PDA

View Full Version : Post your AC3 PC FPS



Pages : [1] 2

al-Assas
11-19-2012, 07:38 PM
It will be a big help for people like me, who want to decide what PC to buy for AC3 or want to know how well it will run on the rig they have, if you post your specs and your FPS.


The most important information:


- Screen resolution
- Graphics card
- Processor
- Graphical settings
- Average and minimum FPS
- What kind of gameplay and where (and when). Preferably city gameplay.


If you want to be super awesome, you could maybe change around the resolution and other settings a bit, and compare the results. (Like measuring the FPS in 1366x768 as well as your native resolution.)


Thank you!

connor_bg
11-19-2012, 07:44 PM
I tried it on a pc with the graphic card- gt 8600 (first generation)- which the price of this card is like 15$ and i run it on all Medium 1280x1024 with around 25-30fps.

chizzy12
11-19-2012, 07:54 PM
why not just play it on console?

Dizlol
11-19-2012, 08:07 PM
console also has 20-30 fps, a decent PC 60 fps.

IDefectedI
11-19-2012, 09:18 PM
console also has 20-30 fps, a decent PC 60 fps.

I am hoping for 120 frames . Just got my CPU OC to 5.1 stable .

DanyMoore
11-20-2012, 01:13 AM
IDK, but this game is by far the worst performing game on my pc . With settings set @ High i get 20 FPS which is a bit ridiculous .
I have a HD 6970 2GB , A 970 Phenom x4 , and 8 Gigs of ram . By even looking at the load on the components while playing it doesn't really go over 50% , i have the newest drivers installed etc . Can't really enjoy this otherwise brilliant game .

BzkGB
11-20-2012, 01:46 AM
IDK, but this game is by far the worst performing game on my pc . With settings set @ High i get 20 FPS which is a bit ridiculous .
I have a HD 6970 2GB , A 970 Phenom x4 , and 8 Gigs of ram . By even looking at the load on the components while playing it doesn't really go over 50% , i have the newest drivers installed etc . Can't really enjoy this otherwise brilliant game .

That's pretty tough to hear, seeing as you have a better video card than I do and the same amount of ram. I'm only using an i5, too :(

IDefectedI
11-20-2012, 02:54 AM
IDK, but this game is by far the worst performing game on my pc . With settings set @ High i get 20 FPS which is a bit ridiculous .
I have a HD 6970 2GB , A 970 Phenom x4 , and 8 Gigs of ram . By even looking at the load on the components while playing it doesn't really go over 50% , i have the newest drivers installed etc . Can't really enjoy this otherwise brilliant game .

Only getting 20 FPS ? So consoles are pushing 10 more FPS ? **** I hope my GTX680s SLI can push 100 if not then **** this will be the last Ubisoft game until they get their act together .

iamfr3e
11-20-2012, 04:05 AM
yea for some reason the game says around 30 fps, i have not looked at the load yet but i should be getting more fps.

running

phenom 2 x6 1090t
his radeon hd 7970
and 8 gigs of ram and only getting as high 45 when the screen is paused.

Ghostheldap
11-20-2012, 04:41 AM
In my opinion, everybody who has posted their AC3 benchmarks in this thread should be suspended or banned for pirating the game.

PrometheanF
11-20-2012, 08:08 AM
If I don't get a constant 60 fps with vertical sync on I'm going to be pretty pissed that I waited so long after the console release to play it on PC. I'm already pissed that it's November 20 and there is still no word about when you can actually play the game.

randallsb
11-20-2012, 10:02 AM
im sure they'll get to unlocking it when they get to it, then we need cdkeys too.. crap, well they'll do it sometime today. haha. >:(

xxtanisxx
11-20-2012, 10:15 AM
Wow...i cannot believe this...(not surprised) Pirated version is already out and our pre-order has to wait? I really dont mind, but how can someone have a physical copy before release date to pirate the game in the first place. I swear that there is a security problem with Ubisoft. Unless other nation released theirs first, it is strange that pirated version surfaced

RaulO4
11-20-2012, 11:03 AM
.....when AC3 comes out can someone with a 660 GPU tell me how it runs for them?
i be great full

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 11:15 AM
Guys, Official update time:

The following is for Ubishop customers, and those who ordered the Digital Deluxe ONLY!

Those of you who ordered the Digital Deluxe Version a while ago from the Ubishop - when it did not have the Season pass, Soundtrack or the new Benedict Arnold DLC - may have noticed that the current version for sale does contain the extra content, however at a higher price..

Many of you found this unfair, so Ubisoft has put in place a means to correct this for you:

In order to recive the updated versions content - you MUST directly contact Ubishop support as soon as possible to make sure you get access to the content.

If you do not contact them - and make it clear you want to be upgraded to the current version - you will not get it - so PLEASE make sure you contact them.

Shop support are standing by to issue extra content codes to those of you who ordered the version with the the season pass etc - for NO extra cost.

I know it does mean you taking a few minutes of your time to contact them directly, however it will ensure you get the same content as everyone else!



Links to support are below, with access to the free web based support - you may also find phone numbers on those pages, but please remember, calls may cost!

France https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/f...700#bottomForm
UK https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/e...700#bottomForm
Germany https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/d...700#bottomForm
Austria https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/d...700#bottomForm
Spain https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/e...700#bottomForm
Italy https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/i...700#bottomForm
Netherlands https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/n...700#bottomForm
Denmark https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/d...700#bottomForm
Finland https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/f...700#bottomForm
Norway https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/n...700#bottomForm
Sweden https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/s...700#bottomForm
Poland https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/p...700#bottomForm
Australia https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/e...700#bottomForm
Any other countries https://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/e...700#bottomForm

taken from shade

Just getting it out there so ppl dont miss it

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 11:38 AM
ive been reading and hearing the pc version is the same as consoles in town wich really ***s me off, i waited to get it on pc because i could not stand the fps in towns on my 360, now im hearing people with slightly better cards than mine are getting 20 fps in town, so basicly theyve done nothing to get the game running at acceptable frame rates on pc, they know pc players want 60 fps, im so angry rite now, may as well of played on my 360, whats the point if it performs the same as consoles. really makes me sick

DanyMoore
11-20-2012, 12:00 PM
So the xbox version isn't much better in fps ? The one who said that everyone who posts here needs to get b& for pirating the game .. I believe that everyone has the right to properly test the game before buying it , for example I think i'am going to leave the pc version and buy one for the 360 . And with the fps it just has to be some comparability issues because as i mentioned before, the load on all of my pc's components while running the game doesn't exceed more than 50% .

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 12:06 PM
Well there's some people who run it just fine at 60fps everythiung on high with 560 gtx aswell so can't be sure until you get your hands on the product =)

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 12:07 PM
i did think to myself theyd have to optimise it reall good if it runs so badly on consoles, i had my suspicians to me it seems that 20 fps and under was there target frame rate all along and the crappy engine they created cant do any better as its not desighned for pc's and they couldnt be bothered to get it to run properly, i just dont know how they can justify and think thats exceptable, like you cant have it run at 60 fps then soon as you go in a town, 20 fps and under, that makes it worse than consoles because its on extreme to another, has anyone tried lowering settings, even though you shouldnt have to does it help


only people ive read run at 60 fps are when not in towns, the towns is the implortant part of wether they fixed the fps issues, t5ing is with consoles theyve got an excuse being that the hardware is so old, but with pcs they have no excuse other than "we have no idea what we are doing"

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 12:13 PM
So the xbox version isn't much better in fps ? The one who said that everyone who posts here needs to get b& for pirating the game .. I believe that everyone has the right to properly test the game before buying it , for example I think i'am going to leave the pc version and buy one for the 360 . And with the fps it just has to be some comparability issues because as i mentioned before, the load on all of my pc's components while running the game doesn't exceed more than 50% .

'testing' the game = ban.


End of story.


Well there's some people who run it just fine at 60fps everythiung on high with 560 gtx aswell so can't be sure until you get your hands on the product =)

indeed...


Why do people think that 'testing' the game - when the code has been tampered with to get it working - by people who have NO idea what they are doing most of the time and without key features [such as DX11] - reflects on the REAL retail product..

it's beyond me..


'testing' = can be misleading ;)

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 12:41 PM
rubbish, in most cases what youre talking about, they usualy run better as they are just the same game, theyre retail copies not unfinished copies

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 12:45 PM
rubbish, in most cases what youre talking about, they usualy run better as they are just the same game, theyre retail copies not unfinished copies
Think what you like, however your thoughts on pirated versions being 'better' is not open for discussion.


The retail version has features the other one does not, and has not had it's code ripped apart...

People with the retail version are reporting 60 fps, on their setups

Hardware does play a part of course ;)


So, I suggest people use the legal version for comparisons only.. since that is what everyone will be playing? correct?

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 12:52 PM
yeah ill be playing legit, but you can understand me being cautious of the fps being bad in towns, can you link me to someone who has said they get 60 fps in towns cuz i cant find that anywhere, only 60 but as soon as they get to town, 20 fps on beast machines

DanyMoore
11-20-2012, 12:57 PM
Well you are right Shade, there is no point in whining if you actually haven't payed for the game lol . Took a little risk and ordered a pc version , hope it ends well . As far as hardware goes i'am starting to lose trust in Amd , there has been numerous times where games didn't run smoothly just because some problems with the drivers .

spectatorx
11-20-2012, 01:53 PM
For people who already have the game and also these who will get it soon and want to be sure everything is fine at their machine i want to remind you should update your gpu drivers to latest versions.

In nvidia case for this moment you should have installed beta driver 310.61 which is available in here:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/win8-win7-winvista-64bit-310.61-beta-driver.html
It has some optimizations for ac3.

Latest amd driver 12.11 beta 8:
http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/AMDCatalyst1211betadriver.aspx
In beta 8 and previous betas nothing mentioned about optimizations for ac3 but should work just fine ;-)



Of course, the same as year ago when revelations been released i will create a faq with some tips and solution. Maybe even today :D I'm not sure but if today i will post only tips how to prepare your computer to make everything work perfect ;-)

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 02:09 PM
To be honest - the game has some settings to tweak - some make a little impact on visual - so try setting world detail to HIGH and the rest maxed - or alter the AA/ shadows and see if that improves things.

The game is very CPU and GPU demanding - so you have to tweak a few settings to find the best balance.

BzkGB
11-20-2012, 02:14 PM
Think what you like, however your thoughts on pirated versions being 'better' is not open for discussion.


The retail version has features the other one does not, and has not had it's code ripped apart...

People with the retail version are reporting 60 fps, on their setups

Hardware does play a part of course ;)


So, I suggest people use the legal version for comparisons only.. since that is what everyone will be playing? correct?

I hope you're right Shade, I really do - we've waited too long for this delayed release. You've been great to have around the forums so far, and I can understand why you have to back up Ubisoft. But if it turns out that you're wrong and AC3 is a bad PC port, giving terrible FPS on high-end systems - what then? It's not like you can realistically do anything to help us out in that situation.

Also thanks spectatorx, downloading the AMD patch now! Shame there are no AC3 optimisations, but oh well :)

IDefectedI
11-20-2012, 02:43 PM
'testing' the game = ban.


End of story.



indeed...


Why do people think that 'testing' the game - when the code has been tampered with to get it working - by people who have NO idea what they are doing most of the time and without key features [such as DX11] - reflects on the REAL retail product..

it's beyond me..


'testing' = can be misleading ;)

All I want is 120 Frames with my GTX 680s and overclocked i7 at 5.0 - I drop my clock speed back a little 5.1 was becoming a little unstable lol

Helforsite
11-20-2012, 02:44 PM
I was just informed that my Freedom Edition left the warehouse here in Germany and because i ordered with DHL Express i am counting on it to be by me tomorrow. I will post my FPS with and let you know how it runs^^

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 02:45 PM
All I want is 120 Frames with my GTX 680s and overclocked i7 at 5.0 - I drop my clock speed back a little 5.1 was becoming a little unstable lol
specs?

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 03:07 PM
I hope you're right Shade, I really do - we've waited too long for this delayed release. You've been great to have around the forums so far, and I can understand why you have to back up Ubisoft. But if it turns out that you're wrong and AC3 is a bad PC port, giving terrible FPS on high-end systems - what then? It's not like you can realistically do anything to help us out in that situation.

Also thanks spectatorx, downloading the AMD patch now! Shame there are no AC3 optimisations, but oh well :)
The game is very CPU / GPU intensive.

I can't guarantee everyone will be able to play 60fps - since not everyone will be using the correct settings for their systems - so that's just silly?



Maxing out on BF3 - is not the same as on Crysis 2 or AC3.


There are things that people may need to understand, such as resolution vs details.. each has an impact, on your own system - so it's a balancing act.

Some are able to get 60fps, which is what I said.


PC owners - should know what settings they can and can't use on their system and what compromises they may have to make - drivers do improve this though, from time to time, so worth updating.


Someone running a GTX260 Max settings at 1080p - may not get the same FPS as someone else at 720p [however the 720p guy is VERY happy] - however they may not always want to drop the resolution, so blame the game.



From early reports - some can hit 60, but some can't - so we will collect feedback as best we can and see what can be improved.

spectatorx
11-20-2012, 03:21 PM
Ok all pc gamers, here i posted my faq which i will keep updated for some time ;-)
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/727382-Assassin%92s-Creed-3-PC-community-faq-%96-tips-and-solutions-to-problems?p=8713491#post8713491

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 03:23 PM
Ok all pc gamers, here i posted my faq which i will keep updated for some time ;-)
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/727382-Assassin%92s-Creed-3-PC-community-faq-%96-tips-and-solutions-to-problems?p=8713491#post8713491
Hopefully that will help some people who do not really know the importance of drivers or what impact different settings can have on a PC ;)

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 03:37 PM
drivers very rarely fix things for me, unless it states theres been improvements for that particuler game, or youre using very outdated drivers, nvidia probably differnt though, but its being reported the retail russian version runs like jank as soon as you hit the towns, smooth before that, high end machines

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 03:41 PM
drivers very rarely fix things for me, unless it states theres been improvements for that particuler game, or youre using very outdated drivers, nvidia probably differnt though, but its being reported the retail russian version runs like jank as soon as you hit the towns, smooth before that, high end machines
And I have seen reports of other people having no problems.

Some who have had drops to 45fps in town, have found dropping the world detail down to 'High' - at little visual impact - has stopped it giving them 60fps again.


So, it maybe worth while altering options to find the balance needed for DX11 / high end machines.


I'm not saying they are wrong - just worth considering it's not always a easy thing to blame the game, or where the game appears at fault - turning down one setting can rectify it.

Will be interesting to see how tessellation impacts performance.

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 03:45 PM
yeah you could be rite mate, im just gonna be too pissed, ive waited too long for this, is very high considered dx11? also dx11 is never done rite, my opinion is any card that has advertised as having dx11 as a feature should be able to run it at least low, its false advertising as the devs cant ever optimise dx11 to run properly unless brute forced, i dont care about dx111 the only reason i waited was to get 60 fps, that why im a little nervous

think ini tweaks there will be any ini tweaks?

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 03:51 PM
yeah you could be rite mate, im just gonna be too pissed, ive waited too long for this, is very high considered dx11? also dx11 is never done rite, my opinion is any card that has advertised as having dx11 as a feature should be able to run it at least low, its false advertising as the devs cant ever optimise dx11 to run properly unless brute forced, i dont care about dx111 the only reason i waited was to get 60 fps, that why im a little nervous
Looking at the limited information I have - Very High world detail - is tessellation

My own card struggles on some games with it enabled - for MP games however I turn it off.. since fps = more important than eye candy!


So... as you say - some cards may struggle.. so worth considering dropping it down to high - if needed.

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 03:57 PM
what card you got, mr shade? i got a hd 6950 wich is bios unlocked giving 6970 speeds, i got it clocked too 1375, 900 core, wich is stock 6970 speeds and dx11 on most games is unplayable, i5 as well, there th odd ones that have been made properly by devs, but not many, now i know i havnt got the latest and greatest but its still way beyong consoels and should be able to play with dx11, this is what makes me sick, thought im not too bothered its just they are ripping people off in a way saying yeah our card has dx11 but youlle never use it, hahaha. and im only playing at 1360x768

kalo.yanis
11-20-2012, 04:22 PM
I can't believe some people here are complaining about not receiving 60 or 120fps! Seriosuly, people, can you even see the difference??

I'm happy when I get 20fps in Revelations (which I do most of the time... sometimes even 23).

nitres15
11-20-2012, 04:26 PM
20 is lower than the consoles...why don´t you just buy one if you´re happy with 20 fps

Helforsite
11-20-2012, 05:18 PM
You all dont know that there is no difference between 35, 60, 79, and 120 fps? Because the eye can recognize 50-65 FPS but just process 25-30.

kalo.yanis
11-20-2012, 05:24 PM
20 is lower than the consoles...why don´t you just buy one if you´re happy with 20 fps

Because I move often and I don't want to lug a console around with me. I have a powerful PC back home, but I'm equally happy playing on my lappy.

MaceMagoo
11-20-2012, 05:32 PM
why not just play it on console?

Because they are horrid machines, 8 years behind PC technically and their very presence holds game development back. Imagine what awesome looking games we would have without consolololol's.

RautaPalli
11-20-2012, 05:38 PM
You all dont know that there is no difference between 35, 60, 79, and 120 fps? Because the eye can recognize 50-65 FPS but just process 25-30.

I'm sorry to inform you that you most likely possess some type of eye cancer if you can't tell the difference between 35 and 120 fps.

diwas13
11-20-2012, 05:50 PM
Isn't the pirated version these *** hat's playing lack dx11? Here's the thing, if you have a dx11 card, higher versions of DirectX sometimes enable the developer to use alternative methods to calculate certain things in the game (a simple case would be e.g. geometry shaders for sprites, GUI, etc. on the screen, which isn't possible in DX9/DX10), which can give you considerable performance increases. So don't fricking jump to conclusions and wait for the **** game to launch.

On a side note, what the hell Ubisoft why can't we disable, tessellation manually.

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 06:22 PM
what card you got, mr shade? i got a hd 6950 wich is bios unlocked giving 6970 speeds, i got it clocked too 1375, 900 core, wich is stock 6970 speeds and dx11 on most games is unplayable, i5 as well, there th odd ones that have been made properly by devs, but not many, now i know i havnt got the latest and greatest but its still way beyong consoels and should be able to play with dx11, this is what makes me sick, thought im not too bothered its just they are ripping people off in a way saying yeah our card has dx11 but youlle never use it, hahaha. and im only playing at 1360x768
I have a MSI 6840(cyclone) and a Q8300 quart core, 4gb ram

runs Crysis 2 in dx11 at 720p at 40fps DX11 off it hits 60 solid (high res pack installed)

BF3 Ultra at 45fps(min) (dx11)

spectatorx
11-20-2012, 06:33 PM
(Information removed)
Conclusion: anyone who been blaming game for low fps with pirated version wasn't right.

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 06:36 PM
Lets not give people ideas..


I would rather these pirates have VERY bad performance - so lets not help them please ;)

Joy_Knute
11-20-2012, 06:43 PM
You all dont know that there is no difference between 35, 60, 79, and 120 fps? Because the eye can recognize 50-65 FPS but just process 25-30.

Streakeracr, please, look this and tell me you can't see the difference between 30 and 60 fps: http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html

kalo.yanis
11-20-2012, 06:52 PM
To be honest (and perfectly objective), Shade, cracked games only have a modified executable, which does little more than launch the game. The .exe file itself is about 0.5% of the total game in Revelations's case. Ripping the game code apart would imply tampering with the engine, graphics etc, which is almost never the case.

I'm by no means encouraging pirating it, but I'm just sayin'. You'd be losing out on the awesome MP anyway.

Meanwhile, I'm patiently awaiting my JoD. Friday can't come soon enough. I just hope it's at least as well optimised as ACR.

Mr_Shade
11-20-2012, 07:01 PM
To be honest (and perfectly objective), Shade, cracked games only have a modified executable, which does little more than launch the game. The .exe file itself is about 0.5% of the total game in Revelations's case. Ripping the game code apart would imply tampering with the engine, graphics etc, which is almost never the case.

I'm by no means encouraging pirating it, but I'm just sayin'. You'd be losing out on the awesome MP anyway.

Meanwhile, I'm patiently awaiting my JoD. Friday can't come soon enough. I just hope it's at least as well optimised as ACR.
I suggest you talk to Spectator - he posted some interesting info about the "crack" however discussion of it on the forums is not allowed due to it being helpful to the pirates.

Can't say more, however you maybe wrong from what he posted, you can get the conclusion in his post ;)

Joy_Knute
11-20-2012, 07:03 PM
That's true, NBST, but sometimes the developers prepares little surprises for pirates (http://www.geek.com/articles/games/rocksteady-catch-batman-pirates-with-deliberate-gameplay-bug-20090911/). :D

kalo.yanis
11-20-2012, 07:15 PM
That's true, NBST, but sometimes the developers prepares little surprises for pirates (http://www.geek.com/articles/games/rocksteady-catch-batman-pirates-with-deliberate-gameplay-bug-20090911/). :D

I remember the version of AC1 that was leaked a month before release had an intentional mid-game terminus, which many attributed to a gameplay bug. That really burned Ubisoft back then and might have been the reason for their more aggressive DRM afterwards.

Evenesque
11-20-2012, 07:50 PM
1920x1080 @60 refresh
intel core 2 duo e7400 @2.9 ghz
Radeon HD 6950 2gb

I didn't fraps it but my first steps in Boston were probably around 10 frames. They stayed that way too. Looking at the sky or straight at the ground jumps it, but all those buildings effs it up. I hoped I could at least run the game smoothly. Guess not.

RautaPalli
11-20-2012, 07:54 PM
1920x1080 @60 refresh
intel core 2 duo e7400 @2.9 ghz
Radeon HD 6950 2gb

I didn't fraps it but my first steps in Boston were probably around 10 frames. They stayed that way too. Looking at the sky or straight at the ground jumps it, but all those buildings effs it up. I hoped I could at least run the game smoothly. Guess not.

This is the thing I've heard from a lot of people. The game runs fine in the smaller tutorial areas but as soon as you get to Boston the game turns to almost unplayable due to terrible performance. Hearing this made me cancel my pre-order, I'll probably buy it later though if they fix it.

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 08:55 PM
frame rate drops in boston are in the exact same places as they were on consoles, how do they think its acceptable, god help people with much lower end specs

BzkGB
11-20-2012, 09:00 PM
So basically PC gamers waited an additional three weeks, yet the game still freaks out in cities and is badly optimised? Sounds like Future Soldier all over again.

Bravo, Ubisoft. Won't be getting Far Cry 3 for PC after all, I suppose.

al-Assas
11-20-2012, 09:09 PM
I've collected some FPS results from Youtube. I couldn't find out if it's okay to post the titles or the URLs of the videos, so here are only the numbers:

Nov 19., 2012

GTX560 Ti / i5 2400
probably 1920x1080 / Max settings, no AA (normal)
Gameplay: countryside(?)
50 - 60 FPS

MSI GeForce 220 GT 1GB / AMD Athlon II 250 3.0 / RAM:4GB DDR2
High settings / 1280x1024
Gameplay: early in the game, indoors
35 - 40 FPS

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.8 Ghz / MSI GTX 560-Ti Twin Frozr II 2Gb / RAM: 12 GB Kingston DDR3 / NVidia Drivers: 310.54
1920x1080 /Maxed Out Graphics
City gameplay
Min 25 Fps, Max 63 Fps, AvG 46 Fps / while recording: 20-55 FPS

Core 2 duo e6300 (1.8) overlock to 2.2 / GTS 250 1 GB / RAM : 2 GB
Max settings / 1280 x 1024
Boston gameplay
19-40 fps, 22 fps stable

GTX 560 Ti / i5 2400
settings: all max / probably 1920x1080
countryside gameplay
45-60 fps

Laptop: Intel Core i5-480M / GT540M (1Gb) / 4GB RAM
1366x768 / Lowest settings
City gameplay
FPS: 20-40

AMD FX 6100 3.3 MHz / ASUS GeForce GTX 560
1280x1024 / Max settings
City gameplay
FPS: 35-60 / while recording: 24-60

Gtx 460 / Intel 2500k / 8 GB RAM
1920x1080 / Max settings
City gameplay
30 - 40 FPS

Athlon II x4 631 2.60 GHz / GTX 550 Ti 1gb / 4GB RAM
Max Settings / 1280x720 at most
City gameplay
FPS: 20-50 / while recording: 20-30

i5 2500K @ 4.6 GHZ / 2x Nvidia Geforce GTX 680 OC SLI / 16GB GSkill 1600mhz DDR3 RAM
2560x1440 / Max settings
Countryside gameplay
40 - 60 FPS

Nov. 20., 2012.

2GB DDR2 / Ati Powercolor HD 5450 512 mb ddr2 64 bit / Athlon II X2 240; 2.8 GHz
1024x768 / Lowest settings
Countryside gameplay
FPS: 14 - 22 / When Recording: 8-15 fps

Intel Core i5-760 3.4Ghz / Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB GDDR5 / RAM 8GB DDR3 1333Mhz
1920x1080 / Max settings, except AA: high
City gameplay
FPS: min 30, avg 35

i5 2400 / Xfx hd 5450 1 gb ddr3 / 4gb ddr3 Ram / Windows 8 pro
1360x768 / Settings: normal
City gameplay
FPS: 17 - 22 / while recording: 16-19

GTX550Ti 1024MB GDDR5, 192bit / AMD Phenom II X4 955 3,2Ghz / Corsair 4GB (2 x 2GB), DDR3, 1333MHz / Windows 8 Release Preview 64 bit
Max settings / probably 1920x1080
Various gameplay, including city
FPS: 45-55-60

MSI GTX 460 1GB OC / Athlon II x4 640 3.0Ghz
Game Settings: All High / Resolution: probably not full HD
Wilderness gameplay
FPS: 40+ while recording

Intel Pentium Dual Core 5300 @2.6GHz / SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 5670 512MB DDR5 / 1.5GB RAM DDR2
1280x720 / lowest settings
Countryside gameplay
FPS: 15/40 / while recording: 12/45.

GTX 550 Ti 1GB / i3 2120
Settings:hight-very hight, AA and FXAA-on / Resolution: 1920x1080
City gameplay
30 - 60 fps / while recording: 30fps

i7 2630qm / GT 540m 2gb Overclocked / 6gb ddr3 1333MHz / Nvidia Drivers 310.54
more than 720p / very high settings
City gameplay
FPS: 34 / while recording: 30

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 09:19 PM
the textures are very very nice though compared to consoles and so is the view distence, i have to play on world quality high, not very high to get any sort of partialy accepatable frame rate, but its still awfull in boston, not much better than consoles, had to cap frame rate to 50, turned aa down to normal wich is lowest and shadows to normal wich is lowest, only playing at 1360x768, spec

hd 6950 oc to 6970 speeds
i5 2400 sandybridge
8gb ram
ssd
windows 7 64 bit

city gameplay is the part thats worse, why cant they just remove some of the npcs, i wish there was some ini tweak that let us stop so many spawning

spectatorx
11-20-2012, 09:22 PM
@ al-Assas , thx for this impressive list, it for sure took you some time to get all this data ;-) Awesome!

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 09:28 PM
the textures are very very nice though compared to consoles and so is the view distence, i have to play on world quality high, not very high to get any sort of partialy accepatable frame rate, but its still awfull in boston, not much better than consoles, had to cap frame rate to 50, turned aa down to normal wich is lowest and shadows to normal wich is lowest, only playing at 1360x768, spec

hd 6950 oc to 6970 speeds
i5 2400 sandybridge
8gb ram
ssd
windows 7 64 bit

city gameplay is the part thats worse, why cant they just remove some of the npcs, i wish there was some ini tweak that let us stop so many spawning

weird, your computer isnt that bad i mean this guy has almost the same and
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.8 Ghz / MSI GTX 560-Ti Twin Frozr II 2Gb / RAM: 12 GB Kingston DDR3 / NVidia Drivers: 310.54
1920x1080 /Maxed Out Graphics
City gameplay
Min 25 Fps, Max 63 Fps, AvG 46 Fps

tried OC your cpu?

ricksta101
11-20-2012, 09:29 PM
I have an i5 with 6GB of RAM and an HD 7950 @ 1100/15740 on Windows 8. I am getting horrendous frames once I get to the colonies. No matter if I put everything to normal detail, performance is still the same. Putting environmental detail to very high worsen things even more, dipping frames into the mid 20s.

Wasn't there supposed to be a day one patch or does it already have it installed?

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 09:29 PM
the textures are very very nice though compared to consoles and so is the view distence, i have to play on world quality high, not very high to get any sort of partialy accepatable frame rate, but its still awfull in boston, not much better than consoles, had to cap frame rate to 50, turned aa down to normal wich is lowest and shadows to normal wich is lowest, only playing at 1360x768, spec

hd 6950 oc to 6970 speeds
i5 2400 sandybridge
8gb ram
ssd
windows 7 64 bit

city gameplay is the part thats worse, why cant they just remove some of the npcs, i wish there was some ini tweak that let us stop so many spawning

weird, your computer isnt that bad i mean this guy has almost the same and
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.8 Ghz / MSI GTX 560-Ti Twin Frozr II 2Gb / RAM: 12 GB Kingston DDR3 / NVidia Drivers: 310.54
1920x1080 /Maxed Out Graphics
City gameplay
Min 25 Fps, Max 63 Fps, AvG 46 Fps

tried OC your cpu?

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 09:38 PM
well i dont have the k version wich is annoying so it doesnt oc too well, not really any point, i brought it when i was a pc noob, didnt even know what oc meant, also what his is, is basicly what mine is, the thing is its not accepable because youll look one direction it will be 60, then its 25 or whatever, so his max was 60, but mine can do that in some corner of boston, but hardly ever, its all over the place, there should be no drops to fkin 25 fps a all, but it does it way way to often in the same spots as consoles making it as bad as consoles, also on very high my average is less than 46, but ive not really teste it just know it runs like crap on very high to the point i could not stand it and had to turn it down

LuGer33x
11-20-2012, 09:44 PM
i5-2500k slightly OC'ed
6970 HD 2GB slightly OC'ed
16 GB of ram

Resolution: 1920x1080 at 60 HZ
Shadows: Very High
Textures: Very High
Environment: High
AA: High

Avg FPS (in town / outdoors): 40 FPS
Avg FPS (everywhere else): 60 FPS

Indoors and everything before town was solid 60 FPS fine. Out in the town it drops to 35-40 FPS which is noticeable unfortunately but still better than consoles and the game obviously looks significantly clearer / sharper anyway. The textures are definitely really nice. I tried putting both Environment and AA on High (or one of them) and lost about 5-10 FPS which was putting me under 30 in town and that was unacceptable.

Overall, I'm pretty pleased with the optimization and appearance of the game so far.

diwas13
11-20-2012, 09:46 PM
Ok I take back what I said, this game has horrible performance issues.

LuGer33x
11-20-2012, 09:46 PM
AA seems to be a killer in this game. I would leave it on High as opposed to Very High unless you have multiple monster cards and/or are happy with sub-30 FPS.

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 09:47 PM
LuGer33x, that town fps was it with gameplay (running around doing w/e stuff) ? your 2500k at 4ghz i guess?

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 09:48 PM
well youre setup is VERY similar to mine and im playing at 1360x768


the worse part is they tease you with beutifull 60fps all the way to boston then bam have that, itslike a sick joke, haha we were just trying to make you think you were gonna get 60 fps, but we dont really know how to do that, even with unlimited power, lol pretty much unlimited wen it comes to pc, higher end any way, specaily for a game made for 8 year old hardware

i allmost feel sorry for the devs that ported this because they got really nice testures, the view ditence is so much improved coming from the 360, if only they could of got the frame rate rite it id be so happy with it, when i first started playing i was all giddy thinking how great it all looked, lol ffs

im so impressed with the textures though, im not talking like here and there, im talking georgeous textures pretty much everywhere, lol that rymes, feel like im playing skyrim with all my texture mods

also i think nvidia users will get a bit better performence than ati equivelent because nvidia are amazing with there drivers and allready released performence drivers before it evenm released, where as us ati users wont see that till weve completed the game

xxtanisxx
11-20-2012, 09:51 PM
Oh wow...now im kind of worried about my Fps. I got i7-950, nvida 9500 and 560, 20GB of ram, 1920x1080 graphic, 3 monitors
Right now stuck at school worrying if my computer can even run this game at high or maxed out resolution with at least 50 fps in the city.

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 09:52 PM
Ok I take back what I said, this game has horrible performance issues.

how bad is it for you? We have kinda the same specs (i have 2500k at 4gz)

diwas13
11-20-2012, 09:53 PM
Why can't we turn off AA, tessellation etc? I would much rather force FXAA through the Nvidia control panel and leave in-game AA off what the fudge Ubisoft.

LuGer33x
11-20-2012, 09:53 PM
LuGer33x, that town fps was it with gameplay (running around doing w/e stuff) ? your 2500k at 4ghz i guess?

It depends on the street honestly. I'll run down one and depending on the people / stuff going on, it'll jump from 35-60 or so, which can definitely be jarring. But I just ran about killing guards and engaging in all sorts of nonsense and it never went below 35. I wish it were a little more consistent.

If you have AMD, I just downloaded the latest beta drivers (12.11 or something) a few hours before playing the game the first time. Not sure whether they're making a difference or not.

And again, putting the AA on Very High really makes the game look beautiful, like something properly next-gen but it torpedoed my performance.

LuGer33x
11-20-2012, 09:56 PM
I guess where I differ with a lot of you, specifically the school student from last page, is that I don't consider it a disaster if the game dips below 60-50 FPS. It's very much playable at high settings and the game looks pretty **** sharp, definitely way better than consoles and I'm getting 20-30 FPS more than consoles on average, even if I'm not at "max settings." Only settings turned down are AA and Environment Quality, and in 1080p, I'm more than happy with 40 FPS average in town.

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 09:58 PM
Ouch yea. I would try without the beta driver, nvidias new beta driver messed up bf3 for my gpu so gonna try both with AC3 once i get it.
Hmm looks good with high on AA? Any settings for MLAA?

I prefer a solid 40 than a up and down 60 =)

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 10:20 PM
well i suppose i could allways jack world quality up to very high, turn aa down to normal and shadows to normal as i find they both look fine at that setting, world quality makes the biggest difference, ill see how i get on, and cap fps at 30

i dont understand that in the ini file, in documents, if aa is set to normal, the number is 0? wich usualy means disabled, o idea why i get screen tearing with vsync on? only if i cap my fps at 40

Fighter771ATWU
11-20-2012, 10:57 PM
Im running a 6990 a Phenomn ii X6 Oc'd to 3.7ghz 1090t and 8 gigs of ram and maxed out i get 18-25FPS and on lowest setting i get 20-35 FPS im pretty sure i should be able to max this

Pleasefixmyacc
11-20-2012, 10:58 PM
well i suppose i could allways jack world quality up to very high, turn aa down to normal and shadows to normal as i find they both look fine at that setting, world quality makes the biggest difference, ill see how i get on, and cap fps at 30

i dont understand that in the ini file, in documents, if aa is set to normal, the number is 0? wich usualy means disabled, o idea why i get screen tearing with vsync on? only if i cap my fps at 40

what happens with the ini file when you mess around with the settings ingame?

IDefectedI
11-20-2012, 11:01 PM
specs?

i7 3770k Overclocked 5.0
GTX680 SLI
16GB ram
SSD Crucial M4
ASUS Maximus V FORMULA/THUNDERFX

diwas13
11-20-2012, 11:06 PM
So I under-clocked my cpu to stock clocks(3.4) to see if the game is as CPU bound as Ubi say it is, and guess what I saw a "whopping" difference of 7-10 fps in the colony lol.

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 11:20 PM
i think i may have found my sweet spot settings wise, im at 1360x768, world quality high, textures highest, aa highest, shadows normal wich is lowest, i capped frame rate at 40 fps wich seems ok, shame cuz outside city its nice frame rate wise. it would of been nice if they gave us more options with the settings, cuz it seems world quality does more than one thing, i know view distence is one of them, i tried using latest radeon pro to disable tesselation but rp wont work with it.

the ini file has hardly any settings, basicly only what we allready have in game settings aspart from vsync wich you can turn off, if you set aa to normal, aa in the ini file is set at 0, wich usualy means disabled, unless theres another ini file somewhere, probably is actualy

yep im happy with that, would of liked world quality maxed but oh well, im just glad the frame rate is playable, coming from my 360 its very nice so i suppose i should be greatfull,it just shouldnt tease you with 60 fps if it cant keep it at it or near it, they know this wich is why you probably dont hve to restart the game when changing settings like you usualy do, maybe they expected us to keep changing

wish i could disable the dof in this game, its the worst ive ever seen in a game

IDefectedI
11-20-2012, 11:21 PM
So I under-clocked my cpu to stock clocks(3.4) to see if the game is as CPU bound as Ubi say it is, and guess what I saw a "whopping" difference of 7-10 fps in the colony lol.

Run CPU monitor on each core let me know what the usage is .

Ptweaker
11-20-2012, 11:31 PM
Also 18-20 fps avg when I get to Boston. HD6950, Phenom II x4 940 and 4 GB 800 Mhz ram here. It seems like it runs very bad on AMD graphics cards, while it runs much better on Nvidia. Nvidia users seems to do fine when updated to the newest drivers. These facts lead me to believe that it is some issue in the game that can either be resolved by Ubisoft or AMD by game tweaks and/or driver updates. I really hope AMD releases some new drivers soon. Also, it is pretty weird that the CPU usage is not at it highest when running this game, that has to be some sort of bug.

hitman47222
11-20-2012, 11:54 PM
6850 Here and the game is running horribly on lowest settings. Should not i at least be able to get 30 FPS?

leroy19852010
11-20-2012, 11:55 PM
Also 18-20 fps avg when I get to Boston. HD6950, Phenom II x4 940 and 4 GB 800 Mhz ram here. It seems like it runs very bad on AMD graphics cards, while it runs much better on Nvidia. Nvidia users seems to do fine when updated to the newest drivers. These facts lead me to believe that it is some issue in the game that can either be resolved by Ubisoft or AMD by game tweaks and/or driver updates. I really hope AMD releases some new drivers soon. Also, it is pretty weird that the CPU usage is not at it highest when running this game, that has to be some sort of bug.

to me that just says its not optimized properly

Lynkin
11-20-2012, 11:58 PM
GTX 680
8GB RAM
Quad core i7 3.2

45-55 FPS in Boston
45-55+ in Frontier
60 FPS indoors

leroy19852010
11-21-2012, 12:14 AM
GTX 680
8GB RAM
Quad core i7 3.2

45-55 FPS in Boston
45-55+ in Frontier
60 FPS indoors

a setup like that should be getting 60 fps all day long on this

odoyle151
11-21-2012, 01:16 AM
it seems even if i turn my settings down i dont achieve a much better improvement in frame rates. i've been runnning them at max settings and in the city im only seeing around 22 fps, turns them down...23 fps... my system should smoke this game 60 fps all day. i really hope they come out with a patch in the near future, this game is too good to port so poorly.

sabertooth 990fx mobo
2x6950 2 gig
phenom 2 985 black edtion oc 4.2 ghz
16 gigs ddr3 ram
2x ssd drives run in raid 0

kosay91
11-21-2012, 01:45 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/727543-PC-Performance-Help-%28AMD-Radeon-users-only%29?p=8715068#post8715068

Follow this thread I created for help, (note for AMD users only)

Razrback16
11-21-2012, 04:35 AM
- 1920x1200
- NVidia GTX 680
- Phenom II 955
- Everything max except antialising which is set to "medium"
- No idea, but with the above settings the game runs butter smooth. Looks incredible, too. :)
- Anywhere. Boston, on the ship, you name it, it's smooth.

dhr09
11-21-2012, 04:42 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/727543-PC-Performance-Help-%28AMD-Radeon-users-only%29?p=8715068#post8715068

Follow this thread I created for help, (note for AMD users only)

Don't know if you mention it in your thread, but AMD also has a new beta Driver 12.11beta8 with some optimizations for Hitman Absolution and AC3.

fishboy_11
11-21-2012, 05:51 AM
Don't know if you mention it in your thread, but AMD also has a new beta Driver 12.11beta8 with some optimizations for Hitman Absolution and AC3.

theres no optimizations for either of those games in the new beta8 drivers, heres whats optimized:



Improves performance up to 5% in Max Payne 3
Includes single GPU performance updates for Far Cry 3
Improves CrossFire scaling for Planetside 2 (Crossfire scaling is still limited to ~30% at 2560x1600)
Resolves the Skyrim lighting issue (missing a lighting pass) for the AMD Radeon HD 7900 Series
Resolves the hang encountered playing Dishonored on the AMD Radeon HD 6000 and AMD Radeon HD 5000 Series
AMD Catalyst 12.11 Beta 8 for Linux includes significant performance improvements for Left for Dead 2

Eboshi12
11-21-2012, 05:51 AM
Microsoft 7
I7 quad core CPU 2.20 G6
6 GB of ram
Nvidia GT 540M 1GB
Lowest settings

In and around Boston, I'm running between 9-12 fps :(
Really disappointed so far, 50 bucks wasted for poor fps and unable to connect to multiplayer. Hope Ubisoft fixes this soon.

Aethiuss
11-21-2012, 05:58 AM
In Boston major fps drops. In forrests and all other enovirments fps is fine

captmaverick06
11-21-2012, 06:35 AM
60fps outside of Boston

30-45fps inside of Boston

Game graphics setting:
1920x1080 60Hz
Eviron Quality: Very High
Texture Quality: High
Anti-aliasing: High
Shadow Quality: Very High


Win7
i7 2600k
16GB 1600 DDR3
GTX 660ti

diwas13
11-21-2012, 06:57 AM
Frontier - 100-80fps
Boston - 70-30fps

1920x1080 120Hz
Environment - Very High
Texture - High
AA - Normal
Shadow - Normal

Does Ubisoft even know, people are having performance issues? I really hope the mods bring these threads to their attention.

spectatorx
11-21-2012, 10:08 AM
Microsoft 7
I7 quad core CPU 2.20 G6
6 GB of ram
Nvidia GT 540M 1GB
Lowest settings

In and around Boston, I'm running between 9-12 fps :(
Really disappointed so far, 50 bucks wasted for poor fps and unable to connect to multiplayer. Hope Ubisoft fixes this soon.


You shouldn't expect much from geforce 540, especially when it's mobile version.


But anyway, as i see there is huge problem with performance of game and something has to be done. When i will get my copy many things will change ;-) Maybe even i will release some modified drivers especially for ac3.

leroy19852010
11-21-2012, 12:21 PM
world quality seems to make the biggest difference with frame rate, i now have that at high, and all other settings maxed and get a pretty much constant 40 fps, ive capped it at 40 as well and im pretty happy, i only play at 1360x768 though, i feel i should be able to play with maxed settings though, and is annoying but ill take a constant 40 over the consoles 10-20 every couple of seconds, so its cool, textures are the best part, a massive improvement from consoles, so i got what i wanted, actualy all i wanted was a playable frame rate, wich i now have

PrometheanF
11-21-2012, 12:26 PM
1920x1080 60hz
All settings max

60 fps with almost no variation.

i5 3570k @ 4.0Ghz
2x GTX 670 in SLI
8GB Kingston HyperX

machjava
11-21-2012, 02:41 PM
i5 3570k @4.2Ghz
GTX 670 SC 4gb
16gb Corsair Vengeance
120gb Kingston HyperX SSD

All settings max, although I switched the anti-aliasing to HIGH instead of either Very High or TXAA, I noticed no difference visually (1920x1080 60Hz). With my current settings, I never dip below 60 anywhere, but when I had TXAA on, I noticed in Boston especially, I'd drop to around 55-56, which was a bit distracting. Other than that, game runs great, just wish it was a little bit more optimized in the cities.

dex3108BL
11-21-2012, 02:56 PM
It seams that for now game is made to run great only on nVidia 6xx series. Most of configurations where game is running good have that series.

Pleasefixmyacc
11-21-2012, 02:57 PM
Havent seen many with 580gtx cards :<

dex3108BL
11-21-2012, 03:03 PM
My GTX 260 will cry like a baby XD

IDefectedI
11-21-2012, 03:14 PM
Good friend who has the same setup I use is getting 80 frames - GTX680 SLI / i7 3770k and he uses no overclock .

IMRicko
11-21-2012, 03:27 PM
i assume the game is not friendly when cpu is overclocked. Played with my i7 2600k overclocked and gtx 670 my fps was around 25-60 average and once I underclock and revert the processor the the original clock my fps increased to 40-60 average

al-Assas
11-21-2012, 03:30 PM
With my current settings, I never dip below 60 anywhere, but when I had TXAA on, I noticed in Boston especially, I'd drop to around 55-56, which was a bit distracting.

Oh my God. I cannot even imagine what being distracted by a drop to around 55-56 can be like.

hitman47222
11-21-2012, 04:05 PM
Any news of a patch or a driver ( for ATI ) coming soon?

machjava
11-21-2012, 05:31 PM
Oh my God. I cannot even imagine what being distracted by a drop to around 55-56 can be like.

When you're cruising at 60, the shift to anything below that results in a stutter that is very noticeable, smartass. This game, like I stated, is pretty well optimized, and those drops are few and nit picking, but there nonetheless.

dex3108BL
11-21-2012, 05:37 PM
Ubi support is in contact with devs and they have reported them FPS problem. Support is advising that players with problems submit ticket to support so they can collect as many information as they can.

DerelictHuman
11-21-2012, 05:54 PM
Ubi support is in contact with devs and they have reported them FPS problem. Support is advising that players with problems submit ticket to support so they can collect as many information as they can.

They're just eating you.

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 05:58 PM
Guys the team are aware of some people having issues - however please do report it directly to Support as well..

Your support tickets are VITAL in helping the team find a solution.

Make sure you put as much detail as possible in the support ticket - esp your graphics card, ram and processor!

www.support.ubi.com (http://www.support.ubi.com)

While it's great you are posting here - you do need to also be contacting support - since those tickets really help and show the spread of hardware affected.


It may also be worth while checking your drivers are upto date and not beta versions - sometimes you can get better performance using slightly older signed versions than beta etc.

DerelictHuman
11-21-2012, 05:59 PM
blablablabla...

You'll just make us wait another month or so. I'm done with Ubisoft.

END OF RINE

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 06:04 PM
blablablabla...

You'll just make us wait another month or so. I'm done with Ubisoft.

END OF RINE
Sorry I can't help you then, however contacting support is vital part of the process - more so with PC - even if they don't have an immediate fix, your information is passed on to the team who will be working on one, if it's game related and not driver related.

Stiler
11-21-2012, 06:13 PM
2600k
8gb ram
GTX 580

Avg fps around high 50's/60's.

Boston fps: Dips into 20's/30's in some area's, VERY noticeable and I also am getting a ton of crashing in Boston. I didn't get a single crash from the first theater area, the ship ride, anything, just in Boston. Also doing the fort mission, 0 crashing, but once back in Boston, crash crash crash.

spectatorx
11-21-2012, 06:16 PM
As i see biggest problem is Boston map and this one needs to be optimized.

From informations i collected singleplayer .forge files are starting in name with dx11 but multiplayer files not. Is multiplayer not dx11? If someone could just run multiplayer game with afterburner (or similar program) osd enabled ane check it, i'll be very thankful for this info.

I will get my copy of game tomorrow :D

MrGreenest
11-21-2012, 06:17 PM
same herer
4gb
A8-3850 3.1 OC
HD 6850
i can play Battlefield 3 with this but no AC 3 in boston

leroy19852010
11-21-2012, 06:20 PM
one thi8ng id like to know is, is very high considered dx11 or not, cuz i dont think it is, i think its dx11 with high and very high options?

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 06:34 PM
Remember not just to post here guys - you need to inform support too.

The more data they have from as many people as possible - the better ;)

machjava
11-21-2012, 06:46 PM
Remember not just to post here guys - you need to inform support too.

The more data they have from as many people as possible - the better ;)

Will do! If you could, would you mind clarifying what the Graphic settings correspond to, there seems to be some confusion. As in, Very High/High/Medium meaning DX11 feature turn on/off, etc.

spectatorx
11-21-2012, 06:54 PM
Shade, you are kinda smart guy, isn't it? ;-) Could you check this what i asked few posts ago? ;-)

ChandlerUSMC
11-21-2012, 06:56 PM
Very odd. I'm not experiencing the performance issues mentioned in this thread. 60 in wilderness, mid/high 50s in Boston. hrm...
GTX580. I7-965 @ 3.8 on Windows 8 64 - 1920x1200. The only setting I turned down was AA to High from Very High. vOv

Hope y'all get your issues sorted.

Stiler
11-21-2012, 07:14 PM
Very odd. I'm not experiencing the performance issues mentioned in this thread. 60 in wilderness, mid/high 50s in Boston. hrm...
GTX580. I7-965 @ 3.8 on Windows 8 64 - 1920x1200. The only setting I turned down was AA to High from Very High. vOv

Hope y'all get your issues sorted.

What drivers are you using? Card oc'd or not?

ChandlerUSMC
11-21-2012, 07:16 PM
Stock GTX 580. Drivers are 310.54. PC is an Alienware. Not sure if matters but earlier today, my AC3 was patched through Steam. Unfortunately, there are no patch notes so I'm uncertain of what was changed or if it had anything to do with performance.

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 07:25 PM
Will do! If you could, would you mind clarifying what the Graphic settings correspond to, there seems to be some confusion. As in, Very High/High/Medium meaning DX11 feature turn on/off, etc.
I would expect 'Normal' will be off - and anything high or above is on..

however it maybe linked to the 'World Detail' as a global setting so I am checking.



Shade, you are kinda smart guy, isn't it? ;-) Could you check this what i asked few posts ago? ;-)
Will be quicker for you to look your self - since I maynot get an answer in time.

fishboy_11
11-21-2012, 07:26 PM
Frontier - 100-80fps
Boston - 70-30fps

1920x1080 120Hz
Environment - Very High
Texture - High
AA - Normal
Shadow - Normal

Does Ubisoft even know, people are having performance issues? I really hope the mods bring these threads to their attention.


they know, they are just blaming it on people using pirated copies of the game, or at least that was what the mod said at the beginning of this thread.

the frames do get better once you are in boston for a bit tho.

BzkGB
11-21-2012, 07:46 PM
Sorry I can't help you then, however contacting support is vital part of the process - more so with PC - even if they don't have an immediate fix, your information is passed on to the team who will be working on one, if it's game related and not driver related.

Who says it'll even get fixed, even after months of waiting and trying to avoid spoilers? Look at GR Future Soldier... what a waste of money that was.

I'll send my ticket to Ubisoft Support but I'm not holding my breath.

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 07:49 PM
Who says it'll even get fixed, even after months of waiting and trying to avoid spoilers? Look at GR Future Soldier... what a waste of money that was.

I'll send my ticket to Ubisoft Support but I'm not holding my breath.
Some things maybe just can't be fixed - however when possible they do try..

The GRFS team is a different one, so I can't speak for them - sorry.


they know, they are just blaming it on people using pirated copies of the game, or at least that was what the mod said at the beginning of this thread.

the frames do get better once you are in boston for a bit tho.

As I was the 'mod' I'll address this..

The Pirated Version suffered poor performance - due to the crack they used - it was not allowing the game to work correctly [shame]

There was proof to back this up - from members of the community if you look..


However that was before the game was released - now we have paying customers with issues - and we are trying to hep the best we can..


the pirates - can still suffer though ;)

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 07:54 PM
Hi Guys,

I have just spoken to the team, as some of you have wondered if your able to disable DX11 support totally.


The game is hard coded to support DX11 - so it's always enabled, so there is no 'off' setting for it.

Garm31
11-21-2012, 07:55 PM
Don't blame this poor port on pirate copies of the game. I own the freedom edition and the performance is unacceptable. To avoid wallet rape, do not buy this game until it's patched.

BzkGB
11-21-2012, 07:56 PM
Some things maybe just can't be fixed - however when possible they do try..

The GRFS team is a different one, so I can't speak for them - sorry.

It'll be a big waste of money for the consumers if they just gave up and decide that it simply could not be fixed, no? I'll be pretty gutted anyway, considering I thought I was pretty lucky to have gotten a Freedom Edition..

I heard Ubisoft Kiev worked on porting both AC3 and GR FR. I could be completely wrong, though. Not to complain to you or anything, you seem to be doing everything you can.

DejanDominic
11-21-2012, 07:58 PM
Please fix FPS i have 6870

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 08:00 PM
Don't blame this poor port on pirate copies of the game. I own the freedom edition and the performance is unacceptable. To avoid wallet rape, do not buy this game until it's patched.
No one is...


Many people do not have a problem - and are hitting steady 60fps - however some are not..

So, we need people to help us identify the issue.


the fact the game is DX11 only - may have some impact on some setups.

Pragzor
11-21-2012, 08:01 PM
"Skip" button always shown in cutscenes, please fix this bug.

Nose-Nuggets
11-21-2012, 08:01 PM
Sorry Shade but i was getting better performance with the pirated 1.0 copy then i am with my steam purchased 1.01 copy.

Andre_0112
11-21-2012, 08:03 PM
"Skip" button always shown in cutscenes, please fix this bug.

How is this a bug? It's an option for lazy people who don't want to see the cutscenes.

On other news, i'm not having a single problem. 40-50 fps for me, works fine :))

Garm31
11-21-2012, 08:04 PM
Please fix FPS i have 6870

It is not you GPU thats the problem. Don't bother looking for drivers. It's the uses your CPU more than your GPU. Just like the consoles. Unless you have the latest i7 (which you shouldn't need), than your gonna get poor performance. :/

Pragzor
11-21-2012, 08:06 PM
How is this a bug? It's an option for lazy people who don't want to see the cutscenes.

On other news, i'm not having a single problem. 40-50 fps for me, works fine :))
It's supposed to disappear after few seconds.

DejanDominic
11-21-2012, 08:06 PM
In boston fps are 15-20 this sucks bad :mad:

spectatorx
11-21-2012, 08:09 PM
Hm... i'm looking at files of game and i have some suspicious about low fps and need some clarification. My question to all you gamers:

Do you have huge framedrop at any or all these maps listed below? If yes so please specify exact maps you had low fps. List of suspected maps:
- Boston (ok, i already know this one is serious problem :D )
- Frontier
- Homestead
- New York


If constant framedrop happens in other locations, pls, specify them. I think i know the reason but i need to make sure myself with your reports. Also welcome are configurations of your PCs, especially amounts of ram and amount of ram on gpu and gpu name.

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 08:11 PM
For those with AMD cards and low performance - have you tried forcing Tessellation OFF in the graphics cards control panel?

Just something to try.. and no - it's not an Official Fix..

GunsmokeLV
11-21-2012, 08:11 PM
Have to agree with Mr_Shade. People have to be more specific with their problems and work together to resolve them instead just go around saying "this game sucks don't buy performance is bad". I do have problems with the game but instead of saying it's garbage I sent a message to the Ubisoft Support. I reckon rest of you do the same. :)

DejanDominic
11-21-2012, 08:12 PM
In Boston FPS drop 15-30 i didnt go far from boston :D


ASUS P7H55-m-LX/SI
INTEL I3-540 (4MB Cache,3.06)
6870 1gb
4GB

Garm31
11-21-2012, 08:12 PM
Go into the games ini file, and disable vsync and set multisample to 0. This will disable anti aliasing. I am using SweetFX SMAA and I am getting slightly better performance. Still not good enough

Specs:
AMD Phenom x4 955 3.6Gh OC
Sapphire HD 7870 2GB
Corsair 8GB 1600mhz
Samsung 256GB SSD

Nose-Nuggets
11-21-2012, 08:12 PM
Ill give the tessellation thing a shot when i get home. is there a recomended ATI driver to use? (latest official vs latest beta?)

Ryukhen
11-21-2012, 08:13 PM
First, my system specs:
Win 7 6-bit
MSI P67A-GD65 mobo
i5 2500K quad core proc 3.2ghz OC'd to 4.0 ghz
8 GB Kingston HyperX Predator RAM
Galaxy GTX 670 2GB
Corsair Force GT 120 GB SSD (drive the game is on)

Game runs at about 50 fps avg for me so far. Experienced a bit of sporadic one-or-two-second hitching in the very beginning of the game that went away around the time I got to the Animus training part.

Should note I did not buy this through Steam so I am only running it through Uplay.

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 08:13 PM
Have to agree with Mr_Shade. People have to be more specific with their problems and work together to resolve them instead just go around saying "this game sucks don't buy performance is bad". I do have problems with the game but instead of saying it's garbage I sent a message to the Ubisoft Support. I reckon rest of you do the same. :)
AMD card? - can you try disabling Tessellation in the CCC please and post back?

[latest drivers have the option to disable it]

just something I would like some to try personally..

Garm31
11-21-2012, 08:14 PM
Have to agree with Mr_Shade. People have to be more specific with their problems and work together to resolve them instead just go around saying "this game sucks don't buy performance is bad". I do have problems with the game but instead of saying it's garbage I sent a message to the Ubisoft Support. I reckon rest of you do the same. :)

The game is not garbage. It's awesome. The performance is ruining a great experience.

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 08:14 PM
Ill give the tessellation thing a shot when i get home. is there a recomended ATI driver to use? (latest official vs latest beta?)
I would try the latest official ones - and if you have time / can /- you can try the beta's - however the latest official ones = recommended as far as I am aware.

BzkGB
11-21-2012, 08:15 PM
Have to agree with Mr_Shade. People have to be more specific with their problems and work together to resolve them instead just go around saying "this game sucks don't buy performance is bad". I do have problems with the game but instead of saying it's garbage I sent a message to the Ubisoft Support. I reckon rest of you do the same. :)

I'm sure there are many of us are submitting tickets and hoping for a solution. I think PC gamers are just annoyed, and rightly so, that they had to wait an additional three weeks for optimisation and the game simply isn't working well for them - even if their computer eats the recommended requirements for breakfast. There's only so long you can dodge all those spoilers online, mate...

Nose-Nuggets
11-21-2012, 08:18 PM
I would try the latest official ones - and if you have time / can /- you can try the beta's - however the latest official ones = recommended as far as I am aware.

I'll have a ton of time over the next 4 days to test different things and report back if my efforts will be helpful. I really like this game and i really want it to work well.

DejanDominic
11-21-2012, 08:18 PM
I try tessellation off dont work same fps 15-20

lorik2010
11-21-2012, 08:19 PM
I have intel i5 3570k @ 4.2ghz and boston frames are utter b**** besides this I also have constant CTD (once in Boston) "the instruction at reference memory at 0x00 bla bla bla. BTW my gpu is AMD HD5870 and seems to affect only 5870 users since one other user mentioned CTD with same GPU . Almost forgot LATEST DRIVERS installed as well.

Nose-Nuggets
11-21-2012, 08:19 PM
I'm sure there are many of us are submitting tickets and hoping for a solution. I think PC gamers are just annoyed, and rightly so, that they had to wait an additional three weeks for optimisation and the game simply isn't working well for them - even if their computer eats the recommended requirements for breakfast. There's only so long you can dodge all those spoilers online, mate...

Don't kid yourself, its doubtful the delay was for optimization. both likely went gold the same day and the delay is to boost console sales. which isn't a bad thing, its a shareholders thing.

leroy19852010
11-21-2012, 08:23 PM
thanks for clarifying the game is permenant dx11 mr shade thats something ive been dying to know, there not too heavy on the info are they, just expect us to figure it out, but im greatfull for these features still, my only problems now is the the very rare drop to 30 fps, never under, and very rare, capped at 40 is ok, not really what i wanted

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 08:26 PM
thanks for clarifying the game is permenant dx11 mr shade thats something ive been dying to know, there not too heavy on the info are they, just expect us to figure it out, but im greatfull for these features still, my only problems now is the the very rare drop to 30 fps, never under, and very rare, capped at 40 is ok, not really what i wantedYou could try lowering the post processing - some have found that has a impact too.


it's just a case of finding settings which work with your hardware - if possible, while the team try and make sense of the issue.

Garm31
11-21-2012, 08:29 PM
Disabling tessellation has no effect on framerate. You keep referring to GPU problems. Again, the game uses the CPU more than the GPU. Doesn't matter if you have a GTX 680 or higher. It's CPU limited.
Which needs to be fixed.

lorik2010
11-21-2012, 08:32 PM
Disabling tessellation has no effect on framerate. You keep referring to GPU problems. Again, the game uses the CPU more than the GPU. Doesn't matter if you have a GTX 680 or higher. It's CPU limited.
Which needs to be fixed.

Not true the real problem is this games uses neither to the MAX . Gpu usage 65-75% ,CPU usage 1st core = 80% , 2,3,4 core = 20%

leroy19852010
11-21-2012, 08:32 PM
yeah for me, the shadows and aa doesnt have a big impact, couple of frames, but world quality has BIG AIMPACT, but i refuse to lower that to normal, as said im ok with what i have, the drops are VERY rare

leroy19852010
11-21-2012, 08:34 PM
seems a case as usual, of game made for consoles, then quickly rush to try and squeeze performence by brute force from high end pc??

Garm31
11-21-2012, 08:34 PM
Uses about 80% CPU and 30-40% GPU. Should be the other way around.

jhewt.sp
11-21-2012, 08:35 PM
Getting arround 10~15 FPS on Boston, it's very unplayable.
Even disabling VSync in AC3's config file (Assassin3.ini) is still the same no matter what settings I'm playing on.

The sad thing is, if this get fixed on AMD's hands i'll still not be able to play it because they are very dumb dropping support for GFX cards older than the 5000 series on Windows 8.
I've tryed every resolution, config settings, everything and is still the same no matter what.

If this wont get fixed, I guess this will be my last game from Ubisoft.

My Specs:
Windows 8 Pro - build 9200
Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 @ 3,2 Ghz
4GB Ram
ATI Radeon HD 4890

leroy19852010
11-21-2012, 08:38 PM
was the 5000 series the minimum card then??

diwas13
11-21-2012, 08:38 PM
This game is poorly optimized FACT. Some of you here who are saying they don't have performance issues are probably used to playing at low fps. But as someone who owns a 120Hz monitor and have played all previous AC games and most of my other games at over 100fps consistently, you haven't faintest idea how much more smoother and responsive the game looks and plays. Anways after updating to the latest Nvidia drivers I'm getting....

200-80fps on the Frotier, Outskirts of Boston and Indoors.
120-50fps in the heart of Boston(and this is the major problem, the fps drops are just jarring)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/66102155@N06/

leroy19852010
11-21-2012, 08:44 PM
diwas cant you just cap youre frame rate at the lowest it goes?

Stiler
11-21-2012, 08:46 PM
I have intel i5 3570k @ 4.2ghz and boston frames are utter b**** besides this I also have constant CTD (once in Boston) "the instruction at reference memory at 0x00 bla bla bla. BTW my gpu is AMD HD5870 and seems to affect only 5870 users since one other user mentioned CTD with same GPU . Almost forgot LATEST DRIVERS installed as well.

I'm on a GTX 580 and I'm having constant crashing in Boston as well.

Playing The theather/ship part before getting to Boston, 0 crashes. Multiplayer, 0 crashes, Boston is crash crash crash happy. Mayb ea few minutes until it crashes. However instead of the memory error it just crashes the display driver.

lorik2010
11-21-2012, 08:48 PM
This game was ported by Ubisoft Kiev ? Theres your answer ! Never hand over precious code to a post-soviet state .PERIOD

diwas13
11-21-2012, 08:48 PM
diwas cant you just cap youre frame rate at the lowest it goes?

That would be 50fps. I can't stand less than 60fps :). And >60fps isn't much to ask.

Mr_Shade
11-21-2012, 09:03 PM
This game was ported by Ubisoft Kiev ? Theres your answer ! Never hand over precious code to a post-soviet state .PERIOD
lets not be offensive towards the dev team please.

atomdrift
11-22-2012, 12:52 AM
1920x1080
AMD 6950 2GB (Catalyst 12.11)
i5-2500K @ 3.7GHz
8GB RAM
Win7 x64
Max gfx settings (except for AA set to 2/3)
45-60 FPS (25-60 with max AA)
Boston daytime area

Overall not too bad. Sad to see yet another game where AMD GPU are outperformed by nVidia, but I imagine they'll get around to optimizing their driver.

Moving from AMD to an Intel CPU has been the single best performance boost I've experienced in PC gaming.

DerelictHuman
11-22-2012, 01:48 AM
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/2392/11379861.png

Highest setting except envoirement quality, its on normal.

AMD Athlon II x4 @3.5 GHz and HD5870

garyjpaterson
11-22-2012, 02:43 AM
- Screen resolution - 1080p
- Graphics card - AMD 6870
- Processor - AMD Phenom II X6 1055t
- Graphical settings - MINIMUM (Except Resolution)
- Average and minimum FPS - Between 2 and 4 FPS
- What kind of gameplay and where (and when). - At the beginning, obviosly cant play the game much in this state.

Johny-Al-Knox
11-22-2012, 03:13 AM
Running on a GTX 680 and i have a i3570k proccesor..

Gotta say im pleased with the performance i got about 60 FPS in boston. It can drop down to 40 ish someplaces. Hopefully they will fix the stability issues..
On max settings

Also ive encountered some pretty hillarious buggs.

jazzman29
11-22-2012, 03:47 AM
Hi everybody!

I have a 5970.
My fps are low in boston, but especially in the frontier where I sometimes get 4-5 fps in the snow (more so in deep snow).
amd 1090t x6 BE 3.7 ghz
4gb 1600mhz

Both gpu activity meters are low. One is like 20-30% and the other about the same or even lower.

SaltyGabriel
11-22-2012, 04:01 AM
First time posting on forums lulz,

Anyways custom gaming laptop, runs perfectly fine outside boston (ofc), meters show gpu-underutilization even with the most recent enduro driver that came out a week ago.
Intel Core i7 - 3630QM Quad Core (2.4GHz -3.4GHz) 6MB cache* (Ivy Bridge) 45 Watt
16GB DDR3-1600 TRANSCEND ram ( 2 x 8GB )
AMD 7970m stock settings.
tinkered abit with settings, but fps stayed roughly the same (vsync off was a small fps gain, but caused screen tearing in high fps areas)
and drops like a brick in boston.
and ofc mobile gpu's arent supported thanks.
GPU utilization at about 35%-40%
Fps 60-90+ starter areas
Fps 20-25 boston areas
offtopic ish, setting AA on max settings caused some wierd texture artifacting (the laptop has the best cooling avaiable and 6 vents, tempartures stayed in normal range throughout testing).
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=109438077&insideModal=1

Edit: Forced Tessellation off in CCC, had no remarkable difference

dhpinoy
11-22-2012, 04:51 AM
Intel Core i5 @2.8Ghz
8GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 7770 1GB

I am stuck at 60fps showing at top left of screen since I have FRAPS running. Runs really smooth. Everything on highest except Anti-Aliasing is on 2nd highest (not sure if it had high/very high)

electrodelic92
11-22-2012, 05:21 AM
Its pretty weird.. i get around 60% gpu and 70% cpu usage running through Boston level and fps is 20-30 everything max @1920x1080
I tried to turn down resolution and AA but it didn't help at all... 1024x768 low AA same fps as 1920x1080 and TXAA lol
Only thing that affects fps is environment detail .. i may get about 10 fps increase when i turn it down to low.
So i think it may be because of my cpu .. or the game just need some performance patch.

gtx660ti 2gb 310.61
amd 960t @3.0 quad
6gb ddr3
win7 64 sp1

torniAlieNxxx
11-22-2012, 05:29 AM
http://benchmark3d.com/assassins-creed-3-benchmark

i don't know why don't you at least assume that the game is poorly cpu optimized. ac revelations also was, i've seen one of the longest distance between higher-lower fps in that game, also obvios not demanding scenes with frame drops. and i think ac3 isn't very far. not even an indie game with the hundredth part of your budget has this optimization issues. not only that, boston is unplayable. please assume it and repair it, you are insulting us if you don't. you promised game of the year, don't fool yourselves

al-Assas
11-22-2012, 07:44 PM
Some more FPS results from Youtube.

The first part is in this post: http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php?p=8714315#post8714315

Nov. 20., 2012 (continued)

Athlon 64 x2 5000+ OC 3.00mhz / Sapphire HD7770 OC / 4 Gb Ram 800mhz
Max Settings / Less than full HD
City gameplay
FPS: 8-12 / while recording: 5-8

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T, 3.2GHz / PowerColor ATI Radeon HD6870, 1GB, 900MHz / RAM: 4GB Corsair Vengeance, 699MHz
Max settings / 1600x900
Gameplay: Opera, ocean. (“the fps drops down in Boston”)
FPS: min 21, avg. 33

Core 2 Duo E7400 @ 2.8 ghz / ASUS GTS450 OC / 4 GB RAM
1920x1080 / max, with high aa and high shadows
Wilderness gameplay
FPS: 20-60 / while recording: 15-40

AMD Phenom II X4 965 / GTX 660 Ti / 4GB Ram
City gameplay
FPS: 4-40

Phenom 945 X4 3,00 Ghz / 8Gb DDR3 Ram 1600 Mhz / Sapphire HD 7850 OC 2GB DDR5 .
1920 x 1080
Opera gameplay
average 30-35 fps , minimum 21-24

Phenom II x4 955 Black Edition @ 3.2ghz / RAM: 2x2Gb DDR3 1600Mhz / GTX 460 1Gb
1920x1080 / max settings
countryside gameplay
FPS: 30-40

Nov. 21., 2012.

GTS 450 GDDR5 1024MB / i3-2100 / RAM 4GB DDR3
1366x768 / max, with normal AA
City night gameplay
FPS: 35-60 / while recording: 30-45 (the video seems to be more like 20)

Phenom x4 955 BE / XFX Radeon HD 5670 1024MB DDR5 / 4GB RAM DDR3
1366x768 / normal, with high texture quality
wilderness gameplay
FPS: 25/42 / while recording: 15/30

i5-2410M / GT 540M 1 GB driver v310.54 / RAM: 4 GB DDR3 1333 MHz
1366x768 / normal settings with high texture quality
Frontier: 36 FPS / City: 50 FPS

ati HD5850 MW2 edition 1gb ddr5 / C2D e6850 @ 3,5ghz / 6gb ddr2 ram
high settings / 1920x1080
city gameplay
35-40 fps,with fraps 25-30 fps (looks more like 20)

Core i5 3570k / GTX 660 Ti / 8 GB Ram
1920x1080 / Ultra Settings
city gameplay
Min-28 Max-51 Average-35

Core i5 3570k / Radeon HD 7770 / 8 GB Ram
1920x1080 / Ultra Settings
city gameplay
Min-27 Max-44 Average-32

i7-2600K @ 4.5 GHz / EVGA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (2GB) @ 915 MHz / 8192MB RAM
1920x1080 / Ultra settings
City gameplay
40-45 FPS

Nov. 22., 2012.

i5 2500k @ 3.30 3.60GHz / RAM DDR3 NANYA 2x4GB 1333 MHz / Gigabyte DDR5 GTX 660 2GB OC Guru II
1920x1080 / Max settings
City gameplay
FPS: 30-60 / while recording: 30+

BzkGB
11-22-2012, 09:29 PM
Fairly stable 55-60 FPS in most places, in Boston it'll dip down to 20-25... Highest settings, only with AA set on 'High' rather than 'Very high'. I haven't reached the Frontier yet, though.

i5 2500k 3.30GHz
AMD Radeon HD 6870 1GB
8GB DDR3 RAM

electrodelic92
11-22-2012, 10:39 PM
Yea.. amd HD7770 same fps as 660ti rofl

AnTiCrIsT_
11-22-2012, 10:52 PM
Res: 3840x2160 (downsampling)
Settings: Ultra
AA: High
49-60 FPS

I7-3930k @ 4,4GHz
EVGA GTX680 SLI
8GB Ram (2133Mhz)
Win8 x64 (256GB Vertex 3 SSD)

kenan1606
11-23-2012, 04:31 AM
Thouht I'd post my specs and average fps

I5 3750k at 4ghz
HD 5870 900 core stock memory speeds
1920x1080 12.11 beta8 drivers catalyst settings application prefence for options that have that, others max quality
All game settings max quality
Win 8 8gb ram
GPU usage 100%
CPU usage 30% to 40%

Boston 26-31fps as far as I've got atm, all places before that solid 32fps.

Game version retail 1.01

KronosJay
11-23-2012, 04:48 AM
LOOK AT THIS!!!
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/728311-HOW-TO-FIX-FPS-DROPPING-FOR-AMD-RADEON-This-is-not-a-question-but-an-answer!

DejanDominic
11-23-2012, 10:35 AM
Dont work

AnTiCrIsT_
11-23-2012, 12:25 PM
after looking through the fps threat im pretty sure the main Problem isnt the Performance.. the Problem is the expectation of some users... if you really think you can run this game on max Details with graphiccards like a HD 5870 or euqivalent with smooth fps. you are just wrong
if you think your laptop with a 2,3 ghz processor will run this game on high or very high just because its called an “alienware” you are wrong
I looked through this threat and havnt found a single user with fps that are below what i did expect from the users machine.

That you have lower fps in boston is totally NORMAL .. boston is something like the main city.. a simulation of a living, breathing city with dozens of people on the screens, lots of details and so on ... its totally normal that the fps drop here – because there is much more to calculate for cpu and gpu – simple as that
60 fps in frontiers while looking at a wall doesnt mean your machine should reach even 50 in boston !
the only point that counts is ATI – they just suck as they always did at newly released games – i quit ATI after more then ten years because i was tired of not beeing able to play games smoothly or without graphic bugs directly after release until they put up some hotfixes
.. be honest to yourself about the potential of your machine... and just lower the graphics – fps will RISE ! (no lie!)

lorik2010
11-23-2012, 12:42 PM
after looking through the fps threat im pretty sure the main Problem isnt the Performance.. the Problem is the expectation of some users... if you really think you can run this game on max Details with graphiccards like a HD 5870 or euqivalent with smooth fps. you are just wrong
if you think your laptop with a 2,3 ghz processor will run this game on high or very high just because its called an “alienware” you are wrong
I looked through this threat and havnt found a single user with fps that are below what i did expect from the users machine.

That you have lower fps in boston is totally NORMAL .. boston is something like the main city.. a simulation of a living, breathing city with dozens of people on the screens, lots of details and so on ... its totally normal that the fps drop here – because there is much more to calculate for cpu and gpu – simple as that
60 fps in frontiers while looking at a wall doesnt mean your machine should reach even 50 in boston !
the only point that counts is ATI – they just suck as they always did at newly released games – i quit ATI after more then ten years because i was tired of not beeing able to play games smoothly or without graphic bugs directly after release until they put up some hotfixes
.. be honest to yourself about the potential of your machine... and just lower the graphics – fps will RISE ! (no lie!)

What are you the AC3 code expert ? go spit your dribble somewhere else ,the game is not taking advantage of my CPU or GPU ,they both get minimum usage 60-65% .And yes I expect this game to work 45+fps 1080p everything highest AA OFF with HD 5870 (equivalent 6950) and core i5 3570k @ 4.2ghz .Have fun with your ridiculous conclusion.

SaltyGabriel
11-23-2012, 01:23 PM
What are you the AC3 code expert ? go spit your dribble somewhere else ,the game is not taking advantage of my CPU or GPU ,they both get minimum usage 60-65% .And yes I expect this game to work 45+fps 1080p everything highest AA OFF with HD 5870 (equivalent 6950) and core i5 3570k @ 4.2ghz .Have fun with your ridiculous conclusion.

Nah, its normal he draws that conclusion, quad cores dont have a high clock per standard, but hyperthreading (in which Ivy Bridge atm excel in) is what makes them superior. ofcourse desktop versions have the edge in the fact they can be overclocked, the i2500 goes well above 4.5k if the feed / cooling can keep it up.
That being said, I dont use alienware, I put mine together myself with a Clevo barebone, combining that with Enduro was the biggest mistake I ever made.
On topic, my my gpu isnt getting fully "used" by AC3 and the CPU at about 50%, with the 1st core running at 98% and the rest of the 7 threads just sitting there looking beautifull :P
To give you a example, battlefield 3 (altho that game is the pinnacle of game optimization) runs well above 60 fps on max settings in high combat), no problems with crysis 2 on max settings either since the new enduro driver.
I dont have a ICT degree, but I grew up with the bastards long enough to know when a system's limit has been reached, and my system, just like my ICT study, is very much slacking.

And as far as things go with AC3, they arent code piling on the executable, asset loading is normal so coding wise its put together decent enough, it just doesnt utilize multi threading cores well, GPU underutilization is somethign AMD in particulair always struggled with.

Sugpung01
11-23-2012, 01:40 PM
I play The Elder Scrolls Skyrim on everything maxed out WITH Matso's ENB.
Anyone seen or heard of Matso's ENB KNOWS the kind of PC required to play Skyrim with it.
None of these games dips down under 60 fps. DX11,Physx and Anti-Aliasing included:
Battlefield 3 maxed out.
Crysis 2 maxed out.
Max Payne 3 maxed out.
Batman:Arkham City maxed out.
And the list goes on and on and on.
Every game except Skyrim uses SweetFX as well. Noooo problem AT ALL.
And then comes along AC3,BOOM HEADSHOT! Below 45 fps in Boston.
Not even gonna bother posting my specs other than im an NVIDIA user.

Darkstorne
11-23-2012, 02:03 PM
Lows of ~25fps. Averages between 30-40fps. Very rarely hits 60fps and is never stable when it does.

Single 2GB GTX 560 Ti (I have two, but waiting on a decent SLI driver update before using both)
i7 @3.4Ghz
16GB RAM

JazzCZ
11-23-2012, 02:18 PM
- 1920x1080
- ASUS ENGTX 580
- AMD Phenom X6 II 1090T 3,6 Ghz
- MAXED OUT
- 70+ AVERAGE AND MINIMUM 40 FPS
- Everywhere. More FPS in buildings obviously.

samout10
11-23-2012, 03:48 PM
avrage 50 Fps

i7 920
gtx580
6 GB ram
all settings max 1080p

SeidoN_
11-23-2012, 03:54 PM
i5 2500k
SLI 570

30-50 frames in Boston. pointless to play, so choppy

AnTiCrIsT_
11-23-2012, 04:39 PM
I dont Get why People expect to have the Same fps in Boston as in other Parts of the Game -.-

Psychosexi
11-23-2012, 04:46 PM
Radeon HD6850 1gb ram
Athlon x3 440
3GB RAM

about 13-18 fps when arriving in boston

DejanDominic
11-23-2012, 04:47 PM
Cant play game ****ing fps drop fix that :mad:

bolz87
11-23-2012, 04:59 PM
Core 2 Quad Q6600 @2,4 Ghz
4 GB DDR2
Radeon 5870 Vapor-X

I also have the FPS drop when arrived in Boston, 14-15 FPS average with settings all max (except antialiasing) at 1680x1050 :(

hitman47222
11-23-2012, 05:03 PM
Radeon HD6850 1gb ram
Athlon x3 440
3GB RAM

about 13-18 fps when arriving in boston

I got 6850 too but a FX-6100 and 8GB RAM.. Yet i get 22-28 Fps in boston. I think this shows that this game is more CPU intensive.. Typical console port

sebaomar444
11-23-2012, 05:50 PM
radeon hd 5850 1gb oc
intel i5 750 @3,5 ghz
4gb ram ddr3

boston 25fps...

Dvellvm
11-23-2012, 06:42 PM
I also had problems with AC3 ... framerate issues, the game is unplayable.
the problem will be corrected by ubisoft or, in my case, by ati?

he most important information:


- Screen resolution 1920x1080
- Graphics card Ati radeon Hd series 6990
- Processor i7 Extreme edition 990x
- Graphical settings all maximum settings
- Average and minimum FPS 2-4, 0-3
- problems are found in:
gameplay, menus, gameplay videos, and in the Animus O_O!

shurik811
11-23-2012, 07:18 PM
this is ridiculous realy... Q6600 4GB ram ATI 5850-i do realize that my rig is not what it used to be a couple of years ago, but it just doesnt seem right when i get 10-15 fps in boston and NOTHING helps.

Likeasunrise
11-23-2012, 07:32 PM
ATI Radeon HD 7970 3GB
AMD FX 8150 3.61GZ
32GB RAM

19-20 FPS in Boston)

Unplayible game, just play Hitman)

Sugpung01
11-23-2012, 07:38 PM
@dreadcorp

Dude,seriously.
Nobody is expecting a billion fps in places such as Boston and the Frontier but with the kind of rigs people have that i have seen in this and other threads like this it's pretty obvious it's a lousy console port.
Look at the post just above you,Kieran should at LEAST have 50 - 60+ fps. No doubt whatsoever. He has a setup well above the recommended specs.
And i have seen better setups in this thread alone. It's blatantly obvious that Ubisoft,as in so many cases are terrible at optimizing their games.Plain and simple.

AnTiCrIsT_
11-23-2012, 08:11 PM
@dreadcorp
He has a setup well above the recommended specs.


recommended doesnt mean you will be able to Play the game in Enthusiast mode - and in Addition.. the Publisher has an interest in keeping the Settings as low as possible to make it attraktive to a wider spectrum of potential customers (VERY old rigs in this case) - the minimal and recommended Settings are almost everytime severe ********

Kardall79
11-23-2012, 08:14 PM
Core-2-Duo 3GHz
nVidia GTX560
Windows 7 64-bit
4 GB of RAM
Resolution: 1600x900

I get on average 55 FPS in Boston and it doesn't seem to make a difference when I turn the settings all the way up or down, it's the same.

peopleperson1
11-23-2012, 08:18 PM
I get 60 all the time (While recording) on High everything 1920x1080 I get 30 when I first load into Boston (Only the very first time when I start the game) GPU: Gtx 580. CPU: Intel i7 3960X. Ram: 32gb 1600mhz. All High no AA ('Cause I see it as a pointless setting.)

Kardall79
11-23-2012, 08:24 PM
I get 60 all the time (While recording) on High everything 1920x1080 I get 30 when I first load into Boston (Only the very first time when I start the game) GPU: Gtx 580. CPU: Intel i7 3960X. Ram: 32gb 1600mhz. All High no AA ('Cause I see it as a pointless setting.)

The quality levels are kinda ... meh. Hardly noticeable unless you're actually paying attention to crevices and shadows on the corners of rock faces. The AA is useless on this game. I'm not complaining about it at all, that means I can turn down the settings and the game still looks absolutely amazing!

torniAlieNxxx
11-23-2012, 09:14 PM
I dont Get why People expect to have the Same fps in Boston as in other Parts of the Game -.-
because it's the same game maybe? or at least we expect it to be playable, not with that glitchy stuttering, c'mon. what's the problem with this people? are you console noobs or you have a gtx690sli that you can't notice the framerate of the game is totally unstable.


after looking through the fps threat im pretty sure the main Problem isnt the Performance.. the Problem is the expectation of some users... if you really think you can run this game on max Details with graphiccards like a HD 5870 or euqivalent with smooth fps. you are just wrong
if you think your laptop with a 2,3 ghz processor will run this game on high or very high just because its called an “alienware” you are wrong
I looked through this threat and havnt found a single user with fps that are below what i did expect from the users machine.

That you have lower fps in boston is totally NORMAL .. boston is something like the main city.. a simulation of a living, breathing city with dozens of people on the screens, lots of details and so on ... its totally normal that the fps drop here – because there is much more to calculate for cpu and gpu – simple as that
60 fps in frontiers while looking at a wall doesnt mean your machine should reach even 50 in boston !
the only point that counts is ATI – they just suck as they always did at newly released games – i quit ATI after more then ten years because i was tired of not beeing able to play games smoothly or without graphic bugs directly after release until they put up some hotfixes
.. be honest to yourself about the potential of your machine... and just lower the graphics – fps will RISE ! (no lie!)

people with a 5870 can run smoothly next gen engines like frostbite 2 or cryengine 3 with the latest dx11 technologies. so, what's the problem if they want to run ac3 smoothly? also, crysis 2 and bf3 looks farly better on pc version, from a lot of dx11 technologies to 4x texture resolutions and 60 constant fps. i don't care to run the game at 40fps or 34fps if it just was 34fps. the frames per second it just means that, a second, not the frame times. but what if a couple of frames inside that second takes a lot more time rendering? it provokes stuttering, and that is what we all see on this game, frame stuttering, no reason because we don't see that demanding scenes provoking that stutter. plus, cpu/gpu usage isn't optimal. so where do we should look? our 300usd card that plays every game full graphics with constant fps, or the new game?

iDeDoK
11-23-2012, 09:17 PM
i7 2600k 4.5GHz
GTX690(1150,3200)
16Gig 1866 cl 9 memory
310.61 drivers
1920*1080 120hz
Max settings
Boston
SLI on=15-20fps
SLI off=35-40 fps
GPU usage is around 30-40%, well done ubisoft.

Sugpung01
11-23-2012, 09:50 PM
Your right of course as it is logical for a games company and publisher to do this. As you said,it attracts to a broader base of potential customers. But with that said,people are (me included) complaining for the fact that they are sure (as am i) that their rig could and should handle the game in whatever setting there is,be it the lowest or the maxed out settings. Hell,people can't even get acceptable framerates at the lower settings let alone trying to max the game out.
I have the rig to outdo and outperform this game in anyway,shape or form.And yet (as many others) it doesn't?
And with Ubisofts track record with PC products,they have infact once again poorly optimized one of their games. I remember not too long ago when Assassins Creed 2 came out and it too was a complete mess when it came to performance.Granted,it did get better with all the patches and fixes,but this game is even worse from the get go then AC2 ever was.

Personally,i didn't wait in anticipation (long time since i was this hyped for any game) over several extra weeks just to see that it underperformed,badly.Could have just gotten it for one of the consoles had i known it was gonna be this badly ported.But enough talk,won't bother with Ubisofts products any more in the future that's for sure. Im glad it works like a charm for you at least. Skidrow,here i come.

Zecks33
11-23-2012, 10:05 PM
1920x1080@60hz
i5-750 @ 3.6ghz
8GB DDR3 Ram @ 1600mhz
2 x AMD 6970 running in Crossfire

This game is very badly optimized, I'm hoping either AMD/NVidia/Ubisoft are patching the game to address the issues in the cities. The game FPS is horrendous in these areas and it has nothing to do with all our hardware. I've played all the Assassin's Creed games on PC and while never perfect they were always playable, this one however is horrible. So upsetting because I almost bought this one for my Xbox but thought I would stick it out for PC as I have always done with them, what a bad mistake.

I think the saddest thing is that Ubisoft just don't seem to care. They haven't even had someone with the decency to come and acknowledge the communities problems (if they have I haven't seen it). Think how many people are having the same issues we are who aren't posting on forums or putting in support tickets. That actually upsets me the most, the people who buy the game but don't know how to tweak or play with settings and or read extensive community posted ideas/articles to get their game to work. Not everyone is tech savvy and it's for these people I feel for the most when crap like this happens.

MontagesNmore
11-23-2012, 10:16 PM
Guys, try my thread

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/728523-NEW!-How-to-FIX-your-FPS-Lag-(ATI-amp-Nvidia)

peopleperson1
11-23-2012, 10:18 PM
AA is useless to me. 'cause I can never really see it at 1920x1080. Also the shadow settings make them look a lot cleaner. The settings in AC3 are smaller things that make it so much better.

electrodelic92
11-23-2012, 10:40 PM
I play with AA maxed because i get no difference in fps.. low AA is same fps as highest AA only looks worse.
Also my gpu usage is really weird its around 50-60% usage when looking at the crowd but when i look at the ground or at sky i get 80-90% usage and 60fps. Why?
My gpu is gigabyte gtx660ti with latest drivers

Legendary_006
11-23-2012, 10:50 PM
I get a 20-25 fps in boston. Lowest settings possible.

My pc
i7-860
6 gb ram
2x HD5870 (i get 10 fps with crossfire on)

Very nice game, i like games that run on slow motion...

dex3108BL
11-23-2012, 11:32 PM
Intel i7 2600K 3.40GHz
8GB Kingston HyperX DDR3
ASUS P8Z68-V/GEN3
Nvidia GTX 260 216sp

Everything is maxed except shadows. Shadows are on High and because my graphic card doesn't support TXAA AA settings is set to High. Resolution is 1080p.

For now in Boston FPS is not going below 30FPS.

CPU Load about 40-50%
GPU Load 100%

sr_pschkn
11-24-2012, 12:06 AM
Also my gpu usage is really weird its around 50-60% usage when looking at the crowd but when i look at the ground or at sky i get 80-90% usage and 60fps. Why?
s*itty port. You're welcome.

nitres15
11-24-2012, 12:09 AM
highest settings, 40-50 fps. Hope this helps if some one else has a similar computer

CPU
i7-3770 3.40G 8MB
Chipset Intel H77

Graphics
NVIDIA GeForce GTX660 3GB GDDR5 (DVI/HDMI/D-sub)

Memory
8G (DDR3 1600, 4G x 2)
up to 16GB Dual Channel DDR3 at 1600Mhz - 4 x DIMMS

dbnicacio
11-24-2012, 12:15 AM
Guys, repport everything in the support area http://ubisoft.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/8982 ,so the devs can get every detail about the problem, since i'm not sure that they are reading everything we write here.

lorik2010
11-24-2012, 12:46 AM
I think if we let AMD know about the issue would be much better .The guy who we should contact is Andrew D (CatalystCreator) on Twitter .He is the guy who can make things happen ,I don't have twitter but those who do, try to get him to know about the issue

BzkGB
11-24-2012, 12:58 AM
I think if we let AMD know about the issue would be much better .The guy who we should contact is Andrew D (CatalystCreator) on Twitter .He is the guy who can make things happen ,I don't have twitter but those who do, try to get him to know about the issue

Just dropped him a Tweet - not sure how much good it'll do, but did it anyway :)

kastrix
11-24-2012, 01:18 AM
Res: 3840x2160 (downsampling)
Settings: Ultra
AA: High
49-60 FPS

I7-3930k @ 4,4GHz
EVGA GTX680 SLI
8GB Ram (2133Mhz)
Win8 x64 (256GB Vertex 3 SSD)

this shows that the problem is with AMD cars, will probaly be fixed with drivers

eburkman
11-24-2012, 01:19 AM
Sent in my ticket. I am also getting poor FPS in Boston and other large areas. The first part of the game ran flawless until the ship pulled into Boston. This is very dissapointing that not only did we have to wait an additional three weeks for the game, but now we are having major issues. I hope this gets resolved quickly. My system runs games like BF3 and Max Payne 3 on max settings with no issues.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 2.66 ghz

8GB dual channel DDR2 RAM

SLI 2GB GTX 560 SC edition,

Screen Res 1600x900. All Drivers up to date.

Joyner08
11-24-2012, 01:27 AM
My PC:

Intel Core i3-2120 Dual (hyperthreaded, 4) CPU @ 3.3 GHZ
8GB G.Skill 1333MHz RAM
Sapphire Radeon HD6870
ASUS P8z68 V-LX

with everything on High (not very) Environment detail is very high + no TXAA due to AMD card, i never dip below 30 frames, get 60+ in cities, the only thing capable of dragging my gpu down is the frontier, tons and tons of shadows.

I am almost always above 40 frames in the busiest parts of Boston.

With everything maxxed I regularly drop below 30 frames, but the visual difference to me is minimal compared gameplay at a more stable framerate.

This is after I modified the Assassin3.ini file to remove vertical sync.

DejanDominic
11-24-2012, 01:35 AM
When i remove vsunc is same is like i cant switch off

al-Assas
11-24-2012, 03:36 AM
My PC:

Intel Core i3-2120 Dual (hyperthreaded, 4) CPU @ 3.3 GHZ
8GB G.Skill 1333MHz RAM
Sapphire Radeon HD6870
ASUS P8z68 V-LX

with everything on High (not very) Environment detail is very high + no TXAA due to AMD card, i never dip below 30 frames, get 60+ in cities, the only thing capable of dragging my gpu down is the frontier, tons and tons of shadows.

I am almost always above 40 frames in the busiest parts of Boston.

With everything maxxed I regularly drop below 30 frames, but the visual difference to me is minimal compared gameplay at a more stable framerate.

This is after I modified the Assassin3.ini file to remove vertical sync.

That sounds awesome. At last an i3. What resolution? What FPS with all max settings? What FPS with vsync on? What does the core-by-core CPU usage graph look like? Especially this last question. I guess vsync and AA doesn't take any CPU power, so whatever, but the big question is what the i3 is capable of. Although if you say it's 60+ FPS in cities with environment detail very high and texture high, that kind of answers the question even if it's at max usage at that point, so yeah, awesome!

cico_thebest69
11-24-2012, 06:21 AM
Ubisoft move your **** *** and release a performance/stability patch. And work fast you ****ing slave mother*****rs

Wojtaswg
11-24-2012, 08:04 AM
]Did you try use the newest Nvidia drivers BEAT?
Maybe it help

Joyner08
11-24-2012, 08:36 AM
That sounds awesome. At last an i3. What resolution? What FPS with all max settings? What FPS with vsync on? What does the core-by-core CPU usage graph look like? Especially this last question. I guess vsync and AA doesn't take any CPU power, so whatever, but the big question is what the i3 is capable of. Although if you say it's 60+ FPS in cities with environment detail very high and texture high, that kind of answers the question even if it's at max usage at that point, so yeah, awesome!

To specify, the stable 60 frames are in Boston with vsync off, yea. But I can easily make it drop below 60. The framerate dips and rises dependant on what is being drawn at that moment, for instance in a combat situation the frames stay reasonably high, mostly due to camera angle (downward, "over" the fight.) If you go to a synchronization point or look down into a busy street from a rooftop you will get heavy frame drops, but like I said, never below 30 for me with my fairly modest setup.

i3's, especially the 2120 are really good for budget gaming. There's a newer one out now that's probably better on the Ivy Bridge platform.

My 1080 monitor died on me so I'm on a 1600x900 right now, not ideal. I didn't really monitor CPU usage but I will now that you mention it. And my GPU usage / idle and under load temps. With Vsync on it will sit around 30-50 consistently, something about forcing vsync actually hurts FPS. And the game isn't prone to screen tearing either, seen very few so far.

ih8soup
11-24-2012, 08:52 AM
60 fps at all times @ 1080p
660ti 2gb, 3570k 4.0ghz, 8gb 1600 ram

ih8soup
11-24-2012, 08:57 AM
Sent in my ticket. I am also getting poor FPS in Boston and other large areas. The first part of the game ran flawless until the ship pulled into Boston. This is very dissapointing that not only did we have to wait an additional three weeks for the game, but now we are having major issues. I hope this gets resolved quickly. My system runs games like BF3 and Max Payne 3 on max settings with no issues.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 2.66 ghz

8GB dual channel DDR2 RAM

SLI 2GB GTX 560 SC edition,

Screen Res 1600x900. All Drivers up to date.

you are being bottle necked by that dinosaur cpu. for some reason.. boston in particular is not optimized for multi core.

AlexFili
11-24-2012, 10:01 AM
I think the saddest thing is that Ubisoft just don't seem to care. They haven't even had someone with the decency to come and acknowledge the communities problems (if they have I haven't seen it). Think how many people are having the same issues we are who aren't posting on forums or putting in support tickets. That actually upsets me the most, the people who buy the game but don't know how to tweak or play with settings and or read extensive community posted ideas/articles to get their game to work. Not everyone is tech savvy and it's for these people I feel for the most when crap like this happens.

That's what I also find unprofessional. Look at BioWare, when they had a problem with the Mass Effect 3 game they acknowledged it and let users know that they were suffering a problem. With all due respect, Ubisoft Support still isn't up to scratch. Often it takes a long time to get anywhere and they have done very little to make port forwarding and matchmaking any better. I just hope that Ubisoft get their act together, because I love their games, but their support is lacking right now.

hitman47222
11-24-2012, 10:35 AM
Everyone with a twitter accound keep tweeting Andrew D (CatalystCreator) .. We have to make him notice this.

spectatorx
11-24-2012, 10:57 AM
you are being bottle necked by that dinosaur cpu. for some reason.. boston in particular is not optimized for multi core.


Unfortunately you are not right, Boston is multithreading well, it fails with low gpu utilization, but in this specific case of eburkman sli might be a problem and temporary disabling sli for this game should fix problem until moment when nvidia will relase sli profiles update.

And second thing, core2quad maybe is an old cpu but still really good for this game, especially 'cos it is 4-core cpu and game, as i said moment ago, is making use of every additional core in cpu.

killler59
11-24-2012, 12:30 PM
I am having 30-40 FPS with highest setting except shadows. And 40-55 FPS with high setting of antialising and shadows rest is at highest. I am using resolution 1920x1080.

MY SPECS:
core i5 2400 (3.1 Ghz)
4gb Xms3 rams 1600 bus
460 watts power supply
Inno3d GTX 550ti.

As for driver version im using 310.61 these having some performance boost for AC3.

norbe09
11-24-2012, 12:57 PM
I am plagued by low FPS too even through my computer should be able to handle this game fairly well i think. Right i ran EVGA precision to check my GPU usage in SLI mode and here is what i get. In Boston when i am running around streets my FPS is anywhere from +80 to 40 which is annoying because of such FPS fluctuations you really notice FPS drops. Now GPU usage is around the same on both of the cores of my GPU but they are however fairly low at around 30% to 60% maximum. Now on the other hand then i look up to the sky the GPU usage and FPS sky rockets to 120FPS and GPU usage at over 90% on both cores. This is just what i have experienced with my rig. Also in multilayer i am always at 60FPS on max settings and GPU usage is good. (I was always running on max graphics)

I will not be playing single player until FPS issues are fixed as i want to enjoy the game at it's maximum. I am fairly disappointed that the game is in this state on release and that Ubisoft has not provided us with an update on the problems. Anyway i will wait patiently.

My rig specs:

I5-2500K 4.5Ghz (Custom water cooling loop for CPU)
GTX 690 at stock clocks
8Gb of ram at 1866MHz
Corsair Gold AX 1200 Watt PSU
1x Corsair 240Gb GS SSD for games
1x Corsair 120Gb GT for OS
Nvidia beta drivers 310.61

chizzy2011
11-24-2012, 01:01 PM
i get avg 45-60fps in boston , frontier mostly fine the occasional drop to 40fps

i7 3770k overclocked to 4.3ghz
16ghz corsair vengence 1600mhz at 9-9-9-24 timing
sapphire 7970 3ghz edition vapor x (very small overclocked) on 12.11 beta8 drivers
installed on a ocz 120gig solid state drive
corsair AX1200 gold psu

and must add every game a put too this machine very rarely drops below 60fps, i feel the new game engine is to blame here..

alftoo
11-24-2012, 01:15 PM
40-50fps in forrest and 15-25 fps in boston

Cortexian
11-24-2012, 01:52 PM
- 2560x1600
- SLI GeForce GTX 470
- Intel Core 5-2500k @ 4.5GHz
http://i.imgur.com/Xr21J.jpg
- Avg: 36.739 - Min: 31 - Max: 60 - Time: 606501ms (10.1min)
- Fighting in the streets of New York, also went into a shop and purchased some smoke bombs
- Nvidia beta drivers 310.54

No issues with performance here. It's consistently within these ranges regardless of my players location or what I'm doing. I can even record Fraps video fairly well without much of a frame rate hit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRL9UmdXeJk

This was the same area and style of fighting I was doing when I got the benchmarks above. However I used some smoke bombs when doing the benchmark.

Dellers
11-24-2012, 02:29 PM
Getting as low as 43 FPS in winter Boston with only one GTX 670 and i7-950 CPU, with two 670's (SLI) almost 10 FPS LESS. The game runs far worse with two cards. Revelations ran significantly better in SLI. Fair enough, my processor isn't quite up to date with the graphic cards, but still getting much lower FPS is pathetic.

dikkemuu
11-24-2012, 03:50 PM
Intro Scene (before Animus tutorial).

- Intel Core i7-2600K @ 3.4 GHz (3.8 GHz turbo frequency)
- Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1866 CL9 kit
- AMD Radeon HD6990
- OCZ Vertex 3



30 - 40 FPS



Disabling CrossFireX made no difference.
Disabling Hyper-threading also made no difference.
Game utilized only 1 CPU core.


What I gather from this is that the game is badly optimized.

eburkman
11-24-2012, 04:55 PM
you are being bottle necked by that dinosaur cpu. for some reason.. boston in particular is not optimized for multi core.

I might believe this if I was trying to run this game with max AA and a screen res of 2560x1600. My GPU usage in Boston is anywhere from 10% to 22%. Everyone else with better processors are having the same issues which leads me to believe that this is a result of poor optimization by Ubisoft.

dikkemuu
11-24-2012, 04:58 PM
I might believe this if I was trying to run this game with max AA and a screen res of 2560x1600. My GPU usage in Boston is anywhere from 10% to 22%. Everyone else with better processors are having the same issues which leads me to believe that this is a result of poor optimization by Ubisoft.

It is badly optimized! (http://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/assassins-creed-iii-pc-performance-analysis/)

lololo999
11-24-2012, 05:12 PM
Hi all,
I uninstalled my drivers catalyst, they were 12.10 (october 2012).

I installed the catalyst 11.2 drivers 8.821, by my DVD (the one I found in the box with the ATI card) and now, all at the maximum, 1920x1200, no lags, or better, not so much lag. I can still observe a minimum lag, sometimes (I'm in boston), but now I can play.

EDIT: no it's all wrong. It was just a moment. I re-open the game, and I am having the same lags.

torniAlieNxxx
11-24-2012, 05:24 PM
- 2560x1600
- SLI GeForce GTX 470
- Intel Core 5-2500k @ 4.5GHz
http://i.imgur.com/Xr21J.jpg
- Avg: 36.739 - Min: 31 - Max: 60 - Time: 606501ms (10.1min)
- Fighting in the streets of New York, also went into a shop and purchased some smoke bombs
- Nvidia beta drivers 310.54

No issues with performance here. It's consistently within these ranges regardless of my players location or what I'm doing. I can even record Fraps video fairly well without much of a frame rate hit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRL9UmdXeJk

This was the same area and style of fighting I was doing when I got the benchmarks above. However I used some smoke bombs when doing the benchmark.

i see the same stuttering on EVERY GPU. and i think that is what causes game bugs. previus assassins creed had the same issues, when the lower the framerates, more bugs the game gets.

hitman47222
11-24-2012, 06:27 PM
Hi all,
I uninstalled my drivers catalyst, they were 12.10 (october 2012).

I installed the catalyst 11.2 drivers 8.821, by my DVD (the one I found in the box with the ATI card) and now, all at the maximum, 1920x1200, no lags, or better, not so much lag. I can still observe a minimum lag, sometimes (I'm in boston), but now I can play.

EDIT: no it's all wrong. It was just a moment. I re-open the game, and I am having the same lags.

Thanks for correcting yourself

Windrius
11-24-2012, 06:41 PM
Ok so.. my FPS is usually ~20 in boston, over 60 in other places. Everything is maxed out, except for enviornment quality, which is set to normal, because it's the only thing in settings that gives me issues. When enviornment is on normal my FPS is around 20, but when it's on very high, it's 11~13. And the funny thing is, when everything else is set on normal(even AA) everything is like at 16FPS. IT LAGS EVEN MORE WHEN THE QUALITY IS WORSE.
So today I tried monitoring everything that is happening and I noticed that while my total CPU usage was about 30 ~ 40% for AC3 and GPU barely over 20%, the first core of my CPU was maxed out, almost 100%, while the others were a little over 30%, below than 50% at most.
I guess that's my problem, the CPU. I use intel core 2 quad q9300 @ 2.50GHz. So probably the people who aren't having issues are the people who have high clock on their CPUs.
All of this is just bad ubisoft optimisation. :(

AnTiCrIsT_
11-24-2012, 07:36 PM
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=109929618 and still 60 fps at 3840x2160 everything max ... still cant see any bad optimisation

BzkGB
11-24-2012, 07:48 PM
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=109929618 and still 60 fps at 3840x2160 everything max ... still cant see any bad optimisation

Yet there are many, like myself, whose computers far exceed the recommended requirements yet they still experience problems with the game. Is it so hard for you to accept that?
Continually posting about how your game runs fine just isn't helping anyone. I'm glad for you, but please get over it.

Vineland
11-24-2012, 10:57 PM
I saw this thread when I was downloading my copy. Came to the forums to see what people were saying about the game while I waited. First post I notice was this call to post fps in the game. After reading about all of the low fps scores, I becames a little worried. Fortunately my game runs very smoothly. I'm still in Boston but my fps pretty much stay at 60. They might dip a few points here and there but immediately bounce back to 60. Here are my specs:

Gigabyte mother board - Z77x-DH3
CPU - 3770K @stock clock
GPU - Gigabyte GTX 670 OC
GPU clock - 980 MHz
Memory data rate - 6008 MHz
Driver - 306.97
Memory - 16 GB G. Skill PC 1600

Game settings:

Resolution - 1360x768
Environmental QA - very high
Texture QA - high
AA QA - normal
Shadow QA - High

Fraps stayed pretty much pinned to 60 fps at these settings so I set:
AA QA to very high
Shadow QA to very high

The game still stays pretty well pinned to 60 fps though it will now dip to 52-53 fps then bounce right back up to 60 every once in awhile.

Hopefully everyone suffering the low fps will have their games straightened out very soon. I've been on the other side, like with Skyrim, so I can empathise.

torniAlieNxxx
11-25-2012, 01:37 AM
Yet there are many, like myself, whose computers far exceed the recommended requirements yet they still experience problems with the game. Is it so hard for you to accept that?
Continually posting about how your game runs fine just isn't helping anyone. I'm glad for you, but please get over it.

plus, link redirects to a image so... no one can see if the game has issues or not. i repeat, all gameplays i've seen have this stuttering. i'm trying righ now a fix from a user but i think before i share it with you, ubisoft has to show respect to pc community and asume his error.