There are quite a few people with fps issues, even those with powerful rigs like myself.

Well this is where I'm baffled.

You have players claiming to have 60 fps everywhere, while others are low like myself. Yet have similar systems.

Saerydoth wrote: »

No, you're getting about what I'd expect. That's a pretty low end setup, and also fairly old.

Are there any set ups you could recommend at the lower end of the price range that could get the job done? I'm not looking to play the game on ultra or even high, I just want a system that can handle at least medium that's not going to cost me thousands.

Spartinz wrote: »

I just got the game and currently I'm playing on an Elitebook laptop. The game lingers around 30 fps constantly and I'm wondering if there is a way to improve it. Currently I have an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU M 620 @ 2.67GHz CPU with a Quadro FX 880M video card.

---

Hi Spartinz - and welcome to ESO ;o)!

I have a very decent desktop rig but my lil ole HP laptop allows me to run the game reasonably well and its two years old.

I know you probably have already heard this from someone but thought I'd just mention for you to go into the options ingame for video and turn the Shader very low or off...brought my fps up 10 or so higher on my laptop. One other thing is to have the terrain selection for grass etc be put at low. *That also helps you sight the nodes for harvesting better hee hee.

I hope you get it fine tuned well and start to have fun and enjoy this game. The devs and staff have their hands busy with new launch issues not unlike many MMO's I started with at day 1. They are responding to player bug reports and suggestions and I'm having a blast with this game. Hope you do too!

1st suggestion: shadows off/lower. And no light beams! Then you killed the top 2 resourche eaters.

Try AMD gaming evolved please and then try higher settings step by step ingame. Plus: get rewards for gaming(Raptr cover of AMD).
http://sites.amd.com/us/game/community/Pages/aboutgamingevolved.aspx
Download:
http://sites.amd.com/us/game/downloads/Pages/raptr.aspx

/edit: there are multiple languages avaiable.

Thanks for all the suggestions, I'll try them out when the maintenance is over!

I guess it's going to be a trade off. Using a Surface Pro 2 with Bluetooth keyboard and external mouse. Shadows was a big one after I turned it off. There's some areas in the game that are also delay input.

There was a place in Stormhaven, a cave with a lot of fog. On the Pro 2, I have all options set down, everything is blurry, and resource nodes show up before the terrain around it loads, making plants and runestones easier to spot. Getting 30+ fps in most areas. I imagine your machine may get more if many of these settings are turned down or off.

Audigy wrote: »

Dalexx wrote: »

WylieCoyote1511 wrote: »

Well this is where I'm baffled.

You have players claiming to have 60 fps everywhere, while others are low like myself. Yet have similar systems.

I have a interesting performance problem (which is why I'm here)

I have two systems, an Intel i7-2600K and a AMD FX-8350. The video card I'm swapping between them for a test is a Gigabyte GTX 780-Ghz edition. On the Intel, I would be the person who says never or very rarely drops below 60fps. On the AMD system, I drop well below 60 into the 30s in some areas. The really odd part is, I picked a isolated tower looking out over an area. The Intel systems gives me 75-80fps. The AMD system, gives me 45-60. Overall, I'm getting a constant 15-20 fps lower on the AMD FX-8350.

I've spent most of the day trying all kinds of things. New drivers, old drivers, reloading the chipsets drivers, disabling, enabling, setting the bios back to default. Reinstalling the game, deleting my user\docs\ESO\Live folder. I also dual boot, both Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 gives exactly the same performance, both are 15-20 fps lower. No overheating, no power spikes\drops.

Here is where it gets exciting. So far, it *seems* limited to ESO. I can run Futuremark's 3dmark11 and the newer one, I can run Unigine's Heaven Benchmark and the AMD and Intel come in very close to each other. I also benchmarked with Battlefield 4 and they are within 5fps of each other.

I just recently built the AMD system, so both Windows installs are very fresh. I'm really at a loss as to what can make the AMD system perform that much worse than the Intel and it not be visible in other benchmarks and games.

Sadly AMD is not the best brand for MMO´s, they suffer under low single core performance since about 6 years. TESO has the most demanding threats like NPC´s, Players always on one core - while the others are pretty much idle.

You can play around with various tools, but it wont fix the problem of your CPU.

Thats why going for Intel is always your best choice if you play MMO´s. I run an Intel + AMD system and its the best thing you can do in my opinion. The 2500k and an AMD 270x or 280x will always outperform your system due the bottle neck of your CPU.

I would always pick an AMD card over an Nvidia, especially now with Mantle and how cheap AMD cards are compared to Nvidia, while having the same or a slightly better performance.

But I cant recommend AMD if it comes to CPU´s and MMO´s. That said, if your MMO is fully optimized, then the difference wont be that big. That's why you see those results in your benchmarks or other games.

Whats your opinion on Radeon graphics? Thats not the same as AMD right? you just find them with a lot of AMD based computers.

cromahn wrote: »

Audigy wrote: »

Dalexx wrote: »

WylieCoyote1511 wrote: »

Well this is where I'm baffled.

You have players claiming to have 60 fps everywhere, while others are low like myself. Yet have similar systems.

I have a interesting performance problem (which is why I'm here)

I have two systems, an Intel i7-2600K and a AMD FX-8350. The video card I'm swapping between them for a test is a Gigabyte GTX 780-Ghz edition. On the Intel, I would be the person who says never or very rarely drops below 60fps. On the AMD system, I drop well below 60 into the 30s in some areas. The really odd part is, I picked a isolated tower looking out over an area. The Intel systems gives me 75-80fps. The AMD system, gives me 45-60. Overall, I'm getting a constant 15-20 fps lower on the AMD FX-8350.

I've spent most of the day trying all kinds of things. New drivers, old drivers, reloading the chipsets drivers, disabling, enabling, setting the bios back to default. Reinstalling the game, deleting my user\docs\ESO\Live folder. I also dual boot, both Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 gives exactly the same performance, both are 15-20 fps lower. No overheating, no power spikes\drops.

Here is where it gets exciting. So far, it *seems* limited to ESO. I can run Futuremark's 3dmark11 and the newer one, I can run Unigine's Heaven Benchmark and the AMD and Intel come in very close to each other. I also benchmarked with Battlefield 4 and they are within 5fps of each other.

I just recently built the AMD system, so both Windows installs are very fresh. I'm really at a loss as to what can make the AMD system perform that much worse than the Intel and it not be visible in other benchmarks and games.

Sadly AMD is not the best brand for MMO´s, they suffer under low single core performance since about 6 years. TESO has the most demanding threats like NPC´s, Players always on one core - while the others are pretty much idle.

You can play around with various tools, but it wont fix the problem of your CPU.

Thats why going for Intel is always your best choice if you play MMO´s. I run an Intel + AMD system and its the best thing you can do in my opinion. The 2500k and an AMD 270x or 280x will always outperform your system due the bottle neck of your CPU.

I would always pick an AMD card over an Nvidia, especially now with Mantle and how cheap AMD cards are compared to Nvidia, while having the same or a slightly better performance.

But I cant recommend AMD if it comes to CPU´s and MMO´s. That said, if your MMO is fully optimized, then the difference wont be that big. That's why you see those results in your benchmarks or other games.

Whats your opinion on Radeon graphics? Thats not the same as AMD right? you just find them with a lot of AMD based computers.

AMD Readon is the correct label for the current Graphics cards by AMD. There are various releases such as the newer ones ( R7 or R9) series. Most pre build PC´s usually ship with an AMD CPU such as the Bulldozer and a low end Nvidia card like a 750TI.

Reason in my opinion is, that AMD is a lot cheaper than Intel if it comes to CPUs - and that a lot of people still think that only Nvidia does good GPU´s. Its all about marketing I often have people that come and say "build me a PC with an AMD CPU and an Nvidia card" - its all in their heads

In my opinion the difference between a card by Nvidia and AMD does only exist in the price and features section.

If you want to have the best Mantle support, the lowest pressure on your CPU so to speak, then not picking an AMD Readon would be wrong. The average price difference to Nvidia is 50$ less, while the performance with Mantle will be a lot higher and without about the same with a tiny % difference based on what game you play.

If you want to have PhysX, Shadowplay and a faster support (even though faster doesn't mean better) and also don't mind spending a few more bucks then Nvidia is your pick.


Personally I did use Nvidia cards for many years, but when AMD offered me more for the same money and in my case a more stable card (not even once an AMD card broke, while Nvidia died 3x) then you just move away from what you once loved.

Its the same with AMD CPU´s, I loved them but since about 7 years I am with Intel and don't regret it.


Many CPU´s (APU) also offer integrated GPU´s, these however are not made for gaming, that said AMD offers the better GPU´s there as far I can tell from recent testing. If you play in low resolutions like 1366 x 768 then it might give a decent performance though.