Performance issues poll based on video card and processor.

Dayel · July 2014

I have the Nvidia 630 which is a nothing special video card, but I have 12g of ram and I have had no issues of this sort since Early Access.

Audigy · August 2014

I appreciate the effort of this thread and the other, the problem however is that we don't play at the same "setting" here.

People might have issues because they try to play on Ultra with a system not designed for it. Others might not have issues because they lowered their details to medium or low - while the system should be able to run more.

Its not a black and white scenario, we would need a lot more information here and a basic "environment" that everyone has.

Fact is, as more stuff needs to be drawn as more resources will be needed and the CPU will bottleneck first. You can see this quite easily if its dark and you quest in the open world, the FPS will be a lot higher than during the day as less light sources need to be drawn.

At the same time the FPS will go down if its raining or while you pvp or if someone is playing with a bad cooling system and the PC has to throttle down.

Its all very situational and depends on what settings a player has.

From my understanding it does not make any difference if you use an AMD or Nvidia Card, if you use 4 or 8 gig of Ram or if you have an SSD or not.

What tends to make a difference is the OS (8.1 performs better on AMD CPUs due the multi core threading compared to win 7). This again is more noticable on the weaker structure of AMD CPU´s compared to intel - however, if this is only an issue at ESO or if other games also benefit from win 8.1 I cant tell.

I do play on a 2500k with a 280x with 8 RAM with a 100 view distance and everything on Ultra. Problems? Not really, but my FPS can go down to 30-35 in towns and crowded situations based on what time and in which weather conditions I play. Elsewhere the FPS is capped at 60 with an average of 45-50 while questing in the forests.

haploeb14_ESO · August 2014

AMD 8150 8 core 4.4 GHz
GTX 780
16 GB ram
3- 27' Monitors i Nvidia surround
Windows 7

I play with Vertical sync in game off and use the Nvidia control panel Vertical Sync.
Everything else is ultra settings.
I have NO issues. I consider my FPS very good with having 3 monitors in surround.

In Cities I have between 35 to 50 FPS. Depending on where I am at in the City. In open PVE world I have any where from 50 to 60 FPS. In PVP, depending on how much is going on I have any where between 30 to 60 FPS. Yes, up to 60 FPS with a lot of other players around and fighting for their lives. AMD processors work just fine for gaming.

c0rp · August 2014

Are the people saying "no issues" claiming that they dont drop down to 20 FPS in huge keep siege battles? Because if so..I'd be interested in hearing what they claim they get.

Rodario · August 2014

No problems on max settings

i7@2.66 GHZ / ASUS GTX 480 / ASUS P6T deluxe mainboard

The rig is 5 years old, the GPU was updated some 3 years ago.

Waiting for Star Citizen before building a new rig.

Vannor · August 2014

c0rp wrote: »

Are the people saying "no issues" claiming that they dont drop down to 20 FPS in huge keep siege battles? Because if so..I'd be interested in hearing what they claim they get.

I have 'no issues' playing the game as I do, which is mostly no P v P. I have no idea what my FPS nor do I care is as it doesn't matter because the game runs fine.

Sallakat · August 2014

I use ultimate settings and I very rarely experience lag or any other performance issues in pve. I very rarely do pvp because large scale isn't for me, but I think I must've been lucky because not even all the time in big siege combats with tens and tens of people, only sometimes I've had severe lag/FPS drop. Was way worse for me during beta in cyrodiil.

-Intel Core i7 3770 3.4 GHz
-NVIDIA GeForce GTX660 2048 MB

Cathexis · August 2014

Geforce Experience has a massive memory leak; uninstall or block it and performance improves.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO · August 2014

No issues, Processor Intel, Video Card NVidia

Intel i7 4820K @ 5Ghz overclock
8GB DDR3 2300 in Quad channel.
GTX780Ti @ 1293 overclock.

1080p. Downsampling 4K rendering. No AA. Everything maxed out, no Bloom, forced AF16 from Nvidia drivers.
ESO Launcher Default settings.

2.6mbit ADSL with gaming priority traffic package.

No issue what so ever on EU server, especially since the migration 2 days ago.

Strontium-Dog · August 2014

Every game ive played online (especially MMOs) since 1999 has had issues with Radeon/Ati . Deny it if makes you feel better but i am just saying what ive seen.
Rare that i see a player base bemoaning an nVidia issue and all the Ati users are happy.

i73820 32gb ram and an old GTX560Ti. ZERO issues.

jockjammerb16_ESO · August 2014

even at lowest settings on a system that is more than enough to handle this game (according to the recommended settings) I have constant crashes. I dont have this issue with any other game. I can run Warthunder on max settings with no issues and thats a monster in the meantime. Something is very wrong with this game. I know other people that have the same problems so it's not a rare thing. It doesnt matter if I min or max this game it still crashes regularly or sometimes makes my entire system lock up.
still love the game but I wonder what they did so different to cause these crashes. Never experienced anything like this ever on any rig I owned.

jrgray93 · August 2014

When I voted no issues, I meant no issues outside of the norm. Everyone struggles in PVP FPS. It's a game limitation.

I also love these people saying they have AMD CPUs and their FPS in Cyrodiil is never below 30. That's impossible if you've been in any kind of combat situation over 20 players.

haploeb14_ESO · August 2014

jrgray93 wrote: »

When I voted no issues, I meant no issues outside of the norm. Everyone struggles in PVP FPS. It's a game limitation.

I also love these people saying they have AMD CPUs and their FPS in Cyrodiil is never below 30. That's impossible if you've been in any kind of combat situation over 20 players.

NO! It is NOT impossible. Read my post above. But for what ever reason you can't or won't believe it, I'm telling you it is possible. But what ever......sigh.

jrgray93 · August 2014

haploeb14_ESO wrote: »

jrgray93 wrote: »

When I voted no issues, I meant no issues outside of the norm. Everyone struggles in PVP FPS. It's a game limitation.

I also love these people saying they have AMD CPUs and their FPS in Cyrodiil is never below 30. That's impossible if you've been in any kind of combat situation over 20 players.

NO! It is NOT impossible. Read my post above. But for what ever reason you can't or won't believe it, I'm telling you it is possible. But what ever......sigh.

With low settings and 25 view distance? AMD CPUs have been shown time and time again to not handle this game as well as Intel. I have a 4770k @ 4.6 and it has dropped to 17 FPS before in Cyrodiil with maximum settings. You're telling me an ancient FX chip won't go below 30?

haploeb14_ESO · August 2014

NO, ON Ultra, WOW, just WOW.

jrgray93 · August 2014

haploeb14_ESO wrote: »

NO, ON Ultra, WOW, just WOW.

Perhaps you haven't encountered a large enough siege? That number you threw out is complete BS and anyone who knows a thing about these CPUs and this game will tell you the same thing. I'm not trying to insult you, so calm down.

Here's some benchmarks done during beta. I don't think this was even in PVP. Need I say more?

http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-MMO-The_Elder_Scrolls_Online-test-proz_tes_online.jpg

smeeprocketnub19_ESO · August 2014

Anastasia wrote: »

Kos wrote: »

Hi All, another reason for lag might be with hardware so here is another fun poll. Difficult to list all options but lets try a very general question including most popular graphics cards and main processor units.

Wonder what the results would be if you include a question about amount of RAM for each of those who voted?

I built my rig about 5 months back; happen to have 16 g in the desktop I'm running right now. I've had smooth gameplay from launch. My friend otoh has a fairly similar build, but only 8 g ram and has numerous issues. o-0

you use windows 8 I assume?

I have no problem with 8gb, my graphics card is old though and even though until recently I was running the game on high settings, I started getting really bad lag, but set at medium it went away. I don't know what changed.

jrgray93 · August 2014

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Anastasia wrote: »

Kos wrote: »

Hi All, another reason for lag might be with hardware so here is another fun poll. Difficult to list all options but lets try a very general question including most popular graphics cards and main processor units.

Wonder what the results would be if you include a question about amount of RAM for each of those who voted?

I built my rig about 5 months back; happen to have 16 g in the desktop I'm running right now. I've had smooth gameplay from launch. My friend otoh has a fairly similar build, but only 8 g ram and has numerous issues. o-0

you use windows 8 I assume?

I have no problem with 8gb, my graphics card is old though and even though until recently I was running the game on high settings, I started getting really bad lag, but set at medium it went away. I don't know what changed.

You should never need more than 8GB for gaming. That's enough to cover the OS, standard background apps, and the game. I don't know of any games that are not 32-bit, and 32-bit programs can only address so much RAM. Specifically ~3GB. That's why Skyrim crashes when you mod it too heavily.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO · August 2014

jrgray93 wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Anastasia wrote: »

Kos wrote: »

Hi All, another reason for lag might be with hardware so here is another fun poll. Difficult to list all options but lets try a very general question including most popular graphics cards and main processor units.

Wonder what the results would be if you include a question about amount of RAM for each of those who voted?

I built my rig about 5 months back; happen to have 16 g in the desktop I'm running right now. I've had smooth gameplay from launch. My friend otoh has a fairly similar build, but only 8 g ram and has numerous issues. o-0

you use windows 8 I assume?

I have no problem with 8gb, my graphics card is old though and even though until recently I was running the game on high settings, I started getting really bad lag, but set at medium it went away. I don't know what changed.

You should never need more than 8GB for gaming. That's enough to cover the OS, standard background apps, and the game. I don't know of any games that are not 32-bit, and 32-bit programs can only address so much RAM. Specifically ~3GB. That's why Skyrim crashes when you mod it too heavily.

yea I was thinking that at some point the game just isn't going to utilize over a certain amount of ram, but I also heard that only the more expensive windows 7 OS's can even handle 16gb, unless you go windows 8, but who would willingly do that? I know my computer won't load with 16gb in place even though the mobo will support it.

jrgray93 · August 2014

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

yea I was thinking that at some point the game just isn't going to utilize over a certain amount of ram, but I also heard that only the more expensive windows 7 OS's can even handle 16gb, unless you go windows 8, but who would willingly do that? I know my computer won't load with 16gb in place even though the mobo will support it.

I would think the OS would load regardless and just only address so much of the RAM. I could be mistaken, however.

But about Windows 8? I suppose anyone who wants to take advantage of the tons of added and improved features, and who also isn't afraid of a functionally identical but visually distinct start menu. I can't even go back to 7 anymore. It's just so archaic now that I'm used to 8.1.

Contrary to popular belief, 8 makes things easier to find. The start menu lets you type to search for programs and files as soon as you open it, just like 7 does. The task manager and system tools are all much better as well. For instance, right click the start menu and suddenly you have a list of every commonly used system tool you need access to; Programs, device manager, control panel, task manager - you name it.

Now, granted I have an addon program to put a stationary bar at the top of my start menu, this is how my 8.1 was set up a few months back. My desktop itself is spanned accross 2 monitors and it has no icons on it.

SirAndy · August 2014

c0rp wrote: »

Are the people saying "no issues" claiming that they dont drop down to 20 FPS in huge keep siege battles?

Yes, that's my claim ...

jrgray93 · August 2014

SirAndy wrote: »

c0rp wrote: »

Are the people saying "no issues" claiming that they dont drop down to 20 FPS in huge keep siege battles?

Yes, that's my claim ...

Not sure if sarcasm or...

MrBeatDown · August 2014

Processor: AMD A8-3520M APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics (4 CPUs), ~1.6GHz Memory: 6144MB RAM Available OS Memory: 5610MB RAM

Last time I played this game I was in cyrodil. Game crashed and the fps was like 5. After the crash I started up ESO again. Something bad had happened. The game didn't look the same anymore. IN fact, I was playing in 2D. I shut this crap off and haven't turned it back on Since. I don't need this game to Damage my computer. This game is a big pile of crap. I will not allow it to damage my computer. Na, I wouldn't recommend this game to anyone. Worked fine in the beginning. But now, my computer doesn't feel very right any more. I have problems opening web pages and using my windows media player. I think it is a direct result of this game. My computer is not functioning the way it used to. I blame the idiots that are updating this game with crap code. My comp did not have these problems until the latest patch for this game. Now it feels like its breaking down. *** on this game.

Elf_Boy · August 2014

Without knowing the distribution of what systems people have over all and with no set definition of 'issues' this is anecdotal at best.

Asking questions about frame rate, while compared to settings, compared to resolution (assuming 24 bit depth) could be more informative.

Probably need to know how much vram too, generation of GPU if not exact model same for cpu.

I am sure that kind of data can be pulled by Zen, doubt it would be made public the way steam does.

Elf_Boy · August 2014

jrgray93 wrote: »

haploeb14_ESO wrote: »

jrgray93 wrote: »

When I voted no issues, I meant no issues outside of the norm. Everyone struggles in PVP FPS. It's a game limitation.

I also love these people saying they have AMD CPUs and their FPS in Cyrodiil is never below 30. That's impossible if you've been in any kind of combat situation over 20 players.

NO! It is NOT impossible. Read my post above. But for what ever reason you can't or won't believe it, I'm telling you it is possible. But what ever......sigh.

With low settings and 25 view distance? AMD CPUs have been shown time and time again to not handle this game as well as Intel. I have a 4770k @ 4.6 and it has dropped to 17 FPS before in Cyrodiil with maximum settings. You're telling me an ancient FX chip won't go below 30?

Pls link your evidence. A few rabid posts by fanboys dont count. Show me the reviews by a reputable media source.

jrgray93 · August 2014

Elf_Boy wrote: »

jrgray93 wrote: »

haploeb14_ESO wrote: »

jrgray93 wrote: »

When I voted no issues, I meant no issues outside of the norm. Everyone struggles in PVP FPS. It's a game limitation.

I also love these people saying they have AMD CPUs and their FPS in Cyrodiil is never below 30. That's impossible if you've been in any kind of combat situation over 20 players.

NO! It is NOT impossible. Read my post above. But for what ever reason you can't or won't believe it, I'm telling you it is possible. But what ever......sigh.

With low settings and 25 view distance? AMD CPUs have been shown time and time again to not handle this game as well as Intel. I have a 4770k @ 4.6 and it has dropped to 17 FPS before in Cyrodiil with maximum settings. You're telling me an ancient FX chip won't go below 30?

Pls link your evidence. A few rabid posts by fanboys dont count. Show me the reviews by a reputable media source.

Rabid posts by fanboys? If you have a basic understanding of the CPU technologies and look at ANY source reporting core load distribution for ESO, it's a simple matter of putting 2 and 2 together. I also already included a graph done by some third party site, but I can't speak for their bias or reliability. It seems consistent with my own observations and experiences, having played on an i3-4340, i7-4770K, and FX-8350.

Azalin76 · August 2014

I have an Intel i7 quad core and am running dual GeForce GTX 770's and I usually have around 99 FPS with everything maxed out but still have issues with lag very often.

Romo · August 2014

Well, the only problem with the poll is the limitation on the question list.

Before the EU move, had no issues(PVE) on NA or EU. Still have no issues on NA, but EU has gone belly up... don't think processor or card related.

IBM/Nvidia.

Armianlee · August 2014

jrgray93 wrote: »

Elf_Boy wrote: »

jrgray93 wrote: »

haploeb14_ESO wrote: »

jrgray93 wrote: »

When I voted no issues, I meant no issues outside of the norm. Everyone struggles in PVP FPS. It's a game limitation.

I also love these people saying they have AMD CPUs and their FPS in Cyrodiil is never below 30. That's impossible if you've been in any kind of combat situation over 20 players.

NO! It is NOT impossible. Read my post above. But for what ever reason you can't or won't believe it, I'm telling you it is possible. But what ever......sigh.

With low settings and 25 view distance? AMD CPUs have been shown time and time again to not handle this game as well as Intel. I have a 4770k @ 4.6 and it has dropped to 17 FPS before in Cyrodiil with maximum settings. You're telling me an ancient FX chip won't go below 30?

Pls link your evidence. A few rabid posts by fanboys dont count. Show me the reviews by a reputable media source.

Rabid posts by fanboys? If you have a basic understanding of the CPU technologies and look at ANY source reporting core load distribution for ESO, it's a simple matter of putting 2 and 2 together. I also already included a graph done by some third party site, but I can't speak for their bias or reliability. It seems consistent with my own observations and experiences, having played on an i3-4340, i7-4770K, and FX-8350.

Is basically true, however... going from my 8350 @ 4.7Ghz and dual 290X (in eyefinity) to a 4770k with the dual 290X (with eyefinity) I saw a constant increase of 5-6fps (in ESO) nothing to get excited about. I saw a drop in 64bit and heavily multithreaded games like Battlefield 4 though again only by 5-6fps. Not only that but for a comparable motherboad to my UD7 I had for my 8350 I had to shell out $350 versus the $200 and still didn't get all the features the UD7 had... that would be $500. The extra cost of the CPU and the Motherboard hasn't yielded me the performance increase I would have hoped for at all. For the record, running the 8350 setup in eyefinity I never dropped below 25fps in ESO, (Ultra at 5760x1080) if I had only one monitor and one 290x I can believe it when people say they haven't dropped below 30fps. In gaming, the IPC of the "i" series doesn't overshadow so much that it makes them worth it (unless you consider a few extra frames at the top end worth a $250+ difference, and that increase isn't consistent with newer games that actually utilise multithreading, which is the future.. not single threaded games). Now, for video editing, audio work etc the higher IPC does dominate and are highly recommended and is why Apple uses them in their machines.

Not sure what is wrong with your 4770k clocked at 4.6Ghz, but mine at 4.5Ghz has NEVER dropped below 30fps at 5760x1080 with everything cranked (plus a few other goodies turned on via CCC)

I don't know of any games that are not 32-bit, and 32-bit programs can only address so much RAM. Specifically ~3GB.

There are quite a few games out there that have 64bit executables. Even some (like the new Wolfenstein) that are 64bit only. I have used over 8GB or RAM plenty of times, especially when gaming, streaming a video to the projector for the kids and converting a video all at the same time. Also while it is true that a single 32bit application cannot use more than 2GB (3GB with a switch set in your boot, which most 64bit OS's do by default) you can still execute multiple 32bit programs on a 64bit OS using well above 8GB (see my above example)

For your comment on Windows 8. I agree, these people that turn their backs on a superior OS because they are afraid of change makes me scratch my head. I've been running 8 since the first dev preview of it, and will not (cannot) go back to 7.

As for staying on topic with the OP. Running my Intel/AMD setup I've had no issues with ESO.

Edit: To add clock speed of FX.

Armianlee · August 2014

Romo wrote: »

Well, the only problem with the poll is the limitation on the question list.

Before the EU move, had no issues(PVE) on NA or EU. Still have no issues on NA, but EU has gone belly up... don't think processor or card related.

IBM/Nvidia.

IBM/Nvidia combo! Damn, do not see many gaming rigs with IBM chips these day. Which chip are you running? Power 7/7+ or 8? Also what kind of framerates are you getting.