PDA

View Full Version : 30-40 fps 1080p on ULTRA with mid-range specs. Please read



Boemundus
11-14-2014, 02:07 PM
Hi all. First of all I apologize for my basic english, I'm from Italy.

I did a lot of tests with ACU and the game runs surpisingly well on my configuration. Pleasa believe me I am no Ubisoft fanboy and I wasn't payed to write this. :o If you search my forum posts history you can see for yourself that I criticized a lot ubisoft in the ACIII forums etc.

My experience with ACU is somewhat opposite to that of many of you. Believe it or not, I can run the game on ULTRA settings (FXAA, high shadows) 1080p with an average of 35-40 fps with drops to 25 in the most demanding situations. I never drop below 25 (exception for cutscenes, strange!)

My 2 GB gtx 760 in theory couldn't even start the game with ultra textures ( 4gb needed), and gerforce.com guide says I should run the game on low-medium settings to achieve a 1080p 30fps gameplay.

The only proof I got are these screenshots taken with fraps, in various Paris environement, Notre Dame included which I think is the most demanding place for CPU-GPU work. I even took screenshots in places with hundreds of NPCs. You can see ultra textures are enabled because LOD distance is very far, compared to high textures which seem to reduce that a lot. You can also see it looking at the street ground texture which is very detailed, and the rooftops tiles.

Can someone explain me why I got this unusual yet very good (I would say excellent for my hardware) performance?

My rig:

intel i5 4690 @ turbo speed 3.9ghz
MSI GTX 760 2GB vram @ 1033 hz clock (small factory OC)
8 GB RAM
SSD
latest nvidia driver
win 8.1


http://imageshack.com/a/img537/7439/884nNa.png

http://imageshack.com/a/img540/1949/0JD2ua.png

http://imageshack.com/a/img909/8048/jclAQQ.png

http://imageshack.com/a/img901/3682/kDK8w6.png

http://imageshack.com/a/img538/3015/4uFVJs.png

Zylkito
11-14-2014, 02:29 PM
Hi all. First of all I apologize for my basic english, I'm from Italy.

Can someone explain me why I got this unusual yet very good (I would say excellent for my hardware) performance?

My rig:

intel i5 4690 @ turbo speed 3.9ghz
MSI GTX 760 2GB vram @ 1033 hz clock (small factory OC)
8 GB RAM
SSD
latest nvidia driver
win 8.1




Well you have a Nvidia Card and ACU is bugged up on PC. Changing Settings doesn't add to much for FPS. I just checked on my 7870 ultra textures, and yes it does start up does not crash or anything just stuttering. This game does run a lot better on Nvidia Cards what is weird. Because since the Console use AMD i thought the game would run fine on AMD too but since Nvidia has their hands on this with their Gameworks, the Game runs poorly on AMD Graphics or AMD CPUs

fashric
11-14-2014, 02:33 PM
25-35 fps is playable for you? I wouldn't be able to play for longer than 10 minutes.

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 02:38 PM
25-35 fps is playable for you? I wouldn't be able to play for longer than 10 minutes.

Absolutely playable for me. If I turn down textures to high I get 45-50 fps. Considering PS4 and XBOX1 run at 20 fps and are considerated fully playable.

pleb87
11-14-2014, 02:41 PM
I'm playing with all settings on Ultra High in 60Hz with TXAA turned on and I'm getting 45 FPS in crowded areas and 50-55 FPS in quiet and indoor areas. My specs are in my sig.

pleb87
11-14-2014, 02:42 PM
Forgot to add it's definitely playable and looks stunning!

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 02:50 PM
I'm playing with all settings on Ultra High in 60Hz with TXAA turned on and I'm getting 45 FPS in crowded areas and 50-55 FPS in quiet and indoor areas. My specs are in my sig.

Ok, but you got a very high end PC.

Is there a reason why I can play with ultra textures with no stuttering even if my GPU has only 2GB VRAM?

ACIDTITAN
11-14-2014, 02:51 PM
People with higher end configs GTX 780+ are getting the same results as u

That's the problem.

I could deal with 45-60fps Ultra GTX 980 if i wasn't getting screen tearing even at Med- High settings.

I really don't care if its high or ultra but the 45-60 45-60 50-60 on any settings is more irritating than missing out on playing it since its the best production value ive ever seen
i hope they actually fix it since it says its playable on 980 ultra with txaa on the official Nvidia Graphics Guide .

pureplayin2
11-14-2014, 03:35 PM
I'm playing with all settings on Ultra High in 60Hz with TXAA turned on and I'm getting 45 FPS in crowded areas and 50-55 FPS in quiet and indoor areas. My specs are in my sig.

That's the same kind of performance I'm getting as well, but with FXAA since for some reason removes aliasing better than the other solutions available in game. i5-4670k stock, 8GB ram, gtx 970

Voyager456
11-14-2014, 03:47 PM
If you could make a video or something that would be nice btw are you using regular or pcss shadows also what AA FXAA or higher?

reizo
11-14-2014, 04:10 PM
It doesn't matter if you set it to ultra textures, you aren't actually getting the full texture usage.
Ultra textures just tells the game to use all the vram you have for better textures, since you have only 2gb of vram, that's all you are getting texture wise, you aren't actually getting the same experience as someone who has 4GB(+).

Also the game is very cpu limited, you have a top end haswell which is helping a lot with your performance. Also optimised for nvidia etc..

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 04:31 PM
It doesn't matter if you set it to ultra textures, you aren't actually getting the full texture usage.
Ultra textures just tells the game to use all the vram you have for better textures, since you have only 2gb of vram, that's all you are getting texture wise, you aren't actually getting the same experience as someone who has 4GB(+).

Also the game is very cpu limited, you have a top end haswell which is helping a lot with your performance. Also optimised for nvidia etc..

Excuse me, then why I see difference if I change from high to ultra high textures, in terms of fps and visual quality? (especially lod distance)

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 04:33 PM
If you could make a video or something that would be nice btw are you using regular or pcss shadows also what AA FXAA or higher?

I'll try to make a video and post it in you tube. I'm using shadows: high and FXAA

reizo
11-14-2014, 04:42 PM
Excuse me, then why I see difference if I change from high to ultra high textures, in terms of fps and visual quality? (especially lod distance)
I'm not saying you aren't seeing a difference, I'm saying the difference isn't the same as with having more vram. you have a very limited pool available, the game is simply adjusting the data being streamed to the vram to deal with this handicap.

Numbtoyou
11-14-2014, 05:02 PM
I'm not saying you aren't seeing a difference, I'm saying the difference isn't the same as with having more vram. you have a very limited pool available, the game is simply adjusting the data being streamed to the vram to deal with this handicap.

I've sen you say this in a few places on the forums. You are simply wrong. Vram is not capable of "deciding" how much data is attempted to be placed into it. Running ( or attempting to), run higher res ( ie ultra) textures will attempt to copy it all in and use the vram available. If it isn't available it will either buffer in the system ram or a page file on the HD, causing HUGE performance issues or textures not appearing AT ALL ( not at a lower quality). Please stop spreading such terrible information.

As to the performance question., I'm in the same boat. I recently built a new PC ( 5820k, 16 GB ram, gtx980), and my performance has been fine, but my wife's PC ( i5, gtx 670, 8 gb of ram), runs it almost as well. But it didn't start out that way, she already needed a reinstall of windows etc, so we did that and it improved the performance dramatically. I'm wondering if people have weird setups or corrupt dx installs.

That said, there definitely is something wrong, lots of bugs, and performance issues need to be improved anyways.

Anderslash
11-14-2014, 05:18 PM
Are you running the game in full screen or borderless window?

AjinkyaParuleka
11-14-2014, 05:20 PM
That's good news for me :D,I am upgrading to i7 4770k and GTX 760 2gb.I would try both high and ultra settings.
btw,sorry for the noob question,1080p is 1600x900 resolution or..?

FranzJeger2009
11-14-2014, 05:31 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble but this game runs like ****! Why do you think there is thousands of articles saying that this is a rushed game and UBI dropped the ball?? What is hard getting maxed settings when your on 1080p? Try running it on 5760x1080 and you will no be happy with the result. SLI is non existing in this game, i have 0 fps gain when running SLI. I Run every game i tried on max setting without problems but this game runs like **** no matter what you do with high resolution.

Even people with overclocked 5830k 4,7ghz and overclocked 980gtx cards has performence issues with this ****ty game.
Saying your not a fanboy of Ubisoft and saying you don't have problems with this games doesn't change the fact that extremely many people has issues.
UBI stock fell 9% last week just because of this failed release! WAKE up!

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 05:31 PM
Are you running the game in full screen or borderless window?

Full screen


1080p is 1600x900 resolution or..?

1920x1080

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 05:33 PM
I've sen you say this in a few places on the forums. You are simply wrong. Vram is not capable of "deciding" how much data is attempted to be placed into it. Running ( or attempting to), run higher res ( ie ultra) textures will attempt to copy it all in and use the vram available. If it isn't available it will either buffer in the system ram or a page file on the HD, causing HUGE performance issues or textures not appearing AT ALL ( not at a lower quality). Please stop spreading such terrible information.

As to the performance question., I'm in the same boat. I recently built a new PC ( 5820k, 16 GB ram, gtx980), and my performance has been fine, but my wife's PC ( i5, gtx 670, 8 gb of ram), runs it almost as well. But it didn't start out that way, she already needed a reinstall of windows etc, so we did that and it improved the performance dramatically. I'm wondering if people have weird setups or corrupt dx installs.

That said, there definitely is something wrong, lots of bugs, and performance issues need to be improved anyways.

Numbtoyou, could you explain to me why I am able to run smoothly (no stutter) ultra textures even with only 2GB of VRAM? Maybe is thanks to the SSD?

reizo
11-14-2014, 05:45 PM
I've sen you say this in a few places on the forums. You are simply wrong. Vram is not capable of "deciding" how much data is attempted to be placed into it. Running ( or attempting to), run higher res ( ie ultra) textures will attempt to copy it all in and use the vram available. If it isn't available it will either buffer in the system ram or a page file on the HD, causing HUGE performance issues or textures not appearing AT ALL ( not at a lower quality). Please stop spreading such terrible information.


What are you talking about, this is the first time I've made a post like this. Also I never said anything about the vram deciding anything, I said the game engine is adjusting; have not you heard of texture streaming? It exist specifically to deal with a low vram configuration. The initial loading of a scene only needs to last until the necessary mip levels are loaded and the rest can be streamed in later and the memory footprint of textures can be reduced (allowing a higher level of detail per frame, which is what he's seeing)
The OP also has enough ram and an SSD to prevent any "huge" performance issues in regards to swapping. So with less vram he's either going to have more swapping or more dynamic streaming, this is how their experience isn't going to be the same as for someone with a higher amount of vram.

Please don't accuse me of making posts I haven't.

Tanyn
11-14-2014, 05:54 PM
Absolutely playable for me. If I turn down textures to high I get 45-50 fps. Considering PS4 and XBOX1 run at 20 fps and are considerated fully playable.

Only by Ubisoft ... not by anyone with an actual brain.

Numbtoyou
11-14-2014, 08:08 PM
Numbtoyou, could you explain to me why I am able to run smoothly (no stutter) ultra textures even with only 2GB of VRAM? Maybe is thanks to the SSD?

I'm not sure off the top of my head. I'm running mine off an ssd as well. It definitely could help if anything is being buffered on the drive to prevent any slowdowns in transfer. I'm not sure what is causing the slowdowns for so many people. I've seen people with better builds than mine getting the slowdown, while I don't, which leads me to believe theres a pretty common configuration causing the problem that was overlooked in testing or not there on the test machines. My guess is its DX or windows related, as I saw the improvement on my wife's computer after a fresh install, and with my computer being pretty new as well.... That said, I havn't done enough testing myself since I haven't had the problems others have.

Numbtoyou
11-14-2014, 08:17 PM
What are you talking about, this is the first time I've made a post like this. Also I never said anything about the vram deciding anything, I said the game engine is adjusting; have not you heard of texture streaming? It exist specifically to deal with a low vram configuration. The initial loading of a scene only needs to last until the necessary mip levels are loaded and the rest can be streamed in later and the memory footprint of textures can be reduced (allowing a higher level of detail per frame, which is what he's seeing)
The OP also has enough ram and an SSD to prevent any "huge" performance issues in regards to swapping. So with less vram he's either going to have more swapping or more dynamic streaming, this is how their experience isn't going to be the same as for someone with a higher amount of vram.

Please don't accuse me of making posts I haven't.



Calm down there turbo....I apologize, I saw a very similar post a few minutes ago from a similar name. I saw this claim yesterday several times as well. You just explained exactly what I said, if the vram is full, it streams/buffers. And depending on how much is streaming/buffering, performance can tank VERY quickly.

Reading your comment is confusing though, you explain how the game can run well with less vram and then claim its going to be a different "Experience"? Its the same res textures ( streamed or not), its the same AI, same code being run. What "experience" is going to be different? Its just open to more possibility of a performance hit if the gpu framebuffer empties before the ddr3's lower bandwidth can resupply it.

I'm honestly not trying to argue, but claiming someone with less vram's game is going to somehow be different because they are streaming/buffering is entirely dependent on if the stream/buffer can keep up. It isn't going to look any different. If I've misunderstood what you're saying again, its possible we are fully agreeing and I just am not communicating well.

bbucha
11-14-2014, 08:21 PM
My experience with ACU is somewhat opposite to that of many of you. Believe it or not, I can run the game on ULTRA settings (FXAA, high shadows) 1080p with an average of 35-40 fps with drops to 25 in the most demanding situations. I never drop below 25 (exception for cutscenes, strange!)



What is your setting for "Ambient Occlusion" ?
Is it turned on or off?
If it is turned on what are you using ?
SSAO or HBAO+

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 08:54 PM
What is your setting for "Ambient Occlusion" ?
Is it turned on or off?
If it is turned on what are you using ?
SSAO or HBAO+

HBAO+

Also, strangest thing: game seems to run better on ultra high textures than on high

Altair1789
11-14-2014, 09:18 PM
I think your textures are on low because you only have 2 GB VRAM. It lets you set Ultra high or high, but it doesn't actually do anything, I am also dealing with that

bbucha
11-14-2014, 09:27 PM
HBAO+

Also, strangest thing: game seems to run better on ultra high textures than on high

Mhh thats strange seriously i dont get it
My System Specs are
I7 2600K stock
8GB RAM
and i have a GTX670 DCU II 2GB

Technically i should be able to get the same results with that Graphics card since its a bit faster than your 760GTX
I also run the game on windows8.1 x64 with the same drivers
But with HBAO+ i get like 20FPS i can only do SSAO
to run it close to 30FPS with drops to 24FPS
Seriously this is mighty strange

i also use Environment Quality = Ultra High
Texture Quality = Ultra High
Shadows = High
Ambient Occlusion = SSAO
Anti-Aliasing Quality= FXAA
Blooming = On
Vsync = On
Streching = On
16:9
1920x1080 Resolution

I simply dont get it only because your Card number is higher doesnt mean its Faster :P no offense
The only difference is that my Game is installed on a normal HDD
because i dont have space on my SSD.

with a little luck someone from Ubi may be nice and explains that to me

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 11:03 PM
I think your textures are on low because you only have 2 GB VRAM. It lets you set Ultra high or high, but it doesn't actually do anything, I am also dealing with that

No way the textures are on low, you can see it in the screens I posted. Anyway I can post even more with interiors where is clear, looking in particular at the floor, that the textures are ultra high resolution. Also, if I turn down textures to low, I clearly see more blurred textures. Read the other posts in this thread where users confirm that the VRAM can't downgrade automatically the texture quality. Plus, Shadow of Mordor demonstrates that you can run on ultra textures even with half the vram needed (remember the 6gb vram debate?)
But maybe I found out the reason why I can load ultra textures without stuttering. I did even more tests with MSI afterburner, monitoring CPU , GPU, VRAM and system RAM usage.
The graphic engine literally uses ALL the resources I got, 100% gpu, 100% vram, 85% on all four cpu cores, and 5 GB system memory.

I have a very fast RAM which operates on a very fast motherboard. I think that's the reason I get this performance on ultra settings. For some reason the game manages to load the texture on the system RAM too. Bring in a super fast SSD and you got the magic: running ACU on a mid range GPU on ultra settings (no msaa or txaa which kill performance) with decent fps.
Without any stuttering. Maybe I'm lucky, but the game is super optimized on my config.
Worth mentioning that the i5 4690k is one of the fastest gaming CPU out there, that beats 1000$ i7s in many benchmarks. Both ACIII and ACIV run a lot faster on i5s that on i7s.
It's clear that the AnvilEngine is strongly CPU and RAM bound. (yes even system RAM)

I can post proof if needed, with more screenshots (showing afterburner intarface), and videos. I forgot to mention that I overclock both VRAM and GPU core frequency by a 10% through afterburner as well.

Boemundus
11-14-2014, 11:17 PM
Mhh thats strange seriously i dont get it
My System Specs are
I7 2600K stock
8GB RAM
and i have a GTX670 DCU II 2GB

I think you are CPU bottlenecked.

uDominion
11-14-2014, 11:22 PM
Men, i have two 760, and it works same as you only if SLI OFF. But if i turn SLI ON, i have better FPS with 2-3 sec. stuttering. All maxed with FXAA 1080p. If i try to down textures to high, i have good performance and smooth FPS 40+. And if try load any mission like rifts, stuttering returns. And i don't know what to do with it :( And why it happen?

bbucha
11-15-2014, 02:31 AM
I think you are CPU bottlenecked.

:D no cpu is under 60% load on super crowded areas, still enough room for more ^_~ i think its the GPU

jeffies04
11-15-2014, 04:16 AM
I'm playing with all settings on Ultra High in 60Hz with TXAA turned on and I'm getting 45 FPS in crowded areas and 50-55 FPS in quiet and indoor areas. My specs are in my sig.

So you're liking your 980? I think I might upgrade from my 780 FTW when my profit sharing check comes.