Get the performance at a respectable level!

(activeClip) #1

Title says it all, i have played Dirty Bomb on and off for over a year now, i played in one of the earlier tests in April or May 2014. The game made incredible steps from then to the steam release roughly 2 months ago but its just not enough now that the real minimalistic configs are no longer able to be used.

Now before i talk figures and hardware and stats let me just say, if your running 60hz and don’t mind low fps then i guess its not an issue for you. But i expect to run all competitive games at 150+ fps due to 144hz screens.

Is that something too big to ask? I guess yes and no, yes when i have a pretty high end computer and no if the game isn’t targeted at competitive audience including fast pace FPS game play.

So what do i have and why do i expect better performance? Well its 2015 and the visuals are not next level or anything at all they are pretty tame for most games. I have tried the max settings and then lowest via the in game menus which both were quite similar in performance. I have tried multiple “competitive configs” from the Reddit one released in roughly May to the latest ones that came out after the locked most of the potato config settings.

My hardware is Intel 4770k, Asus Maximus VI, 16gig @ 1600mhz, 240gig SSD, Asus Strix 970 GPU, 1tb storage, 750w PSU, h100i liquid block ect

Of course it could be better but the CPU is one gen old and the GPU is current. Is it Quake and Counter-Strikes fault that they are perfectly optimized without hitches and give a flawless mouse input resulting in the most amount of fun? Maybe…

So how does Dirty Bomb run? Just like this, Load into Competitive (40-60 ping) have 180-200 fps at spawn, Move towards middle of map fps drops to around 120-150, start playing and going hardcore with shit going on all around you, FPS drops often from 90-110 and back up and down and all the way around from 90-150.

It wouldn’t be a issue if you couldn’t feel the drops and loss of frames but you clearly can and its just too annoying to play in the current state, i want to be competitive in everything i play and i don’t have time for low performance, call me a diva but 144hz has upped my standards by exactly 84 fps…

Now before the patch a few weeks ago that blocked a lot of the configs the game was pretty playable with minimal annoyance from FPS drops and random micro stutter here and there.

This is more of a cry for help and rant then anything else, Dirty Cups is gone for now, im hearing a lot of top tier players are becoming frustrated too with everything. This is not really a good direction for the game that is yes in Beta but we all know that 80% of whats here will remain quite the same and with the slow release of all the mercs to ensure the most amount of money possible comes in i very much doubt anything that greatly increases performance will come in the next 6 months or probably year.

My level of play is Cobalt in MM and near 250 hours since Steam release, add another 100 hours from whatever Alpha/Beta blocks i played in.

Oh and if anyone trys to tell me the performance is perfectly fine i wont be taking you serious.

(srswizard) #2

Amen.
I’m playing on a 144Hz monitor too, and I always aim to maintain that 144FPS when playing, but on DB it has proven to be impossible.
I have some wild guesses about a couple of things that might be strongly affecting frame rates.

  1. Ragdolls of dead and finished players.
    I think they should add an option to cap them at a specific number or to completely disable them. You can clearly see that they affect frame rates, by spamming suicide during the warmup phase, to stack a pile of corpses at spawn.

  2. Draw distance
    I believe that too much of the maps are being rendered at all times, even the entirety of the zones that are off limits, before certain objectives are met.

Again, these are just wild guesses, but I think it’s something worth investigating.

(CCP115) #3

PERFORMANCE IS PERFECTLY FINE

HUMAN EYES CAN’T DETECT OVER 1172852405 FPS

/endsarcasm

In all seriousness, I cannot fathom gameplay under 60 fps. Anything over seems cool, but pointless, kinda like anything over Bronze.

(Hazard) #4

My laptop barely gets 30 FPS (low settings). Feel blessed, guys.

(activeClip) #5

[quote=“extravagentBypass;64529”]PERFORMANCE IS PERFECTLY FINE

HUMAN EYES CAN’T DETECT OVER 1172852405 FPS

/endsarcasm

In all seriousness, I cannot fathom gameplay under 60 fps. Anything over seems cool, but pointless, kinda like anything over Bronze.[/quote]

Yeh the thread was mostly directed towards people using new monitors of 120/144hz, if you were to buy a new screen 144hz (300 dollars BenQ) having more then double the frames viewable to your eyes will make games much more fluid and smooth and accurate, fast paced FPS is the only game that is really day and night a dozen times better with it.

Laptops are not made to be gamed on, even the gaming ones suck. When your in need of a better computer you can probably build a AMD for only like 700 dollars that will play everything perfectly fine except Dirty Bomb… Which is the real problem

(Amerika) #6

I have a 4770k and a GTX780 with an 144hz Asus monitor. I get between 260 and 330FPS pretty consistently. I can lock at 144 and it never moves. All of the micro-stutters I used to get are gone after the patch that made the UI more efficient (a couple of patches ago now).

I am running a high FPC config though. It’s a version of what Outc1der is using with a couple minor changes. I haven’t really tested this at default “low/medium/high” settings though.

Also, don’t end a statement saying you won’t take anybody who doesn’t have the same problem as you seriously. That doesn’t help get to the bottom of a problem and find a solution. It’s just you asking for people to share in your pity party.

So, since this is working for me, there might be some piece of hardware in common that people are having issues with. I’ve seen a lot of people have 970’s and have FPS issues. But that could simply be a coincidence as the 970 is a super popular card right now (rightfully so).

(activeClip) #7

[quote=“Amerika;64783”]I have a 4770k and a GTX780 with an 144hz Asus monitor. I get between 260 and 330FPS pretty consistently. I can lock at 144 and it never moves. All of the micro-stutters I used to get are gone after the patch that made the UI more efficient (a couple of patches ago now).

I am running a high FPC config though. It’s a version of what Outc1der is using with a couple minor changes. I haven’t really tested this at default “low/medium/high” settings though.

Also, don’t end a statement saying you won’t take anybody who doesn’t have the same problem as you seriously. That doesn’t help get to the bottom of a problem and find a solution. It’s just you asking for people to share in your pity party.

So, since this is working for me, there might be some piece of hardware in common that people are having issues with. I’ve seen a lot of people have 970’s and have FPS issues. But that could simply be a coincidence as the 970 is a super popular card right now (rightfully so).[/quote]

I’m going to look at trying to lock FPS, i have not since the last few updates. Are you running at stock 3.9ghz or more like 4.5?

Not saying its not possible for your experience but as someone stated most are happy with 60 fps and do not understand the actual problem. I know about a dozen players who run 144hz and have anything from 2600k to 4770k 670s 780s 970s 280x ect no one is getting the performance that i am let alone good.

My FPS doubled with [TAG] Lightnings config, not bad. others should check it out on his twitch channel. Hopefully solvers the input with higher fps

(Amerika) #8

I am one of the pickiest types of people when it comes to performance. So trust me when I say I would be pretty vocal if I was having an issue. I am a circa-1999 Q3 player where we had to create the popular lego quake configs in order to keep a constant 125fps at all times to ensure that a couple of types of jumps, even with super low hardware, were possible. That has since been fixed in the engine but playing with that type of graphics is still pretty popular (r_picmip 5 for life).

I did forget that I am not running a stock frequency with my CPU. I am currently running at 4.6ghz. However, not long ago I removed my OC for a while to troubleshoot another issue I was having with unrelated software and I didn’t get much of a performance loss.

I know Artier (Bungabunga from PKD) gets under 100fps constant despite having a Sandy Bridge setup OC’d to 5ghz. I have a buddy with a Sandy Bridge clocked to 4.8 and he gets nearly the same FPS as me. So there is definitely some issues that can’t be easily tracked down out there or DB is super sensitive to certain types of software/hardware issues that aren’t apparent in other games.

I wonder if turning off your hud fixes some of your issues. It’s what resolved some people’s issues and lead to the hud UI optimizations in recent patches (coherentui was being a hog).

(Amerika) #9

Another thing I forgot to mention is that I am on Win10 but I upgraded to Win10 at the same time as a patch which included more performances updates hit. I used to have crazy dips and spikes in FPS and now the numbers stay constant. I would presume this has more to do with the patch than my OS change as little has changed in regards to performance when switching from win8.1 to win10 in all my other applications/games. But it’s worth mentioning.

Oh, also, if anybody is using Mumble and has the new Nvidia driver (and it might also be tied to win10), the Nvidia server service for capturing Shadow Play can potentially eat all of your system ram which has been causing lockups and crashes. This is a known issue for Nvidia and they are working on a fix and not everyone might be affected. But it definitely happens to me.

(tulipRowboat) #10

Then there is always that one guy ‘‘My i7 and my GTX Titan runs this game fine HUEHUEHUE’’

(Lisjak) #11

So I made some benchmarks to compare fps with different settings.

My specs are the following: i7 4790k, asus pro gamer z97, radeon 280x. 8GB 1866hz ram, 650watt psu.

The first test was on Bridge 14players on the attacking side. Settings were high preset everything enabled except motion blur.
Min: 66fps
Max: 180fps
Avg: 126

The second test was also Bridge 14 players on attacking side. Settings were low preset.
Min: 134fps
Max: 276fps
Avg: 190fps

So given that your 970 is superior to the 280x I don’t understand why you get that kind of fps.

(D'@athi) #12

Differentiate between oneframethreadlag true or false. And btw. average doesn’t help, and 300 fps either.
What matters is the minimum fps you got in exacpt THAT moment. And without fiddling in the cfg and playing legoquake, the only way to make some 150 MINIMUM is to play with oneframethreadlag enabled, which takes some direct feeling from you.

(Edzer) #13

My i5 and my Sapphire Radeon HD7950 runs this game fine. You really don’t need a high-end pc for this game, it’s just that many people play the game on bamboo laptops.

(activeClip) #14

[quote=“D’@athi;65067”]Differentiate between oneframethreadlag true or false. And btw. average doesn’t help, and 300 fps either.
What matters is the minimum fps you got in exacpt THAT moment. And without fiddling in the cfg and playing legoquake, the only way to make some 150 MINIMUM is to play with oneframethreadlag enabled, which takes some direct feeling from you.[/quote]

This is very well put, were not saying the game isnt ok at times or able to become decent but the very base performance needs to be increased heavily before you get into min maxing the settings to get decent play.

If the game wasnt designed as a fast paced competitive FPS the expectations and requirements wouldnt be so high, but if theres a long term future and any chance this becomes popular with competition it really needs better performance for a more even play field.

(Dwu) #15

My i5 and my Sapphire Radeon HD7950 runs this game fine. You really don’t need a high-end pc for this game, it’s just that many people play the game on bamboo laptops.[/quote]

Thing is, many high end & “up to date” setups get WORSE performance in comparison to older setups. I for example got i7-3930k @ 4.2ghz, 16gb ram & GTX 970 and still have horrible framerate in this game, barely having 60 fps without one frame delay turned on and with that turned on I still can’t have constant 144 fps & get input delay which personally I find noticeable & annoying.

(MTLMortis) #16

Optimizing performance is going to be one of the very last things done. Right now there’s much bigger fish to fry. It is quite playable on all platforms meeting the minimum requirements.

(Dwu) #17

That approach worked out so well for Wolfenstein 2009 & CoD:WaW, definitely should be the last thing.

(srswizard) #18

Are you on the development team?

Either way, that’s a hella dumb way to do this.
Just an example: Upon starting DB, G-sync users are greeted with barely tolerable game menus, that run at ~2 frames per second, and every in game cinematic runs the same way.
That’s a bad first impression to give to people, and first impressions are something that stick.
First impressions aside, nothing has been done about this issue in like… half a year?
In fact, it has not even been properly addressed by the developers.

Things like these lower people’s trust in developers, and if I was in charge of this thing, I’d be ashamed.

Even though this issue won’t affect others, than G-sync users, it still does a dent on the game’s over all image, which is bad for business.

Obviously the performance in the game itself is what REALLY matters, but with the majority of the patches, only making performance worse, or introducing more clamps to the configs, I don’t have very high hopes to ever see this game running, how it should, outdated graphics considered.
Besides, the config clamps raise the question: Who are they really catering for? The competitive crowd, that they originally advertised for, or the 12 year olds, who they clearly tried to draw in with the scrubs trailer?
/rant

(MTLMortis) #19

Are you on the development team?

Either way, that’s a hella dumb way to do this.
Just an example: Upon starting DB, G-sync users are greeted with barely tolerable game menus, that run at ~2 frames per second, and every in game cinematic runs the same way.
That’s a shitty first impression to give to people, and first impressions are something that stick.
First impressions aside, nothing has been done about this issue in like… half a year?
In fact, it has not even been properly addressed by the developers.

Things like these lower people’s trust in developers, and if I was in charge of this thing, I’d be fucking ashamed, truly.

Even though this issue won’t affect others, than G-sync users, it still does a dent on the game’s over all image, which is bad for business.

Obviously the performance in the game itself is what REALLY matters, but with the majority of the patches, only making performance worse, or introducing more clamps to the configs, I don’t have very high hopes to ever see this game running, how it should, outdated graphics considered.
Besides, the config clamps raise the question: Who are they really catering for? The competitive crowd, that they originally advertised for, or the 12 year olds, who they clearly tried to draw in with the scrubs trailer?
/rant[/quote]

http://lm3design.com/rof/OLDCRAP/images/this-is-beta.jpg

(Dwu) #20

This is beta -card starts to get a bit old when people already reported performance issues well over a year ago. You don’t first produce a huge unmanageable pile of shite and then expect to fix the mess afterwards, its a lot harder that way in comparison to fixing an issue when its reported rather than 26 patches later. It simply doesn’t work that way when it comes to programming, you’re better off doing things the right way from the start or the very least cleaning your mess before you hop on to the next task. You’ll probably attract new kids to play the game by adding new content and features all the time, but you alienate your core playerbase by leaving things broken.