Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
New graphics upgrade runs worse then Crysis
Desetes
Member UncommonPosts: 88
in EVE Online
I get 15-20 FPS near space stations at all high, no AA (so there's alot of jaggies still) at 1280x1024 on a 8800GT and X2 dual core AMD 6000+ with 2G DDR2 800 ram. That's worse performance then I get in Crysis.
Comments
So? Fps say nothing. I got 60 and it feels laggy sometimes, with classic i got 20 and it feels ultrasmooth..
Welcome to :
Eve Online Vista Edition
Mmm, well if you get low FPS the problem can be the game or your comp. I dont play Crysis and dont play Eve. Low fps have nothing to do with server lag. Try running 3D mark, and see if it goes nice or with low fps. If it goes well, Eve has a bad engine, if 3D mark goes bad, then make somebody to take a look at your comp.
Well, the boy is talking about FPS not about feeling the game laggy.
You have no idea what you're talking about. 60 FPS is extremly smooth while 20 is really choppy.
And it's not my PC, I can run any other game on almost max and get over 10k in 3Dmark06.
I was suprised at how bad it runs seeing as the background is just a picture and the only objects are ships and stations, the models on them arn't even that great and they're the same polygons as before, the only thing thats changed is the lighting and textures.
I got it running at 50fps with premium and everything turned up max, and i have a X2 4200+ cpu and 2 gig and a 8800 gtx with 256mb of mem and i got no jigger problem at all .
http://www.speedtest.net/result/3845509852.png
Funny since it runs at over 100 FPs at 1920x1200 with my 8800 GTS.
Time to stop using the shadows = extreme setting that does nothign but kilkl your FPS without a noticable quality diff.
If you put everything to the max on crysis you will never even get close to 20 FPS dude.
The neve EvE Client is very smooth with 8800 cards.
Ok, I put shadows on normal and now at 1280x1024 with 4x AA I get 80-120 FPS near space stations.
Have almost the same system specs and i run every on max at constant 74 fps.
Either your system is configured wrong in the BIOS or your hardware drivers are not configured right or it could simply just be the hardware... AMD. Sorry to say. Crysis, was optimized for Intel C2 and Nvidia. EVE was optimized for NVidia GeForce series cards as well. I know AMD and ATI can run these games too but Intel and Nvidia, own the benchmarkds right now.
Is your system a retail store mass produced product? If so that could be another problem because retail companies use low quality parts in their systems. I don't mean to come on this thread with a big "epeen" post... I am just curious why your experiencing such horrible performance?
"Ok, I put shadows on normal and now at 1280x1024 with 4x AA I get 80-120 FPS near space stations."
And I don't know where you got that I'm getting problems in crysis. I run it on high with shadows at medium and physics on very high and the ra_usefakeAA=2 command at 1280x1024 with 25-40FPS.
And my AMD processor is the equivalent to your E6600 but costs $80 less.
Yeh i dunno what extreme shadows does but obv it's broken.
Hum weird.
my rig
[Motherboard] Biostar TForce 570
[CPU] AMD X2 4000+ Brisbane 2.1GHZ @ 2.700 300x9 HT 930mhz Stock Volt/HSF
[Memory] Corsair XMS2 2X1GB 900Mhz CL 5-5-5-12 2T
[HDD] WD 500GB 16MB 7200RPM 8.9MS NCQ
[Videocard] GeForce Foxconn 7950 GT OC @ CORE 650 / MEM 825
i'm running everything at extreme except shadow at normal !
Manager
www.crucialconnexion.ca
Professional Gaming Organization
#c2team irc@gamesurge
Counter-Strike:Source
- ESEA-I
- CEVO-P
Counter-Strike 1.6
- ESEA-M
myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp
Trinity 1.0.1 Patch Notes
Skills
NPE & Tutorials
NPCs
Missions
Science and Industry
Starbases
Corporations & Alliances
Killmails
Other
Settings
Graphics
Patching
Please note: No Windows System files were harmed during the creation or deployment of this patch.
"Ok, I put shadows on normal and now at 1280x1024 with 4x AA I get 80-120 FPS near space stations."
And I don't know where you got that I'm getting problems in crysis. I run it on high with shadows at medium and physics on very high and the ra_usefakeAA=2 command at 1280x1024 with 25-40FPS.
And my AMD processor is the equivalent to your E6600 but costs $80 less.
Well I just assumed you where having troubles in Crysis because the title of this thread is "New graphics runs worse then Crysis". So...
Hmm this is what im using
AMD 3500 (64) Single Core
2 Gigs of 667Mhz ram
Geforce 8600GT Extreme 256DDR
and i run all on extreme but have the shadows set to normal and i get 40-60fps all the time , never seems togo lower than 40.. so not to sure whats wrong with yours and my res is set to 1280 x 1024 altho i do set my graphics card to application controled , so im not forcing any AA ect..
Tip 1:
It's not because you have high specs that your parts are good quality. Your ram might say 800MHZ DDR 2 and yet miss the important caching buffers. Reason you have rams that cost 300$ for 1GIG and others that cost 100$ for one gig.
I run both Crysis and EVE at high end settings and it's ultra smooth.
Tip 2:
Did you put Shadows to Extreme or to high?
If you're going to whine about your crappy PC at least bitch about which OS you're using. Seriously.
I get better performance on my old 2.8 prescott with an ati x1950pro, 2 x1gb duel channel ddr, running XP Pro. AND I run it at 1680x1050 !!
Using one game to compare to another game soley for "max" settings and "fps" is an obvious sign you're a complete noob. Who taught you this bad habbit?
*note: my post was intentionally sarcastic.
Im really suprised by the ammount of people here who obviously didnt read beyond the OP.
He solved the problem it was the shadows he had them set to extreme. The FPS issue is fixed now that shadows are set to normal.
"Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god."
-- Jean Rostand
Has anyone else noticed that the graphics are kinda odd in space now? Like if you are looking at a ship in space it's graphic will be up above the target icon? Like this:
ship here
[.] <-- Target icon here
It's really wierd. If I go into graphics settings and change anything, then apply, they go back to normal where the target icon is superimposed. But it constantly comes back. Downright annoying. Haven't figured out what's causing it yet.
"A ship-of-war is the best ambassador." - Oliver Cromwell
Has anyone else noticed that the graphics are kinda odd in space now? Like if you are looking at a ship in space it's graphic will be up above the target icon? Like this:
ship here
[.] <-- Target icon here
It's really wierd. If I go into graphics settings and change anything, then apply, they go back to normal where the target icon is superimposed. But it constantly comes back. Downright annoying. Haven't figured out what's causing it yet.
Yeah, there've been quite a few graphic and animation glitches reported. That's why I posted the patch notes in here, since some of those glitches are discussed for fixing in the thread there, and LOD for the shaders is actually addressed in the patch, so hopefully that'll boost some peoples FPS.As for the different cache settings, I've frankly noticed no differences either. Some players ( and a mod even ) have posted their differing ides about what they actually do ( can't remember which thread on the Eve-O site ), but basically it all comes down to the same thing: nobody knows.
You have no idea what you're talking about. 60 FPS is extremly smooth while 20 is really choppy.
And it's not my PC, I can run any other game on almost max and get over 10k in 3Dmark06.
24-25 FPS is unnoticeable, hell even 20 may be barely noticeable. I bet you are one of those guys who have to break the uber 100+ FPS mark to play a video game, or one that yells the rate of speed of a bullet is measured by FPS... lmfao.
I purposely cap the FPS off at 30 FPS in all the games I make, it's all amusement to me.
20 FPS barely noticeable? Get better eyes. And did I say I need 100? I just want 35-40 for a nice smooth experience.
PS: I set my shadows to high instead of normal and I still get 90-120 FPS near space staions. But on extreme I again get 15-20. Must be a bug because the visual difference is really small yet the FPS drop is huge.
You have no idea what you're talking about. 60 FPS is extremly smooth while 20 is really choppy.
And it's not my PC, I can run any other game on almost max and get over 10k in 3Dmark06.
24-25 FPS is unnoticeable, hell even 20 may be barely noticeable. I bet you are one of those guys who have to break the uber 100+ FPS mark to play a video game, or one that yells the rate of speed of a bullet is measured by FPS... lmfao.
I purposely cap the FPS off at 30 FPS in all the games I make, it's all amusement to me.
20 FPS barely noticeable? Get better eyes. And did I say I need 100? I just want 35-40 for a nice smooth experience.
PS: I set my shadows to high instead of normal and I still get 90-120 FPS near space staions. But on extreme I again get 15-20. Must be a bug because the visual difference is really small yet the FPS drop is huge.
The visual part may be small, but the calculations are probably huge and obviously pointless. (Note, that's a guess and could well be a bug ;P)
At least I now know not to choose that option once I get back.
-iCeh