So after trying to figure out what is causing such horrid performance on my machine, I've narrowed it down to CPU usage. The game only utilizes one core of my i7 and even then only uses that core up to 50% load. Anyone know how to address this?
LordCrash you`re lucky!!-) What specs do you have? I bought GTX 750 2Gb with latest drivers,and have 15-20-Fps,in the best cases I have 25-30 FPS,running on the Ultra...
Last edited by James 540; 01/07/1411:22 PM.
Experience is a hard master but a good teacher-Proverb of RPG player (c)
OP there is something going on with yours. On my i7 it uses most cores/threads and if I force it to one it will use 100% with no FPS loss. Here is a little video, may help you/others to compare...
Please email supportdos@larian.com, with a description of the problem and the report.zip file generated by the D:OS support tool (for the PC version). The report.zip file includes your saves, in addition to system and game info, which are not directly relevant to the performance problem, so most/all can be deleted to reduce the file size.
So after trying to figure out what is causing such horrid performance on my machine, I've narrowed it down to CPU usage. The game only utilizes one core of my i7 and even then only uses that core up to 50% load. Anyone know how to address this?
If it's only using 50% of a single CPU core, then that means the CPU is not the bottleneck - in most such situations the GPU would be holding things back and the workaround would be lowering graphics settings (or overclocking/replacing the GPU).
However the current game release still has logging and debugging code present (as evidenced by the number of logfiles) so it's a fair bet to say that once most bugs and system compatibility issues are fixed, that this will go and performance will improve.
If you had a single core running at 100%, then that would suggest a problem - if all other games were affected similarly, then something like a poorly written Explorer plugin could be at fault. 50% though suggests the problem lies elsewhere.
(for the record, I'm seeing multiple core usage on an i7, but framerates in the 25-30 range with dual 580GTXs - only one of the GPUs seems to be used but for now, I'm attributing this to "early build blues").
Intel Core i7-3770 4x 3.40GHz GeForce GTX 660 OC 2GB 16 GB RAM Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit
Am using older drivers 335.23 (due to a glitch playing wildstar and this driver fixed the issue) Am running at 1600 x 900 (60HZ) Getting 100 FPS Full Screen(capped it at 100 via Afterburner) in the first town you come across. Card running at 41% usage running game in ULTRA
and like Horrorscope my i7 is using most of it's cores/threads.
Did try and take a screenshot of the FPS but for some reason it doesn't work,just comes out black.
LordCrash you`re lucky!!-) What specs do you have? I bought GTX 750 2Gb with latest drivers,and have 15-20-Fps,in the best cases I have 25-30 FPS,running on the Ultra...
The game is not multi-core/thread optimized at all. The whole game runs almost completely on only one core. Only my third core has an average load of 20%, six threads of my Xeon are more or less unused. The first core - the only one really used - must put out all the performance which leads to a CPU load that fluctuates between 70% and almost 100%. That's not really state-of-the-art hardware/CPU usage, Larian...
Depending on scenery my GPU usage goes up to 95%.
The game uses about 4GB of my RAM and it only uses 0.5GB of my VRAM. I wish Larian would add some high-res textures to the game...
In most areas the game runs at more or less stable 60FPS for me with maxed-out settings. But some areas (for example north of Cyseal) seem to be pretty hardware hungry and my framerate gets huge hits there from time to time...
The game is not multi-core/thread optimized at all. The whole game runs almost completely on only one core...
That is how well most games (and programs generally) work. Only a few specific tasks benefit from massively parallel processing and while most other can benefit from some parallelisation, gains tend to be smaller due to resource conflicts.
Developers should focus on getting code right, fixing bugs and dealing with compatibility issues - performance and multi-core usage should be left till later.
The game is not multi-core/thread optimized at all. The whole game runs almost completely on only one core...
That is how well most games (and programs generally) work. Only a few specific tasks benefit from massively parallel processing and while most other can benefit from some parallelisation, gains tend to be smaller due to resource conflicts.
Developers should focus on getting code right, fixing bugs and dealing with compatibility issues - performance and multi-core usage should be left till later.
Ahem, no, I disagree.
If the CPU is at 100% load in some sceneries and causes FPS/performances issues because the engine refuses to use at least two or four threads/cores properly then the optimization of the engine just sucks and that's not acceptable imo. That's also not a "minor" issue nowadays but something you would expect on PC in 2014...
Most modern games use at least 4 cores and support decent multicore optimization. Unreal Engine does. Cryengine does. Frostbyte does. Anvil Engine does. Even Unity does. Should say enough...
The game is not multi-core/thread optimized at all. The whole game runs almost completely on only one core...
That is how well most games (and programs generally) work. Only a few specific tasks benefit from massively parallel processing and while most other can benefit from some parallelisation, gains tend to be smaller due to resource conflicts.
Developers should focus on getting code right, fixing bugs and dealing with compatibility issues - performance and multi-core usage should be left till later.
While I agree in terms of primacy for everyone, bugs and game breaking stuff needs to be fixed first, performance is as important to the experience. I dunno if I'm spoiled by other games but I know my standards are high FPS, especially for an isometric RPG such as this which doesn't appear to be that intensive. I don't know if it was meant to be, but I'm pretty sure my computer should be able to handle it. If I had my computer from 2 years ago playing this game at 20fps then I'd be fine. I'm spoiled now by the 45-60fps I have in all my other games and playing at lower than 30fps aggravates the hell out of me to the point of me not even wanting to play it anymore. Maybe it's just me but I hope that Larian addresses optimization for everyone asap.
It runs for me at 60FPS most time (~90%). But in some regions the framerates seems to suffer...
Are you running the game from an HDD? Maybe it is a streaming issue.
Yeah, normal HDD. But I can't really believe that data streamin is the problem. The game only uses 500MB of VRAM. It's not like there were tons of data to be streamed...
And I can run other, much more graphics intensive games without any streaming issues.
It runs for me at 60FPS most time (~90%). But in some regions the framerates seems to suffer...
Are you running the game from an HDD? Maybe it is a streaming issue.
Yeah, normal HDD. But I can't really believe that data streamin is the problem. The game only uses 500MB of VRAM. It's not like there were tons of data to be streamed...
And I can run other, much more graphics intensive games without any streaming issues.
I agree. Things aren't that big to warrant needing SSDs. Maybe you can say this may be an issue 5-8 years from now where games become massive. HDDs are perfectly fine still. If anything SSDs just make load times faster for what I can tell and that's not an issue for me. Load times are fast.
Just checked, the game only uses 600MB VRAM, which isn't very much. I guess you are right, it probably isn't a streaming issue.
BTW, I am running the game in "Fake Fullscreen" mode. Try it, maybe it will solve your problems.
I've fiddled around with all the possible combinations of display settings. That actually makes it worse for me, shedding 5-6 fps instead of increasing them. Other than lowering resolution to 1280x720 for frames, I don't know as 1600x900 isn't on the list for me if I want to get frames. Unfortunately 1280x720 looks like crap on a 1920x1080 screen lol. Playing it windowed makes it too small/frames are back to what they were at 1920x1080 so it wouldn't make sense for me to do so.
