FPS - is this typical?

[Spacehogking]

I get 40-60 fps on low, 20-35 fps on medium, high and ultra are unplayable.
My specs are:

Win XP Home
Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7 Ghz
Nvidia GTS 250
4 GB RAM

I could get solid 60 FPS on ultra in Crysis 2 but i'm getting such bad fps, and I hate playing on low because it looks awful.

 

[Centory]

well you have a pentium, this is a CPU based game

case closed

 

[clambo]

GTS250 is a re-badged 9800GTX+- one level down from a regular nvidia 550 - and with that processor you won't get 60fps. The i5 with a 560Ti will get 60fps.

 

[Rumpullpus]

pentium is a pritty old chipset, basicly almost out of date. so ya i would say thats typical.

 

[catfish@rock]

Nah, this thing seems to be poorly optimized due to dev's less caring for performance.

All the unnecessarily big texture sizes, memory leaking, poor gpu usage, cpu usage, this thing seems to be very far, far from good optimized game.

I have

windows 7 32bit
i5 -760 stock @
gtx 460 1G
4g ram

In crysis 2 pc mp, if I mess with options in cfg, I could get great visual with great FPS from 60 minimum to 140 in multiplayer, with no stuttering in any circumstances.

TBH, crysis 2 pc is the best optimized game which provides great visual even in the lowest setting.
However, RO2 might be the one of the very poorly optimized games to date.

Obviously this thing need at least gtx 560ti or better
cpu much more powerful than i5 750
minumum ram 8G

4g shows hellish performance due to memory leaking
gtx 460 1g isn't enough at all for nice looking smooth gaming obvioulsy.

and I bet most here who says his performance is fine basically have uber fast quad core cpu or better, 8G ram minimum, minimum gtx560ti or better cards.

 

[gimpy117]

yeah, optimization needs to happen. the people who have "no issues ever" have really high end systems.

 

[jolorulz]

^Actually many people with "high end systems" are having the same problem as we have. Optimization is a priority that should always be looked into and worked on. TWI will be on the money... maybe... I'm not sure... they have weird schedules...

 

[MadTommy]

and I bet most here who says his performance is fine basically have uber fast quad core cpu or better, 8G ram minimum, minimum gtx560ti or better cards.

Most of what you say is a complete load of BS.

I have a dual core E8400, 4 GB RAM with a decent GTX480 and on Ultra i get 50 - 80 fps, no stuttering.

The game never uses more than 2 GB Ram so my 4GB ram limit is never gotten close to. Don't spout crap about memory leaks. A couple of my mates run in on GTX460 have no issues at all as well.

You simply have a grudge to bare on these forums and you regurgitate the same crap on each thread about performance.

OP the game is resource intensive, and i'm afraid your CPU is the major issue and you graphics card is old to run detailed games like RO2. You need to upgrade to see a marked improvement.

 

[Dirtybandit]

You cant even put crysis 2 on ultra without a dx11 gpu..
On the other hand, yes this game does needs work

 

[jinnwarior]

Replies in orange.

• Nah, this thing seems to be poorly optimized due to dev's less caring for performance.

no. just no.

• unnecessarily big texture sizes

i don't think you understand LOD scaling.

• memory leaking, poor gpu usage, cpu usage

GPU usage is fine, its CPU usage that needs optimizing.

• blah blah Crysis Crysis i don't know how to spell

crysis 1 had trash optimization. Crysis 2 is a console rail shooter.
Crysis is not a benchmarking tool you idiots

• 4g shows hellish performance due to memory leaking

running the cheapest 2GBs i could find, no problems. fix your computer.

• and I bet most here who says his performance is fine basically have uber fast quad core cpu or better, 8G ram minimum, minimum gtx560ti or better cards.

GT240, core 2 duo 1.8GHz(indiv), 2 GB of cheap crap ram, nothing OC'd, running some settings on med and getting good FPS and good gameplay. haters gonna hate, i guess.

 

[Mattebubben]

its just pretty random.
i have 20-30fps and my friend with the exact same pc have 60+ and another friend with a bad pc also have 60+fps while my brother with a freaking monster pc got 30-40fps.
its just kinda random if its running good then good for you but no need to trash the ppl that are having problems just because you are not.

 

[LHeureux]

Replies in orange.

1.8GHZ nothing OCed?! You must be playing on extra low with a tweak that put on super extra low and I guess you're still having 10 FPS max. No way you can run this game fine on medium with 1.8 GHz hahaha

 

[Pectus]

Most of what you say is a complete load of BS.

I have a dual core E8400, 4 GB RAM with a decent GTX480 and on Ultra i get 50 - 80 fps, no stuttering.

The game never uses more than 2 GB Ram so my 4GB ram limit is never gotten close to. Don't spout crap about memory leaks. A couple of my mates run in on GTX460 have no issues at all as well.

You simply have a grudge to bare on these forums and you regurgitate the same crap on each thread about performance.

OP the game is resource intensive, and i'm afraid your CPU is the major issue and you graphics card is old to run detailed games like RO2. You need to upgrade to see a marked improvement.

I get around 40-60 fps on medium settings, GPU usage around 20-25%, CPU usage 50-60%. On top of the crappy frames i get, i have huge stuttering issues.

Pretty much every game on my computer runs better than RO2, and i'm sorry to say, but RO2 isnt exactly "cutting edge" in terms of graphical output, yet it runs ridicilously bad, so there is definetly something dodgy about the optimization of RO2.

 

[wooki]

AthlonII dual 2.8 oc'd 3.1
hd5750 1gig oc'd to something something
40-60
My settings (except aa off these days, framerate smoothing on and warmovie instead of enhanced):screenie
Hardly highend system.

Gamebooster and daily maintenance ftw
Oh I also shut off steam overlay. That gave me a big boost.

 

[Dumba [cro]]

Oh I also shut off steam overlay. That gave me a big boost.

Pretty crappy implementation of something promoted so much, namely le steamworks integration...

 

[Poerisija]

Phenom II X2 550
GTX460 1GB
4gig of memory


Runs fine(30-60 depending on number of players and map) on mostly ultra with all the motion blurs and such turned off. I can get additional 10-20 fps if I turn depth of field off but I've no need for it atm.

New drivers, pretty much clean install of windows and no overclocking anywhere. Not really sure what's up with some people's computers, none of my mates who got it (16+ of them) got any problems whatsoever.

 

[catfish@rock]

Replies in orange.

Aside from your childish vulgar language, you seem not to know really well about what you said.
Once again, great internet, great ppl. thanx.

Well, RO2's running fine for you that's good for you.

However in my system, it does have memory leaks every round if the map is big, stutters everytime when arty's heavy, ppsh starts to fire, sound cracks and distorted if not disappear compleltely.

I killed every post process effect as bloom, dof, blur, light shaft, minimized shadow resolution, almost anything I could find on web to optimize this thing.

I defrag C: regularly, fix drive error, logical bad sectors, keep clean system status by using minimal but powerful security apps.

Crysis warhead, GTA4 run much better than this, and they had "much rare" and "far less severe" memory leaking cases than RO2.

 

[DasFist]

I get above 60fps constantly now, I didn't at release, http://imgur.com/dfsCo settings.

q6700 @ 3.5Ghz, 4gb ram, dual hd4890+

not a high end system at all

 

[Reise]

I have a dual core E8400, 4 GB RAM with a decent GTX480 and on Ultra i get 50 - 80 fps, no stuttering.

Not on anything over 24 players you aren't.

 

[catfish@rock]

I get above 60fps constantly now, I didn't at release, [url]http://imgur.com/dfsCo[/URL] settings.

q6700 @ 3.5Ghz, 4gb ram, dual hd4890+

not a high end system at all

CPU at fast cloak, dual graphic card isn't exactly an example of average, low end pc.