PDA

View Full Version : People really don't know what medium settings are



doughy12
11-13-2014, 02:14 AM
I've watched people continually CLAIM they lowered the settings of the game and say it still runs like crap. But the people only lowered SOME of the settings,not all of them. You cannot lower only some of the settings and then say you had it on low settings. It doesn't work like that

So here is a guide that shows people what TRUE medium settings are in this game and how to properly adjust the game accordingly

Let start with the CPU:
any quad core - i3 should not even be playing this game
an i5 can only play the game on medium settings NO MATTER what GPU you have and you cannot use V-Sync and ani-aliasing
an i7 can play on med, high and very high (See the chart below) V-Sync = ok

Next is the GPU
Any GPU 780 and below need to be on MEDIUM settings
Any GPU 980 should be playing the game on high settings
Any Titan users should be playing the game on Very High settings

Next there is the drivers that need to be installed that people usually always overlook or think they automatically get installed...Regardless if you think it's installed or what anyone says, install them anyway, so go to the installed game directory and open the \Support\Software and manually install both the DirectX and VCRedist, if it asks you to repair it, then repair it, and then reboot your computer.

Now launch the game and go to options and start with Graphics
ASPECT RATIO: Most monitors use 16:9 aspect ratio, but if you don't know, set it to AUTO
RESOLUTION: The in game resolution needs to match your desktop resolution
REFRESH RATE: People think the higher the refresh rate the better and this is incorrect, refresh rate needs to be adjusted according to the monitor it's on For example, using a 70 Refresh rate when the monitor's refresh rate is actually 60 will make the game look and run like crap

GRAPHICS QUALITY: Set this according to the GPU chart above
V-SYNC: See Chart Above

ADVANCED GRAPHICS:
ENVIRONMENT QUALITY: MED
TEXTURE QUALITY: MED or High if there is no setting for med
SHADOW QUALITY: LOW (This is a useless feature that does nothing but draw a huge amount of power from the game which usually results in massive lag, stuttering and a whole slew of other problems
AMBIENT OCCLUSION: SSAO
ANTI-ALIASING: FXAA
BLOOM: OFF

Regardless of what hardware anyone has, These are the settings you MUST start out with and then work your way up through the changes. ONLY EVER CHANGE AND TEST ONE THING AT A TIME. YOU will start to see that there are settings affecting the game that you don't think are.

This is my comp setup:

i7 @ 2.8ghz L3 8MB cache
12GB GDD3 RAM
Nvidia GeFrce gtx 770

And I'm using the entire setup I just explained above and my game looks and plays perfectly fine. If I start setting things like the Anti-aliasing higher than what i have shown, the game starts having graphical issues.

You're welcome in advance

NightmareGK13
11-13-2014, 02:31 AM
I saw a rig worse than mine run on med at 30 fps. Or so he claimed, I like to believe it is true

what do you make of this?
i7 2600 3.4ghz - in the vid it was an i5
gtx 550 ti - the guy in the vid was running with an hd 5770
8 VRAM ram

doughy12
11-13-2014, 02:39 AM
I saw a rig worse than mine run on med at 30 fps. Or so he claimed, I like to believe it is true

what do you make of this?
i7 2600 3.4ghz - in the vid it was an i5
gtx 550 ti - the guy in the vid was running with an hd 5770
8 VRAM ram

You see this is why people are all ****ed up when it comes to this it's because you have idiots recording the game at a lower resolution, and then up-scaling it to a higher definition. So sure they probably did play it on that rig, but I will bet you any amount of money it looked like absolute garbage until they up-scaled it.

It's people like this which shows why no one knows wtf is going on.

Follow what I said above and you should be fine.

NightmareGK13
11-13-2014, 02:42 AM
You see this is why people are all ****ed up when it comes to this it's because *******s like that record the game at a lower resolution, then upscaled it to a higher definition.

It's people like this on why no one knows wtf is going on.

Follow what I said above and you should be fine.

You really think so? You're the first one aside from Naumaan that doesn't say my gpu sucks and I won't be able to run it. I asked the guy in the video and he said I'd do fine as we'll starting to see some light :p

lordseymore
11-13-2014, 02:47 AM
cpu: AMD A10-6800K
GPU: ATI AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
16gb ram

ADVANCED GRAPHICS:
ENVIRONMENT QUALITY: low
TEXTURE QUALITY: low
SHADOW QUALITY: low
AMBIENT OCCLUSION: off
ANTI-ALIASING: off
BLOOM: OFF

additionally: v-synch: off

still getting 20-25 fps :/

(also lots of graphical glitches like (SPOILER ALERT):
the part where you get thrown into jail, the jail door just dissapears..

doughy12
11-13-2014, 02:56 AM
You really think so? You're the first one aside from Naumaan that doesn't say my gpu sucks and I won't be able to run it. I asked the guy in the video and he said I'd do fine as we'll starting to see some light :p

What exactly is all your hardware? And have you changed and lowered anything else other than what you just posted, did you install those drivers I said? NOTE: If your CPU and RAM isn't up to par, then your GPU doesn't matter, I can probably help you out and get it to run nicely on your system. Also are you using Steam or just UPLAY (Using Steam now means you have to have both Steam and UPLAY running, and also causes problems.

And you have to remember that people are idiots when it comes to games. They think that what they see is exactly how things are going to and supposed to be. Even after explaining what something can look any way a developer wants it to look and it's totally legitimate they still don't get it.

Also a lot of these clowns complaining, have had their hardware go to their head, they think that if something is not in 60000 HD 6.0 clear ultra HD blu-ray edition dolby surround being payed on a $60,000 Plasma super ultra 6.9999 HD monitor, then the graphics suck and doesn't look good.

You have to remember that a game is exactly how the game is when it gets released, and you cannot ever compare one game to another in the way they run..In other words, some people think that since they can run one game (Insert demanding game) they're going to be able to run another...and those are the dumb asses that don't get it and have no idea how things work.

NightmareGK13
11-13-2014, 03:08 AM
Well I did give you some of my specs, and as far as I know both CPU and RAM are up to par, just the GPU that isn't in this case.
what more information do you need?

I don't have the game yet, just asking if it possible for me to run it with the specs i spoke about

doughy12
11-13-2014, 03:14 AM
Well I did give you some of my specs, and as far as I know both CPU and RAM are up to par, just the GPU that isn't in this case.
what more information do you need?

I don't have the game yet, just asking if it possible for me to run it with the specs i spoke about
I avoid AMD GPU's like the plague for a reason. I suggest you invest in an Nvidia GPU.

And I was asking lordseymore what his hardware is because they said they were still getting a low FPS. Sorry for the confusion.

lordseymore
11-13-2014, 03:27 AM
I avoid AMD GPU's like the plague for a reason. I suggest you invest in an Nvidia GPU.

And I was asking lordseymore what his hardware is because they said they were still getting a low FPS. Sorry for the confusion.

oh! sorry as well for not catching that! lets see..

http://i.imgur.com/ZccpYDu.png inserting image because im shamefully lazy :(

NightmareGK13
11-13-2014, 03:28 AM
I avoid AMD GPU's like the plague for a reason. I suggest you invest in an Nvidia GPU.

And I was asking lordseymore what his hardware is because they said they were still getting a low FPS. Sorry for the confusion.

ahah no worries, I don't have an amd GPU, I have the gtx 550 ti I mentioned above, which seems to be a bit better than the HD5770 in this video.
According to this I should be able to play like him

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71YUESwQkVw

arno.ghale
11-13-2014, 03:36 AM
the specs of my computer is as follows:

core i7 4790k 4.4Ghz using Corsair h110 AIO cooler
2 EVGA GTX 980 superclocked 1.4Ghz boost clock 1.752 memory
16gb ram 1866mhz

how should i go about with it?

doughy12
11-13-2014, 03:38 AM
OK lets start with any missing drivers, did you all do what I said above about installing those 2 things from the directory, and then rebooting your computer? If not, go do that, then type back when you're done.

MrFisse
11-13-2014, 03:48 AM
Doughy12, there is so many wrongs in your first post, not even gonna bother correcting you. I understand why your nick is doughy... Stop posting crap like this please

You know what , just for lulz im gonna ask you to explain further on some of your worst bs.

Why should you not be running AA or more interestingly v-sync on slower cpus?
Why do you have to match your desktop and gaming resolution?
Why would running a higher refresh rate affect the image quality or the game performance (more than making the screen go black) and also how do you actually chose a higher refresh rate than your monitor supports from within the game?
If two 980 cards in sli cant run the game at very high how can a single titan do it?
Since when is directx and vcredist drivers?
Who appointed you the guy to decide what the medium settings are and why does not ubisoft agree with your medium setting law, should they be punished for breaking your medium setting law?
Does texture pop-in and all the bugs dissapear if we follow your medium setting laws?
Your pc is a piece of outdated garbage, do you think it is appropriate for you to make graphic settings laws for higher spec pcs?
Following your laws (i think) I should be able to run the game at very high considering my two 780tis are more powerful than a Titan, why cant I do so? Are you a false prophet?
Do your settings for the graphics card lineup work for all resolutions?
Are you aware that resolutions play a big part in the work load for the gpu.

Looking forward for your enlightment in these questions.

fashric
11-13-2014, 04:00 AM
I avoid AMD GPU's like the plague for a reason. I suggest you invest in an Nvidia GPU..

Also saying things like this make you look like a fool to anyone with any level of hardware knowledge. I own a GTX780 before you call me an AMD fanboy.

doughy12
11-13-2014, 04:15 AM
Doughy12, there is so many wrongs in your first post, not even gonna bother correcting you. I understand why your nick is doughy... Stop posting crap like this please

[QUOTE=MrFisse;10330599]You know what , just for lulz im gonna ask you to explain further on some of your worst bs.
Say and think whatever you want, but the fact remains I have never once ever encountered a single problem in any game people posting problems with.


Why should you not be running AA or more interestingly v-sync on slower cpus?
Because it draws more power and the lower end rigs cannot run both without performance issues, that's a fact.


Why do you have to match your desktop and gaming resolution?
If you have to ask this then I'm not spending time answering this specific question.


Why would running a higher refresh rate affect the image quality or the game performance (more than making the screen go black) and also how do you actually chose a higher refresh rate than your monitor supports from within the game?
The fact that you're asking this after trying to tell me pretty much everything I said is incorrect, then I'm also not going to bother getting into this aspect with you.


If two 980 cards in sli cant run the game at very high how can a single titan do it?
Because contrary to what you and other believe Crossfire hasn't been supported in games in at least the past 4 years. Games only use 1 GPU so this whole dual GPU crap people keep yammering on and on about doesn't actually apply to games.


Since when is directx and vcredist drivers?
Perhaps you should look up what a .dll extension is before asking idiotic questions.


Who appointed you the guy to decide what the medium settings are and why does not ubisoft agree with your medium setting law, should they be punished for breaking your medium setting law?
No one appointed me anything, the problem with people like you is, you've been fed so much false information (And you're even arguing against facts I've already posted) that when information is provided that goes against your incorrect information you think it's wrong, so until you remove that mindset, you won't ever grasp what I'm saying and understand why what I said is correct, and you will continue using misinformation to say it's wrong.
You cannot have part of a games settings on medium, while things like Shadows are on high, it doesn't work like that.


Does texture pop-in and all the bugs dissapear if we follow your medium setting laws?
Correct settings and running the game so your rig can handle it coupled with a proper gaming GPU like NVIDA reduce and eliminate this.


Your pc is a piece of outdated garbage, do you think it is appropriate for you to make graphic settings laws for higher spec pcs?
Again say and think whatever you want but the fact that my PC runs games without problems speaks volumes. All the problems anyone posts about in these games I've never once run into, ever. So clearly I know something you do not.


Following your laws (i think) I should be able to run the game at very high considering my two 780tis are more powerful than a Titan, why cant I do so? Are you a false prophet?
Except the game is only using 1 GPU because crossfire isn't supported, you with this whole DUAL GPU explains that the game cannot determine which one to use, resulting in lower power.


Do your settings for the graphics card lineup work for all resolutions?
it's not the card it's the base rules for individual settings in ones comp


Are you aware that resolutions play a big part in the work load for the gpu.
Are you aware that running a game at an incorrect resolution results in graphical problems.

I'm now done with this, you're trolling now and other people want help.

mcketten
11-13-2014, 04:17 AM
I really hope people aren't buying what the OP is saying. The guy has clearly demonstrated he hasn't even basic understanding of PC hardware.

EverAmbiguous
11-13-2014, 04:18 AM
Are you aware that running a game at an incorrect resolution results in graphical problems.

I'm now done with this, you're trolling now and other people want help.

I apologize. I'm not trying to be rude. But you're ignorant. Ignorant simply means unknowing.

There is no such thing as an "incorrect resolution." A resolution is ONLY the number and scale of the pixels on your screen. Less pixels means your GPU has to do less.

fashric
11-13-2014, 04:25 AM
Dbgager and Doughy12 have to be the same person lol. I really think everyone is being trolled.

naumaan
11-13-2014, 04:25 AM
I saw a rig worse than mine run on med at 30 fps. Or so he claimed, I like to believe it is true

what do you make of this?
i7 2600 3.4ghz - in the vid it was an i5
gtx 550 ti - the guy in the vid was running with an hd 5770
8 VRAM ram

you can believe it !!!

doughy12
11-13-2014, 04:30 AM
Also saying things like this make you look like a fool to anyone with any level of hardware knowledge. I own a GTX780 before you call me an AMD fanboy.
I love how people make idiotic statements and ignore the facts.

FACT 1:
Games with PhysX require PhysX in order for the game to be running fully and effectively

FACT 2:
AMD GPU cannot use PhysX

FACT 3:
Since AMD GPU's cannot max out and play a game that require PhysX in order to do so

Trying to argue against these facts with idiotic comments about people who hardware knowledge makes you look like the tool. Anyone with real hardware knowledge knows those three facts cannot be argued with.

It constantly amazes me how AMD users seem to think that they can run a game fully on 3 parts even though the game requires 4 parts to be running in order to do that.

EXAMPLE, if a game requires 4 parts to run fully and one of those parts being PhysX, since AMD cannot use PhysX, then that means the AMD user is only running 3 parts of the game out of 4, which makes it impossible for the AMD user to fully run the game.

How do all you amd users fail to grasp that. And still think the 4th part isn't needed.

Just because the AMD card can run a game without the 4th part doesn't mean the 4th part isn't needed in order to run the game fully. amd users are so frigging annoying and dense and love to troll, even after you've been shown and explained how things really work, you still argue and say it's wrong.

Look here if you need all 4 parts to run something fully, and you can only run it with 3 of those 4 parts.

THEN YOU ARE NOT FULLY RUNNING IT...PERIOD it's afact, and anyone who thinks or tries to say otherwise IS A DELUSIONAL TROLLING MORON

doughy12
11-13-2014, 04:35 AM
There is no such thing as an "incorrect resolution." A resolution is ONLY the number and scale of the pixels on your screen. Less pixels means your GPU has to do less.
WOW YOU ARE A COMPLETE IDIOT

If you're monitor has a maximum resolution of 1440x900 and you force the game to run at 1920x1080 YOUR GAME WILL LAG AND STUTTER AND MOST LIKELY CRASH

If you run the game at a resolution of 800x600 it will look like absolute ****.
If you run the game at 1440x900 with a 70 refreshrate it will have color issues and the screen will be off centered and flicker 99.9% of the time run the refresh rate at 50 or even 59 and you will have major graphical problems because the screen will not display what's on it correctly and it may even go black.

You are so dumb it's not even funny.

I'm done with dumb people who don't get how things work

fashric
11-13-2014, 04:36 AM
Haha now I know 100 percent you are a troll, nice try though.
A+ for effort.

doughy12
11-13-2014, 04:37 AM
Haha now I know 100 percent you are a troll, nice try though.
A+ for effort.
There is thousands of videos that back up everything I said and you know it.

so nice try yourself.

I've indulged you contaminated inbred chipmunks long enough!

MrFisse
11-13-2014, 04:47 AM
[QUOTE=MrFisse;10330599]Doughy12, there is so many wrongs in your first post, not even gonna bother correcting you. I understand why your nick is doughy... Stop posting crap like this please


Say and think whatever you want, but the fact remains I have never once ever encountered a single problem in any game people posting problems with.


Because it draws more power and the lower end rigs cannot run both without performance issues, that's a fact.


If you have to ask this then I'm not spending time answering this specific question.


The fact that you're asking this after trying to tell me pretty much everything I said is incorrect, then I'm also not going to bother getting into this aspect with you.


Because contrary to what you and other believe Crossfire hasn't been supported in games in at least the past 4 years. Games only use 1 GPU so this whole dual GPU crap people keep yammering on and on about doesn't actually apply to games.


Perhaps you should look up what a .dll extension is before asking idiotic questions.


No one appointed me anything, the problem with people like you is, you've been fed so much false information (And you're even arguing against facts I've already posted) that when information is provided that goes against your incorrect information you think it's wrong, so until you remove that mindset, you won't ever grasp what I'm saying and understand why what I said is correct, and you will continue using misinformation to say it's wrong.
You cannot have part of a games settings on medium, while things like Shadows are on high, it doesn't work like that.


Correct settings and running the game so your rig can handle it coupled with a proper gaming GPU like NVIDA reduce and eliminate this.


Again say and think whatever you want but the fact that my PC runs games without problems speaks volumes. All the problems anyone posts about in these games I've never once run into, ever. So clearly I know something you do not.


Except the game is only using 1 GPU because crossfire isn't supported, you with this whole DUAL GPU explains that the game cannot determine which one to use, resulting in lower power.


it's not the card it's the base rules for individual settings in ones comp


Are you aware that running a game at an incorrect resolution results in graphical problems.

I'm now done with this, you're trolling now and other people want help.

Since I in contrary to you actually know the answers to the above questions im now gonna explain them for you.

1. Antialiasing is primarily taxing your gpu and not your cpu.
2. V-sync does in no way tax your cpu, it is used to match the gpu fps output to your screens refresh rate to avoid screen-tearing.
3. Having different resolutions for your desktop and for your game is in NO way affecting image quality. Actually if i run the game in 1920x1200 which is my desktop and my monitors native resolution the game looks worse than running the game at 1920x1080 since the game does not properly support 16:10.
4. Generally you can not change your refresh rate above your monitors capabilites since the drivers for the monitor tells your OS and inturn the game what the max refresh rate is. You can force it higher other ways but this will either return a black image or so severe distortions you cant see a thing on the screen.
5. Not sure what the hell you are talking about there. First of all crossfire is when you use two or more AMD cards and SLI is what it is called when you use two or more NVIDIA cards. Where did you get the the info that crossfire/Sli has not worked the last four years? Nvidia actually included the sli profile for this very game in their latest driver? And my sli setup works just fine with evey other new game this very instant.
6. DirectX is an API and vcredist is a c++ IDE specifically written for DirectX. A dll file is not a driver but it can be part of a driver package.
7. You sure can have some settings on high and some on medium or low. That is why there are SEPARATE settings. Some settings are more demanding than other. And you are pretty much saying that until i accept your false information to be correct i am automatically wrong. Do you run a cult?
8. No it does not reduce or eliminate the pop ins.
9. Or you are perhaps to stupid to notice.
10. The game is not a teenager trying to decide wether to use the red or pink helly kitty panties. The game does what it is programmed to do. And it should be programed to properly use dual gpu setups.
11. What?!
12. Running a game in incorrect resolutions in worst case result in a upscaled image with higer fps.

See pretty much everything you said was wrong, i guess that is some sort of achievement?

EverAmbiguous
11-13-2014, 04:48 AM
WOW YOU ARE A COMPLETE IDIOT

If you're monitor has a maximum resolution of 1440x900 and you force the game to run at 1920x1080 YOUR GAME WILL LAG AND STUTTER AND MOST LIKELY CRASH

If you run the game at a resolution of 800x600 it will look like absolute ****.
If you run the game at 1440x900 with a 70 refreshrate it will have color issues and the screen will be off centered and flicker 99.9% of the time run the refresh rate at 50 or even 59 and you will have major graphical problems because the screen will not display what's on it correctly and it may even go black.

You are so dumb it's not even funny.

I'm done with dumb people who don't get how things work

Calm down. Really, ignorance is not something to get upset over. It is easily solved--with knowledge.

First off, you're not totally correct for the first part: what will typically happen is that it actually won't even display at all, and if it does it will look very odd, with everything super tiny. Crashing has nothing to do with it. And whether it stutters or not is based on your video card, not the monitor resolution.

About a lower resolution like 800x600--it looking like "absolute ****" is not a graphical problem, which is what I quoted you saying. It's a personal choice, that one can use to get a better framerate and IQ.

Refresh rate has nothing to do with color. It has everything to do with your monitor's refresh rate, or how fast the monitor's image updates. If you select a refresh rate higher than your monitor allows, then it simply will not show (thankfully, most choices revert back after a few seconds if you don't confirm so this isn't permanent).

EverAmbiguous
11-13-2014, 04:49 AM
I've indulged you contaminated inbred chipmunks long enough!

See, this totally looks like trolling. But no one is actually rising to it. No one is getting angry. So I don't understand. Are you just being mindlessly aggressive? it's funny, if nothing else.

Edit: This feels like Shepard saying something like "I've had enough of your disingenuous assertions" before decking a reporter full in the face.

mcketten
11-13-2014, 04:51 AM
WOW YOU ARE A COMPLETE IDIOT

If you're monitor has a maximum resolution of 1440x900 and you force the game to run at 1920x1080 YOUR GAME WILL LAG AND STUTTER AND MOST LIKELY CRASH

If you run the game at a resolution of 800x600 it will look like absolute ****.
If you run the game at 1440x900 with a 70 refreshrate it will have color issues and the screen will be off centered and flicker 99.9% of the time run the refresh rate at 50 or even 59 and you will have major graphical problems because the screen will not display what's on it correctly and it may even go black.

You are so dumb it's not even funny.

I'm done with dumb people who don't get how things work

Dear God.

If you find a way to force a monitor that has a max of 900p to run at 1080p, please, inform the world.

Until then, keep making posts like this. It provides entertainment for those of us who do have years of experience in hardware.

EverAmbiguous
11-13-2014, 04:53 AM
Dear God.

If you find a way to force a monitor that has a max of 900p to run at 1080p, please, inform the world.

Until then, keep making posts like this. It provides entertainment for those of us who do have years of experience in hardware.

There IS something, which I am certain the OP knows nothing about, called downsampling which allows you to render a game at a higher resolution then display it at the lower one. For example, render everything at 4K and then drop down to 1080p. Can be an alternative to AA, and looks pretty fantastic. GeDoSaTo is a great tool.

mcketten
11-13-2014, 04:57 AM
There IS something, which I am certain the OP knows nothing about, called downsampling which allows you to render a game at a higher resolution then display it at the lower one. For example, render everything at 4K and then drop down to 1080p. Can be an alternative to AA, and looks pretty fantastic. GeDoSaTo is a great tool.

Right, but that isn't giving your 1080p monitor 4k graphics, it is just first rendering 4k graphics, and then compressing them to 1080p.

Just like you can watch a blu-ray on a non-HD TV, but you won't see 720 or 1080p, you will still see it at 480 because that is the maximum amount of pixels your tv is capable of putting on the screen.

doughy12
11-13-2014, 05:00 AM
EverAmbiguous
Even when corrected you still don't get it. So you're beyond hope. The Fact is what you think you know and actual testing result in the test disproving everything you said I am wrong about. So all the jargon and made up tech talk you've done, crumbles under actual results from real testing.

Real tests that show everything are what matter, not a wall-O-text filled with information tests show to be incorrect.

MrFisse
11-13-2014, 05:03 AM
EverAmbiguous
Even when corrected you still don't get it. So you're beyond hope. The Fact is what you think you know and actual testing result in the test disproving everything you said I am wrong about. So all the jargon and made up tech talk you've done, crumbles under actual results from real testing.

Real tests that show everything are what matter, not a wall-O-text filled with information tests show to be incorrect.

Are you serious?

mcketten
11-13-2014, 05:06 AM
Are you serious?

It's quite obvious the kid is very young and new to PC gaming in general. He has read a few buzzwords and maybe a wikipedia article or two, possibly watched a youtube video that generically goes over how PC gaming works, and thinks he knows what he's talking about.

Now, when faced with people who do know what they are talking about, he is getting defensive. He's not a troll, just an easily embarrassed young kid.

doughy12
11-13-2014, 05:12 AM
It's amusing how all you trolls actually believe that real tests that show results, are irrelevant because you guys have talk and talk and walls-O-Text have more credibility than real tests.

All anyone has to do is load the game, change their refresh rate and they will see that exactly what I said about that is a fact, they then compare what happened in that test I said to what you guys said and they will see you guys are the ones that have no idea what you're talking about and you're just 2 clowns that think evidence and test results don't matter because after all you guys have nothing but talk and no tests and yet are continually arguing without any proof.

It's very easy for my information to be verified, just go do it, and see. and since mine is verified, then I'm the one who is right. If I don't know what i'm talking about then why is it I'm 100% accurate on the tests and the outcome of those tests with results that match up to exactly what i said.

Interesting how you both keep saying results that are verified by simple tests aren't correct..

No one is going to take either of you serious because of that.

mcketten
11-13-2014, 05:17 AM
Notice how he is trying an appeal to authority, without even offering the authority up? He doesn't understand what he is talking about, but thinks he understands what others may have said on the subject. He can't offer the authority because he doesn't know where it came from or what it means. When confronted with actual information, he dismisses it as it doesn't fit his preconceived notion of what the authority is or what it means.

And, of course, when all else fails he resorts to calling people trolls.

The sad part is that he views some very informative posts as irrelevant walls of text. He could be learning something, sparing himself future embarrassment, but he is so damned certain he is right he doesn't want to even acknowledge that there may be more information out there.

If a few years, you will see a clueless freshman meme about him.

MrFisse
11-13-2014, 05:23 AM
It's amusing how all you trolls actually believe that real tests that show results, are irrelevant because you guys have talk and talk and walls-O-Text have more credibility than real tests.

No one is going to take either of you serious because of that.

I have not said that tests are irrevelant. But you are spreading missinformation. And most of all you are implying that this games poor optimization and bugs are our own fault and due to our lack of gaming/pc knowledge. The game is broken and we are voicing our pissed of oppinions in a desperate hope that enough of us is pissed of enough that it will go viral and ubisoft fixes their product.


YES we can lower the settings to get decent fps but the game looks like black flag or worse turned down. And the texture issues are still there and the huge amount of bugs and glitches. That is not a viable solution for me nor should it be for anyone else.

doughy12
11-13-2014, 05:24 AM
Say and think whatever you want, it's not going to change the fact how tests results prove everything I'm saying, and all you have is talk.

It's amusing how you keep ignoring tests results that match up to everything I said 100%..by dodging the facts by attempting to derail the topic with nonsense.

I know you're butt hurt but no matter how many times you say I'm wrong and or I don't know what I'm talking about, isn't going to change that I'm right and the tests results prove that and back up everything I said because the test results match up exactly on everything I said just how I said they will.

If I'm right about everything and the test results match up 100% exact just how I said they were, then why keep saying I'm wrong, if this was in court you'd lose..

But even after you lost, you're still say you won.

mcketten
11-13-2014, 05:27 AM
Say and think whatever you want, it's not going to change the fact how tests results prove everything I'm saying, and all you have is talk.

It's amusing how you keep ignoring tests results that match up to everything I said 100%..by dodging the facts by attempting to derail the topic with nonsense.

I know you're butt hurt but no matter how many times you say I'm wrong and or I don't know what I'm talking about, isn't going to change that I'm right and the tests results prove that and back up everything I said because the test results match up exactly on everything I said just how I said they will.

If I'm right about everything and the test results match up 100% exact just how I said they were, then why keep saying I'm wrong, if this was in court you'd lose..

But even after you lost, you're still say you won.

Sad that you should think this was some competition, or that you "won" anything or he "lost".

The fact of the matter is, everything you have said has been, at best, a half-truth. I do not think you are deliberately spreading misinformation, I think you are genuinely ignorant and confused and stumbling through trying to understand. But you sadly take every response that doesn't agree with you as some attack and feel a need to defend yourself, rather than spend some time learning and increasing your understanding.

doughy12
11-13-2014, 05:33 AM
Facts come from test not talk. and you somehow seriously think your talk has more credibility than tests with matching results.

Saying I'm wrong over and over isn't going to make it a fact, it might in your own head and anyone else who is in your delusional world where talk means more than tests and matching results, but that's about it.

My understanding comes from actual testing with real results, not endless nonsense posts on forums.

MrFisse
11-13-2014, 05:35 AM
Say and think whatever you want, it's not going to change the fact how tests results prove everything I'm saying, and all you have is talk.

It's amusing how you keep ignoring tests results that match up to everything I said 100%..by dodging the facts by attempting to derail the topic with nonsense.

I know you're butt hurt but no matter how many times you say I'm wrong and or I don't know what I'm talking about, isn't going to change that I'm right and the tests results prove that and back up everything I said because the test results match up exactly on everything I said just how I said they will.

If I'm right about everything and the test results match up 100% exact just how I said they were, then why keep saying I'm wrong, if this was in court you'd lose..

But even after you lost, you're still say you won.

The problem is that you are not right about everything. I provided you with 12 corrections and some bonus info in a previous post. Unfortunately you dismissed that for some reason. I am glad you found some settings that worked for you. But they are in no way helpful for many of us, we do not want to play a ****ty looking game on expensive gaming computers. You will just have to accept this no matter how much you love ubisoft or the franchise. Nighty night!

mcketten
11-13-2014, 05:46 AM
Facts come from test not talk. and you somehow seriously think your talk has more credibility than tests with matching results.

Saying I'm wrong over and over isn't going to make it a fact, it might in your own head and anyone else who is in your delusional world where talk means more than tests and matching results, but that's about it.

I don't want to burst your bubble, but you haven't shown any facts backed up by relevant tests, that I can find.

What you have said is on your particular rig, it works well. That isn't a test that proves something in any way, shape, or form.

On my rig, which is arguably more powerful than yours, it doesn't work well. I have a superior CPU, superior RAM, I'm running it on a SSD and have 2 cards that come in close to your single card's performance on benchmarks - yet we are having vastly different outcomes.

Then there are some of your statements - such as disabling vsync should improve performance. While there is no doubt it does in ACU, it should not. vsync, by its very nature, prevents the cards from doing more than necessary for any particular cycle. The people who normally disable vsync are the ones who want to push a game beyond low or medium settings, not vice versa.

Your statements on CPUs are flat wrong. Sorry, but they are. You are repeating a myth that is often repeated by those less knowledgeable about hardware - that the iterative number indicates ability. It does not. A simple google search would have explained that to you. When others pointed it out, with real verifiable tests that they linked, you flat out ignored them or called them trolls.

Another example is your use of AA - granted, there is a significant performance boost in ACU with it turned off. But, again, there should not be. FXAA and MSAA have very little overall power drains. In most scenarios, you are looking at a less than 5% difference in framerate, not 10-20% as we are seeing here.

You tried to defend your statements on resolution by using outlandish and impossible examples. You demonstrated you understood the core of resolution issues, but not the reasoning behind them. In general, on Windows machines, it is better for performance to run a game a the same resolution as your desktop. That is simply due to DirectX being designed with that in mind. It does not mean that someone can force a resolution higher than their monitor or refresh rate can handle, despite your assertions that it is possible and would hurt the game (it would, as the monitor would show nothing.)

You also went on an interesting tirade about physx. While you are correct that physx requires an nVidia card, you completely ignored the fact that in most games - hell, all - physx automatically disables if you don't have an nVidia card. You also ignored the fact that there appears to be little, if any, implementation of physx in ACU. This is also easily testable by simply switching a secondary card to physx processing and noting the lack of power used, or switching physx to CPU, and noticing the same.


When confronted, you refer to the ambiguous evidence, but do not produce it.

Finally, you keep referring to these actual testing results - but have offered none.

doughy12
11-13-2014, 05:54 AM
When people want facts and real information they're going to side with everything I said, when people just want trolls and gibberish they will side with you.

I'm done with this now.

MrFisse
11-13-2014, 05:56 AM
I would before you once again refer to your test provide us with a video showing us your game looking good, the FPS you have and the absence of visual artifacts such as texture lod pop-ins. Without this we only have your word and considering the amount of false information you already shared your words as you understand hold no merit on their own.

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-13-2014, 07:11 AM
When people want facts and real information they're going to side with everything I said, when people just want trolls and gibberish they will side with you.

I'm done with this now.

You're the only troll here.

Phobius187
11-13-2014, 07:27 AM
it doesn't matter what settings I have this game on it still runs slow it mostly sticks around to 23 fps.
I even put my resolution all the way down to the minimum and turned whatever settings like aa off to test it and still no performance increase.
ive evern rebooted the game after changing the settings to the minimum, and also I went and tried the new beta drivers from amd which did nothing.

Im able to play pretty much every game I own on very high settings with smooth performance like watch dogs whitch I was surprised since alot of people were having issues with it, but this game there is something very wrong if I cant even play at a steady 40-60 fps on the lowest settings let alone 30.

windows 7 64-bit
i7-2600 3.4ghz
7970 3gb
8 gigs of ram

AcheronTheFox
11-13-2014, 07:40 AM
Hello. I'm trying to run ACU with my rig, which is:

Windows 7 64-bit
Graphics Card: Nvidia GTX 680
CPU: AMD FX 8350 Eight-Core Processor
Power Supply: Thermaltake 850w
RAM: 16 GB
Mobo: ASUS Sabertooth 990FX
Monitor: 27'' 2560x1440 resolution with 60 Refresh Rate

Generally, I never have issues in any game, ultra settings are just fine with an easy 30-50 fps, which for my standards are fantastic. Anti-aliasing I usually keep low because it is pretty taxing. Trying to lower ALL my settings for ACU, a minimal framerate difference is made, while obviously destroying the visuals, as to be expected. This is the only game which suffers in performance, so I cannot say that my rig is the underlying cause.

Will anybody with knowledgeable experience offer a solution to this issue that I can perform on my own? Of course, I don't mind waiting until a patch is pushed out, but I would like to finish the first sequence at least if it can be helped.

No doughy, go away, I don't need to see you mention the words "*******", "idiot", or any other vulgarity in your response. I especially don't want to take advice from someone who also believes launching the game through Steam is a worldbreaking stupid move because it's "extremely resource intensive" when all it does is bring up the Uplay DRM and give me a background overlay. Never an issue.

Cheers!

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-13-2014, 07:51 AM
Hello. I'm trying to run ACU with my rig, which is:

Windows 7 64-bit
Graphics Card: Nvidia GTX 680
CPU: AMD FX 8350 Eight-Core Processor
Power Supply: Thermaltake 850w
RAM: 16 GB
Mobo: ASUS Sabertooth 990FX
Monitor: 27'' 2560x1440 resolution with 60 Refresh Rate

Generally, I never have issues in any game, ultra settings are just fine with an easy 30-50 fps, which for my standards are fantastic. Anti-aliasing I usually keep low because it is pretty taxing. Trying to lower ALL my settings for ACU, a minimal framerate difference is made, while obviously destroying the visuals, as to be expected. This is the only game which suffers in performance, so I cannot say that my rig is the underlying cause.

Will anybody with knowledgeable experience offer a solution to this issue that I can perform on my own? Of course, I don't mind waiting until a patch is pushed out, but I would like to finish the first sequence at least if it can be helped.

No doughy, go away, I don't need to see you mention the words "*******", "idiot", or any other vulgarity in your response. I especially don't want to take advice from someone who also believes launching the game through Steam is a worldbreaking stupid move because it's "extremely resource intensive" when all it does is bring up the Uplay DRM and give me a background overlay. Never an issue.

Cheers!

I don't think there is one. The game is CPU intensive, so Ubisoft needs to add settings that allow players to reduce the things that are actually straining the CPU. From what I've noticed, it's the rendering of buildings that aren't close to you, the large civilian crowds (AI strain), and lighting that are negatively affecting the CPU performance (noticed that eagle vision disables the normal lighting, and the game runs better when using eagle vision). So we needs settings to reduce all these things. As for the GPU, Ubisoft needs to release an option to disable the Nvidia hair technology, like COD Ghosts allowed players to do with the fur tech, which was also Nvidia I believe.

junliu9
11-13-2014, 07:52 AM
Hello. I'm trying to run ACU with my rig, which is:

Windows 7 64-bit
Graphics Card: Nvidia GTX 680
CPU: AMD FX 8350 Eight-Core Processor
Power Supply: Thermaltake 850w
RAM: 16 GB
Mobo: ASUS Sabertooth 990FX
Monitor: 27'' 2560x1440 resolution with 60 Refresh Rate

Generally, I never have issues in any game, ultra settings are just fine with an easy 30-50 fps, which for my standards are fantastic. Anti-aliasing I usually keep low because it is pretty taxing. Trying to lower ALL my settings for ACU, a minimal framerate difference is made, while obviously destroying the visuals, as to be expected. This is the only game which suffers in performance, so I cannot say that my rig is the underlying cause.

Will anybody with knowledgeable experience offer a solution to this issue that I can perform on my own? Of course, I don't mind waiting until a patch is pushed out, but I would like to finish the first sequence at least if it can be helped.

No doughy, go away, I don't need to see you mention the words "*******", "idiot", or any other vulgarity in your response. I especially don't want to take advice from someone who also believes launching the game through Steam is a worldbreaking stupid move because it's "extremely resource intensive" when all it does is bring up the Uplay DRM and give me a background overlay. Never an issue.

Cheers!

The game is pretty poorly optimized, no one is having solid performances as of the moment. What I've found that helped a bit with my framerate is disabling AA and V-sync in game because it was poorly implemented. I'm not sure if i'm allowed to post links of outside sources but this is the method i used.

http://i.imgur.com/IRK5pN7.png

My Specs are
i7-4790K
EVGA GTX 770 SC W/ACX
16GB ram
1080p res

FPS Hovering around 40-60
Settings
Environment: Ultra
Texture: High
Shadow: High
AO: HBAO+
AA: Off
Bloom: On
V-Sync Off

There are occasional performance dips during cutscenes and large crowds but overall it it around 40-60 FPS. Lowest has been 28. Hope this helps a bit with your performance

USAdystopia
11-13-2014, 08:00 AM
The person that needs to defend their position...usually does not know what they are talking about.

This game will get better...I'll be playing FarCry4 when it does.

AcheronTheFox
11-13-2014, 08:01 AM
Thank you guys, I'll give it a shot with those tips. Hopefully it'll serve as a successful workaround.

PricklyBlitz
11-13-2014, 08:59 AM
The game plays on high on default and at the start its smooth 45- 60 fps tanks when in huge crowds but after a while it stutters like crazy but its not lag related so i believe this game suffers from a huge memory leak or vram leak and its annoying because the game is solid story is good and parkour reworked in a goodway not to mention theres lots to do in paris but the suttering makes me not wanna play the game anymore

i7 3770k
gtx 760 SC
8 gb of ram

AcheronTheFox
11-13-2014, 09:04 AM
Well, after those tweaks, my performance was better for a spell, but not by much. Though in sequence 3 and 4, performance took a nosedive and I fell through the map. Guess I wait for patch day.