Hi, I'm Jon and I recently bought this game from the Steam store. I've got a real problem with my FPS, it's all running at 30 on small planets and at around 20 on big planets. I don't really know what the problem is, my drivers are up to date, I don't lag in other games that my gpu can handle like Starcraft 2, and I don't have any viruses. Is it the optimization or something because I had a scenario where I can bump up the settings to anything between high and low and still get the same fps. I can play Starcraft 2 on high and those graphics look as good as these graphics, if not better actually. Could someone please assist me with this matter, I really don't want to have wasted my money on a game that is supposed to be running on maxed out settings on my native resolution. Reply as soon as possible. Thank you. Jon.
i ran stracraft 2 on a computer with a am1 sempron, and some graphic card that didn't even have a dvi port. that computer couldn't run LoL. optimisations can work miracles and starcraft 2 could run on your cellphone. upload your Dxdiag.txt as an attachment and then we'll see. it's possible you've set your settings too high too. what graphical settings did you set (if any)?
Yeah I guess optimizations do miracles and I know that this game is still in beta-ish? I hope it'll get optimized more since I don't think you need a beast to run these sort of graphics, my cpu is not a problem since it has 4 cores running at 3.4GHz, here are some more specs : Graphics Card : GT 630 2GB RAM : 8GB 1333mhz HDD : 500GB, no solid state drive. A friend of mine running a better gpu is also experiencing these fps drops with a GT 645(3 times better than my gpu) But here is the dxdiag that you requested. Thank you for replying as soon as you could, really appreciate it. Jon.
your driver's 5 months old but that shouldn't be an issue. you do unfortunately. it's not beauty that determines how difficult something is to render. each tank on your screen is composed of a small number of polies, but together when in the thousands represent close to hundreds of thousands of polies. even when zoomed out you don't get that many surfaces in BF3/4. you only ever get some one or two hundred. the graphic style of PA is intentionally simplified to reduce strain on the GPU. that being said some of our existing most advanced graphical technologies are in use in PA. and when I say "in use I mean in use alot. You have point light and point shadow. This is demonstrated in a number of the unreal engine 4 demo videos where they say it's basically the most advanced revolutionary thing ever. pay close attention to shadows on the planet surface and lights coming from vehicles next time you play. you also have some form of light tessellation for the terrain. I'm not sure how that's done. also there are 3D FX. explosions and smoke which can be viewed from any angle and have volume. and all of these things thousands of times over on the screen at the same time. PA is as far as I know the most graphically demanding game in existence. the only game that could possibly make a use of a 4-way GTX 980 SLI. do not behave as if that is what your computer is equipped with. be reasonable. I have a GTX 560 TI (quite respectable card) and I run PA at medium quality preset. you have a GeForce GT 630 (in my opinion should figure outside of PA minimum specs, but hey Uber wanted to reach a broader public) my card is rated 3,547 on videocardbenchmark wheras your is 745 : http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/mid_range_gpus.html use ctrl-F and type GTX 560 on the first and GT 630 on the second. As far as I know you should turn everything off if possible or lowest but I wouldn't be surprised if the FPS still sucked for you. : / sorry man but lookit the bright side :> ...christmas is coming up! now you know you want a graphic card.
The graphics in Starcarft 2 are basically all 2d effects. The engine dates back to the late 90's (based on the Warcraft III engine) so essentially *any* recent computer can run it easily. In contrast, PA is a *fully 3D engine* that uses *3D effects* rather than 2D, it's based on fully 3D maps and has simulated projectiles. All these things make it much harder to run than Starcarft 2 (remember Starcraft 2 has a very low unit cap, in contrast PA throws hundreds to thousands of units around). The two aren't comparable. One issue for yours and your friends graphics cards is the slow DDR3 memory. You really need a graphics card with the much faster GDDR5 memory to run it well. An Nvidia GTX 750 / 750ti would probably be the best option for looking at running 900p high settings. Remember this is a *newly released game* and it needs quite a bit of hardware to run maxed out. That said, I run it fine on my old first gen i5 laptop, with a GT420M graphics card (similar performance to yours) on low settings and like you I get a consistent 20 fps most of the game. As this is an RTS game that is actually *perfectly playable*. To be clear though, if your expecting maxed out settings in this game with that graphics card then your out of luck. Just as your not going to get maxed out settings in any other demanding game released this year on that card. Really your system is very imbalanced (you have a mid to high end CPU, 8gb ram then an entry level GPU that is slower than the integrated intel HD graphics on your CPU). I seriously would recommend thinking about a graphics board upgrade, not just for PA but for all your games. There are some fantastic options available at the moment for not a huge sum of money (Nvidia GTX 660 is a good option for example). Option for cheapest graphics card I'd recommend thinking about (PA needs good GPU, and 2gb of GDDR5 memory minimum): http://www.ebuyer.com/666536-gigaby...displayport-pci-e-graphics-card-gv-n750oc-2gl Good option if you have a bit more money: http://www.ebuyer.com/669009-zotac-...-displayport-pci-e-graphics-card-zt-60901-10s If your looking at an AMD board, they have weaker Opengl drivers compared to Nvidia so purely for PA Nvidia makes more sense. That said I have a R9 280 (due to it only costing £160 and being bundled with 3 free games!), and it runs pretty well. Playing on large systems I maintain 40+fps on medium at 1920 x 1080p. Some good AMD options if you prefer: http://www.ebuyer.com/614468-powerc...ayport-pci-e-graphics-axr9-270x-2gbd5-tdhe-oc http://www.ebuyer.com/663138-msi-r9...-dual-mini-displayport-pci-e-r9-280-gaming-3g
@cdrkf Memory in graphics cards is overated, I play with good fps and I have no VRAM /s No but I actually get pretty nice fps with one of the most meh GPUs I actually own a 5770, which is at least more powerful than what I have, with 1GB of VRAM. I can't put it in though, because laptop.
Idk, I play with around that fps. I guess I don't strive for high-class living. Anyhow, this game runs fairly low fps on fairly low-med computers, and fairly high on higher computers. But the first part of that is good, with 4g ram and a dual core and 1g gpu all from 2 years ago and under 800 dollars, you can run this game alright. That is what I have, xept I have 8g ram.
.....it's ...definitely not overrated with PA. pa USES Vram contrary to a lot of other games, gigabytes of it actually.
Frame buffer size isn't critical (depending on target resolution, 2gb is sufficient for max settings at full hd assuming the rest of the system can keep up). Speed is important though. An example, hd7750 is available with ddr and gddr5 memory (the latter approx 2x the speed) with everything else the same. The gddr5 version is a lot faster despite having the same gpu. Obviously there is a point where faster memory doesn't help but usually faster memory is better.
I might be getting that GTX 750 this December, we have a store near us. I just need the money. But why overcomplicate the game with advanced stuff, like you said those "extraordinary shadows which are groundbreaking" In my own opinion though, I really don't think the game looks better than what Starcraft 2 can offer but one thing is for certain, the gameplay is much better than Starcraft 2, and yes I read that it doesn't use the same stuff than SC but still, I just don't understand how I can't run this at maxed out. I guess it's like FSX's optimization, if there are any flight simmers here you should probably know what I'm talking about. Honestly, it's really sad to hear that the only solution will be to upgrade my card to a 750 not being able to run it on maxed out still... really sad. I'll just stick to League of Legends and Starcraft for now while I wait for further optimization patches and my soon to be 750. I'm shaking my head right now, I could've bought another RTS which would've probably ran and looked better on my system. Anyway, I'll see what the devs do about this and if they indeed provide the buyers with some optimization patches, because it IS a FACT that there are people out there with lower end systems that don't have a lot of money for these kind of graphics cards and whatnot, every dev should take into consideration for those people because he or she can earn more money since those people with the low spec PC's will end up buying it knowing that they can atleast play it on low settings with a good framerate. Alright then, thanks for your answers. I'll check into buying a new gpu next month. Jon
The game runs fine on low end stuff though, just on reduced detail....? I'd understand your attitude if it were a case of the game not running, but it does. Min graphics in pa don't look bad imo. PA on those settings will run on Intel integrated hd graphics reasonably. The game is scalable to make use of higher end kit if people have it. Frankly that is why the game has graphics settings- and they do exactly what they should. This isn't a case of lack of optimisation.
why? because engine over game. I can really support this approach because the engine turned out insufficient for my vision. (it's my desired approach to games in general anyways, when I saw the KS for PA the subtext was clearly to me "this is what this engine will be able to do", not "look at this awesome game we're making that will look like every flippin' detail in this video" ) sadly it's the closest thing but it really doesn't support planets that are big enough and has low support for multitudes of units in comparison to FA. like I said it's still the closest thing out there to what I need and I'm damn glad that it features the latest tech out there. some things including multithreading, 64bit, linux support and all the graphic technologies I mentioned above which were reimplemented into an OpenGL environment by UBER themselves. In the end this means that as our hardware progresses we will be able to mod in crazier and crazier detailed units and terrains.
