How well is your pc running PA?

Beta Build: 56387

CPU: Intel Core i7 875K @ 2.93 GHz
GPU: XFX Radeon HD 5770 1 GB HD-577A-ZNFC
RAM: 16 GB DDR3 G.Skill F3-1200CL-4GBRL
HDD: 1 TB Caviar Black
Motherboard: ASUS P7P250D-E PRO
Resolution: 1920x1080p

Settings on medium, FXAA off, HDR off, Res. Scaling on supersample(110%), and window mode.

Experience: Generally runs between 25-75ish fps depending on planet type. All drivers are up to date and power setting set at performance. HDR set off due to issues with brightness.

This doesn't seem to be the case, at least not for me

The game only use 25% of my CPU because it uses one core and the GPU is barely used, yet I'm running at 20 fps.
The game is extremely CPU-intensive and I don't know why since all the calculations are done on the server. Also this screenshot was taken at the end of a game, nothing is moving. This means that the rendering uses a lot of CPU but is limited to one core and this create a serious bottleneck.
I don't think I've seen another game that uses as much CPU for rendering as this one.

I'd take a look at this threads:
How does PA utilize system resources and is it constant across multiple architectures?
Multi-Threading
How To Improve Frame Rates (All Video Cards) + (Driver links)

EDIT

Would be nice if PA is going to support mantle. We really need a good fps boost.

for me it runs poorly on my desktop. It's ok on the laptop but because I updated the network drivers. It's wifi performance is poor.

I also have to restart it to use the nvidia graphics card everytime
Manufacturer:
Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.
Processor:
AMD Athlon(tm) II X3 435 Processor (3 CPUs), ~2.9GHz
Memory:
6142MB RAM
Hard Drive:
1 TB
Video Card:
NVIDIA GeForce GT 220

PA is running perfect for me.

Intel Core i7-2600K @ 3,4 GHz
Windows 8.1 Pro N
2x4 Gig 1600 Mhz Ram

Graficscard:
Gigabyte GV-N580UD-15l
Driver 331.65
GPU:GTX 580

But again the specs are not the only factor if the game will run slow/fast.

I have the same performance as my wife:

Intel Core i7 4770K 4x(3.5GHz)
GeForce GTX670 2GB
16GB 1600 MHz (4x4 GB)
Same Diver and OS

You really need an upgrade. Your CPU is probably okay but your video card should be replaced.

nVidia naming scheme has lately been like this:

XY0

e.g. 220, 320, 480, etc

X = Kind of like "model year". 300s are newer than 200s
Y = Sub-model. 280 is better than 220.

Generally where Y is less than 5, it's for desktop computing, not gaming.
220
320
420
540, etc
These are not really gaming cards. The sub-model number is less than 5.

280
380
570, etc
These are gaming cards. The sub-model number is higher than 5. ("5" itself is kind of like a bad compromise)

Consequently, going from a 280 to a 320 would actually be a downgrade. You're moving up one model year but moving way down from high-end gaming card to low-end desktop card.

Not sure what the best deal is right now. Maybe a 770 or a 670? I never go top-top end because that's like $600. One step down and one year back is usually a good deal. But the 220 is definitely out of date and not really built for gaming to begin with.

It's not "fake" AA. It is basically the original AA and most common, least graphically intensive iteration of it. Screen res is not as incrementally demanding as applying filters.

My bad i was just simplifying it for the public."i should have used a more apropriate term "
Im sure super sampling is a better option than Anti-aliasing, it does save the GPU grabing the surrounding pixels to every pixel rendered to blur edges and soften lines to a point tho, but im guessing using %150 higher res at 1920x1080 is more GPU intensive then the AA option..

---edited--
fixed my touchscreen nonsence sentances *sighs* i should stop using the tablet to post on the forum ...

I would imagine that the AA Option would scale in intensity based on your resolution anyways. One could probably get better performance with the AA option off and the scene upsampled. At NC here, I make sure folks are rendering double res before moving on to higher alias settings. Way more cost effective per frame. This is not real time however, but the numbers we record off our farm speak for themselves.
Most likely for QUALITY, the AA option is a more effective eliminator of the problem.
I tested last night with using 150% resolution and AA off and I got better performance, decent and decent aliasing. I found with a single res with AA option on, the render had less pixels to work with and so was not all that effective anyways. Then of course...I tried 150% Res WITH AA option turned on, which had a obvious performance dip but daaaamn it looked nice.

Prior to the most recent patch PA ran fine for me at basically max settings (I turned HDR off cause the bloom annoyed me). I definitely did not have any issues with framerate or lag.

That being said, since 56516 was released, the game is completely unusable for me since it crashes at launch (and crashes Steam along with it).


I'm running:

Windows 7
Intel i7 950
6GB DDR3 RAM
nVidia GTX 480 1.5GB RAM (Latest versions of all drivers)
1440x900 resolution

can you go into the pa install dir and delete the game and redownload it. there may be a file from the old build interfereing.

C:\Program Files (x86)\steam\steamapps\common\Planetary Annihilation\ <-- delete this directory and re-download through steam.
(im assumiong you used the default install directory)

So I've made some observations and I've reached these conclusions:

- The rendering is extremely CPU-intensive and is usually the main cause of low performance, rather than the GPU
- The rendering is single-core, which means that it'll only use a fraction of your CPU
- The rendering performance is directly tied to the number of primitive being drawn. Since the graphic settings have no impact on this number, it means that neither the resolution nor the graphic settings affect the rendering process. They only affect the actual rendering from the GPU which is not the main cause for slowdowns so the FPS gain is not significant.
As a result, metal planets give far better performances than other planets, especially earth.
- UI components that are refreshed every tick can also cause big performance drops, for instance metal and energy bars, or placing the cursor on an unit.

This is a frustrating issue because no GPU optimizations are going to make a big impact on performance. I hope Uber is aware of this and have plans to improve performance (maybe using multiple cores for rendering), however I don't believe it's an easy problem to solve.

win7
i7 920 @ 3.6 (I had it at 4.1 but had to knock it down this year - I got it in 2008)
xfx 7950 3gb vram, res is at 1900x1200
18 GB ram

I got all settings at high / uber, resolution scalling is native (100%). I have no issues what so ever.

I had to remove the files through steam (it wouldn't re-download them when I tried just deleting them), but it seems to have worked. Thanks.

Powerz have you got a computer and if so what is it?

nope i don't have "A" computer i have MANY computers

I'm using an Acer Iconia w700 tablet, i5 3317u 1.7ghz (2.6ghz) cpu 4gb ram. <-- i play PA on this one
I also have 2 Mac mini's 2010, 2.4ghz core 2 duo's. one has 2gb ram the other has 4gb ram.
My desktop is a pain ( i blew up the PSU) its an i5 3570k 3.6ghz, with 2 ATI radeon HD 6870's crossfired (well it was i given one of my videocards to my best friend as havin two video card's in a dead pc was mostly pointless).
I have 2 Laptops, a LG express dual s1, and a HP pavilion craptop laptop.

--edited--
I forgot to mention my compuer graveyard.. lol
I work as a free trading computer tech when im not busy runing my other two buisnesses, i have a shed full of obsolete hardware from upgrading peoples systems.

Alls good, it seems that a lot of people are having this issue, a file from an old build is getting stuck and its not removed during an update and its causing some clients to have crashes/ glitches.
I'm glad i could help

Chap I hardly think your the best person to be giving hardware advice on this forum, but I do like you.

I think your quite miss informed, i seem to be one of the best people here offering advice.