20 - 30 FPS with EVERYTHING on low.

[Veniathan]

According to the steam store the minimum requriments are barely that hard to get. So i taught to myself ill get this after Ostfront because i honestly LOVE tripwire. And i always have.

I read the minimum requirements ofcourse. And my computer passes them quite a fair bit. Now that means i would be able to run the game on the lowest settings with atleast 50 - 60 FPS or sometimes above.

However this is obvious bull****, As its not true. I have lowered my resolution and EVERYTHING completely to the lowest, The game looks like something from the 80's. But guess what. Still lagging, I even edited the ROengine.ini to literaly disable any graphical thing that takes up usage.

The game looks like utter ****, Im not even joking. And i still can't run it. Ill post specs below


AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 6200+ (2 CPUs), 2.83 GHz
Nvidia 9800 GT with 512 MB
4GB of RAM

I have my drivers updated to the latest, I installed all the drivers after first trying out RO2.

My normal temperatures for the specs are between 25 - 35 Celsius, In rare occasions it goes up to 40 or slightly above.

So, EXPLAIN why i can't run this on low without 30+ FPS?

 

[Krazyxazn]

Seems one of those rare issues. However you are using an old old dual core, its not like your using a more modern Intel C2D or AMD Phenom II X2, even these dual cores are kinda old.

I've tested my rig with a stock Q6600 (quad core) and a spare Nvidia 9600GT (similar video card to yours) and I get 40 fps playing 1920x1200 @ medium.

CPU can make a big difference, especially with how old your is, even if its a dual core. Pentium 4 Duo are dual core, but I sure as hell wouldn't consider them as the minimum requirement.

 

[Razorman01]

Your specs are low to mid range (barely mid range).

 

[YUNOSTOPQQ]

I am having the same issue with Asus g73 laptop.

Basic Specs:
HD 5870 Mobility 1GB
i7-720QM 1.6ghz ( 2.8 in turbo )
8gb RAM ( DDR3 1066/1333 MHz )
Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit

Medium ( recommended by the game ) I get 25-30 fps on Barracks. On lowest I get 30-35 fps. Any suggestions?

 

[PUTZ]

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 6200+ (2 CPUs), 2.83 GHz
Nvidia 9800 GT with 512 MB
4GB of RAM

So, EXPLAIN why i can't run this on low without 30+ FPS?

A 9800GT is no better than a 7800GTX. We have a 9800GT 512mb here in the office, and it can run the game, on low, just a bit better, because it has a Core 2 Duo @ 2.4ghz.

A modern cpu would be a HUGE boost to your graphics quality.

What is your OS?

 

[psycho78]

same here. with the new patch i get 15 fps avg... sometimes 5 if artillery is dropping with EVERYTHING on low.


2.4 ghz amd triple core.
hd 5770
6gb ram

i mean my computer doesnt suck. I should be getting atleast avg of 40 or 30 right?

 

[Veniathan]

I dont think you people are fully aware of my situation.

Im saying that, MY COMPUTER meets the MINIMUM requirements. Thus i WOULD be allowed to run EVERYTHING on low. I dont even need anything on medium. I always take FPS over graphics.

But even though the requirements say one thing, It doesnt work as it should. I hope this is all clear now.


My OS is: Windows Vista Ultimate 64 Bit.


Inb4 you guys flame Vista as if it is 2007.

 

[PUTZ]

You are expecting too much from your old hardware. 60fps on your hardware on a server with more than a few people isn't really possible, even on low. .

And we do understand where you are coming from. We are trying to make even more optimizations, but there's only so far we can go.

 

[SolitarioSoldat]

I dont think you people are fully aware of my situation.

Im saying that, MY COMPUTER meets the MINIMUM requirements. Thus i WOULD be allowed to run EVERYTHING on low. I dont even need anything on medium. I always take FPS over graphics.

But even though the requirements say one thing, It doesnt work as it should. I hope this is all clear now.


My OS is: Windows Vista Ultimate 64 Bit.


Inb4 you guys flame Vista as if it is 2007.

I know that feeling,but tell me if this make sence to you and look at my sig for my PC specs....

Ultra= 25-50FPS
High= 25-50FPS
Medium= 25-50FPS
LOW= 15-25FPS (ummm WTF? )

On any settings game is struggling,but on lowest it lags like its running but have a bubble gum stuck under the shoes

 

[psycho78]

^they already said crossfire/sli doesnt work very well yet.

 

[Sheps]

I wouldn't mind so much if my FPS was steady. But having your FPS continually go from 20-30 and dip into to 11-15 isn't great.

I've said it before but as a gamer with a mid range rig it feels like RO2 is catered towards high end machines and anyone slightly behind the technological curve might as well bugger off.

Yeah maybe we expect too much from our rigs, but the game needs to be optimized to a higher extent.

 

[Fisher]

I have:
Processor: AMD Phenom II X6 1075T Processor 3 GHz
RAM: 4GB
System type: Windows 7 64 bit
Case: Cooler Master Elite 430
PSU: OCZ StealthXstreamII 500
GPU: MSI ATI Radeon HD 6950 OC Twin FrozR III Power Edition 2048MB GDDR5 PCI-Express
Motherboard: ASRock M3A770DE AM3

Not too shabby, should be able to max it. However, with settings on lowest I still only get 20-30 fps and when people start shooting or artillery drops I get roughly 3 secs between frames!! I guess we just have to sit tight and hope they fix it. If it's like this in the main game, I'm going to try and get a refund.

 

[Kephamos]

I have got an
Athlon II x4@2,9GHz
4 Gb ram
NVidia gts 450 512Mb
and i have almos same low fps 15-45 on low/med/high @ 1600*900 and 1920*1080.
Do you think my videocard causes the low fps?

 

[MajorMelchett]

Hmm, gonna test this on my rig, X4 @ 3.875ghz, 4gb ram CL8 1666, GTX480 @ 850/4000 (slightly faster than a stock 580) and Win 7 x64. I have bad performance on ultra/high settings so it would be interesting to see how it fairs at low.
---
Well that was interesting, considering my rig with everything on low and anything and everything turned off this is what i got.

I ran 2 minutes on fraps benchmarking (not recording or anything) running around barracks.
Minimum 43, Maximum 92, Average 67.508.

That's not exactly good IMO considering the rig etc. The artilery kills the framerates the most, the lowest framerate was recorded when that started.

 

[shaqism]

Im playing with an old system but my performance is garbage aswell, lowest of low settings

2.8 quad core
8 gb ram
4650 1g

 

[Krazyxazn]

An interesting to note, all you guys have AMD processors. Does anyone with an Intel processor see lower performance?

Cause you guys are using AMD/ATI and Nvidia video cards, so might not be that.

 

[Mauser98k]

I have:

Intel Q8400 processor
ATI 5850 HD
4 GB ddr2

I can't even get reasonable FPS on all low. The game is poorly optimized, I don't know why we're getting told that we're expecting too much from our systems. Upon release, if the game performs even nearly as bad as it has been, there's going to be some angry people.

 

[Robersdee]

nope im on intel, Q6600 with a GTX 460 and it run horribly, even with most things unchecked and on low, this is ridiculous, its U3? same guys who made RO?

Its a bloody joke at the min, a total mess.

 

[ItsJono]

If it's any consolation, i'm on an overclocked i7 920 D0 @ 3.7 GHz with a GTX 580 SC with everything maxed out and achieve anywhere from:

20 FPS (Heavy/Intense action)

30-45 (Average)

50 (Not too much action but with players on screen)

FPS

 

[Howitzer114]

If it's any consolation, i'm on an overclocked i7 920 D0 @ 3.7 GHz with a GTX 580 SC with everything maxed out and achieve anywhere from:

20 FPS (Heavy/Intense action)

30-45 (Average)

50 (Not too much action but with players on screen)

FPS

I have similar performance on my Intel Core 2 Quad @ 2.83GHz and GTX 470. Most likely an optimization issue