Jump to content
sgtcaboose

What FPS do you get playing Squad with your rig?

Recommended Posts

FPS 40-80

CPU RYZEN5  1600X @ 3.9MHz

GPU GTX1080TI

RAM 16G DDR4

RES 3840 X 2160 4K

 

Settings... mostly EPIC

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FPS 40-50

 

i5 2500k @ 4.3ghz 

760 GTX 2GB

16 GB DD3

1920X1080

 

Settings are high view distance, medium foilage, high effects and low/off for most other things

 

Ok for a system 6 years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Average FPS 50. vsync on. 79 PLAYERS. FULL SERVER

1920x1080

i5 6600k @ 4.2ghz 

970 GTX 4GB. yes, it is 4GB.

16 GB DDR4

--------------------

 

Settings custom= best picture:

TXAA

SUPER SAMPLING 1.5X

EFFECTS CINEMATIC

ALL THE OTHER EPIC AND ON.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

70-100 - don't go below 70.

I7 7700K 5.2 GHz
MSI 1080Ti Custom watercooled and overclocked
32 GB 3200 MHz Ram

Running on 3440x1440p screen with effects epic, foliage low, view distance high, shadows medium, everything off except eye adaption (Tournament settings).

Not that turning it on to max affects anything since I'm still CPU limited. My GPU dishes out around 120-140 FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you play above 70 fps and setting low?

You have a 144Hz monitor?

Your screen is way too big. That's not nice to play. You are too far away from the screen and it spoils the fun of play. Like console players with big TV screens.

Even people who were used to 60FPS for a while, then go to a 144Hz monitor at 144+ FPS and can't tell the difference..

A game is very good to play from 40 fps. Better a wonderful game and gameplay than a big screen at pc games.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

^What are you talking about? There is no comparison between 60/144, provided you can push those fps...

 

50-65 fps. 78-80 Player Server.

 

i5 6600K @ 4.6 GHz

EVGA 780 classified hydrocopper @ 1319/3105

16 GB Ram 2344 MHz

 

[email protected]

SSAA 1.5x

Everything low

Shadows Medium

Only Eye Adaption active.

 

Gonna need a faster gpu. Could have ~5 extra fps with ssaa on 1.0x..

Edited by moeppling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

""^What are you talking about? There is no comparison between 60/144, provided you can push those fps... ""

 

You do not understand my answer.
I'll say that too.
So why does someone play between 70-100 fps and setting low, while he can easily put everything on an epic.

Weird people;-).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Super Sniper said:

So why does someone play between 70-100 fps and setting low, while he can easily put everything on an epic.

Nothing weird about it at all, it's for playing more competitively.

Low foliage is nearly normal with competitive players, granted not all use it as it is a choice.

I run shadows medium, view distance high (Squad community tournament requirements) and everything else low or off personally. I need all the edges I can get! LOL

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then they should not complain about bad graphics for a computer of $ 1500 or euro ;-)
I do not play that way, b
ut okay, I understand your idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 09/08/2017 at 7:38 PM, Super Sniper said:

""^What are you talking about? There is no comparison between 60/144, provided you can push those fps... ""

 

You do not understand my answer.
I'll say that too.
So why does someone play between 70-100 fps and setting low, while he can easily put everything on an epic.

Weird people;-).

 

Game looks stunning all maxed out. Sadly though its a disadvantage vs these low end systems to play with all the eye candy turned on. 

Why we cannot have servers where the graphics are pre set and any config edits will be kicked i dont know. Always pandering to the low end, out dated pc user!!! Complaining they cannot run a 2017 game on hardware from 10 years ago. How can a game move forward if it always needs to think of the budget user with specs that only scrap the minimum.

 

There was a guy posting last year sometime about how good his KD was. Then when he posted screen shots you could see why. All the lovely grass and cover was removed because everything was set on low and config edits had made his game look like a throw back to a mid 90s shooter. 

Would love to play on a server where everyone was locked to the same specs in game. 

Edited by UnderFire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FPS: 30 average (70 player server)

CPU: AMD 1035t overclocked to 3.7 GHz 

GPU: Rx 580

RAM: 8GB 1600MHz DDR 3 RAM (2x4GB)

Res: 1920x1080

Settings: Medium/Low

 

New build just finished:

 

FPS: 75 average (70 player server)

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Overclocked to 3.64 GHz

GPU: Rx 580

RAM: 16GB 3000MHz Corsair Vengeance (2 x 8 GB), actual speed 2926.4 MHz

Res: 1920x1080

Settings: High

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, UnderFire said:

 

Game looks stunning all maxed out. Sadly though its a disadvantage vs these low end systems to play with all the eye candy turned on. 

Why we cannot have servers where the graphics are pre set and any config edits will be kicked i dont know. Always pandering to the low end, out dated pc user!!! Complaining they cannot run a 2017 game on hardware from 10 years ago. How can a game move forward if it always needs to think of the budget user with specs that only scrap the minimum.

 

There was a guy posting last year sometime about how good his KD was. Then when he posted screen shots you could see why. All the lovely grass and cover was removed because everything was set on low and config edits had made his game look like a throw back to a mid 90s shooter. 

Would love to play on a server where everyone was locked to the same specs in game. 

I think a perm tournament settings server could do well, that would mean that all players would have to have shadows on medium and view distance high as a minimum which is a good start. Obviously foliage is currently not controlled for tournament settings, this would be a good addition.

Hopefully one of the clans will agree and get a public server going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, UnderFire said:

Game looks stunning all maxed out. Sadly though its a disadvantage vs these low end systems to play with all the eye candy turned on. 


Why we cannot have servers where the graphics are pre set and any config edits will be kicked i dont know. Always pandering to the low end, out dated pc user!!! Complaining they cannot run a 2017 game on hardware from 10 years ago. How can a game move forward if it always needs to think of the budget user with specs that only scrap the minimum.

 

There was a guy posting last year sometime about how good his KD was. Then when he posted screen shots you could see why. All the lovely grass and cover was removed because everything was set on low and config edits had made his game look like a throw back to a mid 90s shooter. 

Would love to play on a server where everyone was locked to the same specs in game. 

 

Wow, really... The game looks good in certain situations but mostly it doesn't even look decent. The finished models look amazing but the foliage, shadows and lighting in general look bad. I have a 1 year old PC and it doesn't run the game fine, no normal setup runs it well because the game is so severely limited by single-thread performance. It's funny that knowing this you'd try to blame the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, UnderFire said:

Snip

There was a guy posting last year sometime about how good his KD was. Then when he posted screen shots you could see why. All the lovely grass and cover was removed because everything was set on low and config edits had made his game look like a throw back to a mid 90s shooter. 

Would love to play on a server where everyone was locked to the same specs in game. 

 

Yeah,I remember that dude! He loved playing with the Config files to make the game look like a 90's version. But he seems to have disappeared or gone back to BF:

Me,My FPS...not telling y'all cos its embarrassing :$

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Xx-RAGING-DEATH-xX said:

 

Yeah,I remember that dude! He loved playing with the Config files to make the game look like a 90's version. But he seems to have disappeared or gone back to BF:

Me,My FPS...not telling y'all cos its embarrassing :$

 

Nah, he just changed his name to @Skul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Quote

There was a guy posting last year sometime about how good his KD was. 

3 hours ago, Xx-RAGING-DEATH-xX said:

Yeah,I remember that dude! But he seems to have disappeared or gone back to BF:

Nah, never left. 2.4k hours in Squad, broke world record of kdr and kills per round in 2k17:

XJV413b.png

The funny fact that it was after some tournament match and I forgot to turn shadows and all of that other bullshit off. So I just played it on tournament settings. It doesn't matter what settings you use(in terms of results you'll achieve), the only thing that matters how bad or how good you are.

 

When you see some guy just destroyed your team with some ridiculous scoreboard, like, 87-4, chances are that's me.

 

Also won Squad Masters.ep.gif

 

3 hours ago, Xx-RAGING-DEATH-xX said:

He loved playing with the Config files to make the game look like a 90's version.

Yeah, I also tinker with my BIOS settings and resolder my hardware, and you wouldn't believe what else if I told you. ae.gif

Edited by Skul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 9.08.2017 at 8:38 PM, Super Sniper said:

""^What are you talking about? There is no comparison between 60/144, provided you can push those fps... ""

 

You do not understand my answer.
I'll say that too.
So why does someone play between 70-100 fps and setting low, while he can easily put everything on an epic.

Weird people;-).

 

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?"

Edited by PadrePadre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just upgraded today:

 

CPU: i7 920 @ 3.6 ghz → i5 7600K @ stock 3.8/4.2ghz (boost)

RAM: 6GB DDR3 533mhz → 16GB DDR4 3000mhz

GPU: HD6950 1GB → GTX1060 6GB

 

Frames went from ~30-35 on all low regardless of map/server, although sometimes jumping up to 40 on smaller ones... to pretty much hardly ever falling below 70 at everything maxed out (except super sampling & texture streaming)

 

I benchmarked 10 minutes of a full server with fraps (Edit: on Logar valley, although fools road and Kokan were the same from my glances at my fps count) 

Frames: 52225

Time (ms): 665453

Min: 63

Max: 90

Avg: 78.480

 

Very happy with the results, especially since I haven't had to bother overclocking at all. 

Edited by Psyrus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

CPU - i5-3570 3.4 GHz
Ram - 8 gb DDR3-1333 Mhz
GPU - ASUS GTX 760 2gb
Resolution - Full HD, Settings all low,but shadows Medium and View dictance High.
Full server 40 vs 40: 30-40 FPS.
Gorodok, Narva, OP First Light - very bad maps for good FPS on my PC. Have big lags.

Edited by FullRussianMachine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 8/12/2017 at 8:57 PM, Psyrus said:

Logar valley 80/80

Frames: 52225

Time (ms): 665453

Min: 63

Max: 90

Avg: 78.480

 

Chlora 78/78

Frames: 114144

Time (ms): 1637438

Min: 49

Max: 101

Avg: 69.709

 

Albasrah 78/78

Frames: 63771

Time (ms): 1023734

Min: 46

Max: 81

Avg: 62.293

Edited by Psyrus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FPS: Min: 70   High: 145

CPU: i7-7700K @ 4.2Ghz

GPU: GTX 1080 Ti

RAM: 32GB 3200Mhz

OS: Windows 10 Pro x64

RES: 3440 x 1440 35" G-Sync 100hz

 

Everything maxed, Super Sampling, OFF!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

FPS:25-50 (usually on the lower end)
CPU: amd fx 6300
GPU
: gtx 980
RAM: 8 gig 1600 ddr3
Res: 1080p
Settings: medium-low

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

PC built in feb 2012

CPU : i7 2600K OC @ 4.4 GHz

GPU : R9 280X IceQ X² 3Gb (not original one)

RAM : 16Gb DDR3 Corsair

OS : Win 7 Home

Playing @ 1920*1080 @ 60Hz ; V-Sync off, no supersampling, effects cinematic, shadows medium (high/epic unplayable, too laggy) foliage medium/high depending on map ; using SweetFX (~5 FPS loss with SwFX activated but game looks much sharper and more beautiful, on me...) ; I play for fun and for love of Squad so I don't care about lowering gfx to spot ennemies easier, when I see I can set some settings on epic coz the map is not demanding, I do it. Only condition is not to get my FPS under 30-40 or my eyes can't bear it :(

 

--> FPS min : 35 (~20% time) , avg 55-70 (~60% time) max : 80-90 (~20% time) servers full @ 70-80 players, if number of players gets below 60-65 I usually switch server so I rarely play on not crowded servers.

 

 

On 06/08/2017 at 9:00 PM, Super Sniper said:

Even people who were used to 60FPS for a while, then go to a 144Hz monitor at 144+ FPS and can't tell the difference..

A game is very good to play from 40 fps.

 

 

I'd say it depends on each player ; I perfectly can see the difference between 40 and 60 FPS and even if I don't care and can play a demanding game on a medium rig, however it is quite tiring after hours. And I can say that playing @ >100FPS is much more relaxing for my eyes (but I know I've good and reactive ones, maybe the reason why ?). We're all different ;)

 

On 11/08/2017 at 2:17 AM, UnderFire said:

 

Game looks stunning all maxed out. Sadly though its a disadvantage vs these low end systems to play with all the eye candy turned on. 

Why we cannot have servers where the graphics are pre set and any config edits will be kicked i dont know. Always pandering to the low end, out dated pc user!!! Complaining they cannot run a 2017 game on hardware from 10 years ago. How can a game move forward if it always needs to think of the budget user with specs that only scrap the minimum.

 

And low-end PC owners could answer "buying a new/updating an old PC can be expensive" and they'd be right... I've been one of them for years. We have to compose and deal with low-end PCs and cheaters trying to get the best KDR with no respect for others players and the spirit of the game. You are right, its sad but eh !

 

On 11/08/2017 at 9:18 AM, SHO-SHIN said:

I think a perm tournament settings server could do well, that would mean that all players would have to have shadows on medium and view distance high as a minimum which is a good start. Obviously foliage is currently not controlled for tournament settings, this would be a good addition.

Hopefully one of the clans will agree and get a public server going.

 

+1 !!

 

On 11/08/2017 at 11:56 AM, banOkay said:

 

Wow, really... The game looks good in certain situations but mostly it doesn't even look decent. The finished models look amazing but the foliage, shadows and lighting in general look bad. I have a 1 year old PC and it doesn't run the game fine, no normal setup runs it well because the game is so severely limited by single-thread performance. It's funny that knowing this you'd try to blame the players.

 

The funny fact is that my 150€ CPU and 150€ GPU can run the game @ avg 55-60 FPS when some high-end PCs (CPU+GPU > 1K€) sometimes get the same result ^^ I dont laugh at high-end PCs owners of course, the game just need more optimization... I trust the devs :)

 

@banOkay If you don't still, I recommand using SweetFX, it sharpens the game very well and with the right settings it makes it much better and warmer concerning colors ;)

 

On 11/08/2017 at 0:41 PM, Xx-RAGING-DEATH-xX said:

 

Yeah,I remember that dude! He loved playing with the Config files to make the game look like a 90's version. But he seems to have disappeared or gone back to BF:

Me,My FPS...not telling y'all cos its embarrassing :$

 

I can remember you put it somewhere (if I'm not mistaking) and it was embarrassing amazing ;)

 

On 11/08/2017 at 3:46 PM, Skul said:

Nah, never left. 2.4k hours in Squad, broke world record of kdr and kills per round in 2k17:

XJV413b.png

The funny fact that it was after some tournament match and I forgot to turn shadows and all of that other bullshit off. So I just played it on tournament settings. It doesn't matter what settings you use(in terms of results you'll achieve), the only thing that matters how bad or how good you are.

 

When you see some guy just destroyed your team with some ridiculous scoreboard, like, 87-4, chances are that's me.

 

Also won Squad Masters.ep.gif

 

Yeah, I also tinker with my BIOS settings and resolder my hardware, and you wouldn't believe what else if I told you. ae.gif

 

O.o

wow

Impressive... GG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

******************************************

v9.8

******************************************

On 8/13/2017 at 11:59 PM, Psyrus said:

Albasrah 78/78

Frames: 63771

Time (ms): 1023734

Min: 46

Max: 81

Avg: 62.293

 

******************************************

v9.9

******************************************

Al Basrah 72-78/78

Frames: 62031

Time (ms): 741454

Min: 58

Max: 105

Avg: 83.661

(Improvements of roughly 30% over 9.8)

 

Kokan 78/78

Frames: 56642

Time (ms): 560094

Min: 56

Max: 136

Avg: 101.129

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×