Regarding performance

GUYS, THE ERROR IS IN POOR USAGE OF NEWER CARDS. THE GAME DOES NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE WAY THE NEWER CARDS ARE SET UP, RESULTING IN LOWER PERFORMANCE FOR THOSE WITH BRAND NEW CARDS. THEY NEED TO RE-OPTIMIZE THE GAME FOR THESE NEWER CARDS IN ORDER FOR YOU TO GET THE FPS AND GRAPHICS YOU SHOULD EXPECT.

Read the thread, they suspect it has to do with the way the newer cards handle individual objects, but they aren't sure. It's all right there. New cards = hampered performance.

I'm running an older card and I get buttery smooth framerates and proper card behavior because the game is taking advantage of all my card's resources properly. It isn't doing this for newer cards.

[TW]Ramm-Jaeger said:

Regarding performance
...But at the end of the day, when you boil it down to cold hard data, RO2 is pushing more polygons, models, and shaders than most (if not all) other shooters currently on the market. To put it another way, there may be other games that are pushing more details on smaller levels, but we're pushing lots of detail in much larger levels than other games are doing.

With that said, there are improvements that can still be made, and there are things we could have done better before launch. In all of our testing internally the the game was running great on a wide range of hardware (for example, I have a five year old AMD FX-60 dual core with an 8800 sitting next to me that runs the game at a solid 50 frames per second). But as we have learned during the beta and launch there are certain types of PC configurations (even very powerful ones) that are struggling to run the game at a good framerate. So here is what we are working on to address these issues:

Click to expand...

Come on man, you cant be serious posting this. First you tell us the game performs like this coz its pushing more shaders, more polys and more everything more than any else. And in the next paragraph you tell us that you have an ancient (yes, those CPUS are ancient) pc with a mediocre Graphic card (for today standars) that runs the game at 50 fps?... Come on man, be serious, after all you are the president of the company.....Dont tell me the game may choke with hardware that is better in any aspect thatn that and will run just fine in a computer that actually has more weak spots than any moderm machine.

Josef Nader said:

GUYS, THE ERROR IS IN POOR USAGE OF NEWER CARDS. THE GAME DOES NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE WAY THE NEWER CARDS ARE SET UP, RESULTING IN LOWER PERFORMANCE FOR THOSE WITH BRAND NEW CARDS. THEY NEED TO RE-OPTIMIZE THE GAME FOR THESE NEWER CARDS IN ORDER FOR YOU TO GET THE FPS AND GRAPHICS YOU SHOULD EXPECT.

Read the thread, they suspect it has to do with the way the newer cards handle individual objects, but they aren't sure. It's all right there. New cards = hampered performance.

I'm running an older card and I get buttery smooth framerates and proper card behavior because the game is taking advantage of all my card's resources properly. It isn't doing this for newer cards.

Click to expand...

My graphic card is not new, actually its almost 3 years old, but was the best graphic card you could get.. tell me another history please.

Josef Nader said:

GUYS, THE ERROR IS IN POOR USAGE OF NEWER CARDS. THE GAME DOES NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE WAY THE NEWER CARDS ARE SET UP, RESULTING IN LOWER PERFORMANCE FOR THOSE WITH BRAND NEW CARDS. THEY NEED TO RE-OPTIMIZE THE GAME FOR THESE NEWER CARDS IN ORDER FOR YOU TO GET THE FPS AND GRAPHICS YOU SHOULD EXPECT.

Read the thread, they suspect it has to do with the way the newer cards handle individual objects, but they aren't sure. It's all right there. New cards = hampered performance.

I'm running an older card and I get buttery smooth framerates and proper card behavior because the game is taking advantage of all my card's resources properly. It isn't doing this for newer cards.

Click to expand...

Go to stats perfdump folder in technical support. There are people with older cards and performance issues there too. :/

maleficarus said:

You sound like some dude from Hard[OCP], you know, the elitist website were everything is tri SLI, dual power supplys and gaming resolutions that would make an alien race jelous? LOL! My point is and this is very, very valid, the gaming resolution that your monitor is native too is not properly used for PC gaming. Game makers are not sitting at there PC's thinking about 2560x resoutions. So all you did when you bought that monitor is paid for your own compatability problem. Yes, you paid for that, now enjoy the problem!!

This is fact, this is reality. Blaming video games for this just shows how imature you really are. Ignorence is bliss I guess...

Click to expand...

Oh dear, you're only coming across as a fanbois as well as childish and argumentative!

My rig isn't by any means 'high end', however, it does run everything I throw at it at 2560x1440 perfectly well. Sorry, but you are talking absolute cr*p! This resolution is widely used by gamers and is very popular. As for compatability problems, I do NOT have any! The fall in FPS and micro-stutters were not present earlier irrespective of res but they are now! Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Just look around the forum...many people running with decent hardware at 1920x1080 also have serious performance problems. I have also run RO2 at 1920x1080 and 1680x1050 on my Samsung 226BW monitor and performance although slightly improved at the lower res is not that much better than 2560x1440.

Do you actually think that RO2 is well optimised at this time? If you do you are seriously deluded! Many people on here are experiencing cr*p performance and many of them have better rigs than me.

I and many others do not think the game is well optimised. I'm happy that TW are working on it but my original post was mainly pointing out (to you for the third time!) that performance was better during the early beta stage than it is now. If you are arguing with that fact then you must be one of the lucky ones that has better performance now than during the beta stage. I personally am puzzled as to why performance has dropped for me despite several patches since the beta and release. I'm not crying about it but I'd be interested to know why this has happened.

I posted in all innocence regarding the performance problems that I've had since release only to be 'attacked' by you which I certainly did nothing to provoke. I have since retaliated but realise that was pointless because you are one of two things (or both maybe). Either you are a just a troll or/and you don't like the fact that I have a fairly decent rig.

I'll be sticking with TW and RO2 for the long haul as I really like the game. My biggest problem so far has been not been with the state of RO2 but with certain members of the community both in game and here on the forum 'bigging it up' from behind their keyboards. You're not really one of those are you M? I'd prefer it if you picked on some of the more undesirable members of this community that deserve it. It shouldn't take you long to find them. As for me being ignorant regarding video games I've been playing since the Sinclair ZX81 was around! Remember those M?

Stick with it TW. I look forward to playing R02 in all its glory sometime down the line. If you've isolated the problems to the newer graphics cards I hope that a solution will be coming soon.

atomMan said:

ARMA 2, DCS:A-10

Much, much larger maps.
And with bigger rendering distance

Also some stunning graphics too.

Click to expand...

ArmAII is also a well-known resource hog, and had craptastic performance on release and for months afterwards. And it's not just rendering distance - it's also what you are rendering. From what I've seen in gameplay videos (my copy of RO2 is still in the mail, unfortunately), RO2 has a *lot* more detail than ArmAII, especially indoors. (Can't comment on DCS:A-10, as I've never played it).

I just hope TWI doesn't take anywhere near as long as Bohemia to fix the problems.

DSC Blackshark is neither an optimized game, nor a good looking game. The surface textures are pretty bland and low res by today's standards. But yes, HoS is a mess. My friend's GTX295/i7 920 setup is having a hard time with the game. I get a lot of stutter and dips at random.

The following maps run pretty good: apartments (of course), spartanovka, and grain elevator.

I think almost all the others run not so great on my pc.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what map, what settings, my performance is crap. It is NOT map optimization. The same maps in single player give me atleast 15fps boost. Lower player count servers give me better FPS.

The fact that I can turn everything all the way up, and ON, yet only see 20% cpu, 33% RAM, and 55% gpu usage while getting 15-25 fps on a 64 player server, prooves it's in optimization, and engine build. The game doesn't know how to use the entire video card. It doesn't know how to use the entire CPU. (with latest generations gfx cards, and proccessors that is).

Then, THEN they have the balls to say, Its my fault? My hardware isn't good enough? I'm comparing RO2 to a console port game? IL2: Cliffs of Dover ISN'T a console port, has less optimization, renders at least 10 times as much information, has less qualified programmers making it, and it runs WAY better.

You're having problems with optimization? Fine.
It may take a while to get it worked out? Fine.
You're actually communicated with the community? AMAZING!
Blaming us for "Buying the wrong hardware"?

Really?
Really?
Really?
Really?
ARE YOU SURE?
NOT SURE IF SERIOUS...
LAME.

Bosniac said:

DSC Blackshark is neither an optimized game, nor a good looking game. The surface textures are pretty bland and low res by today's standards. But yes, HoS is a mess. My friend's GTX295/i7 920 setup is having a hard time with the game. I get a lot of stutter and dips at random.

Click to expand...

They were talking about DCS - A:10. That's a fairly nice looking game actually. It wasn't optimised great when it came out but patches have helped pick things up some. Arma OA was the same - horrible at first for me but now quite decent after a few patches. The same will happen with HoS no doubt once they iron out these issues with the newer cards. I'm a bit surprised they didn't discover these issues before as I would've thought that a few of their testers would've been playing on decent rigs but whatever. I can wait a few weeks for the performance improvements as I know they'll come. More interested in seeing what modders can come up with to bump the realism up a few notches.

Srinidhalaya said:

*words*

Click to expand...

But it -is- map optimization. The graphics cards in question (I thought it was just newer cards, but someone has said older cards get it too) render objects differently than the cards this game was optimized for, and they're choking on the sheer volume of objects in the maps. The devs have said they're trying to optimize, trim down, and alter the way that objects are rendered in order to better utilize the cards the engine is choking on.

It has nothing to do with your hardware's power and everything to do with how the game uses that power. You can have the most powerful card on earth, but if the game isn't optimized for that chipset you're going to get crappy performance.

So, they're re-optimizing the maps for the chipsets you guys have.

It's that simple.

But it -is- map optimization.

Click to expand...

So, why do the same maps on single player run completely different? Excellent performance in the campaign, ultra settings. (for myself atleast)

And your telling me, that a 580gtx is going to choke on the number of objects rendered, but a 8800 will not?
Now THAT is funny.

This thing with FPS drops look so random. Once its 60fps after 2-3 minutes its 25 than its 10 than again its solid 50 and all in the same spot on the map on the same server with the same amount of players, changing settings doesn't do anything, it doesnt help it doesnt make things worse, it all seem so random...and to be honest there are FPS games out there that look way better and are made exclusively for PC and have way better performance. So dont tell me its my PC fault. Lets get real, we payed for this don't throw sand in our eyes.

Srinidhalaya said:

It doesn't matter what map, what settings, my performance is crap. It is NOT map optimization. The same maps in single player give me atleast 15fps boost. Lower player count servers give me better FPS.

The fact that I can turn everything all the way up, and ON, yet only see 20% cpu, 33% RAM, and 55% gpu usage while getting 15-25 fps on a 64 player server, prooves it's in optimization, and engine build. The game doesn't know how to use the entire video card. It doesn't know how to use the entire CPU. (with latest generations gfx cards, and proccessors that is).

Then, THEN they have the balls to say, Its my fault? My hardware isn't good enough? I'm comparing RO2 to a console port game? IL2: Cliffs of Dover ISN'T a console port, has less optimization, renders at least 10 times as much information, has less qualified programmers making it, and it runs WAY better.

You're having problems with optimization? Fine.
It may take a while to get it worked out? Fine.
You're actually communicated with the community? AMAZING!
Blaming us for "Buying the wrong hardware"?

Really?
Really?
Really?
Really?
ARE YOU SURE?
NOT SURE IF SERIOUS...
LAME.

Click to expand...

what qualifies you to tell that Cliffs of dover programers arent as qualified?. Are you that ignorant? seriously?. Actually "those less qualified" guys you say are the guys doing the most complex games and many of them come from military grade sim industry... Dont compare cliffs of dover to this man. Its like comparing quake to pacman....

maleficarus said:

You sound like some dude from Hard[OCP], you know, the elitist website were everything is tri SLI, dual power supplys and gaming resolutions that would make an alien race jelous? LOL! My point is and this is very, very valid, the gaming resolution that your monitor is native too is not properly used for PC gaming. Game makers are not sitting at there PC's thinking about 2560x resoutions. So all you did when you bought that monitor is paid for your own compatability problem. Yes, you paid for that, now enjoy the problem!!

This is fact, this is reality. Blaming video games for this just shows how imature you really are. Ignorence is bliss I guess...

Click to expand...

The more I read your posts the more it's sounding like typical "sour grapes" BS from a small mind.

You're not doing Tripwire any favors with your idiocy so why bother putting people down for having nicer things than you?

I bet you key nice cars in the street too.

Also, your "technical" explanations are laughable. You have no idea what you're spouting do you?

Have like 3 years old rig (q9550 @ 2,83 Radeon HD4850, 6 gig's of RAM), 1280x1024, everything on ultra except FSAA, FPS is good and very playable (like 30-40). Improovments and tweaks will make it even moree smooth

Srinidhalaya said:

So, why do the same maps on single player run completely different? Excellent performance in the campaign, ultra settings. (for myself atleast)

And your telling me, that a 580gtx is going to choke on the number of objects rendered, but a 8800 will not?
Now THAT is funny.

Click to expand...

It's not that it's choking on the number of objects rendered, it's how it's being told to render the objects.

I don't know how familiar you are with computer engineering or computer science, but the short and short is that different chipsets handle data drastically differently. Something that is optimized for one chipset -will not- work on another chipset. That's what drivers are for. They convert the high level programming language into the specific machine code for that chipset (the 1s and 0s). Different chipsets use different machine code, and different machine code is written differently for each compiler.

Something about RO2 is getting into a fight with your driver, and the machine code isn't compiling correctly into your GPU. It's using the chip wrong.

It's like having a V12 engine in your car, but the transmission isn't shifting properly, so you can't get out of first gear. All that power doesn't do you any good if it doesn't work with the game properly.

As for single player running differently, I can't say. I haven't tried it, nor do I have the performance errors. Perhaps it's a problem with the server code, if that's the case. Try games with lower numbers of players and see if that boosts your performance? Maybe they need to optimize their code there.

Josef Nader, this sounds interesting...
but did you notice you finished your expose with:
Maybe they need to optimize their code


The guy with the doctor's appointment is also fun to read.

atomMan said:

Josef Nader, this sounds interesting...
but did you notice you finished your expose with:
Maybe they need to optimize their code


The guy with the doctor's appointment is also fun to read.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what I'm saying they need to do. They need to optimize their code for the different chipset, as the chips that are running poorly aren't getting along with the way the code is compiling now.

Guys this is my system and i have no fps problems...

i7920 @3.6ghz
6gb corsair XMP memory
8800 Ultra

And these are my frames and settings in game

In the beta, it ran really smooth. Then an update came up in the beta which forced me from high settings to medium settings - now its compeltetly unplayable.