test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Graphics performance is really sub-par and something much be wrong

1235789

Comments

  • mikael74mikael74 Member Posts: 206 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    izombiesk wrote: »
    What does that have to do with anything? They do not say "recommended to get no performance issues". The recommend is a best guess on what is required to run the game without crashing. 15 years of tech support and personally testing your said CPU and GPU says that your CPU is the problem.

    Then the recommended specs should be listed as the minimum specs because I get 14 ****ing FPS in the ****ing city of ****ing Neverwinter.
    I play as a control wizard and when it comes down to it... it's all about the freeze.
  • serenasummersserenasummers Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 14 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    i have a lenovo v570 with i5-2430M and intel HD 3000 and i get great fps in town and outside of town at low/medium settings
    mikael74 wrote: »
    Then the recommended specs should be listed as the minimum specs because I get 14 ****ing FPS in the ****ing city of ****ing Neverwinter.
  • eckexeckex Member Posts: 26 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    So i guess that i should start my own thread asking my question since you guys are all focused in on a "no you" argument that isn't going to go anywhere? :P
  • yasha00yasha00 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 479 Bounty Hunter
    edited May 2013
    mikael74 wrote: »
    Then the recommended specs should be listed as the minimum specs because I get 14 ****ing FPS in the ****ing city of ****ing Neverwinter.



    Its the same with most mmos I've played- you need a really good, modern cpu/mobo, fast ram, good pcu, mid-high end graphics card, with adequate cooling to run them well. The recommended specs usually seem pretty understated. For example my computer is far above the recomended spec for Tera, but struggles in some parts of that game (it runs neverwinter quite smoothly though, and my graphics card is much slower than yours).
  • kimoy8520kimoy8520 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    I'm not quite sure with this, but I think Enclave has a larger vertical border compared to other maps. (I'm looking at you Moonstone Mask)
  • caiokillcaiokill Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    mikael74 wrote: »
    Then the recommended specs should be listed as the minimum specs because I get 14 ****ing FPS in the ****ing city of ****ing Neverwinter.

    Dude, stop cry and realize, ITS YOUR CPU+MOBO+RAM.

    Did u try down the game graphs? Maybe downing the graphs u can get some frames.
  • gama205gama205 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 9 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    mikael74 wrote: »
    CPU issue... hahahaha you are funny.

    This game isn't graphics intense enough to bottleneck a duo core CPU.

    Lol why are you talking about a dual core processor like its good?
    It doesn't have to do as much with graphics but so many more things moving and going on at once in an MMO the processor might have trouble keeping up.
  • mikael74mikael74 Member Posts: 206 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    i have a lenovo v570 with i5-2430M and intel HD 3000 and i get great fps in town and outside of town at low/medium settings

    It's your super CPU that is giving you good FPS and that your graphics card is very sub-par doesn't matter at all.

    So sayeth the forum dwellers.
    I play as a control wizard and when it comes down to it... it's all about the freeze.
  • ramuxxramuxx Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 4 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    This game doesn't even have that great of visuals, it should not be performing as awful as it does on low end rigs. Guild Wars 2 runs on my piece of junk work laptop, with an integrated video card and on low that game still looks beautiful. I play NWN on low and the entire game looks blurred out, pixelized and still runs like ****. It's a poor game engine, that's all there is to it. It's funny that the majority of people here defending it are those that have spent $60 or more and want to ignore the games faults through rose tinted helmets.
  • mikael74mikael74 Member Posts: 206 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    caiokill wrote: »
    Dude, stop cry and realize, ITS YOUR CPU+MOBO+RAM.

    Did u try down the game graphs? Maybe downing the graphs u can get some frames.

    On the lowest setting I get maybe ten more FPS.
    I play as a control wizard and when it comes down to it... it's all about the freeze.
  • mikael74mikael74 Member Posts: 206 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    ramuxx wrote: »
    This game doesn't even have that great of visuals, it should not be performing as awful as it does on low end rigs. Guild Wars 2 runs on my piece of junk work laptop, with an integrated video card and on low that game still looks beautiful. I play NWN on low and the entire game looks blurred out, pixelized and still runs like ****. It's a poor game engine, that's all there is to it. It's funny that the majority of people here defending it are those that have spent $60 or more and want to ignore the games faults through rose tinted helmets.

    Yeah it's what I have been saying all along... it's the games fault that I get these low FPS.
    I play as a control wizard and when it comes down to it... it's all about the freeze.
  • izombieskizombiesk Member Posts: 8 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    mikael74 wrote: »
    Then the recommended specs should be listed as the minimum specs because I get 14 ****ing FPS in the ****ing city of ****ing Neverwinter.


    They cannot know how every single rig performs, especially since it's impossible to inhouse test thousands of people in one area. This is not their fault nor problem - it is yours. Not trying to be an ***, that's just the way it is.
    mikael74 wrote: »
    It's your super CPU that is giving you good FPS and that your graphics card is very sub-par doesn't matter at all.

    So sayeth the forum dwellers.

    They work together. One without the other is pointless eg the aforementioned 'bottleneck' word.
    StarCraft 2 is the perfect example for this. You can run a relatively bad video card for it and be fine as long as you have a fast processor. It is an extremely CPU focused game.
  • izombieskizombiesk Member Posts: 8 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    ramuxx wrote: »
    This game doesn't even have that great of visuals, it should not be performing as awful as it does on low end rigs. Guild Wars 2 runs on my piece of junk work laptop, with an integrated video card and on low that game still looks beautiful. I play NWN on low and the entire game looks blurred out, pixelized and still runs like ****. It's a poor game engine, that's all there is to it. It's funny that the majority of people here defending it are those that have spent $60 or more and want to ignore the games faults through rose tinted helmets.

    I have not spent anything on the game. I have had zero problems with lag or fps. With settings maxed, I find the game looks pretty **** good for it's scale in a F2P game.
  • mikael74mikael74 Member Posts: 206 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    I'm pissed paying $25 for this HAMSTER-poor performance.
    I play as a control wizard and when it comes down to it... it's all about the freeze.
  • bpphantombpphantom Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Currently, I'm on an i7 quad and a single GTX480, only 8GB of RAM in the system as well. Neverwinter runs great with no drops below 30 FPS. Just saying.
    - bpphantom

    Grace, Tiefling Devoted Cleric

    "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are. Then leave the rest to Batman."
  • wormgaswormgas Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 57
    edited May 2013
    It's the CPU. I noticed that on mine as well.
    That's a fact!
  • muffiemuffie Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    After 5 pages I gave up reading due to shear stupidity of people

    Run in windowed mode with task manager open, or if you have a clue "resource monitor". Simple basic way to check bottlenecks.

    Also to the guy that said SSD isn't for good gaming -_-
  • ixothixoth Member Posts: 59 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    ascher11t wrote: »
    Don't listen to this guy. SSDs are useless if you're gaming. They're only useful if you're doing video processing, and they aren't needed for gaming.

    This is wrong in so many levels. I use SSD and for example wow runs much faster if I play it from SSD rather than hard drive - the zoning times are much faster. Of'course you need fast SSD and not some sluggish cheap ones. I recommend OCX vertex 3 (or better), and you need also fast serial ata bus to be able to take the advantage of fast SSD - serial ata 3 or better is recommended for such OCX drive.

    Also I'd like to know how much RAM you got and what operating system do you use? 64 or 32 bit?
  • alexdinhoettalexdinhoett Member Posts: 2 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    pwthebest wrote: »
    Honestly, he's not really wrong. Especially when compared to a game like GW2, which seems to have bigger areas and such, graphics are better, but the system requirements are lower in GW2. With this game it just seems more of an optimization issue.

    This game looks as good and is better optimized then GW2, i stopped playing GW2 because i could not get a setting with good graphics and good performance. This game is like melted butter on my screen, im on a gen 1 i7 and a gtx570. Game is smooth crisp and have awesome lightning effects and environments.
  • alexdinhoettalexdinhoett Member Posts: 2 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    ixoth wrote: »
    This is wrong in so many levels. I use SSD and for example wow runs much faster if I play it from SSD rather than hard drive - the zoning times are much faster. Of'course you need fast SSD and not some sluggish cheap ones. I recommend OCX vertex 3 (or better), and you need also fast serial ata bus to be able to take the advantage of fast SSD - serial ata 3 or better is recommended for such OCX drive.

    Also I'd like to know how much RAM you got and what operating system do you use? 64 or 32 bit?


    No you are wrong sir. A descent mechanical disc and a good amount of fast RAM beats that problem, i have a old raptor disc and i NEVER have any issues with loading times stutter etc, the zoning is perfect, and i think it would be on a descent ordinary mechanical disc aswell. SSD is good but it wont make the game run better, if the game is choppy etc the last upgrade to do is the freckin disc.
  • majzlikmajzlik Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    mikael74 wrote: »
    I'm pissed paying $25 for this HAMSTER-poor performance.

    You should be pissed at yourself for buying top end GPU with subpar CPU and RAM. I run i7 2600k (way better than yours) and 560TI (way worse than yours) and 16gb DDR3 1666Mhz (way better than yours), and I dont dip below 30 in city, usually hover around 40.

    Your c2d is 5 years old. It doesn't even sell in the two biggest IT eshops in my country anymore. That should give you a hint that it's time to upgrade.
  • wygrathwygrath Member Posts: 9 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    I'm running an i7 3.40Ghz and a GTX 650 and I run the game maxed out and haven't had any issues. I also have 32GB of RAM so I'm sure that helps a bit. Modern PC gaming is RAM intensive. SSD's affect load times significantly but any other benefit is negligible.
  • ixothixoth Member Posts: 59 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    No you are wrong sir. A descent mechanical disc and a good amount of fast RAM beats that problem, i have a old raptor disc and i NEVER have any issues with loading times stutter etc, the zoning is perfect, and i think it would be on a descent ordinary mechanical disc aswell. SSD is good but it wont make the game run better, if the game is choppy etc the last upgrade to do is the freckin disc.

    I also have WD velociraptor and my OCX beats that HD in data transfer speed and access times hand down.
  • caiokillcaiokill Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    ireg35Divffbc.jpg

    Look this graphic and say again: "the graphic in this game sucks"


    please, say again.
  • zombiesxiiizombiesxiii Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    I'm using a AMD Phenom II X4 965, 7950 & 8g DDR3 1600Mhz and using a regular old 7200rpm hdd. Game plays perfectly at max settings, everything is super smooth. I've never had any lag whatsoever, in previous betas or now.
  • wygrathwygrath Member Posts: 9 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    caiokill wrote: »
    ireg35Divffbc.jpg

    Look this graphic and say again: "the graphic in this game sucks"


    please, say again.

    You're obviously not running the game on maxed out settings. The game world and specifically the backgrounds look infinitely better than that on max settings.
  • norobladnoroblad Member Posts: 556 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    caiokill wrote: »

    Look this graphic and say again: "the graphic in this game sucks"


    please, say again.

    Whatever that pic came from, the graphics in it are awful. Its blurry and pinched across the horizon. Look at the far guard, if you can make him out.... its the grey blur on the left side.

    Is that from THIS game? I did not recognize it.
  • thahn204thahn204 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    This is to the OP don't post here asking for opinions and laugh at people telling you the truth. I have an Intel Core i7 @2.8GHz (not that amazing ik this isn't the point) and an evga gtx 560 ti factory overclocked only 8gb ddr3 ram and I run this game maxed out with NO dips at all always at 40+. The graphics in this game are pretty **** good. I don't understand the QQing on that front. Also it is optimized very well if you want to see crappy optimization check out Darkfall Unholy Wars, that is garbage. The problem does sit in your processor sorry man but it's most likely the issue. Also im still running the basic HDD not a SSD and the load times are minimal no lag skipping nothing game is smooth as butter.
  • caiokillcaiokill Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    Awful? Are u guys kidding me?

    Get the URL link and open in new window in your browser, and see the full pic(1920x1080), and yes, its on max settings.

    Oh, and yes, its NW.

    Edit: The background looks like ****, cuz I take this picture completing one quest, with NPC window open.. When u do that, the focus stay on NPC.
  • mutharexmutharex Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited May 2013
    caiokill wrote: »
    ireg35Divffbc.jpg

    Look this graphic and say again: "the graphic in this game sucks"


    please, say again.

    I start to think that people might have misconfigured their graphics because I heard someone saying that it looked 'grainy'...
    I think the GFX are the last thing to worry about in NWO

    BTW OP, your CPU surely doesn't help. I have a 'lowly' i3 and a 7850HD and I rarely have FPS problems (only network lag)
Sign In or Register to comment.