This is with the settings the offline started with; I havent changed the settings except to try it with no clutter but switched clutter back on cuz it looks so good. Still getting 35-45 fps.

-Fallsjager

Yeah my specs are a little better than that. I wouldn't be surprised if I'm doing something wrong. May try to clean my system up a bit. Well, on the good side 1.30 is running like a champ, lol!

[GrAnit]

Just upgraded to a AMD 955, new MB, 4 gigs of DDR3 1333 ram with a 9800GTX plus (previous card).

What worried me is that when I spawn in Antwerp AF base and look around, I am only getting ~25 FPS!

Performance needs to be inproved at least 2x from beta or the patch will flop.

[blipoop]

Bud I appreciate it' date=' but I'm a total noob on this kind of stuff. I looked up dxdiag, but I couldn't find out how to perform the diagnostic.[/quote']

im guessing your using XP?

Start>Run>Type dxdiag>ok>Save All Information>Save it to your desktop or somehwere easily accesible>That creates a notepad file>then just copy and paste to the forums.

Edited December 31, 2009 by blipoop

[flinflon]

I believe there was a similar quote in one of the recent production updates. I will try to find it for reference. However, I did use the word "If" at the beginning of my statement.

Regards,

Twig

Being an avid reader of the mailbag and the forums, I agree that this was a definite message coming out of CRS that several of the legacy issues sucking down FPS were being fixed. I think Ahwulf (and Rafter?) were working on this and talked about it in the forums.

[majhavoc]

the clone tool and stuff will cause a 25% decrease inperformance

[AHWULF]

We aren't done by any stretch with performance. In fact a week before beta everyone in the office was getting 7fps in Antwerp.

A lot of things have changed enginewise, but we also added a ton of new stuff, so it will take a bit to balance things.

[Hinfoos]

We aren't done by any stretch with performance. In fact a week before beta everyone in the office was getting 7fps in Antwerp.

ouch