sparafucilsarwb17_ESO wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

GamerzElite wrote: »

DaedricCheese wrote: »

You could blame the lighting engine they made for 1.2.4, or your PC if it's getting old already.

BTW i love the way you named Customer support as Crowd Control.

U mean AMD FX 8350 with R9 290x can't handle ESO.....

Here we go again....

Is your CPU mate. Overclock it at least to 4.8Ghz (you need good cooling not the stock HSF), and move the game to cores 1-7 (not core 0).

Is known that AMD has pathetic cores, yes many ( 8 ) but they are pathetic when comes to power.
And on top two cores per module (4 modules) share the same FPU (Floating Point Unit), which is needed to calculate the extra lighting etc. Only 2 games support properly the FX83xx. BF4 and Thief. And those still lack behind in DX11 until you use Mantle (you need AMD GPU).

Also I would advice you to try switch the game to DX9 from the settings.


I had a FX8350 overclocked at 5Ghz, with two 7950s in CF. My i5 laptop with a GTX550M was feeling much more powerful when I was playing TW Rome 2 (CPU intensive game) last year.
So I sold the lot, bought an i7 and my 780Ti and haven't looked back.
Even an ancient i5 2500 is more powerful on TESO than an FX8350 unfortunately, even if overclocked to 5Ghz.

I am playing with AMD 8150 at 4GHz with 8gb ram and a amd 7850. I have all my settings at ultra except shadows and am getting around 59 to 62 fps without v-sync on. Don't think it's his cpu if I can get better with a bulldozer which is pretty crappy compared to the 8350. ( I did see a frame drop after the 1.2 patch but with the hot fixes it's nearly back to what it was but is still about 10fps short)

Now all Einstein and so called Computer genius should read this Post.
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/118351/new-performance-fps-issues-hotfix/p1
ZOS admitted there is FPS issue in game after patch 1.2.3 and they are working on it.

I read most of all of this thread and have some comments about ESO's LOW fps and frame rates in general. Most, if not all all my comments about frame rate are my opinions only.

I have a AMD bulldozer & AMD 7800 2GB video card & 16 GB of memory. I play the at 1920 x 1080. I thought the fps was slow when it was released but it was acceptable. Now my fps is very BAD with updates 1.2 and 1.3. I only PVE and i dont know how anyone PVP's with it so slow. The worst fps drops are definitely network communications bound but game is too WAY cpu bound also for being a modern game. I see no signs of the game being graphically bound with my setup.

I am sure its cpu bound because all tes games have been cpu bound and for my set up it has all the characteristics of a cpu bound game. Changing graphic settings other than view distance has very little effect on my graphics. I get huge drops in frame rate when i am in crowded areas or if i use a view distance beyond 20. Screen Resulution and graphic options have very little effect on my FPS. Right now my fps, with a view distance of 45, drops from drops from the 40's to too the low 20's when i enter riften which is usually crowded with players.

Check your Performance monitor in Windows Task Manager and u will see it only uses one core. The game should be able to utilize more than one core. Off the top of my head i thought of lots of thing like chat, inventory, add on scripts, UI elements ect that could be off loaded to other cores it seems to me. I dont think that is a lot to ask for a premium game which has a high initial price and high subscription fee.

Cpu's have been mghz bound for a decade. After they reached 3 or 4 Ghz, it was much easier to double the cores than to get meaningful speed increases. Since cpu speeds no longer get faster, which has been known for a LONG time, any modern game should utilize more than one core.

I can play ESO at lower framerates than most games but the frame rate is still way to slow. I am more concerned with the min fps than avg fps in any game. i will say i am happy that i rarely see huge drops/spikes in fps in ESO, when i do have huge drops there is usually large amounts of server communications.

As for what is unplayable vs playable vs optimum fps I was definitely better with high fps back when i used to play 1st person shooters a lot. In an fps shooter, frame rates up to 120 fps were much better for me than 30 fps. At first i thought it was psychological because i heard the wifes tale the eye cant perceive more than 30 fps. I thought about it and came to this conclusion, in most of those games there were fast moving missles fired at you which need to be dodge or shoot. This is similar to batter being able to hit a fast pitched ball or tennis player being able to hit a fast serve. If a missle is fired 30 game feet from you, and travels at 300 fps (~200 mph), it will hit u in 1/10 of sec and below are how many FRAMES you will see at different FPS:
20FPS - 4 frames
30FPS - 6 frames
60FPS - 12 frames
120FPS - 24 frames

Lower speeds or longer distances will add frames but u need time to react and time to make a quick reaction decision so every frame is crucial. If the object is traveling in a arc or parabola vs a straight line, more frames are also needed for ur brain too estimate its position when it reaches you.

Anyway, the more frames that are seen by the eye, the better chance one has to judge where it will hit. That is why i think 60 fps to 100 fps is optimal. For me, beyond that i never noticed a difference. Maybe a tournament 1st person shooters can feel difference between 100 and 200 fps but i cant.

Is ESO fast paced ?, thats debatable .. i am not sure ... lots of things can't be dodged, they have been pre-calculated to hit you. Some can be dodged or blocked or interrupted. One also can change play style so fps doesnt matter as much. The game is kinda a hybrid targeted game. Lots of MMO are pure tab targeted games vs 1st person games where all particles may or may not hit the player. (I do know in beta the the developers added lots of visual/audio/physiological cues that make u feel its not a tab targeted combat so i call it hybrid targeted combat). Any way this makes it less fast paced combat than the traditional 1st person shooter, so fps is less critical.

Also as i said earlier, its min fps stays close to its avg fps. For me 20 fps in ESO, feels like about 40 fps in other games. Still 20 fps is pretty slow. The latest patches have been making it slower and slower to where it is starting to effect my game play.

Ever Since 1.2 The FPS has not changed for me . I was getting between 50 and 60 during beta and up to 1.2. Now I get anywhere from 28 to 16 in open world. Cyrodiil I get 4 to 8 FPS. Mind you this is the only game I have this issue with. And I play 6 different MMO's and 12 stand alone platform game . I run everything on ultra. Here are my specs.
CPU:
Amd AMD FX-8150 Zambezi 3.6GHz Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8150FRGUBOX
Cooling:
Air
GPU:
Nvidia EVGA 02G-P4-3660-KR GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB 192-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card
Motherboard:
GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD3 AM3+ AMD
Memory:
8GB Crucial Technology
Primary Storage Device:
Kingston SSDNow V300 Series SV300S37A/120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) SSD
Secondary Storage Device:
ST1000DM003-1CH162 Capacity 931.5 GB HDD
Optical Drive:
TSST corp CDDVDW SH-224BB ATA Device
Power Supply:
CORSAIR HX Series HX750 750W ATX12V 2.3 / EPS12V 2.91 SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS GOLD Certified Modular Active PFC ...
Case:
COOLER MASTER HAF X
OS:
Microsoft Windows 7 (6.1) Ultimate Edition 64-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
Mouse:
RAZER Black Wired Laser Naga Molten Special Edition Gaming Mouse
Display:
3x ASUS 24 inch Monitors

I agree, I'm running an intel Haswell, lightning fast RAM and two AMD 290Xs and in PVP when it gets very busy on my screen I'm looking at around 15fps.