Jump to content

PadrePadre

Member
  • Content count

    81
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by PadrePadre

  1. Squad optimization

    PUBG is one of the worse optimized games released since FX lineup is on market. Both, Squad and PUBG looks like 2001 games and requires very strong PC to run smooth. In the same time, the same PC runs BF1 50fps+
  2. Squad optimization

    Squad is all about a power of a single core of CPU. Although you can play a better looking games with your FX CPU, in Squad you won't get playable fps with it. UE4 works really well with FX CPUs, but it requires proper multi core setup - devs are not interested in it so far, they prefer to focus on new animations etc. So sorry.
  3. Yes, fortunately the problem was fixed. That's good.
  4. I hope they will fix it. Already all my teammates left idea of buying Squad due to it's huge engine problems and they are going for a walk to Tarkov. So fingers crossed for the texture bug, if it's it.
  5. Total bullshit - I bet you never had this card. R9 290 is a great GPU and CPU is running at it's full potential all the time. And why the heck GPU can go meltdown? It's running extra cold with 65 degrees after OC thanks to TriXX cooling system. I can play literally every other game in high/ultra setttings in 1080p in decent FPS. And I run 16 gigs of 3200 DDR4. It's just Squad engine is junk for now as what it offers. As I've said before, game looks like 2001 game with 2021 system requirements.
  6. That's not true. I own 7700k, can play any game on marked in at least 60 fps - and in Squad, maps like Narva are unplayable for me. It's just crap engine optimisations or total lack of it. 100 fps ... I hope it was a sarcasm.
  7. There are maps like Narva where I can't play a game as looking in one direction is giving me instant slideshow. It's just example, same as new big forest map. I'm playing in 1080p with upscaling to 1.5x, and it's fine, but there are maps where game is unplayable no matter the settings. For now, Squad is a waste of time because of performance. It looks like 2001 title and runs like something from 2021.
  8. if you can run all other games at decent fps - don't buy PC components to play squad, it's now worth it. I've bought 7700k to play this game, and although I can play any other game in 60+ fps on ultra - squad is still unplayable. It's just not worth it. Wait for FPS fixes and optimisation.
  9. 7700K @ stock 16 GB DDR4 @ 3000Mhz R9 290 After most recent update game is at best "playable" on most maps in low, except the largest ones and building intensive - those are literally unplayable. PC requirements of Squad are still laughable. And I still regret buying it. Salty but true.
  10. gpu/cpu utilization questions

    I'll sugest OC of your FX CPU. 4.5-4.6 Ghz is easy on good air cooler, I had mine at 5.0 for some time.
  11. Optimization

    UE4 is fully capable of supporting and getting max out of modern CPU design, including multicore support (for now it's 8 threads from what I remember). Current bad CPU performance/usage is just about how Squad engine works. http://kotaku.com/5477534/unreal-engine-4-still-a-long-ways-off Originally posted by Mark Rein [...]Unreal Engine 4 is designed for the day we get massively multi-core processors, [...]
  12. It worked nice for my 8350, so can work for Ryzen also. Same as assigning cores in Windows manager + setting Squad priority to High. If you do 3 things with 3 fps gain from each of it - you can get ~10 fps, and this is nice
  13. Nothing above, I'm just referring to PC specs that are needed to run game crossed out with Squad visual side - and for now it looks old, still can be attractive, but looks old. It doesn't mean devs are doing bad job, they are doing what they can. But I'm quite straight forward and I think graphic is not matching requirements.
  14. That's totally not true. UE4 fully supports multicore CPUs, it's all about how devs uses this engine and how they will assign engine workload for CPU - it's all about optimisation. For Squad, optimisations are not yet done - this is the reason for insane requirements (for now) as for such medicore looking game. Originally posted by Mark Rein [...] [...]
  15. Because playing ULQ is giving you huge advantage in spotting. Setting everything to low, max resolution and supersampling you can get = best enemy spotting. Anyways, Epic settings looks medicore, like quite old game and are not worth sacrificing spotting for just a bit better game look. With ULQ and SSx2.0 you can spot enemy at distances where your team will ask "who the heck you are shooting at?"
  16. CPU testing, old AMD vs Ryzen with Rx 580

    Squad alone is not worth skipping Ryzen. All other games runs great with Ryzen, it's a great CPU line. Anyway - thanks for posting FPS ranges, It's nice to have it.
  17. Zen Ryzen

    Overclock i7 7700K ? "overclocks so well" ? Man, those CPUs are so damn hot that even Intel is advising to ... not overclock the X series. http://www.pcgamer.com/intels-tells-core-i7-7700k-owners-to-stop-overclocking-to-avoid-high-temps/ You need to scalp i7s to get decent temperatures, and I'm not going to risk to kill such expensive CPU. Some i7700k chips are getting really hot even at stock clocks.
  18. That's why I love Frostbite. Insane looking, 64 players per game + insane performance and framerates. CPU utilisation in current squad engine can be compared only with a big, brown, smelly ... you know what. I can't wait when devs will do some work with better multicore CPUs usage - but I don't think it's going to be anywhere near in future. @ChiefSOSA - 90% of calculations are done in a single core in Squad, that's why just high Ghz is giving best FPS boost in squad. The CPU that provides best Mhz wins for now, no matter the number of cores. That's why even such eunuch like i3 will give you a decent FPS in Squad and there won't be much difference i3 vs i7. Ghz counts.
  19. Low FPS

    It's brilliant CPU if you setup it correctly. Mine 8350 can run all games I've tried with high/ultra settings in 1080p, I can't expect anything more from CPU for 150 bucks (price from ~2 years ago). If CPU can handle 99% games and fail to get decent FPS in just one game, it's not the CPU problem - just Squad optimisation is a trash. For SQUAD, there is one thing you can go - you can go to BIOS, enable 1 core per module, and this give you big OC headroom, and since 90% of calculations made by squad engine uses just 1 core, it's the best thing you can do. With cheap air cooler, you can go 4.7Ghz at +1 stock voltage setting.
  20. Direct x 12

    I think it will never be implemented, just look how game is running and how little was done in terms of game performance.
  21. Are you a good shot?

    Easy topic for me - I can't remember when I was able to hit anyone as it's impossible with frame rates I'm getting in Squad. So I just try to look good in uniform and I don't bother with kill ratio.
  22. Skylake X

    OMG! Thanks for letting me know, it should be 16% to 28% market share since 2016 up to now. 11% in just last 3 months You know, too many positive emotions with brand new AMD CPU! And after few conversations with our IT guys, I'm sure ThreadRipper is going to make those numbers grow. Once again - thanks and regards.
  23. Ryzen 5 performance vs i5-6600k (stock)?

    CPU usage and temps should also be mentioned. For example those i5s are really sweating with 90% CPU usage, in the same time Ryzen CPUs are relaxing at around 30-50% CPU usage. This leaves a lot buffer.
  24. Skylake X

    Well, there is a reason why AMD jumped from 6% market share to 28% since Ryzen was released.
  25. High End PC: Low Performance

    In my case, in all tests I performed performance of my PC jumped to 120% (DX11 fps wise) when I switched from 8.1 to 10. My stup is 8350 and R9 290. What's more, after I moved to Win10, my R9 290 beated my brother's GTX970. So from my point of view, I can only recommend Win10, especially for AMD GPUs (the boost is huge, even on DX10/11). And I measured it in several games so I can assume, it can be the same with Squad.
×