Low FPS

[karambaitos]

Originally Posted by TheComedian

Refractor 2 > Unreal 3 engine BUT...

Refractor 2 doesn't have multi-core compatibility.

EDIT: Also this belongs in the support forum.

we'd be lucky if COD was running on UE 3
its actually running on an modified quake 4 engine (much cheaper to license)

you might want to try playing with the options in the properties of the PR shortcut, and defraging the game (if you havent defraged the HDD after a new PR install) each new patch really fragments the game, and defraging it has some performance increase (loading if nothing else)

[PoisonBill]

I like having my fps around 90, then when I have too look long distances I wont lag that much. If my fps goes to around 40, the game starts to feel sluggish and fast aiming get harder. If you guys are satisfied with 25 fps I guess you guys just like the walking part of the game.

[Th3Exiled]

"Pft 35 fps! stop complaining... movies are typically only ~24 fps and they are smooth so therefore you don't need anything higher than that!.... now I know nothing about how our perception of light works or almost anything about eyes but I'm pretty sure I'm an expert on it cause I can post on an internet forum...."

(Note: this is for all the people who don't realize I'm taking the micky, and are about to comment on my above paragraph not realizing this isn't my view, and that in fact I'm just portraying the average ignorant person.)

Now listen, I've been on both sides of this: I used to run this game on horrible.... horrible hardware.... to be precise

E4300 core 2 duo @ 1.8GHz
2 GiB DDR2 ram @667MHz (single channel?)
nvidia Geforce 8500GT 512MiB upgraded to Radeon 5750 1 GiB in march 2010
320GB 7200 RPM HDD

Now to be honest 30-40 fps would be heaven to me back on this computer and that was on mostly medium, no AA and a resolution of 1440x900.
However, in late 3rd quarter last year I built myself a gaming computer since I finally had money from my job. Now all the people who were saying that the op was posting just to show off his hardware... well, mines better :P This is my specs as of this moment (for those too lazy to check my profile)

Intel core I7 950 @ 3.65 GHz
P6x58D-e motherboard
12 GiB of DDR3 ram @ 1331MHz Triple channel (memory timings - 6, 8, 6, 21, 1T)
1x Radeon 6950 2 GiB (was running 2 in crossfire)
Creative x-fi Titanium soundcard
2x corsair 60 GB SSD Raid 0 (OS, games and programs)
3x 500 GB 7200RPM Seagate HDD Raid 0 (some less important games/programs, files/movies/music and where I've been recording some footage through X-fire)

The game plays alright in most cases, sometimes on some maps it's a bit lower than I'd like and while recording on muttrah the other day I'd occasionally have the game practically pause for 2 seconds. Though my computer is due for some maintenance so I may be able to fix those few flaws... Now since I got this computer, I like having my frame rate at a constant 60fps... Now I'm not really one of those people who buys expensive stuff just for the bragging rights or anything, I just enjoy the perfomance.... I mean I was stuck on that thing above for 3 years.... and some 1.7GHz single core AMD processor with 256 MiB Ram before that for 6 years.
So I can tell you from experience, 60 fps does make a huge difference. Playing under 50 fps is just not the same. Arma II is hell.... haha... Just be thankful that PR doesn't run as badly as Arma II.
also about fallujah... I used to get (incredibly) low frames around the fields (less than 15 fps) when I first got this computer on that map using a radeon 5750 & 6850, both featuring 1 GiB of ram. The upgrade to a radeon 6950 2 GiB fixed this issue and it ran at around the same performance as everywhere else on the map. I think it's pretty safe to say that the limiting factor in this case was video card memory... so if you want to have awesome performance on fallujah when running a high resolution (eg. 1920x1200 or 1080) max graphics and 8x AA, a graphics card with more than 1 GiB of memory is worth looking at.

Exiled.

[FOX_11_GUY]

Whats worse than low fps? Losing connection every five minutes, only in PR

[Airsoft Soldier]

I consider 40-60 fps good because it's the best I get on my desktop PC. I'm lucky to get 20 fps on maps like Shaiah (sp) valley, burning sands, fallujah.

[[R-MOD]Eddiereyes909]

Wanna know what's funny? My mac gets about 60 FPS on all high with AA on.


Really, if you don't want to play the game, then don't. If you do want to play, have fun and enjoy yourself. Just don't make a thread with the angry > smiley face because you get 40-60 FPS when looking a certain direction on a map.

[Arnoldio]

Originally Posted by Phenom 955

ujelly? It seems to me that you are or you wouldn't care.

I mentioned my specs because people automatically assume that I'm running on an older computer.

I think I'm just going to go play some Forgotten Hope 2 where my FPS can actually stay above 60.

Im not craving for you specs, but they wouldnt hurt.

Omg, hes going to play FH2, blasphemy!

[Gracler]

what I referred to is that you wont "miss" any objects that you would be able to hit with your reaction ability. That said it you might experience "blur" when something moves fast, but if you would refer to bfbc2 it seems like everything is made "blurry" on purpose so it must be a plus in there eyes


If you want to make sure that you "see" everything while flying a jet you might need 500 fps, but since most monitors only refresh with 60 or 120 frames per seconds it would be useless anyway.

id say start to worry when you go below 24 fps and don't bother to tweak it any more when your monitor cant keep up any more.

[CareBear]

try running the game on only 1 core of your cpu, sometimes helps, did on my old computer

[TheComedian]

Originally Posted by karambaitos

we'd be lucky if COD was running on UE 3
its actually running on an modified quake 4 engine (much cheaper to license)

Funny how Infinity Ward claims to have made a "brand new" engine called IW 4.0 lol