Shouldn't I be able to run the game at max with constant 85 fps?
- Thread starter Pinkerston
- Start date
RO is very CPU intense due to ballistics and network calculations (all the zones, anti-portal etc. stuff that determines who can see and who can hit whom)
I run an AMD X2 5000+ (at 2.6GHz) and I do not get constant 60FPS (vsynch) on maps with large outdoor firefights. If I run without bots, the graphics alone will not slow me down, it's the shooting and fighting that taxes the CPU down. Even modern processors can suffer from certain maps.
I run an AMD X2 5000+ (at 2.6GHz) and I do not get constant 60FPS (vsynch) on maps with large outdoor firefights. If I run without bots, the graphics alone will not slow me down, it's the shooting and fighting that taxes the CPU down. Even modern processors can suffer from certain maps.
![[5thW]Rehakles[TRO]](/data/avatars/s/3/3418.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
@ 3.0 Ghz
@ 3.0 Ghz
I overclocked my processor from 2.66 to 3.0 Ghz. I noticed an improvement: maybe from 5 to 10 fps.
I could maybe overclock more, but first I need a fan to the front and back maybe.
@ 3.0 Ghz
I overclocked my processor from 2.66 to 3.0 Ghz. I noticed an improvement: maybe from 5 to 10 fps.
I could maybe overclock more, but first I need a fan to the front and back maybe.
Something interesting for you. I have an e6700 and had drops like that with 7950 gx2. BTW don't use that map for benchies as there are A LOT of things going on. Anyways, RO runs SO much better on vista for me and I think it can be attributed to that XP was not originally made for duals cores or even quad cores. That is the only thing I can think of. What are your FPS on say krasnyoktobr? Little things going on there.
Wrong
In first personnal shooters, the more fps you get , the better it is.
Pinkerston: Leningrad is not the best map for a benchmark