FPS issues on current build

[Karmaterror 982]

Hey guys im having real trouble getting a playable framerate atm, the weird thing is my framerate seems to not change with vid settings.

 

At first I thought it was just the higher detai in SA so I dropped a couple of settings....no improvement. Couple more....still nothing. So I decided to do a little experiment, I put everything on ultra, then everything to low (included was a view distance change from 2000 to 750m) the net benefit of dropping every setting was only around 6 fps.

 

So I guess im just curious, is everyone having this issue? if its already known sorry for posting this but its so strange, never had a framerate like this on SA ::(

[RagedDrew 209]

The game hasn't been optimised yet and as far as I understand it, the game is very dependent on CPU rather than GPU. I hope this sheds some light on it for you.

[Karmaterror 982]

I got a 6 core AMD @3.4ghz .....Maybe time for an upgrade?

[Outroduce 14]

If you want to get decent framerates, don't even dare to buy AMD. Go for i5 4th or 5th generation.

[Karmaterror 982]

If you want to get decent framerates, don't even dare to buy AMD. Go for i5 4th or 5th generation.

 

Aww AMD used to be the best for gaming :(

 

Always used an AMD/Nvidia setup in the past. Il look into some Intel boards and chips today. I did just see an AMD fx9980 (or something like that) was 8 core @ 4.4ghz, might do the job?

 

Also ganna grab a gtx980 4bg just to be sure. Whatever I go for il post some fps results later :)

 

PS, is ram much of an issue, got 8 atm, could grab another while im out and go to 16?

Edited November 22, 2014 by Karmaterror

[Outroduce 14]

Of course not, even AMD FX-9590 5GHz won't be as fast as the cheapest i5 in DayZ. Not to mention it draws over 200W at full load. Also, it is better to buy 970 instead of 980. 200$ for 10% performance isn't good deal.

 

[Karmaterror 982]

Thanx for the replies guys, gonna see what I can do about this now. Once again quick helpful advice from the dayz forums :D

[blackberrygoo 1416]

If you want to get decent framerates, don't even dare to buy AMD. Go for i5 4th or 5th generation.

Probs the best info you need to know for this game ^^

My cousin just bought a brand new computer with an I7 processor at 4.0 ghz and he can hardly get 30 fps with a great graphics card, my rig runs at all times above 30 and to 60 fps(unless in novo on a full server) and I have an i5-3570K , which Is about a year OLDER than my cousins ... So even if you're torn to buy an I7 ,I would say stick with a late generation i5 as they seem to have a lot more power for this game at least ...

[alferret 45]

From my observations with my new build i5 4690k @ 4.5 & gtx970 I utilise about 40% of the GPU and 90% CPU. My frames are avg 60 out of town and 30 in built up areas with occasional drops to low 20's.

Settings are mostly normal to high. But also frames is server dependant, some servers are worse than others and the better ones can give me anything up to an extra 20fps but I can easily lose 20 from my avg on shitty servers.

[ChainReactor 922]

When you say current build, are we speaking of stable or experimental ?

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

I'm the same way, no matter what setting I put the game on my FPS does not change.  i7 3770k @ 4.4ghz 16g Ram gigabyte r9 270x OC edition

25-30 FPS in the large cities and up to 80 fps in the open.  As others have said, game is not optimized yet.  You could try running command line parameters.

 

I use -cpuCount=4, -exThreads=7, -maxVram=2048, of course it'll be a different cpu count and threads for your AMD.

[soulfirez 901]

Probs the best info you need to know for this game ^^

My cousin just bought a brand new computer with an I7 processor at 4.0 ghz and he can hardly get 30 fps with a great graphics card, my rig runs at all times above 30 and to 60 fps(unless in novo on a full server) and I have an i5-3570K , which Is about a year OLDER than my cousins ... So even if you're torn to buy an I7 ,I would say stick with a late generation i5 as they seem to have a lot more power for this game at least ...

All he needs to do is turn hyperthreading off on his I7 and then it will sing leaving your I5 in the dust ( well not really it will be slightly better though lol )

 

Edit which is a pain in the butt as for most everything else hyperthreading is better(generally) and if they ever actually multithread this game rather than it running on 1 core his i7 will rock the house..(with hyperthreading on.

Edited November 22, 2014 by SoulFirez

[rickyriot 1009]

You see, I accept that Intel's will perform better, but then again there is the cost issue associated.

 

The thing that bugs me is that a pretty decent 8-core 8320 (Vishera not Bulldozer) combined with an average 7770 shouldn't struggle badly with frame rates when comparable games (even heavy processing titles like WatchDogs) can run considerably better.

 

Obviously there is a legacy of the engine, and in turn I appreciate that there have been some decent improvements in that area, but again I'll return to the main comment that really the system I have shouldn't be struggling to run even when on fairly low graphics settings.

 

 

Ultimately the argument that Intel are better than AMD shouldn't be the stock reply to anyone who questions frame rates.

 

 

btw, I am an experienced computer user and have played around with command line and config file settings but it's still "not good enough".

Edited November 22, 2014 by ricp

[Karmaterror 982]

When you say current build, are we speaking of stable or experimental ?

 

Stable .50

 

 

I'm the same way, no matter what setting I put the game on my FPS does not change.  i7 3770k @ 4.4ghz 16g Ram gigabyte r9 270x OC edition

25-30 FPS in the large cities and up to 80 fps in the open.  As others have said, game is not optimized yet.  You could try running command line parameters.

 

I use -cpuCount=4, -exThreads=7, -maxVram=2048, of course it'll be a different cpu count and threads for your AMD.

 

Ahh yeah forgot to mention I had that on and configured for my rig. I did notice that it helped a little.

 

Well I went a bit nuts got me a new mobo processor and GPU, think I was gonna need it anyway as next gen games on ultra were starting to stress my system out a bit. Went for..

 

MSI 970 gaming board

GTX 970 (cheers for the advice Outroduce)

(and I couldn't help it, guess im stuck in my ways lol) AMD 9590 Black Edition (8core 4.7gb)

 

CBA building it tonight so will post results tomoz, thanks again for all the advice....even if I did still go AMD lol

 

Hopefully this will pull it up to playable while I wait for optimisation :)

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

You see, I accept that Intel's will perform better, but then again there is the cost issue associated.

 

The thing that bugs me is that a pretty decent 8-core 8320 (Vishera not Bulldozer) combined with an average 7770 shouldn't struggle badly with frame rates when comparable games (even heavy processing titles like WatchDogs) can run considerably better.

 

Obviously there is a legacy of the engine, and in turn I appreciate that there have been some decent improvements in that area, but again I'll return to the main comment that really the system I have shouldn't be struggling to run even when on fairly low graphics settings.

 

 

Ultimately the argument that Intel are better than AMD shouldn't be the stock reply to anyone who questions frame rates.

 

 

btw, I am an experienced computer user and have played around with command line and config file settings but it's still "not good enough".

Of course it's still not good enough.  The game is still not optimized.

[Caboose187 (DayZ) 3036]

Stable .50

 

 

 

Ahh yeah forgot to mention I had that on and configured for my rig. I did notice that it helped a little.

 

Well I went a bit nuts got me a new mobo processor and GPU, think I was gonna need it anyway as next gen games on ultra were starting to stress my system out a bit. Went for..

 

MSI 970 gaming board

GTX 970 (cheers for the advice Outroduce)

(and I couldn't help it, guess im stuck in my ways lol) AMD 9590 Black Edition (8core 4.7gb)

 

CBA building it tonight so will post results tomoz, thanks again for all the advice....even if I did still go AMD lol

 

Hopefully this will pull it up to playable while I wait for optimisation :)

I use to be an AMD fan but their systems tapered of on performance way to much for me.  The last one I ran was an old 1055t hexcore and I put that thing to the test.

[Outroduce 14]

Stable .50

 

 

 

Ahh yeah forgot to mention I had that on and configured for my rig. I did notice that it helped a little.

 

Well I went a bit nuts got me a new mobo processor and GPU, think I was gonna need it anyway as next gen games on ultra were starting to stress my system out a bit. Went for..

 

MSI 970 gaming board

GTX 970 (cheers for the advice Outroduce)

(and I couldn't help it, guess im stuck in my ways lol) AMD 9590 Black Edition (8core 4.7gb)

 

CBA building it tonight so will post results tomoz, thanks again for all the advice....even if I did still go AMD lol

 

Hopefully this will pull it up to playable while I wait for optimisation :)

I'd take i5, especially now. DayZ is still using DX9 - utilizing only 2 cores at once. FXs have relatively low performance of single core. With new renderer FXs will perform better than now but I doubt they catch i5.

[Belphegor (DayZ) 25]

All he needs to do is turn hyperthreading off on his I7 and then it will sing leaving your I5 in the dust ( well not really it will be slightly better though lol )

 

Edit which is a pain in the butt as for most everything else hyperthreading is better(generally) and if they ever actually multithread this game rather than it running on 1 core his i7 will rock the house..(with hyperthreading on.

 

ah, this explains a lot.. on the current stable version i get 13-20 FPS with an I7.. idk why but on the previous build i got 20-25 FPS and when 0.51 was experimental even a bit more on that. i'm playing A3  breaking point for a while until dayz it's a bit more optimized because the lag is just a bit too much during pvp

[rickyriot 1009]

The frustrating thing is that it's not like mutli-core chips are a new thing. I've been using multi-core chips in my PC for a good 5 years now.

[xalienax 621]

I'd take i5, especially now. DayZ is still using DX9 - utilizing only 2 cores at once. FXs have relatively low performance of single core. With new renderer FXs will perform better than now but I doubt they catch i5.

Unless im missing something, that would only be beneficial for DyaZ SA and not really anything else- Not a big fan of building system around a single title's short falls. I would expect most, if not all newer releases and stuff going forward to be making use of Multi-core CPUs and i dont think 64bit being the standard is to far into the future either (expect ram usage to improve as a result).

 With that in mind wouldn't High end /latest-gen I7's and the 6/8 core CPUs for AMD uses be better in that regard?

 

if anything we should be rather Irate with BIS for not adopting quadcore + 64 bit based systems as the stanmdard and bringing thier engines up to curent standards.

[Karmaterror 982]

Well its all together and its much better now, im hovering around 27-32 in cities (did see it hit 22...only once tho) and out in the wilderness iv seen high 40's, never below 38.....wohooooo!

 

I saw dx9 mentioned, im sure its there intention for dx11 support and I noticed oncard comparison sites that the dx9 performance dosent really go up a lot from modern cards to 2-3 year old ones. Maybe once dx11 is in we can start seeing proper framerates :)

[xalienax 621]

Well its all together and its much better now, im hovering around 27-32 in cities (did see it hit 22...only once tho) and out in the wilderness iv seen high 40's, never below 38.....wohooooo!

 

I saw dx9 mentioned, im sure its there intention for dx11 support and I noticed oncard comparison sites that the dx9 performance dosent really go up a lot from modern cards to 2-3 year old ones. Maybe once dx11 is in we can start seeing proper framerates :)

Pretty much. I have I7 4770k and GTX780 TI (2x SLI). It's super annoying that this shiddy implementation cant make proper use of that hardware. Game devs need to get with the times and starting building thier engines around quad core CPUs and 64bit-based systems. so poor performance, not due to it breing to hard to run, but due to not making use of all available CPU cores. *Sad panda*

[Outroduce 14]

Unless im missing something, that would only be beneficial for DyaZ SA and not really anything else- Not a big fan of building system around a single title's short falls. I would expect most, if not all newer releases and stuff going forward to be making use of Multi-core CPUs and i dont think 64bit being the standard is to far into the future either (expect ram usage to improve as a result).

 With that in mind wouldn't High end /latest-gen I7's and the 6/8 core CPUs for AMD uses be better in that regard?

 

if anything we should be rather Irate with BIS for not adopting quadcore + 64 bit based systems as the stanmdard and bringing thier engines up to curent standards.

Non k I5s beat FXs in 99% games. If we talk about k versions they give no chances to FXs. It won't change soon.

[rickyriot 1009]

Non k I5s beat FXs in 99% games. If we talk about k versions they give no chances to FXs. It won't change soon.

 

It's not quite as clear cut as that. Here is a performance table.. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

 

Also, when you say FX, that covers a lot (a LOT) of ground, especially when you consider the differences between the Vishera and Bulldozer variants.

 

Now I am not arguing that Intels in general don't perform better, but then you pay for what you get. What we need to get away from is telling people that DayZ is running badly because they chose a bad CPU. Mine is a 8 core 8320, which is a good chip, it's the fault of the game not the chip that DayZ runs so slowly.

Edited November 23, 2014 by ricp

[xalienax 621]

Non k I5s beat FXs in 99% games. If we talk about k versions they give no chances to FXs. It won't change soon.

But isnt this a limitation of dated engines not using all physical cores?

If so, it doesnt make the I5 better then I7 or AMD 6 core CPUs as a whole, it just means the I5's SINGLE CORE performance is better. we all use Multi-core CPUs tho. ever current era gaming rig is Multi-core CPU based.

 

If that is the case we need to start demanding more of developers. i dont give a flaming f**k about consoles or anything else either. if current generation games arent making use of current generation PC hardware developers should be spammed continuously and relentlessly with complaints untill they pull thier fingers out of thier backside and get with the times.

 

Looking at you BIS. 64 bit client, DX11, 4-8 core Usage, and day 1 support for SLI/CF. this is 2014 not 1995. get with the fricken program.