optimize Homestead

frankoffrankof Posts: 1,077Moderator
This discussion was created from comments split from: Swenson Range.
ss_4_frankof.png
«1

Comments

  • JungleSheepJungleSheep Posts: 87Player
    Oh, I see. By the way, are there any plans to optimize Homestead for better FPS?

  • TheTotsTheTots Posts: 2,279Player
    With a map that dense, there's not much more we can do.If we can find better optimization in the future we would certainly do it, but no plants at the moment.
    The game wasn't made exactly to my specifications, so I feel it's broken.

  • -=}WoLvErInE{=--=}WoLvErInE{=- Posts: 1,169Player
    Oh, I see. By the way, are there any plans to optimize Homestead for better FPS?

    It's 2016, get a better PC. ;) Just kidding.

    I'm curious though, what are you PC specs?
  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    FunPolice wrote: »
    no plants at the moment

    I think too many plants is part of the issue ;)
  • TheTotsTheTots Posts: 2,279Player
    You know what, that typo's staying!
    The game wasn't made exactly to my specifications, so I feel it's broken.

  • iDK.ArkeiroiDK.Arkeiro Posts: 775Player
    I don't need this... I already mastered all guns o:) Pff lol jking. Should be fun to test this out.

    Over 2k Golden Hawkeyes.
  • [ENG]Uni-Sol[ENG]Uni-Sol Posts: 3,193Player
    FunPolice wrote: »
    You know what, that typo's staying!

    Just like the plants I hope :mrgreen:
    If my trollery drives you crazy, you'd better put on your seatbelt.






  • JungleSheepJungleSheep Posts: 87Player
    I have an I5 and GTX 660. It's probably mid range by today's standard. Homestead is the only map that I have fluctuating FPS which is worse when it's 12v12. I remember that intercept had FPS issues when it first came out, but the devs fixed it and it became playable.

  • SSKnecaboSSKnecabo Posts: 2,721Player
    FunPolice wrote: »
    You know what, that typo's staying!

    Typo.. yeah sure..
  • -=}WoLvErInE{=--=}WoLvErInE{=- Posts: 1,169Player
    [Gen]Adzic wrote: »
    FunPolice wrote: »
    You know what, that typo's staying!

    Just like the plants I hope :mrgreen:

    Great here we go again. You guys must be smoking happy plants. :p
  • .dcG-Colts^.dcG-Colts^ Posts: 1,973Player
    edited April 2016
    Oh, I see. By the way, are there any plans to optimize Homestead for better FPS?

    Would be nice doubtful though.
    FunPolice wrote: »
    With a map that dense, there's not much more we can do.If we can find better optimization in the future we would certainly do it, but no plants at the moment.

    Low quality textures or low quality bushes/plants w/e would help FPS a lot on this map. If I shoot while in the bushes or behind them or just bushes are infront of me or plants are infront me my fps drops drastically! I get drops from 125 or higher depending on max fps to as low as 60fps. If I am running around on solo mode i have my max FPS throughout the level but anytime I shoot near a plant or bush FPS drops like crazy again. I have a 144hz monitor which I use 120hz lightboost @ 10% strobe brightness on so if my FPS drops below 120 and as low as 60, 70, 80, 90, or even 100 it is really laggy and choppy impossible to shoot. Really killing the map for me right now. Only option is turning hz down to 100 just for when I play homestead but then I still have to deal with when the fps drops to between 60-90. Getting 90-100fps on 120hz would feel exactly like getting 30-40 on a 60hz. Getting 60fps on 120hz feels like 15fps on 60hz. It's very brutal since there is no settings in the main menu that drastically change the quality of game like texture quality, character quality, terrain quality, foilage quality, less detail on world objects like cars and stuff like that would help a lot. What kind of game forces everyone to play on High Detail settings?
    Oh, I see. By the way, are there any plans to optimize Homestead for better FPS?

    It's 2016, get a better PC. ;) Just kidding.

    I'm curious though, what are you PC specs?

    I have msi gtx 670 2gb power edition
    intel i5 3570k OC to 4.3ghz

    -rant starting-

    I know people with gtx 980's and gtx 970's with i7 4770k or similar that get fps drops and bad performance at random times in random rounds on maps like cold front and slums. Homestead is even worse at random times. For the most part though these guys can run around and get constant 150+fps or more. But they still get drops. Overall its a huge joke because a gtx 970 or 980 should be running a directx9 game like nothing. Take this game allow users to choose/switch between directx 9 and directx 11 (WIthout the extra quality that comes with dx11 IE tessalation and stuff) and the performance will be 100% better. Run game in Directx11 but still exact same quality as now so no extra performance hinder features Directx11 can support. Just running the game in DX11 with DX9 quality and then watch the performance of the game sky rocket.

    *It's a serious problem that could eventually kill your game with each new series that comes out they are going to support directx9 less and less 900 series cards are made to run on DX12.1 and DX11 not DX9. Especially with a new gen console's all the console games will be DX11 and DX12. All console games are ported over to PC it is very rare to find a game that is on console and PC and the PC version is not a console port. This means in the near future support for directx 9 will not be thought of nor needed because every console port is going to be DX11 or 12. Search online directx9 vs directx11 performance on games with newer video cards same quality settings though and be amazed by the performance differences I have seen some benchmarks get double the FPS.

    There's also the issue with video card drivers you need latest drivers for lastest games are these drivers going to keep fixing issues or bugs with DX9? or just ignore them?

    -rant over-

    Pie charts + Graphs= Very Bad.



  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    .dc-colts^ wrote: »
    Getting 90-100fps on 120hz would feel exactly like getting 30-40 on a 60hz. Getting 60fps on 120hz feels like 15fps on 60hz.

    lol where do you even come up with this stuff?
  • iDK.ArkeiroiDK.Arkeiro Posts: 775Player
    Saccho wrote: »
    .dc-colts^ wrote: »
    Getting 90-100fps on 120hz would feel exactly like getting 30-40 on a 60hz. Getting 60fps on 120hz feels like 15fps on 60hz.

    lol where do you even come up with this stuff?

    I guess we will never know...

    Over 2k Golden Hawkeyes.
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,161Player
    I have a 144hz monitor and I honestly don't notice much of a difference when FPS falls under 144. Even at 100 I really don't notice much of a difference, maybe it's just me. On the other hand, playing any game under 30 fps (no matter which monitor) is unplayable.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • SSKnecaboSSKnecabo Posts: 2,721Player
    Whiplash27 wrote: »
    I have a 144hz monitor and I honestly don't notice much of a difference when FPS falls under 144. Even at 100 I really don't notice much of a difference, maybe it's just me. On the other hand, playing any game under 30 fps (no matter which monitor) is unplayable.

    I have a 144hz monitor as well and if my fps drop to 100 I can really feel it. Same thing my my old pc and the old 60hz monitor. Once fps went down to 60 it felt like playing on about 30.
  • K!Dz.applePIEK!Dz.applePIE Posts: 1,050Player
    Arkeiro wrote: »
    Saccho wrote: »
    .dc-colts^ wrote: »
    Getting 90-100fps on 120hz would feel exactly like getting 30-40 on a 60hz. Getting 60fps on 120hz feels like 15fps on 60hz.

    lol where do you even come up with this stuff?

    I guess we will never know...

    +1
  • .dcG-Colts^.dcG-Colts^ Posts: 1,973Player
    Saccho wrote: »
    .dc-colts^ wrote: »
    Getting 90-100fps on 120hz would feel exactly like getting 30-40 on a 60hz. Getting 60fps on 120hz feels like 15fps on 60hz.

    lol where do you even come up with this stuff?

    By testing.
    Pie charts + Graphs= Very Bad.



  • .dcG-Colts^.dcG-Colts^ Posts: 1,973Player
    edited April 2016
    Whiplash27 wrote: »
    I have a 144hz monitor and I honestly don't notice much of a difference when FPS falls under 144. Even at 100 I really don't notice much of a difference, maybe it's just me. On the other hand, playing any game under 30 fps (no matter which monitor) is unplayable.

    Yeah maybe you should try capping your FPS at 100 see what happens or turn of vsync and see how choppy and terrible it is when your FPS drops even the slightest.
    SSKnecabo wrote: »
    Whiplash27 wrote: »
    I have a 144hz monitor and I honestly don't notice much of a difference when FPS falls under 144. Even at 100 I really don't notice much of a difference, maybe it's just me. On the other hand, playing any game under 30 fps (no matter which monitor) is unplayable.

    I have a 144hz monitor as well and if my fps drop to 100 I can really feel it. Same thing my my old pc and the old 60hz monitor. Once fps went down to 60 it felt like playing on about 30.

    Exacty. It is even worse when you have vsync enabled which you are supposed to with lightboost and higher hz. I can't because I maintain 120fps better in this game with a max of 150 fps due to the fps drops that don't make any sense. If I turn on vsync it forces me at 120fps and those drops still happen and give me lower fps. The game is also incapable of keeping a constant FPS number regardless of whats going on. Most games you look at the ground or still at the wall the FPS won't move at all. This game the FPS is always moving whether it be by only 0.1-1 fps or higher. I go load up America's Army 2 and I can get constant FPS staying still looking at wall or ground with no movement on a computer that can only run this game at 20FPS and as well my computer. Simple fact is the performance in this game is far from perfect or fine. I can go get Triple the fps in CSGO and the graphics don't look any better on AAPG.
    Pie charts + Graphs= Very Bad.



  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    If you're getting 60+ FPS and think it's comparable to 15 FPS on a cheaper monitor, either your system is really poorly configured or you're not realizing just how much choppier 15 FPS really is.

    With 15 FPS on a 60 Hz monitor, the *fastest* screen updates are still way slower than the *slowest* updates with a 60 FPS/120 Hz setup. It's not even close.

    As for excess choppiness -- turn on triple buffering in NVIDIA Control Panel and set VSYNC to Adaptive. Running without triple buffering causes slower frame updates due to back buffer availability with VSYNC on and essentially locks updates to a smaller set of possible values.
  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    .dc-colts^ wrote: »
    Yeah maybe you should try capping your FPS at 100 see what happens or turn of vsync and see how choppy and terrible it is when your FPS drops even the slightest.

    VSYNC on without triple buffering means that FPS below monitor refresh rate forces frames down to refresh rate / 2. That's a configuration problem. Turn on triple buffering and that problem largely goes away.

    Turning off VSYNC will produce tearing, but that's the expected trade-off for the faster refresh rate.
Sign In or Register to comment.