Zewks wrote: »

The common thing Im taking away from this is:

Cyrodil cant run at 60+ FPS, no matter what your specs are


Is there ANYONE out there with a system that can handle a common sized battle in Cyrodil while keeping at LEAST a steady 60 FPS?

Just look up various 60fps youtube videos featuring ESO PVP. You will notice in large battles, weaker systems drop down to 10-20fps and higher end systems sometimes dropping to 35-40fps, which is quite playable.

When I lower some graphics settings I find the performance tends to improve even more in those situations. Previously I had to run away from large keep battles because my frame rate would drop below 10fps.

Zewks wrote: »

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Zewks wrote: »

The common thing Im taking away from this is:

Cyrodil cant run at 60+ FPS, no matter what your specs are


Is there ANYONE out there with a system that can handle a common sized battle in Cyrodil while keeping at LEAST a steady 60 FPS?

Just look up various 60fps youtube videos featuring ESO PVP. You will notice in large battles, weaker systems drop down to 10-20fps and higher end systems sometimes dropping to 35-40fps, which is quite playable.

When I lower some graphics settings I find the performance tends to improve even more in those situations. Previously I had to run away from large keep battles because my frame rate would drop below 10fps.

My 3770k i7 handles PvE at 100 fps steady, but drops to around 20 FPS in Cyrodil.

Adjusting video settings (any) doesnt improve upon this because the video settings are linked more to your GPU, rather than your CPU. (my GPU (1080) isnt the bottleneck here, its barely at 30% load during Cyro battles). I was planning on upgrading my CPU soon, but I had hoped that the newest CPU's out would be at a point that could handle Cyro battles and at least get a steady 60 fps. 35-40 is playable, but is still annoying to my eyes.

Its just sad that a game that is 4+ years old, still cant handle a moderate sized Cyro battle even with the newest bleeding edge CPU and GPU on the market, so many years later. Thats not a hardware bottleneck, thats a software/programming bottleneck.

Well, there are zerg battles and then there are Zerg Battles®. With i7-6700K and 1060 6GB, it is rare that any large keep battle drops me down to 20fps. Usually it drops to 30-40fps in large battles (this is at 1080p, with medium texture, max subsampling, shadows off, grass off and max view distance) and then eventually goes back up again to around 45-60fps. There are some occasional really bad battles though, that drop down closer to 20fps, often accompanied by high latency problems, rubberbanding etc.

This does have at least something to do with demand on client hardware. Weaker hardware cannot achieve 30-40fps in large battles at 1080p. My old laptop would often drop down to 5-10fps or lower, sometimes 1-2 frames per second in those kinds of battles. I would try to block, and just sit there hoping nobody killed me. And that was at lowest possible settings and 1024x768 or even 800x600 resolution. With my new PC Cyrodiil is quite playable at 1080p even in the worst situations.

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Zewks wrote: »

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

Zewks wrote: »

The common thing Im taking away from this is:

Cyrodil cant run at 60+ FPS, no matter what your specs are


Is there ANYONE out there with a system that can handle a common sized battle in Cyrodil while keeping at LEAST a steady 60 FPS?

Just look up various 60fps youtube videos featuring ESO PVP. You will notice in large battles, weaker systems drop down to 10-20fps and higher end systems sometimes dropping to 35-40fps, which is quite playable.

When I lower some graphics settings I find the performance tends to improve even more in those situations. Previously I had to run away from large keep battles because my frame rate would drop below 10fps.

My 3770k i7 handles PvE at 100 fps steady, but drops to around 20 FPS in Cyrodil.

Adjusting video settings (any) doesnt improve upon this because the video settings are linked more to your GPU, rather than your CPU. (my GPU (1080) isnt the bottleneck here, its barely at 30% load during Cyro battles). I was planning on upgrading my CPU soon, but I had hoped that the newest CPU's out would be at a point that could handle Cyro battles and at least get a steady 60 fps. 35-40 is playable, but is still annoying to my eyes.

Its just sad that a game that is 4+ years old, still cant handle a moderate sized Cyro battle even with the newest bleeding edge CPU and GPU on the market, so many years later. Thats not a hardware bottleneck, thats a software/programming bottleneck.

Obviously, there are zerg battles and then there are Zerg Battles®. With i7-6700K and 1060 6GB, it is rare that any large keep battle ever drops me down to 20fps. Usually it briefly drops to 30-40fps in large battles (this is at 1080p, with medium texture, max subsampling, shadows off, grass off and max view distance) and then goes back up again to around 45-60fps. There are some occasional really bad battles though, that drop down closer to 20fps.

This does have at least something to do with demand on client hardware. Weaker hardware cannot achieve 30-40fps in large battles at 1080p. My old laptop would often drop down to 5-10fps or lower, sometimes 1-2 frames per second in those kinds of battles. I would try to block, and just sit there hoping nobody killed me. And that was at lowest possible settings and 1024x768 resolution.

Except ESO isnt the only game with large multiplayer scaled battles. It is the only one however that runs that badly on my hardware.

For example. GW2 - I can maintain a solid 60 FPS (maybe higher, i use vsync) with 150 players zerged on the screen at once, catapults and spells going off like crazy.

So clearly, how the game is coded to handle things in large scale combat is different. Yes... ANY code is going to task your hardware. It just seems that ESO's code isnt very optimized and tasks it a lot more than is probably needed. Throw a strong enough engine in a car, and you can make it move even with square wheels. It doesnt mean its the most efficient or optimized design just because you can get it moving with a strong enough motor.

GTX 1070. Ultra ultra graphics settings including post-processing and have no problems with getting super high, smooth gameplay. Even in Trials.

You might want to take a look at what CyberPower has. You can get a nice gaming PC without spending a fortune.

If you're running Windows 10 that probably holds things up a bit as well, given that you're not just passing info to the ESO server on everything that you do in the game but are passing it onto Microsoft as well !

More seriously, players shouldn't under-estimate the benefit of a cabled internet connection over a wireless one as that can make a big difference to performance consistency in gaming.

Graphics set to Ultra w/no issues
i7-3770 CPU @3.50 GHz Overclocked to 3.90 GHz
Gigabyte Ultradurable UD5H liquid cooled
16GB RAM
Nvidia Geforce 680 GTX 4GB
500GB SSD
Win10 Pro
Cable internet w/ Nighthawk X10 router

Custom built purchase from CyberPower March 2012 (router in Jan 2017)

Tandor wrote: »

If you're running Windows 10 that probably holds things up a bit as well, given that you're not just passing info to the ESO server on everything that you do in the game but are passing it onto Microsoft as well !

More seriously, players shouldn't under-estimate the benefit of a cabled internet connection over a wireless one as that can make a big difference to performance consistency in gaming.

The Gates conspiracy!! He plays with my characters when im sleeping...

Anyway, too many seem to use these wireless connestions, here in Finland, it seems almost everyone is using them and then they complain abut it and get faster.. They say cabled or optical is expensive but i dont think 25e a month of optical 100mb network is that much at all considering im not victim of "rush hour" like users of 3g and 4g are at populated areas.

I fine tuned everything in settings, as well as applied a couple of manual edits in the settings.ini file, and it seems to work alright. You can google the .ini setting modifications, might not do much but it seemed to help with my average machine.