Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Soo.. how many of you with 60fps?

12357

Comments

  • TheScavengerTheScavenger Matrix, NYPosts: 911Member Uncommon

    my fps sucks, and lowering resolution to the lowest doesn't change it at all. In fact, I lose 2-3 fps at the lowest resolution. So I keep it at my native resolution (1920x1080). I actually don't gain any FPS on the high performance setting, or if I do it is only 3-4, maybe 5 at most.

     

    Everything on, except reflections are completely turned off. NO other setting gained/lost nearly as much FPS as turning off reflections. I lose around 20 fps with reflections (even if it is just sky/terrain) turned on. About same amount with all reflections on.

     

    I get 30-35 fps outside, 40-50 in interiors. It is playable, but nowhere near 60. I also have the latest Nvidia drivers. And no setting except turning off reflections, gains me any FPS at all...and if it does, its too little to matter. So I just have everything maxed out.

     

    System specs

     

    Geforce 260GTX 896MB

    Windows 7 64bit

    8gig DDR3 ram

    i7 CPU 3.4 GHz

     

    Dunno why the game has so little fps for me. And in some cases, turning down graphics details (like resolution) just makes me lose FPS...

     

    In any case, the game is playable at 30+ FPS. Never drops below that. Though haven't tried world vs world out.

    (edit: And 1680x1050, the next res below my native...drops my FPS too. Same amount as all the others lower than my native res. Windowed mode drops my fps by around 5. Windowed fullscreen doesn't drop my fps, but doesn't raise it either)

     

    image
  • ValentinaValentina Los Angeles, CAPosts: 1,675Member Uncommon
    I get between 60-92ish depending on the area very rarely below. I've occasionally gone down to like 45 in Lions Arch, though.
  • JyiigaJyiiga Seneca, SCPosts: 1,041Member Uncommon

    Everything pve works fine for me.

    On the other hand WVW is a sick embrasssment and I am amazed it doesn't run better (talking top end systems have issues). 

  • Goll25Goll25 bath, PAPosts: 187Member
    60+ fps even in intense situations, maxxed options, gtx560ti (sli), amd 1100t be, no overclocking. Not a too expensive setup at all, pretty budget. Also have an asus G75 laptop that runs it a above medium settings, and never dips below 60. Pretty damn smooth game, on both pc's I had to put vsync on because of all the tearing.
  • aretinaaretina PoznanPosts: 104Member
    I got i5-2500k , 8gb ram, gf570 and win7 64bit i got evrything in game on max or almost ( i do not got supersample but native ) and even in intensive situations like DEs zerg i got over 100fps, only in WvW i got "steady"25fps but i know they are working on it.
  • cointermcointerm New York City, NYPosts: 47Member

    Tom's Hardware has a whole section on GW2 benchmarks. It seems the AMD processors just don't run the game as well as their Intel counterparts.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/guild-wars-2-performance-benchmark,3268-7.html

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,020Member Uncommon

    I run it at 60+, everything maxed out besides shadows (and the reason is that I dont see the point of that, I could probably max those as well).

    AMD Phenomenah II 3,2ghz x6. 8 Gb Ram & 480 GTX. Win 7 64 bits

    If I were OP I would consider reinstalling windows, I think he have a lot of background crap clogging up his system.

    You can insrease your PCs gaming power a lot by just cleaning it up and see that it doesnt run any none essiential program in the background. And that is me trying to be helpful, not complaining on OP.

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member

    I5-760 with Nvidia-460 here.

    Runs fine with 1920x 1080 all max.

    No complaints. :)

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • sargey123sargey123 HolonPosts: 102Member Uncommon

    I bought completly new PC 

    I5 3570k 3.4 Ghz,

    8 GB RAM Corsair Venegeance Blue

    Asus Geforce 560 Ti

    and yea game works on 30-60 fps on max setting s;

  • seridanseridan ThessalonikiPosts: 1,202Member Uncommon

    A Q9400 and a 5850 are enough to run the game on high-higher settings without any kind of fps drop. I just had to tweak my view distance a bit so in large outdoor areas my GPU could handle the load.

    Block the trolls, don't answer them, so we can remove the garbage from these forums

  • corvikcorvik PraguePosts: 2Member

    I7 2600k

    nVidia GTX580

    8GB ram

    SSD intel 510 120gb

    game run on 1920*1080 with max details smooth on 60 fps ( i set limiter to 60fps ) 

     

     

     

  • GreyhooffGreyhooff New York, NYPosts: 654Member

    I get around 30-40 FPS on my netbook by turning shadows and post processing off, but keeping high textures and some other nice stuff, but playing in 1366x768 resolution which helps a lot.

    On my desktop, running at 1080p - 60fps with everything maxed on one 570 and a stock processor.

    Honestly, this game has the same system requirements as WoW, an 8 year old game. Don't use a calculator to run it of course, but you don't need good hardware.

    It requires the least hardware of any MMO published in the last 5 years.

    image

  • kadepsysonkadepsyson sun prairie, WIPosts: 1,937Member

    40-80 FPS depending on if i'm in a battle or whatnot.

     

    7680 x 1600 resolution.

    El Psy Congroo

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,020Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by TheScavenger

    my fps sucks, and lowering resolution to the lowest doesn't change it at all. In fact, I lose 2-3 fps at the lowest resolution. So I keep it at my native resolution (1920x1080). I actually don't gain any FPS on the high performance setting, or if I do it is only 3-4, maybe 5 at most.

    Everything on, except reflections are completely turned off. NO other setting gained/lost nearly as much FPS as turning off reflections. I lose around 20 fps with reflections (even if it is just sky/terrain) turned on. About same amount with all reflections on.

    I get 30-35 fps outside, 40-50 in interiors. It is playable, but nowhere near 60. I also have the latest Nvidia drivers. And no setting except turning off reflections, gains me any FPS at all...and if it does, its too little to matter. So I just have everything maxed out.

    System specs

    Geforce 260GTX 896MB

    Windows 7 64bit

    8gig DDR3 ram

    i7 CPU 3.4 GHz

    Dunno why the game has so little fps for me. And in some cases, turning down graphics details (like resolution) just makes me lose FPS...

    In any case, the game is playable at 30+ FPS. Never drops below that. Though haven't tried world vs world out.

    (edit: And 1680x1050, the next res below my native...drops my FPS too. Same amount as all the others lower than my native res. Windowed mode drops my fps by around 5. Windowed fullscreen doesn't drop my fps, but doesn't raise it either)

    Have you tried the latest Nvidia beta drivers? They seems to give a 20% boost to many people.

  • CujoSWAoACujoSWAoA Nooo, AKPosts: 1,781Member
    Game runs smooth as ice for me.
  • TorgrimTorgrim GothenburgPosts: 2,088Member
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by TheScavenger

    my fps sucks, and lowering resolution to the lowest doesn't change it at all. In fact, I lose 2-3 fps at the lowest resolution. So I keep it at my native resolution (1920x1080). I actually don't gain any FPS on the high performance setting, or if I do it is only 3-4, maybe 5 at most.

    Everything on, except reflections are completely turned off. NO other setting gained/lost nearly as much FPS as turning off reflections. I lose around 20 fps with reflections (even if it is just sky/terrain) turned on. About same amount with all reflections on.

    I get 30-35 fps outside, 40-50 in interiors. It is playable, but nowhere near 60. I also have the latest Nvidia drivers. And no setting except turning off reflections, gains me any FPS at all...and if it does, its too little to matter. So I just have everything maxed out.

    System specs

    Geforce 260GTX 896MB

    Windows 7 64bit

    8gig DDR3 ram

    i7 CPU 3.4 GHz

    Dunno why the game has so little fps for me. And in some cases, turning down graphics details (like resolution) just makes me lose FPS...

    In any case, the game is playable at 30+ FPS. Never drops below that. Though haven't tried world vs world out.

    (edit: And 1680x1050, the next res below my native...drops my FPS too. Same amount as all the others lower than my native res. Windowed mode drops my fps by around 5. Windowed fullscreen doesn't drop my fps, but doesn't raise it either)

    Have you tried the latest Nvidia beta drivers? They seems to give a 20% boost to many people.

     

    Those drivers made the game alittle choppier for me so i reverted to .79 ones.

    If it's not broken, you are not innovating.

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,020Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Torgrim
    Originally posted by Loke666

    Have you tried the latest Nvidia beta drivers? They seems to give a 20% boost to many people.

    Those drivers made the game alittle choppier for me so i reverted to .79 ones.

    I got a slight improvement myself, but for many with Nvidia 200 cards have gotten a lot better performance. Since they are beta drivers they are somewhat unreliable though.

    Still, always worth a try for anyone with bad performance and a Nvidia card.

  • MyTabbycatMyTabbycat SP, MOPosts: 312Member

    I get well over 60 fps but I have things set variously on high/med/low or off. I just turned things down and decided what would give me nice graphics and decent fps. If the game is ugly and you are getting bad fps, you might want to take into consideration some of the advice on here to upgrade your computer.

    It's probably not going to help that I post my specs cause I have what I consider a mid range gaming pc.

    AMD Phenom(tm) II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz

    AMD Radeon HD 6850

    4 Gig ram

    I haven't done any upgrades to it (other than driver updates). At the point it gets to where I have issues with running games, I'll add more memory.

    I've heard people saying AMD processors have more problems running the game but I haven't had that issue. Maybe because it's 6 core? I dunno.

  • TalRashaTalRasha GroningenPosts: 827Member

    first generation i7.

    mobile radeon HD 5870.

    ~25 fps in divinity reach, ~50 fps in uncrowded queensdale.

    Most settings on high, and most settings don't really affect the framerate noticable, except for shaders (set on high) and render sampling (set on native).

    Even changing resolution does not seem to affect the fps much. It's the same on 1680/1050, 1920/1080, 1920/1200.

    I have capped the fps at 30 now to avoid the laptop going into highest cooling mode.

    I'm a bit disappointed at framerates in cities and crouwded areas. And the only way to get noticable better performance is by lowering shaders to low. Changing the render sampling is no option, because that makes the game look absurdly ugly like in the OPs screenshot.

     

    I also have a desktop with the same specs (only in name of course). I have not seen the framerate drop below 50fps here even when I set render sampling to highest.

    My newest computer with a 2e generation i7 and an HD 6850 also manages to stay above 50fps, unless I increase render sampling beyond native. Wich makes sense since the 6850 is slightly weaker than the 5870. The better i7 processor obviously is no help there.

  • TeknoBugTeknoBug Calgary, ABPosts: 2,156Member

    Water reflection and post-processing is what kills most video cards, turn those two off and you'll get 45-60+ fps, goes for me. I can't stand bloom anyways, I don't have such great eyesight and it just makes it worse for me to have post-processing turned on (as well as depth of field).

    image
    image

  • MosesZDMosesZD Kirkwood, MOPosts: 1,383Member
    Originally posted by Masa1

    I'm really curious how other people are running the game.

     

    Processor: AMD Phenom(tm) 9650 Quad-Core Processor,  MMX,  3DNow (4 CPUs), ~2.3GHz
                 Memory: 3328MB RAM (DDR2)

            Card name: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series

     

    As you can see my PC is not the best possible, but it can still run most modern 3d games with 60fps.. at least if I tune settings down a bit.

     

    Playing game as ugly as GW2 and getting 20FPS is just UNACCEPTABLE. I feel like I've been ripped off by ArenaNet / NCSoft.

     

     

    That's because they're simpler.   I know you THINK they're more complex, but in reality the developer has much better control over the environment and deliberately limits every situation to keep total poly-count down while tricking your eyes into believing things are more complex than they are.

     

    You can't do that in an MMO because, unlike your heavily controlled single-player game, players can go everywhere and do everything...  So to make a 'good looking' MMO, you crush the people with bottom-feeder computers who, because they can play Crysis at 40FPS think it'll work.    Only it's not true much to their unhappiness.  So, the best rule of thumb I know is:   Single player games bottle-necked with GPU speed.   MMOs are also bottled-necked with VRAM.  (Rule of thumb, so don't whine about it.  It's a rule of thumb, not an iron-hard lawf.)

     

    Which gets us to your FPS...    There's more to the spec-story than you're telling us.    An "HD4800 series" card can be a cheap-bottom-dwelling card or a robust, but obsolete (DX) card.   I'm suspecting it's a shared memory or low-memory card integrated card, but I have no proof.

     

    Now, I have an HD5850 with 2GB VRAM.  It's over-clocked and has the GPU capacity close to a 7850.   And, ironically, here is me in close to the same spot from three days ago:   http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7884024340/    116 FPS.  

     

    Here is my settings which I did earlier in Divinity's Reach:   http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7887186050/    60FPS with a lot of people around, crafting, some particle effects, a long, complex draw and all the specs as high as possible.

     

    Here I am in a world-boss event (Vile Maw) in the Norn starter zone.   Very long draw distances, muliple tornados (at least 6) about 50 players...    Huge number of spells, particle effects out the wazoo:  42FPS & somewhat later at 44FPS.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7883880110/

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7883868818/

     

    And a dynamic event (about 25 people and 20 centaurs rushing us):   http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7884020938/    60FPS

     

    Normal soloing:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7883979276/   80FPS

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7883973440/  77FPS

     

    It's your computer, mate.   It isn't the game.   Most GOOD LOOKING MMOs I have played would have died in the Vile Maw fight.   SWTOR would have been going like a slide show and tearing.    DCUO would have stuttered to death.   STO...  Who knows, I probably would gone back it time...     Rift would stuttered.    LOTRO would stutter. 

     

    So, when I'm in a huge boss fight, moving around, shooting, with 50 other people...

     

     

  • MosesZDMosesZD Kirkwood, MOPosts: 1,383Member
    Originally posted by Masa1
    Originally posted by FuryV

    For crying out loud, stop living in the past.  You already admitted it, your PC sucks.  Don't blame the game.  I've got the game on full graphics with a steady 60 FPS, using a mid range system.  You ripped yourself off by not upgrading your PC, it's not ANET's fault in the slightest.

     

    It's your's.

    I could upgrade... but every other modern game works with max FPS. It's ONLY GW2 which works so badly. Why spend 1500€ for 1 game? It's GW2s fault.

     

    No.  It's your fault for not understanding why highly-limited single-player games will work on your low-budget computer and not understading why MMOs will struggle.

     

    THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.    MMOs for any level of detail, require MUCH MORE ROBUST computing.  

  • gracefieldgracefield BallymenaPosts: 275Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Techleo
    I have a older AMD 720BE Tricore. With my current 4870 512 at all high settings, save for post processing which I don't use and I dont use anything but the lowest shadow settings. Stting at 43 to 51 FPS. Definitely working out well for me. However I am running into some issues and I need to update my graphics drivers due to some minor lag spikes due to graphics not rendering quite right. Altogether though good performance on a older rig.

     

     

    Yes, I agree, I run an older rig myself but I keep it optimised and keep system load down and I can get decent results on a surprising range of modern games. I have a cheap E7200 Core 2 and a 4870 512mb with 3.5 gig of RAM on XP (yeah, I know, shouldn't even be playing games!), but it does really well considering and I think the OP should be able to manage much better than his screenshots would suggest. There must be something else wrong with his set-up - give the thing a good clear out, turn off unnecessary processes, defrag it etc. and try it again, I'd say...There are guys on here with great gaming rigs (which my wife has informed me I will never own btw), but you don't need half of what some of these guys have in order to get a decent game on.

  • VaporsVapors Fr.Posts: 407Member Uncommon
    This fps showen there is bugged, i have also 21 with having 60 in TSW, but the game runs defenitly smooth even it says 21, i guess its about 50 too since im not having single lag in wvwvw when 1000 players rape  me
  • TorgrimTorgrim GothenburgPosts: 2,088Member
    Originally posted by MosesZD
    Originally posted by Masa1

    I'm really curious how other people are running the game.

     

    Processor: AMD Phenom(tm) 9650 Quad-Core Processor,  MMX,  3DNow (4 CPUs), ~2.3GHz
                 Memory: 3328MB RAM (DDR2)

            Card name: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series

     

    As you can see my PC is not the best possible, but it can still run most modern 3d games with 60fps.. at least if I tune settings down a bit.

     

    Playing game as ugly as GW2 and getting 20FPS is just UNACCEPTABLE. I feel like I've been ripped off by ArenaNet / NCSoft.

     

     

    That's because they're simpler.   I know you THINK they're more complex, but in reality the developer has much better control over the environment and deliberately limits every situation to keep total poly-count down while tricking your eyes into believing things are more complex than they are.

     

    You can't do that in an MMO because, unlike your heavily controlled single-player game, players can go everywhere and do everything...  So to make a 'good looking' MMO, you crush the people with bottom-feeder computers who, because they can play Crysis at 40FPS think it'll work.    Only it's not true much to their unhappiness.  So, the best rule of thumb I know is:   Single player games bottle-necked with GPU speed.   MMOs are also bottled-necked with VRAM.  (Rule of thumb, so don't whine about it.  It's a rule of thumb, not an iron-hard lawf.)

     

    Which gets us to your FPS...    There's more to the spec-story than you're telling us.    An "HD4800 series" card can be a cheap-bottom-dwelling card or a robust, but obsolete (DX) card.   I'm suspecting it's a shared memory or low-memory card integrated card, but I have no proof.

     

    Now, I have an HD5850 with 2GB VRAM.  It's over-clocked and has the GPU capacity close to a 7850.   And, ironically, here is me in close to the same spot from three days ago:   http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7884024340/    116 FPS.  

     

    Here is my settings which I did earlier in Divinity's Reach:   http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7887186050/    60FPS with a lot of people around, crafting, some particle effects, a long, complex draw and all the specs as high as possible.

     

    Here I am in a world-boss event (Vile Maw) in the Norn starter zone.   Very long draw distances, muliple tornados (at least 6) about 50 players...    Huge number of spells, particle effects out the wazoo:  42FPS & somewhat later at 44FPS.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7883880110/

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7883868818/

     

    And a dynamic event (about 25 people and 20 centaurs rushing us):   http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7884020938/    60FPS

     

    Normal soloing:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7883979276/   80FPS

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/86072414@N06/7883973440/  77FPS

     

    It's your computer, mate.   It isn't the game.   Most GOOD LOOKING MMOs I have played would have died in the Vile Maw fight.   SWTOR would have been going like a slide show and tearing.    DCUO would have stuttered to death.   STO...  Who knows, I probably would gone back it time...     Rift would stuttered.    LOTRO would stutter. 

     

    So, when I'm in a huge boss fight, moving around, shooting, with 50 other people...

     

     

     

    Now this is how it all works sadly as you say most gamers don't understand the difference between singleplayer and MMO.

    Great postimage

    If it's not broken, you are not innovating.

Sign In or Register to comment.