I am curious to know what kind of fps different rigs are getting so that is the reason for this thread. If you can make a video of it and showit here that would give people and Idea of what it looks like as well.
I start things off with my current build.
ASUS X99-A mobo
Intel Core i7 5820K
1x ASUS GTX 980 STRIX
SAMSUNG 840 Pro 512GB SSD
Here Is the video I took and uploaded to You Tube using Nvidia Shadow Play:
2x GTX 980s @1440p w/ all Graphics settings maxed
Ave: 47.6 FPS
Min: 29.4 FPS
2x GTX 980s@2880p w/ Graphics settings High preset
Ave: 26.8 FPS
Min: 21.3 FPS
Wow, nobody? I am actually pretty surprised that this topic has absolutely no appeal to other Dragon Agers. Where are my techies at? I even reserved a spot for new hardware that I will be adding to my PC and share the comparison between the two. Just to give you a taste, I will be adding an all in one/custom loop hybrid water cooling system to the CPU first and then to the two, yes I said two, GTX 980s. Anyways, here is the direct link to the video I posted on youtube with took 20 min to upload because its at 1080p:
Christ, I feel like a looser now.
I got 35.2 average on my test. My system isnt as nice as yours but I have it set to Mantle API which seems to help a ton with performance. I'm running a AMD FX 6100 cpu, HD9750 3gb vid card and 8gb ram.
over 9000
Not sure right now, PSU blew up while playing it last night so until new PSU arrives I cant benchmark.
What FPS monitoring software did you use or is there an option in-game to show FPS via console commands (I haven't checked yet).
That benchmark is worthless... try using the FrostByte console (PerfOverlay.DrawFPS) in the Hinterlands and report. I have an R9-290x, using the "Ultra" settings (MSAA off) and that benchmark is reporting 56fps (w/ Mantle API). In the Hinterlands I'm getting some huge fps drops (30-40 max).
Not sure right now, PSU blew up while playing it last night so until new PSU arrives I cant benchmark.
What FPS monitoring software did you use or is there an option in-game to show FPS via console commands (I haven't checked yet).
Wow, that sucks. I use MSI Afterburner to overclock my graphics card and it comes with Rival Tuner which is what the software is that I used. It is much better than just a simple FPS counter because you can program it in the monitoring tab in afterburner to tell you almost whatever specs you want to have displayed in the OSD. You have to go to each different spec and set it to display in OSD. You can change to color, size, font and location it displays in Rival Tuner. It wont mess up anything and is a really good way to tell how your system is performing at any given place in the game.
That benchmark is worthless... try using the FrostByte console (PerfOverlay.DrawFPS) in the Hinterlands and report. I have an R9-290x, using the "Ultra" settings (MSAA off) and that benchmark is reporting 56fps (w/ Mantle API). In the Hinterlands I'm getting some huge fps drops (30-40 max).
While I don't doubt that some places within the game may be more stressful for your system, I'm calling BS that you get 56 FPS on ultra without touching any of the settings for the benchmark. BTW I use a ton of different benchmark tests and it is best to use many when finding a stable overclock as well as the game or games themselves. So how do you do for 3dmark advanced? care to post a screenie? BTW I did this bench with everything maxed, which is even more demanding than ultra.
While I don't doubt that some places within the game may be more stressful for your system, I'm calling BS that you get 56 FPS on ultra without touching any of the settings for the benchmark. BTW I use a ton of different benchmark tests and it is best to use many when finding a stable overclock as well as the game or games themselves. So how do you do for 3dmark advanced? care to post a screenie? BTW I did this bench with everything maxed, which is even more demanding than ultra.
Sure here are some screenshots...
Like I said, I'm using the "Ultra" preset w/ MSAA off, using the Mantle API :
http://i.imgur.com/YbPF300.png
Here are my results :
http://i.imgur.com/B3stzU3.jpg
Still, when I'm near the Crossroads in the Hinterlands, I'm getting huge slowdowns, like in the low 40s... so what I'm saying is that the benchmark isn't a real test of the power required to run this game at a stable 60+ fps. I'm guessing we'll need better drivers and / or optimizations through patches.
I play on a 3 year old laptop. A screaming 2.2 quad CPU and a cutting edge {for the turn of the century} 560M GTX video card. I am happy with getting an average of 22 without the fake shiny hair do {with all other settings on low}. I am overjoyed that I can do this at 1920x1080. Dropping to 1680xWhatever doesn't gain much. I can play with 22 fps and not get dizzy. I'll call it good.
I can get a screen cap later, but here's my run down.
i5 4670
32GBs DDR3 1866
Asus Radeon R9 290X@1050Mhz and Catalyst 14.11.2 Beta
2560x1440@60Ghz
Using the Ultra presets, with MSAA turned off, my machine scores 38min/50avg under DirectX 11. Under Mantle, that drops to 33/40. I suspect its because my CPU is simply too fast to really take advantage of Mantle, but there's likely some more driver & game improvements that could bring that up. Mantle and BF4 on this same machine saw measurable & consistent gains with Mantle of DX11.
Actual gameplay seems pretty representative of what I score as well, usually in the mid to upper 40s frame rate. For this game, thats a perfectly acceptable frame rate. I think odds are good that I could easily get it to a consistent 60 with some selective tweaks . . . but I'd rather oogle the eye candy. The 30fps cutscenes are still pretty jarring when it transitions to them and back to gameplay.
Well I can't be arsed to make a video, but here are some results.
The specs
i5 3570k @4,3GHz
2x Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 Gaming
16GB DDR3 1600Mhz
Windows 8.1
Results on Ultra preset (SLI enabled):
http://i.imgur.com/S2YYCCD.png
Results with custom settings (SLI disabled):
http://i.imgur.com/IwOZ8fj.png
The custom settings just have shadows and effects reduced to high and MSAA off, otherwise it's maxed. It's what I'm running at the moment. In most situations during gameplay, I get better framerates than in the benchmark.
I can get a screen cap later, but here's my run down.
i5 4670
32GBs DDR3 1866
Asus Radeon R9 290X@1050Mhz and Catalyst 14.11.2 Beta
2560x1440@60Ghz
Using the Ultra presets, with MSAA turned off, my machine scores 38min/50avg under DirectX 11. Under Mantle, that drops to 33/40. I suspect its because my CPU is simply too fast to really take advantage of Mantle, but there's likely some more driver & game improvements that could bring that up. Mantle and BF4 on this same machine saw measurable & consistent gains with Mantle of DX11.
Strange, you should be getting better performance with Mantle regardless. I guess your lower avg fps is because of your resolution (1440p vs 1080p), we have about the same setup (i7-4970k, 16GB DDR3 1866, XFX R9-290x...)
Like you said, I don't really mind my current framerate, it's just the constant ups and downs that bother me... the cutscenes are horribly laggy and definitely the worst.
My benchmark average at launch was 25.6.
Then AMD released their beta drivers and I could enable Mantle.
Now my benchmark average is 56.8.
1920*1200
57max
38min
GTX780
4790k (or some such)
Game runs nicely.
EVGA GTX 980 (Stock)
Intel i7 4820k @ 3.7Ghz (Stock)
Roughly getting 55-60fps max.
Lowest I've seen 44fps.
Average around 52fps.
Everything maxed, no MSAA as I can't see a difference at 1440p with PP-AA turned on.
Didn't expect to get below 60FPS with a brand new GTX 980. This game shocked me a little, along with FC4. Just seeming quite badly optimised at the moment.
Hoping the patch for driver compatibility for both AMD and Nvidia works some magic.
Well I just went with automatic setting which has everything on High (except for Ultra textures and Medium Tesselation) and no MSAA. 1080p resolution.
I get 57.7fps average and a low of 48.2. I only notice it drop below 60fps when in areas with lots of NPCs such as Skyhold. Because it doesn't affect combat at all I don't mind.
I'm not at home so I don't remember my specs. But I recall I've got around 39fps minimum and 45fps tops with everything maxed.
MSAA is not worth it imo, we've already got POSTAA. I can barely see any difference between MSAA and POSTAA. Try turning off your MSAA but leave your POSTAA at max then run those benchmarks again. There's a very significant difference in fps and i can barely see the difference
I have:
MSI Z87-G45 MOBO
i5 4670k
EVGA GTX 970 SC
With everything set to ultra and high postaa
x2 MSAA
Avg 45.3
Min 37.6
no MSAA
Avg 52.1
Min 41.0
I have:
MSI Z87-G45 MOBO
i5 4670k
EVGA GTX 970 SC
With everything set to ultra and high postaa
x2 MSAA
Avg 45.3
Min 37.6
no MSAA
Avg 52.1
Min 41.0
I have almost identical HW (bought it yesterday:)
Anyway, I set postAA to LOW, I really don't mind this setting on low and game runs almost stable >60FPS (with slight FPS drops in heavier areas)..
And game looks so pretty 
I have almost identical HW (bought it yesterday:)
Anyway, I set postAA to LOW, I really don't mind this setting on low and game runs almost stable >60FPS (with slight FPS drops in heavier areas)..
And game looks so pretty
I think postaa is just fxaa, this setting isn't taxing at all.
Gigabyte GTX 970
16GB RAM
i5 4670k
Everything Ultra+ Fade touched 2xMSAA
48.8
37.0
Everything Ultra+ Fade touched No MSAA
55.2
39.2
Also, I don't really find the DAI benchmark accurate.
The benchmark tool doesn't even work properly on my PC. It just goes in super fast forward.
Retour en haut
