60% more FPS with a Nvidia GPU

rosendoichinoveb17_ESO

I get capped at 100 FPS on ulta 1080p with a GTX 1080Ti as my TV supports 120Hz only at fullHD and 60 at 4k.

Vulkan will be a great improvement but honestly as far as I know the game was DX11 based with some additions for a minor multi core support later on.

Does anyone know how to get past 100 FPS as I have seen Alcast and other streamers to be over this cap (his config settings on his page did not put me over the cap).

ryzen_gamer_gal

Hyperion616 wrote: »

LeagueTroll wrote: »

Yet i get 30 fps with a gtx1070, gpu never even reached 30% load playing eso.

I have a 1080 Ti and Christ man, max settings and my fps jumps from 110 to 27 in some places. My latency sits at a constant 100 to 110 with highs reaching 170. I can't help but keep thinking these ESO servers are not located here in the states.

i believe i have been told previously that the na server is in texas.. and given the better performance i get on the eu server i'm guessing it is in virginia.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO

skiidzman wrote: »

HuawaSepp wrote: »

I did a lot of testing with a friend and only the use of a nvidia card instead of an amd card was improving fps by 60%.
AMD GPU users are still in a bad spot.
The implementation of Vulcan (not a lazy DX12 implementation) would help a lot.

I'll never buy AMD again, the majority of games do not support it like NVIDIA.

There will be someone who replies to this comment saying "harhar you are wrong, derpyderp, wickywicky" but trust me, I've done my research, built many builds, and tested the crap out of games.

NVIDIA and Intel will win that debate.

Where is the damn LOL button in this forums.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO

deepseamk20b14_ESO wrote: »

I have an RTX 2080 TI and graphics set to ultra, everything other setting set to on and view distance at max on a wide screen “2k” monitor. In towns FPS at 45, out of towns 55-75, dungeons above 100. I havent overclocked my CPU Or GPU yet but honestly I expected a bit more. I hear ESO is somewhat unstable and CPU has a big role with this game so when I OC my 8700k, perhaps I’ll see an improvement.

I’m kind of interested in seeing what the new AMD stuff is capable of.

Either way, I think even if you have a super high end computer this game still doesn’t get crazy FPS if everything is set to max. Nvidia or not.

I use a Vega 64 having overwritten all the settings, at 2560X1440 monitor, and have the same perf as you are.
With a 8600K @ 5Ghz overclock.

The game is CPU limited.

Kalante

deepseamk20b14_ESO wrote: »

I have an RTX 2080 TI and graphics set to ultra, everything other setting set to on and view distance at max on a wide screen “2k” monitor. In towns FPS at 45, out of towns 55-75, dungeons above 100. I havent overclocked my CPU Or GPU yet but honestly I expected a bit more. I hear ESO is somewhat unstable and CPU has a big role with this game so when I OC my 8700k, perhaps I’ll see an improvement.

I’m kind of interested in seeing what the new AMD stuff is capable of.

Either way, I think even if you have a super high end computer this game still doesn’t get crazy FPS if everything is set to max. Nvidia or not.

wow I wish I had at least 20fps in console anywhere I go the map loads at 5-10fps. Here yall complaining about not getting 60fps LOL.

Uryel

Funny how that hwole thread is full of "experts" who say a lot of bulldung.

"only a Nvidia GPU helps", or "there is no point in upgrading hardware for this game" : that is plain wrong. It all depends on what you start with. If you have a *** Nvidia or a decent AMD, AMD will be better. If you have a potato for a rig, upgrading WILL give you a better performance overall. If you have an already decent rig and expect to have the perfectly smooth experiment by going over the top, however, yeah, forget about that.

"This game is single thread" : no, this game is single core. Maybe it runs on two cores now, though, I haven't checked in a while, but it certainly can't make a proper use of multicore CPU. A high instructions per cycle, high frequency CPU will provide much better results than a lowinstructions per cycle, average frequency / manycore CPU. Worst case scenario were AMD CPU from the generation before the first Ryzen, as they had a low instruction per cycle count on each core, and frequency wasn't that high.

For exemple, when I upgraded from an AMD FX 4350 to a Ryzen 2600X (which incured a change of motherboard and RAM too), I almost doubled my FPS. The CPU is a major bottleneck in this game. Granted, the 4350 was ageing, and not an exceptionnal CPU to start with.

And then, there are the server issues. For some reason, you can get FPS drop for no reason at all even in the most quiet, distant places, and the only way we know it's server side is that it does seem to happen to a notable amount of people at the same time... Oh, but that was fixed, of course. Silly me, must be my computer then. I mean, it's not like it was my job to maintain systems like I used to work in IT. Wait... Yes, it was.

ssorgatem

rosendoichinoveb17_ESO wrote: »

I get capped at 100 FPS on ulta 1080p with a GTX 1080Ti as my TV supports 120Hz only at fullHD and 60 at 4k.

Vulkan will be a great improvement but honestly as far as I know the game was DX11 based with some additions for a minor multi core support later on.

Does anyone know how to get past 100 FPS as I have seen Alcast and other streamers to be over this cap (his config settings on his page did not put me over the cap).

The Mac client already uses a Vulkan backend. Using Vulkan on OSX only makes sense if they plant to use the Vulkan backend on other platforms too; otherwise they would have gone directly with Metal instead of MoltenVK (Vulkan over Metal).
It's possible that the PS4 one will use that too, so they finally drop the OpenGL backend from all platforms.

As for performance... I play on Linux. With DXVK (DirectX 11 to Vulkan translation layer), at 4K resolution on a Vega GPU, and I get consistent 60 FPS (except in trials, crowded places, etc., where it's server-bound...)

DXVK generally performs at a 90% of native D3D11, so if you are getting lower performance than me on Windows, there's something wrong with your Windows setup.

TheDigitalAlchemist

kaithuzar wrote: »

There are tons of optimizations you can do with the ini file.
There are also tons of OS level system performance tweaks.
I’ve done a lot and while I can say I’ve gained some performance increase, existing issues with server latency & zerging causing FPS lag, really continue to dominate.

I would say it’s not anywhere near the awesome performance at launch which had 0 pvp lag, but it’s better now than the past few years.
Hopefully performance optimization doesn’t fall off ZOS’s roadmap.

As for the OS & ini optimizations, google is your friend. I’ve even written about some.

~

Actually, for a little while now the .ini file has not been used. Rather the UserSettings.txt file now is where you can tweak all the settings and more that we were accustomed to finding in the old .ini file. The UserSettings.txt file in most cases can be found in the default path ~C:\Users\"yourusernamehere"\Documents\Elder Scrolls Online\live~ If using Windows 10, just look for the "Elder Scrolls Online" folder in your "Documents".

Make a copy of the existing UserSettings.txt file and place it somewhere safe! Watch a couple vids to read some of the great guides out there. Then dive in and test out all the tweaks and optimizations you can find or come up with. Make sure the launcher and client are closed if you want your variables to be saved properly after editing. Share your results! When you finally break something or have adverse effects, copy and paste that backup of the UserSettings.txt you made in previous step back into the original directory to restore things back to default and start all over.

MLGProPlayer

Uryel wrote: »

Funny how that hwole thread is full of "experts" who say a lot of bulldung.

"only a Nvidia GPU helps", or "there is no point in upgrading hardware for this game" : that is plain wrong. It all depends on what you start with. If you have a *** Nvidia or a decent AMD, AMD will be better. If you have a potato for a rig, upgrading WILL give you a better performance overall. If you have an already decent rig and expect to have the perfectly smooth experiment by going over the top, however, yeah, forget about that.

"This game is single thread" : no, this game is single core. Maybe it runs on two cores now, though, I haven't checked in a while, but it certainly can't make a proper use of multicore CPU. A high instructions per cycle, high frequency CPU will provide much better results than a lowinstructions per cycle, average frequency / manycore CPU. Worst case scenario were AMD CPU from the generation before the first Ryzen, as they had a low instruction per cycle count on each core, and frequency wasn't that high.

For exemple, when I upgraded from an AMD FX 4350 to a Ryzen 2600X (which incured a change of motherboard and RAM too), I almost doubled my FPS. The CPU is a major bottleneck in this game. Granted, the 4350 was ageing, and not an exceptionnal CPU to start with.

And then, there are the server issues. For some reason, you can get FPS drop for no reason at all even in the most quiet, distant places, and the only way we know it's server side is that it does seem to happen to a notable amount of people at the same time... Oh, but that was fixed, of course. Silly me, must be my computer then. I mean, it's not like it was my job to maintain systems like I used to work in IT. Wait... Yes, it was.

The FX 4350 was a low end CPU from 2013, before this game even released. Of course upgrading it will result in a huge performance increase.

But anyone with even remotely modern hardware won't see any benefits. I often see posters suggesting that people upgrade their i5s or R5s/R7s to i7s, which is a complete waste of money. An i7 8700K won't run this game any better than an i5 8600 R5 2600.

NocturnalSonata

SirAndy wrote: »

NocturnalSonata wrote: »

eso is single thread cpu bound

ESO is *not* single thread. That's just plain wrong ...

Yeah, poor choice of word order for me... what i meant to indicate is that your Cpu clock is far more important than number of cores/threads e.g having 8 cores at 4.2 is not as good as 4 cores at 5.0. Th eonly way to see any performance increase in eso is through higher single core speed. My Gpu is hardly doing any of the heavy lifting.

MikaHR

HuawaSepp wrote: »

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

I'd also be interested to know which GPUs you compared. Were they ones of equivalent power?

(and does ESO have any company-dependant code in it? I know there have been plenty of games programmed to work better on one company's GPU's vs the other's.)



...dislaimer: I don't use high-end cards. I just upgraded my system to an RX 570, from the R9-270X 2GB that I'd been using for years. Never spent more than $175 for a new GPU. 60fps is nice, but not necessary for many games. Let alone 144.

I compared a Vega 64 (undervolted -150mv) and a RTX 2080. No company-dependant code.

Vega 64 $400
RTX2080 $800

Not even same class of GPUs....

My RX580 is 100% faster than GTX1050ti.

Its also 50+% faster than GTX970 i used to have....never nvidia again, soooooooooooooo many driver issues, no thanks.

And now Navi looks like its gonna make new one to nvidia, probably my next upgrade, "RTX" is the worst GPU in a decade, it barely competes with 3 years old GPUs and costs much more, its like someone slapped "stoopid" sticker all over nvidia...

Uryel

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

anyone with even remotely modern hardware won't see any benefits. I often see posters suggesting that people upgrade their i5s or R5s/R7s to i7s, which is a complete waste of money.

Yeah, that's right. gamers often have a very specific idea of what "remotely modern hardware" is. Specifically, if you're not running on a 2000+ euros rig and /or have any part more than a year old, you're prehistoric.

Truth is, lots of people have sub par computers, or simply unbalanced rigs. What good is a top notch GPU when your CPU is a major bottleneck ? What good is a badass CPU when you simply don't have enough RAM ? A balanced machine will achieve more performance, and more importantly, more reliable performance.

Mordors

Still loves that 1 Thread over the others....

Tested while only running ESO.

All cores are at running 4.2 Ghz O.C Via Bus Speed change. (Doesn't show on Task manager for some weird reason confirmed with CPU Z and Hardware info)

MikaHR

Uryel wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

anyone with even remotely modern hardware won't see any benefits. I often see posters suggesting that people upgrade their i5s or R5s/R7s to i7s, which is a complete waste of money.

Yeah, that's right. gamers often have a very specific idea of what "remotely modern hardware" is. Specifically, if you're not running on a 2000+ euros rig and /or have any part more than a year old, you're prehistoric.

Truth is, lots of people have sub par computers, or simply unbalanced rigs. What good is a top notch GPU when your CPU is a major bottleneck ? What good is a badass CPU when you simply don't have enough RAM ? A balanced machine will achieve more performance, and more importantly, more reliable performance.

I often see so much bad advice given and result is completely imbalanced PCs where most of money is wasted on unnecessary stuff.

Like buyinf i7 8700k....and pair it with GTX1050. Its is just plain idiotic, just because someone watched some dumb youtubers/internet claiming that "8700k gives most FPS in gaming". Not with GTX1050 it wont, same as if not overclocked to 5 GHz whic require small portable power plant and industrial grade cooling...

Mordors

MikaHR wrote: »

Uryel wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

anyone with even remotely modern hardware won't see any benefits. I often see posters suggesting that people upgrade their i5s or R5s/R7s to i7s, which is a complete waste of money.

Yeah, that's right. gamers often have a very specific idea of what "remotely modern hardware" is. Specifically, if you're not running on a 2000+ euros rig and /or have any part more than a year old, you're prehistoric.

Truth is, lots of people have sub par computers, or simply unbalanced rigs. What good is a top notch GPU when your CPU is a major bottleneck ? What good is a badass CPU when you simply don't have enough RAM ? A balanced machine will achieve more performance, and more importantly, more reliable performance.

I often see so much bad advice given and result is completely imbalanced PCs where most of money is wasted on unnecessary stuff.

Like buyinf i7 8700k....and pair it with GTX1050. Its is just plain idiotic, just because someone watched some dumb youtubers/internet claiming that "8700k gives most FPS in gaming". Not with GTX1050 it wont, same as if not overclocked to 5 GHz whic require small portable power plant and industrial grade cooling...

Yeap sadly this is how it goes around the internet... not only that i don't also understand people buying K versions of these CPUs while having no idea how overclocking works...not only that also saying sht like "if you overclock you will burn your CPU".... BUYS a i9-9900K Ugghh

Twyst

Vega 64 LC user at 1440p ultra wide with frames mostly capped at 100 with dips into the high 40s in towns and trials.

Would never go back to NoVidia

Mordors

Twyst wrote: »

Vega 64 LC user at 1440p ultra wide with frames mostly capped at 100 with dips into the high 40s in towns and trials.

Would never go back to NoVidia

This has noting to do with Nvidia vs AMD tbh it's %100 CPU bottleneck with ESO when you have some degree of a capable GPU

Mordors

rosendoichinoveb17_ESO wrote: »

I get capped at 100 FPS on ulta 1080p with a GTX 1080Ti as my TV supports 120Hz only at fullHD and 60 at 4k.

Vulkan will be a great improvement but honestly as far as I know the game was DX11 based with some additions for a minor multi core support later on.

Does anyone know how to get past 100 FPS as I have seen Alcast and other streamers to be over this cap (his config settings on his page did not put me over the cap).

To make your FPS Cap Unlimited do the following...

Goto

C:\Users\YOURPCNAME\Documents\Elder Scrolls Online\live

Find

UserSettings.txt

Open it with notepad

CTRL+F

Find

SET MinFrameTime.2

Set To

SET MinFrameTime.2 "0.00000001"

Save the file...

Done Have fun.

Merlight

Mordors wrote: »

SET MinFrameTime.2 "0.00000001"

Wouldn't setting it to "0.008" be a better advice? What good is rendering frames that noone will see?

Tandor

I can't believe it's taken over 5 years for this forum to enter the "Nvidia versus AMD" debate !

Anotherone773

I always build my own PCs(order a custom build) because of the horrible hardware balance they have for anything but surfing the web and checking email. I worked on computers for extra money for nearly two decades and i have seen so many people want to blow all there money on a single high end item, usually a graphics card or CPU. I tell them you dont want that, in 6 to 12 months a card/CPU half that price will do the same thing.

Its better to have a well balanced PC. For example on my new PC i went with a regular ol' 8700 and gtx 1070, with a 256GB PCIe SSD(2 TB data storage) and 32 gb of 2666 ram. It fits my needs but i made sure that every component was a good balance with others in cost and it would perform well under the load of ESO.

It does great with ESO. i dont have max settings but they are really high. Not 4k but this monitor doesnt support 4k. Im dont need everything to be the latest and greatest i know its a big waste of money for a minor improvement. I do get some random no reason lag drops and my performance did go down quite a bit from when i first loaded the game from this pc. That is because of addons though. On a fresh pc i am really seeing the difference between no addons and my suite of 8 addons.
I was getting 5 to 10 second load screens for fresh loads and my FPS was more steady and slightly higher.

I built this pc to last me a 3-4 years with no upgrades. I really want both the RTX and 9 gen intel, i just dont want to pay the current price. So ill wait until the price drops build another pc and give this one to my wife.

Anotherone773

Tandor wrote: »

I can't believe it's taken over 5 years for this forum to enter the "Nvidia versus AMD" debate !

I worked on PCs for nearly two decades as i stated above. AMD has always been garbage. they are inferior in quality and always have issues. They are harder to cool and they really fall on their face when they are hot. They require more cores to do the same amount of work as an Intel. Even with a smaller nm process than intel they can barely stay in the same ballpark.

Ive replaced AMD at 3 times the rate of intel and i use to get so sick of people whining about the slow performance of their AMD PCs. There is a reason why AMD is a good amount cheaper than Intel. Protip: never go on the cheap when it comes to electronics, you really arent getting a good deal and that brand that is "price gouging" is actually just using a lot better quality materials and manufacturing. ATI has always been the AMD of graphics cards and of course now officially is. I use to buy ATI as a teen because they were cheap upgrades and i i didnt know better. I use to have a stack of used, out of date cards i could pawn to my friends for a few bucks.

kaithuzar

TheDigitalAlchemist wrote: »

kaithuzar wrote: »

There are tons of optimizations you can do with the ini file.
There are also tons of OS level system performance tweaks.
I’ve done a lot and while I can say I’ve gained some performance increase, existing issues with server latency & zerging causing FPS lag, really continue to dominate.

I would say it’s not anywhere near the awesome performance at launch which had 0 pvp lag, but it’s better now than the past few years.
Hopefully performance optimization doesn’t fall off ZOS’s roadmap.

As for the OS & ini optimizations, google is your friend. I’ve even written about some.

~

Actually, for a little while now the .ini file has not been used. Rather the UserSettings.txt file now is where you can tweak all the settings and more that we were accustomed to finding in the old .ini file. The UserSettings.txt file in most cases can be found in the default path ~C:\Users\"yourusernamehere"\Documents\Elder Scrolls Online\live~ If using Windows 10, just look for the "Elder Scrolls Online" folder in your "Documents".

Make a copy of the existing UserSettings.txt file and place it somewhere safe! Watch a couple vids to read some of the great guides out there. Then dive in and test out all the tweaks and optimizations you can find or come up with. Make sure the launcher and client are closed if you want your variables to be saved properly after editing. Share your results! When you finally break something or have adverse effects, copy and paste that backup of the UserSettings.txt you made in previous step back into the original directory to restore things back to default and start all over.

My bad I misspoke regarding the name of the file. It operates exactly like an ini file, so rather than double checking the name, I was speaking the function; sorry & thanks for the correction.

kaithuzar

Uryel wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

anyone with even remotely modern hardware won't see any benefits. I often see posters suggesting that people upgrade their i5s or R5s/R7s to i7s, which is a complete waste of money.

Yeah, that's right. gamers often have a very specific idea of what "remotely modern hardware" is. Specifically, if you're not running on a 2000+ euros rig and /or have any part more than a year old, you're prehistoric.

Truth is, lots of people have sub par computers, or simply unbalanced rigs. What good is a top notch GPU when your CPU is a major bottleneck ? What good is a badass CPU when you simply don't have enough RAM ? A balanced machine will achieve more performance, and more importantly, more reliable performance.

I don’t know/think I believe the part about sub-par computers for the majority of gamers.
I think the issue here is a lack of good software developers using a system to its full potential & instead creating greedy/sloppy code.

kaithuzar

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

I can't believe it's taken over 5 years for this forum to enter the "Nvidia versus AMD" debate !

I worked on PCs for nearly two decades as i stated above. AMD has always been garbage. they are inferior in quality and always have issues. They are harder to cool and they really fall on their face when they are hot. They require more cores to do the same amount of work as an Intel. Even with a smaller nm process than intel they can barely stay in the same ballpark.

Ive replaced AMD at 3 times the rate of intel and i use to get so sick of people whining about the slow performance of their AMD PCs. There is a reason why AMD is a good amount cheaper than Intel. Protip: never go on the cheap when it comes to electronics, you really arent getting a good deal and that brand that is "price gouging" is actually just using a lot better quality materials and manufacturing. ATI has always been the AMD of graphics cards and of course now officially is. I use to buy ATI as a teen because they were cheap upgrades and i i didnt know better. I use to have a stack of used, out of date cards i could pawn to my friends for a few bucks.

I used to be an AMD fan boy.
That said I’ve switched to intel over the last decade. Will it remain at the top for the future? Unknown. But as a poking fun, AMD was at the top for all of a year right around/just over 2 decades ago =P

PapaWeeb

skiidzman wrote: »

HuawaSepp wrote: »

I did a lot of testing with a friend and only the use of a nvidia card instead of an amd card was improving fps by 60%.
AMD GPU users are still in a bad spot.
The implementation of Vulcan (not a lazy DX12 implementation) would help a lot.

I'll never buy AMD again, the majority of games do not support it like NVIDIA.

There will be someone who replies to this comment saying "harhar you are wrong, derpyderp, wickywicky" but trust me, I've done my research, built many builds, and tested the crap out of games.

NVIDIA and Intel will win that debate.

clueless

HuawaSepp

MikaHR wrote: »

HuawaSepp wrote: »

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

I'd also be interested to know which GPUs you compared. Were they ones of equivalent power?

(and does ESO have any company-dependant code in it? I know there have been plenty of games programmed to work better on one company's GPU's vs the other's.)



...dislaimer: I don't use high-end cards. I just upgraded my system to an RX 570, from the R9-270X 2GB that I'd been using for years. Never spent more than $175 for a new GPU. 60fps is nice, but not necessary for many games. Let alone 144.

I compared a Vega 64 (undervolted -150mv) and a RTX 2080. No company-dependant code.

Vega 64 $400
RTX2080 $800

Not even same class of GPUs....

My RX580 is 100% faster than GTX1050ti.

Its also 50+% faster than GTX970 i used to have....never nvidia again, soooooooooooooo many driver issues, no thanks.

And now Navi looks like its gonna make new one to nvidia, probably my next upgrade, "RTX" is the worst GPU in a decade, it barely competes with 3 years old GPUs and costs much more, its like someone slapped "stoopid" sticker all over nvidia...

If fps doesn't matter and you go for 4k+ resolution, it makes a difference if you buy a 200$, 400$ or 800$ card.
But if you are like me and always want at least 60+ fps in a trial or pvp, you can buy a GTX1050ti and get the same result as with a Titan Z.

For eso you want something like:

- Intel Core I9-9900KF (https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html)

- Dual channel, dual sided DDR4 RAM with 5000+ Mhz (and very low timings)

- AND a Nvidia GPU because yeah... They got a driver that can put the dx11 draw calls on 2 cpu cores. AND that will result in a 60% fps increase.

Trinity_Is_My_Name

If you want to measure GPU, CPU, Thread loading, Temps, etc...I highly suggest getting MSI Afterburner.

You can set it for onscreen in game and see actual loading of everything in your system.

I usually see no more than 31% CPU loading and GPU loading is split to about 35% loading on each GPU. You will also see that thread loading is fairly balanced across all Threads.

They have done a good job spreading the loading but I do think the game engine needs updating for better performance.

kojou

I went from a AMD 7870 to an RTX 2070 and I didn't see nearly the performance improvement I thought I was going to see.

I am getting higher frames at a higher resolution, and higher details, but the gpu is showing 40% and my CPU never goes above 30%.

It would be interesting to know what the bottleneck actually is.

Goregrinder

It's true, I swapped my Nvidia GPU for the same exact Nvidia GPU and got 60% more performance.