ESO - Worst performance award 2016?

LEGENDARYYY

Built a new computer today, with an i5 6600k, 16 GB ram, the ZOTAC 1070GTX Amp beast GPU.

I get frame drops in ESO down to about 30 fps in cities.

This is just slightly better than my GTX960M gaming laptop, which drops to about 25 fps.

Are you kidding me?

A 5 times better video card give me 5-10 higher fps in ESO.

I knew this game was eating CPU (at least 1 core.....) but this is just ridicolous.

In almost any other game I get a performance increase of about 100 fps.

Mojmir

Yup

Aeladiir

Even with 64-bit, I had to decrease my graphics for a huge margin. I can run Witcher 3 at highest, but need to play ESO on medium in order to have stable performance (pre-Thieves Guild I had everything on high, except shadows). My computer is nothing close to what you've got, but I also get around 30 in cities (15-30 in trials, 10-30 Cyrodiil, 0(!!!!)-25 Orsinium).

Optimization is incredibly poor and something should be done about it.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Poor you...

FullBlownBeast

I agree.

Bonzodog01

So, you built a great new computer, put tons of thought into the RAM and GPU, but didn't stop to think that the GPU NEEDS the CPU to even begin processing half the info? That i5 is very under-powered and wimpy. Should have gone for an i7 at the very least. You bottle-necked your own system.

LEGENDARYYY

Bonzodog01 wrote: »

So, you built a great new computer, put tons of thought into the RAM and GPU, but didn't stop to think that the GPU NEEDS the CPU to even begin processing half the info? That i5 is very under-powered and wimpy. Should have gone for an i7 at the very least. You bottle-necked your own system.

Stop talking about things you obviously know nothing about.

All I can say is, go google benchmarks, get enlightened.

IF thats to hard for you, I can give you the answer. Theres AT MOST 5 fps difference in gaming performance between the i5 6600K and the i7 6700K. In ESO, probably 0.

EDIT: Just noticed ur on XBOX, that pretty much explains things.

anitajoneb17_ESO

I love how ppl love the 100FPS thing when the human eye can only distinguish 25-30 FPS.

LEGENDARYYY

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

I love how ppl love the 100FPS thing when the human eye can only distinguish 25-30 FPS.

Also wrong, IF one is gonna talk about how many fps ur eye can see it is somewhere in the range of 65-70 pictures per second. Allthough, the eye doesn't work exactly that way so it is impossible to draw conclusions.

The reason you think 30 fps is enough is because of smoothing technologies in for example movies.

Rohamad_Ali

If that's an I5 processor , there's the issue . Need a I7 or better for 60FPS . If it is a better processor apologies .

Either way you are absolutely right about the games optimization being bad . I have a I7 and still have FPS issues dropping to 45-50 in PvE and under 30 in PvP .

neville_bart0s

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

I love how ppl love the 100FPS thing when the human eye can only distinguish 25-30 FPS.

it took me literally 30 seconds to find out this is not true.

google.com

Samuel_Bantien

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

I love how ppl love the 100FPS thing when the human eye can only distinguish 25-30 FPS.

Play Skyrim or any game at 30 FPS. Then move to 60 FPS. Then try moving to 60+ FPS. Huge differences.

Rohamad_Ali

When I watched on a friends PC playing at 100 FPS , I was so amazed . You really can see a very clear difference . I'm so jealous of that dudes computer ...

ArchMikem

LEGENDARYYY wrote: »

Bonzodog01 wrote: »

So, you built a great new computer, put tons of thought into the RAM and GPU, but didn't stop to think that the GPU NEEDS the CPU to even begin processing half the info? That i5 is very under-powered and wimpy. Should have gone for an i7 at the very least. You bottle-necked your own system.

Stop talking about things you obviously know nothing about.

All I can say is, go google benchmarks, get enlightened.

IF thats to hard for you, I can give you the answer. Theres AT MOST 5 fps difference in gaming performance between the i5 6600K and the i7 6700K. In ESO, probably 0.

EDIT: Just noticed ur on XBOX, that pretty much explains things.

Just looked up the Benchmark. My prebuilt Cyberpower has an AMD FX-8350 and even that's got a better performance mark than the i5, and everyone loves to remind others how utter crap AMD processors are. I can understand if you were going for what you wanted to afford, so did I, got my Comp on sale. But if you wanted utter performance the common theme is always go for an i7 if you can.

But disregarding all that I do still agree with you, this game has a ton of optimization hookups. I know I keep using this same game as a comparison all the time but it's the only other MMO I've played a ton of, but Planetside 2 runs insanely well compared to ESO. And that game runs thousands of players on megaservers, all playing in the same instance.

Maybe ZOS should call Daybreak and ask what their secret is.

Miszou

There's nothing wrong with an i5. The only thing the i7 gives you over the i5 is hyperthreading, which is only useful under certain rare situations.

Sure, bigger is better, but 95% of people will never notice the difference. The lions share of the work in modern games is done by the GPU, so adding a handful of hyperthreads to a quad core system is only really useful in a *** measuring contest.

Averya_Teira

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

I love how ppl love the 100FPS thing when the human eye can only distinguish 25-30 FPS.

That is 100 % false... If you can't see the difference between a 30 and 60 fps video, you should get your eyes checked because it's pretty *** obvious lol....

LEGENDARYYY

ArchMikem wrote: »

LEGENDARYYY wrote: »

Bonzodog01 wrote: »

So, you built a great new computer, put tons of thought into the RAM and GPU, but didn't stop to think that the GPU NEEDS the CPU to even begin processing half the info? That i5 is very under-powered and wimpy. Should have gone for an i7 at the very least. You bottle-necked your own system.

Stop talking about things you obviously know nothing about.

All I can say is, go google benchmarks, get enlightened.

IF thats to hard for you, I can give you the answer. Theres AT MOST 5 fps difference in gaming performance between the i5 6600K and the i7 6700K. In ESO, probably 0.

EDIT: Just noticed ur on XBOX, that pretty much explains things.

Just looked up the Benchmark. My prebuilt Cyberpower has an AMD FX-8350 and even that's got a better performance mark than the i5, and everyone loves to remind others how utter crap AMD processors are. I can understand if you were going for what you wanted to afford, so did I, got my Comp on sale. But if you wanted utter performance the common theme is always go for an i7 if you can.

But disregarding all that I do still agree with you, this game has a ton of optimization hookups. I know I keep using this same game as a comparison all the time but it's the only other MMO I've played a ton of, but Planetside 2 runs insanely well compared to ESO. And that game runs thousands of players on megaservers, all playing in the same instance.

Maybe ZOS should call Daybreak and ask what their secret is.

Theres a huge difference between tests that use all cores/threads and gaming performance.

Most games today still struggle utilizing more than 1 or 2 cores.

the i5 6600k has a better single core performance than the FX-8350, ergo its better in games nowadays. Also, intel has always *** over AMD in regards to the cache functions of the CPU, resulting in an overall better performance for the same buck. http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-6600K-vs-AMD-FX-8350

an overclocked i5 6600K can even perform almost equal i7 6700k in terms of fps stability in games.

EVEN, in cases where ppl put on only settings to stress the CPU: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhaB1dqYv_I

I have no idea where u get ur numbers from. Your FX-8350 isnt bad, but its priced the same as i5 6600k, and is worse in todays games.

The i5 6600K OC isnt much of a bottleneck at 1080p gaming, if at all. And on high resolutions, not at all.

mistermutiny89

I was really excited to give the award to ESO but Pokemon go wins for 2016.

Worst performance for 2017 through to 2020 definitely incoming though.

Wifeaggro13

LEGENDARYYY wrote: »

Built a new computer today, with an i5 6600k, 16 GB ram, the ZOTAC 1070GTX Amp beast GPU.

I get frame drops in ESO down to about 30 fps in cities.

This is just slightly better than my GTX960M gaming laptop, which drops to about 25 fps.

Are you kidding me?

A 5 times better video card give me 5-10 higher fps in ESO.

I knew this game was eating CPU (at least 1 core.....) but this is just ridicolous.

In almost any other game I get a performance increase of about 100 fps.

Most MMO's gorge on cpu's. Go with the i7 6700x already oc. go liquid if you are scared of case heat retention. The true 6 cores are over kill

Milvan

Wifeaggro13 wrote: »

Most MMO's gorge on cpu's. Go with the i7 6700x already oc. go liquid if you are scared of case heat retention. The true 6 cores are over kill

Most mmo's I have ever played, and it was like at least 10 of them were very cpu friendly. Real open world areas with no loading screens, massive battles with barely and fps drops etc.

ESO does have a problem. I mean, they need to fix their engine otherwise the game will still remain 5 years behind any decent asian mmorpg.

ScottK1994

For virtual reality I think 60fps would cause some eye pain, like the Hobbit movies apparently did in cinemas.

But your issue sucks, we don't have frame rate issues in console but we have lots of others so it's about even

Vaoh

ScottK1994 wrote: »

For virtual reality I think 60fps would cause some eye pain, like the Hobbit movies apparently did in cinemas.

But your issue sucks, we don't have frame rate issues in console but we have lots of others so it's about even

Console doesn't have FPS issues? Surely you aren't playing on Xbox One or PS4.

We have significant FPS issues. Entering a populated town, large PvP battle, or trial is the quickest way to immediately drop you to ~5FPS - 15FPS. According to what we were told by ZOS, it is never supposed to stray from a stable 30FPS.

Even reaching the Lord Warden's Council in Imperial City Prison kills FPS!

Not even going to start on the multitude of other performance issues

IcyDeadPeople

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

I love how ppl love the 100FPS thing when the human eye can only distinguish 25-30 FPS.

I take it you have never watched any of the many thousands of 60fps gameplay videos on youtube?

60fps is much more smooth for any game compared to 30fps or lower. It is extremely noticeable. Even 45fps is significantly smoother than 30fps.

20 to 30 fps is a more laggy experience, like playing games with too much motion blur. Lower than 20 and it starts to become difficult to respond or even determine what's happening on the screen.

Played a number of games at all of these various frame rates, and even lower. IMHO 60fps should be target minimum frame rate for developers working on every single game excluding turn based strategy titles like Civilization.

Wreuntzylla

LEGENDARYYY wrote: »

ArchMikem wrote: »

LEGENDARYYY wrote: »

Bonzodog01 wrote: »

So, you built a great new computer, put tons of thought into the RAM and GPU, but didn't stop to think that the GPU NEEDS the CPU to even begin processing half the info? That i5 is very under-powered and wimpy. Should have gone for an i7 at the very least. You bottle-necked your own system.

Stop talking about things you obviously know nothing about.

All I can say is, go google benchmarks, get enlightened.

IF thats to hard for you, I can give you the answer. Theres AT MOST 5 fps difference in gaming performance between the i5 6600K and the i7 6700K. In ESO, probably 0.

EDIT: Just noticed ur on XBOX, that pretty much explains things.

Just looked up the Benchmark. My prebuilt Cyberpower has an AMD FX-8350 and even that's got a better performance mark than the i5, and everyone loves to remind others how utter crap AMD processors are. I can understand if you were going for what you wanted to afford, so did I, got my Comp on sale. But if you wanted utter performance the common theme is always go for an i7 if you can.

But disregarding all that I do still agree with you, this game has a ton of optimization hookups. I know I keep using this same game as a comparison all the time but it's the only other MMO I've played a ton of, but Planetside 2 runs insanely well compared to ESO. And that game runs thousands of players on megaservers, all playing in the same instance.

Maybe ZOS should call Daybreak and ask what their secret is.

Theres a huge difference between tests that use all cores/threads and gaming performance.

Most games today still struggle utilizing more than 1 or 2 cores.

the i5 6600k has a better single core performance than the FX-8350, ergo its better in games nowadays. Also, intel has always *** over AMD in regards to the cache functions of the CPU, resulting in an overall better performance for the same buck. http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-6600K-vs-AMD-FX-8350

an overclocked i5 6600K can even perform almost equal i7 6700k in terms of fps stability in games.

EVEN, in cases where ppl put on only settings to stress the CPU: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhaB1dqYv_I

I have no idea where u get ur numbers from. Your FX-8350 isnt bad, but its priced the same as i5 6600k, and is worse in todays games.

The i5 6600K OC isnt much of a bottleneck at 1080p gaming, if at all. And on high resolutions, not at all.

How old is BF3 now? Six plus cores. Every game I play uses more than ESO.

ScottK1994

Doncellius wrote: »

ScottK1994 wrote: »

For virtual reality I think 60fps would cause some eye pain, like the Hobbit movies apparently did in cinemas.

But your issue sucks, we don't have frame rate issues in console but we have lots of others so it's about even

Console doesn't have FPS issues? Surely you aren't playing on Xbox One or PS4.

We have significant FPS issues. Entering a populated town, large PvP battle, or trial is the quickest way to immediately drop you to ~5FPS - 15FPS. According to what we were told by ZOS, it is never supposed to stray from a stable 30FPS.

Even reaching the Lord Warden's Council in Imperial City Prison kills FPS!

Not even going to start on the multitude of other performance issues

I have lag on PS4, lots of invisible enemies etc. But it always looks stunning... So I at least never stray from my fps. I have lots of other issues but not frame rate

And during my few moments alive when I've been in the middle of a zerg it sometimes doesn't show damage being done to me or aoe on the ground or healing but still it doesn't get that clunky feeling I remember from low fps

Vaoh

ScottK1994 wrote: »

Doncellius wrote: »

ScottK1994 wrote: »

For virtual reality I think 60fps would cause some eye pain, like the Hobbit movies apparently did in cinemas.

But your issue sucks, we don't have frame rate issues in console but we have lots of others so it's about even

Console doesn't have FPS issues? Surely you aren't playing on Xbox One or PS4.

We have significant FPS issues. Entering a populated town, large PvP battle, or trial is the quickest way to immediately drop you to ~5FPS - 15FPS. According to what we were told by ZOS, it is never supposed to stray from a stable 30FPS.

Even reaching the Lord Warden's Council in Imperial City Prison kills FPS!

Not even going to start on the multitude of other performance issues

I have lag on PS4, lots of invisible enemies etc. But it always looks stunning...

Graphics and the beauty of Tamriel is quite different than the FPS.

I agree with you that the game displays a beautiful world. FPS (and a million other performance issues) needs polishing atm.

CherryCake

PS4 master race...?

ScottK1994

People seem to have different sets of issues. One issue I've never had is being stuck in Wrothmar for example! And there are console players I've spoken to who don't get loading screens and black characters/invisible npcs.

Some educated guy had mentioned a memory leak

ScottK1994

EstelioVeleth wrote: »

PS4 master race...?

Lol I'm not saying it's better than the PC I think the issues aren't to do with the machines at all in most cases

Vaoh

Here's for you PC players to see. This is ESO on PS4 atm

https://youtu.be/_nBuKJpzQgA

Video Clip Guide

00:00 - 00:54 Snipe Health Desync

00:55 - 01:11 Funnel Health Desync

01:12 - 02:11 vMA Crematorial Guard Health Desync (Magicka NB went from V2 to CP501. First vMA attempt and this happens -_-)

02:12 - 03:47 Stutter Performance Issue in vMA (Magicka NB went from V2 to CP501. First vMA attempt and this happens -_-)

03:48 - 04:58 Wayrest Performance: Low FPS, Cut Audio, Invisible NPCs and Guards, Player Silhouettes, Difficulties w/ World Map

04:59 - 06:53 Wayrest Performance: Low FPS, Load Screens, NPCs not spawning, Player Silhouettes, unloaded textures

06:54 - 08:20 Greenshade Performance: Multiple Load Screens, Very Little distance traveled per load screen, stuff popping in out of nowhere, etc

08:21 - 09:29 Bangkorai Performance: Same as Greenshade since the issue is universal across possibly all zones, heavily underpopulated zone yet still have load screens and character movement speed does not change this

09:30 - 09:51 Thieves Guild patch IC Arena: Back when the performance issue was still a baby Invisible meteors that are still present in the Arena!

The Thread: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/278133/ps4-performance-video/p1

jircris11

LEGENDARYYY wrote: »

Built a new computer today, with an i5 6600k, 16 GB ram, the ZOTAC 1070GTX Amp beast GPU.

I get frame drops in ESO down to about 30 fps in cities.

This is just slightly better than my GTX960M gaming laptop, which drops to about 25 fps.

Are you kidding me?

A 5 times better video card give me 5-10 higher fps in ESO.

I knew this game was eating CPU (at least 1 core.....) but this is just ridicolous.

In almost any other game I get a performance increase of about 100 fps.

try running black gold then tell me what you thin. i can run eso much smoother then that game XD.