9700 pro owners show your unreal 2 fps

.runs pretty well on my system but some lows. i run it in 1024x768 4xaa 8x quility anio.all highest settings v synce enabled.at the start off hell level in the open i hover around 17fps.most areas are 30-45.somtimes hiting 85 when in small areas.is this about right.i get 15k on 3d mark and run the enclave demo in 1600x1200 2xaa and 8x anio so im sure my machine is in good order.i just wanna know if im having particular problems with this game which i shouldnt be.some of the later levels get quite slugish.i cant go any lower than 1024x768 and refuse to sacrifice aa or anio

Even with your 9700 pro, you WILL have to sacrifice some AA/AF, maybe crank em down one or two notches. This game is a system killer. To me, running a game @ 18fps is unacceptable. Even if you're walking down a hall and getting 60-80fps, the minute you run into a large room with a monster, you're done ie. tankin framerates. Its not the resolution you're playing in, since you'll probably find you'd get the same or close to it @ 1280 as you do 1024. BTW, what is the command to turn on the framecounter in U2?

I am plagued by poor FPS as are many people. I consider my system pretty good too ATM and am about 13600 on 3dmark at all stock settings. I have tried everything and nothing improves the frame rates. I run 1024 4X FSAA and 16X ANISO simply because turning these features off gives the exact same FPS. I can even go up to 1600x1200 and still be about the same at these settings. Also turning down in game features does nothing too. I would say I'm 30-40 but can easily hit the 20's or teens at times. I am very disappointed by this. I think the coding is crappola. It plagues all video card types or CPUs and the only common denominator is the the damn game.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LAG
BTW, what is the command to turn on the framecounter in U2?

---

stat fps

Yeah, well, I think the days of 80+ frames per second are over (which is a good thing mind you).

Most users, no matter what their system specs are seem to fall in the range of 15-70 fps at any given time. Either the game is really CPU bound (which it is) or it is just badly coded, but I don't think that's the case, seeing as they've had quite a while to work with it. Just wait a few hardware generations, then we'll get U2 at 100 fps constant. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cam
I am plagued by poor FPS as are many people. I consider my system pretty good too ATM and am about 13600 on 3dmark at all stock settings. I have tried everything and nothing improves the frame rates. I run 1024 4X FSAA and 16X ANISO simply because turning these features off gives the exact same FPS. I can even go up to 1600x1200 and still be about the same at these settings. Also turning down in game features does nothing too. I would say I'm 30-40 but can easily hit the 20's or teens at times. I am very disappointed by this. I think the coding is crappola. It plagues all video card types or CPUs and the only common denominator is the the damn game.

---

The newer games are seriously CPU limited. There is nothing out there powerful enough at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Doomah
Yeah, well, I think the days of 80+ frames per second are over (which is a good thing mind you).

---

imo...the days of efficient coding are over...

I get from 35-75 fps in UT2k3 with all the eye candy cranked.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CrawlingEye
I get from 35-75 fps in UT2k3 with all the eye candy cranked.

---

Me too. When I run benchmark I get 90.21flyby/52.75botmatch at 1600x1200. Ingame I see it drop to around 38fps every now and then. IMO that is very good for a game that just came out. Especially looking at the 1.3GB+ texture folder :eek:

Eric

1280x1024 4x AA 16X AF



http://www.torchlake.com/cam/pic6.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PointlesS

imo...the days of efficient coding are over...

---

soooo sad, but true :(

Quote:

---

.runs pretty well on my system but some lows. i run it in 1024x768 4xaa 8x quility anio.all highest settings v synce enabled.at the start off hell level in the open i hover around 17fps.most areas are 30-45.somtimes hiting 85 when in small areas.is this about right.i get 15k on 3d mark and run the enclave demo in 1600x1200 2xaa and 8x anio so im sure my machine is in good order.i just wanna know if im having particular problems with this game which i shouldnt be.some of the later levels get quite slugish.i cant go any lower than 1024x768 and refuse to sacrifice aa or anio

---

Maybe somebody already said this, but you are getting those lows because you have vysnc enabled. Try turning it off and see if it helps any.

hmmm in 1600x1200 8x anio no aa the outside on hell was down to 8fps:eek: i nedd an R400-9700 showing the strain alredy.turnimg off aa didnt help my frames really on 1024x so cpu seems to be a big limiting factor.im running at 2.7ghz aswell.doom 3 alpha seems to run better on my machine then this so i suspect some bad coding.there is one part in hell inside that should be 60 plus fps but gets about 15.yet bigger more open areas with more going on getting 40+fps.also onboard the spaceship betwwen missions seems sluggish yet youd think it would be one of the smother parts.in the games deffence though the graphics are awsome with some breath taking outdoor ares

I've said it before, it's a tough time to invest in a PC because the next generation of games (i.e. Unreal 2 and Doom 3) seem to run only fair to poor on even top of the line hardware. I would be upset spending money on the best computer available only to have games run around 18 FPS.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rhettro
I've said it before, it's a tough time to invest in a PC because the next generation of games (i.e. Unreal 2 and Doom 3) seem to run only fair to poor on even top of the line hardware. I would be upset spending money on the best computer available only to have games run around 18 FPS.

---

U2 is CPU intensive, Doom 3 is GPU intensive. Doom 3 is being made by a FAR FAR better programmer then the 30 or so used to make U2, John Carmack. The game will run a high FPS even on a GF4.

I seriously doubt the reason why Unreal 2 runs slow is due to unoptimized code. Stop complaining about under 50FPS. That is still a very good framerate.

Why cant the answer be that programmers are designing games that run fair on current hardware but better on future hardware?

Stop complaining people.