sabrehawk Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) Ridoncolous FPS variation all over the place In Boot Camp look at complex scenery,medium distance wall, skybox and ground , fps variation from 35 to 85 fps , with 12 to 24 ms frametimes Setting 1440 p, no AA , effects cinematic, all other settings HIGH, vsync off, supersampling off, motionblur off, steam overlay disabled. FOV 100 load all texture to video ram ON (8 gb vram) and i consider these perfectly reasonable settings for this kind of hardware. Place where i tested this is next to 8 cm mortar in FOB on Training Level. Imho this scenario should run easily a 100 fps on this system given the fact that it was the training level, theres no complex calculations going on with the CPU (no network load, no moving objects, no players,and no AI or stuff) , The GPU is absolutely capable of handling this. System: SKYLAKE Core I7 6700 3.4 ghz Nvidia GTX 980 M 8 GB 16 GB Kingston System SSD Samsung 960 EVO NVME m.2 PCI EXPRESS GAME SSD : SAMSUNG 850 EVO SATA no thermal throttling High Energy Profile Fans set to max speed System cost: Around 2500 € Windows 10 Pro Creators Fall Update, Latest Nvidia Driver Edited November 25, 2017 by sabrehawk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Major Trouble Posted November 25, 2017 27 minutes ago, sabrehawk said: System: SKYLAKE Core I7 6700 3.4 ghz Nvidia GTX 980 M 8 GB 16 GB Kingston System SSD Samsung 960 EVO NVME m.2 PCI EXPRESS GAME SSD : SAMSUNG 850 EVO SATA no thermal throttling High Energy Profile Fans set to max speed System cost: Around 2500 € Windows 10 Pro Creators Fall Update, Latest Nvidia Driver Your problem is the GTX 980M. At best it's on par with a GTX 1050ti desktop equivalent. Jensens Range (Boot Camp) is probably nowhere near being optimized so might explain the large performance variations you're seeing. My old GTX 780ti performed around a similar 85fps on the range. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
moppel Posted November 25, 2017 Squad patch 9.17 FPS: ~25-30 minimum CPU: i7 5820K @ 3.4Ghz GPU: GTX 1080 FTW 1860Mhz max Boost RAM: 64 GB in QC 2400Mhz Cl 15 Squad on an 1TB EVO 850 res 2560x1080 Cache cleared after the Update , get even bad FPS in Singelplayer now ( Screenshot shows Al bash in Singelplayer via adminchangemap). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PadrePadre Posted November 25, 2017 On 24.11.2017 at 2:01 AM, ZXD_Lee said: oh shit just seen, you've got a R9 290 OMFG that's totally shit!!! CPU Good GPU no good at all Your CPU will be running at 40 to 60% and your GPU will be having a meltdown As a keep on saying don't bring old crap or anything from AMD! unless you have ryzen or the new AMD GPUs and you must have at least 16gb of ram 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. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZXD_Lee Posted November 26, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, PadrePadre said: 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. I would say R9 290 is not even as good as a 1060!!! its defo not the right card for running any beta game!!! by the time squad is out and a year old the poor old 290 is going to useless and having cards like this just slows everything down a few years ago it was ok for the games at the time but things have moved on since then and by meltdown, i don't mean heat I mean it just can't handle squad its a bit like playing in 1080p, it was ok to a year ago but now its 1440p thats PC gaming for you Edited November 26, 2017 by ZXD_Lee Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Verdin Posted November 26, 2017 36 minutes ago, ZXD_Lee said: I would say R9 290 is not even as good as a 1060!!! its defo not the right card for running any beta game!!! by the time squad is out and a year old the poor old 290 is going to useless and having cards like this just slows everything down a few years ago it was ok for the games at the time but things have moved on since then and by meltdown, i don't mean heat I mean it just can't handle squad its a bit like playing in 1080p, it was ok to a year ago but now its 1440p thats PC gaming for you You would say, so you're only speculating and have no real experience with the GPU? Once again, you're speculating that a particular GPU is going to to be "useless" when you don't even know what the final optimized performance of SQUAD is going to be. seriously? lol *Note: the R9 290 is listed as a recommended GPU by OWI on the store page. 1080p is supposedly not ok anymore, but it's still the most widely used resolution for gaming.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Major Trouble Posted November 26, 2017 Not necessarily speculation. http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB-vs-AMD-R9-290/3639vs2171 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Verdin Posted November 26, 2017 http://store.steampowered.com/app/393380/Squad/ System Requirements Recommended: OS: Windows 7 SP1 (x64), Windows 8 (x64), Windows 10 (x64) Processor: Intel Core i7 4790k CPU Memory: 16 GB RAM Graphics: Geforce GTX 970 or AMD Radeon R9 290 DirectX: Version 12 Network: Broadband Internet connection Storage: 35 GB available space Additional Notes: A microphone Besides the fact that I happen to own a R9 290, and know what it's performance is like in SQUAD when paired with a solid CPU, I'd tend to believe OWI's recommendation on their own game, over some rando on the internet. lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZXD_Lee Posted November 26, 2017 16 hours ago, Verdin said: http://store.steampowered.com/app/393380/Squad/ System Requirements Recommended: OS: Windows 7 SP1 (x64), Windows 8 (x64), Windows 10 (x64) Processor: Intel Core i7 4790k CPU Memory: 16 GB RAM Graphics: Geforce GTX 970 or AMD Radeon R9 290 DirectX: Version 12 Network: Broadband Internet connection Storage: 35 GB available space Additional Notes: A microphone Besides the fact that I happen to own a R9 290, and know what it's performance is like in SQUAD when paired with a solid CPU, I'd tend to believe OWI's recommendation on their own game, over some rando on the internet. lol I don't care about the min specs, you're just going to get low frames in squad with a 290 it's as simple as that!!! all my guys have upgraded now and it much much much better for them 100 plus frames are easy with 1070 or above, get upgrading!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Verdin Posted November 26, 2017 13 minutes ago, ZXD_Lee said: I don't care about the min specs, you're just going to get low frames in squad with a 290 it's as simple as that!!! all my guys have upgraded now and it much much much better for them 100 plus frames are easy with 1070 or above, get upgrading!!! Recommended specs, not minimum...and I can easily maintain 60+ fps @ 1080p in SQUAD on 80 player servers with my overclocked 4690k. Maybe you consider that low, but I find it rather fluid and quite playable for a secondary rig. No, it doesn't match the performance of your 1070 or my 980 ti's with a overclocked 4790k...but I find the 290 to be far from "useless" in SQUAD. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Root Posted December 7, 2017 The R9 290 is actually still a really good card. The problem with Squad is optimization. I can't believe some people are actually arguing against it. It is an alpha, after all, with basically no real optimization in it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Psyrus Posted December 7, 2017 7 hours ago, Root said: It is an alpha, True! 7 hours ago, Root said: with basically no real optimization in it. I would wager that the devs who spent hours of their lives performing analysis and pouring over data, then painstakingly going through and fixing assets, code and creating workarounds would disagree strongly with your sentiments. A more accurate statement would be: Quote with only two alpha-stage optimization passes completed. Feel free to use it next time Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eagon89 Posted December 7, 2017 (edited) On 25/11/2017 at 10:05 PM, moppel said: Squad patch 9.17 FPS: ~25-30 minimum CPU: i7 5820K @ 3.4Ghz GPU: GTX 1080 FTW 1860Mhz max Boost RAM: 64 GB in QC 2400Mhz Cl 15 Squad on an 1TB EVO 850 res 2560x1080 Cache cleared after the Update , get even bad FPS in Singelplayer now ( Screenshot shows Al bash in Singelplayer via adminchangemap). That's very strange. My situation is: Squad patch 9.17 FPS: ~85/90 minimum - 130 maximum (single player Al Basrah map) CPU: i7 5820K @ 3.3Ghz÷3.6Ghz GPU: GTX 980 Ti Strix 1317Mhz max Boost RAM: 64 GB in QC 2800Mhz Cl 16 Squad on an 3TB HD 7200 rpm res 1920x1080 Edited December 7, 2017 by eagon89 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chew_Kok_Long Posted December 7, 2017 On 25.11.2017 at 10:05 PM, moppel said: Squad patch 9.17 FPS: ~25-30 minimum CPU: i7 5820K @ 3.4Ghz GPU: GTX 1080 FTW 1860Mhz max Boost RAM: 64 GB in QC 2400Mhz Cl 15 Squad on an 1TB EVO 850 res 2560x1080 Cache cleared after the Update , get even bad FPS in Singelplayer now ( Screenshot shows Al bash in Singelplayer via adminchangemap). You Sir must have some serious software issues. Running game at 2560x1440 with i5 6600k and a poor GTX970 - mostly have around 70-120 fps with lows of around 40. Settings put on low preset then changed everything to high. Run 3dMark FireStrike (its free) and see if your rig performs properly. Are you experienced with computers? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Root Posted December 10, 2017 (edited) @Chew_Kok_Long I agree. There's no reason his specs should be under performing so horrendously. I'd say corrupt driver install or some bloatware is the cause.@moppel Have you tried deleting the Squad file in AppData manually (not through the game!) and then restarting Steam to verify your Squad files? If you have, please considering downloading DDU, restarting your PC into Safe Mode and uninstalling your drivers. Then reboot normally and find the latest drivers for your GPU (W10 & W7 64bit) and install them and reboot again. If you have already done those steps and found no help from them, then take a look at your computer temps. Is your CPU or GPU heating up? If they look normal, make sure the game isn't starting off Intel intergrated graphics but your GPU. I believe you can do this through the Nvidia control panel. You can also check whether Squad is using iGPU or GPU in %localappdata%\squad log files. On 12/7/2017 at 12:15 AM, Psyrus said: True! I would wager that the devs who spent hours of their lives performing analysis and pouring over data, then painstakingly going through and fixing assets, code and creating workarounds would disagree strongly with your sentiments. A more accurate statement would be: Feel free to use it next time They most likely did spend countless hours pouring over data to offer some sort of optimization so that testing the game is actually possible, but that doesn't mean what I said isn't true and trying to disregard my statement by making it seem like I am throwing their work out as nothing is playing at extremes. What they have released now is not what many in the gaming community (the same who attack AAA companies even) would call "real optimization". There hasn't been any real optimization because it is an alpha and it won't get it for a while. I'll use what I've been saying because isn't inaccurate at all. While they have released some optimization patches, we haven't to this gotten the real optimization yet that comes with beta or even release. I don't see how there is room to argue this. Would you actually call the optimization we have gotten "the real" optimization we're going to get later on when their intent isn't even to offer that just yet (because of alpha status)? No, I should think you wouldn't, unless you have an uber computer and the poor optimization we have right now doesn't bother you whatsoever. Edited December 10, 2017 by Root Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Psyrus Posted December 11, 2017 (edited) @Root As a thread for posting performance measures isn't the best place to have an extended debate about semantics I'll try to answer your questions and close off my points as succinctly as possible. I would PM this to you but I feel like it's a good discourse to have that I can refer other people to later if I want to make the same points without retyping everything. I personally believe the meaning of words matter, and while in your second point, you kindly included quotation marks to indicate that you were not referring to the actual meaning of "real", but some definition that you (or in your opinion, the gaming community at large shares) have made up, your original post that I responded to did not. That is why I posted the clarification, because without any clarifying statements or qualifying quotations marks, your statements that no/hardly any real optimization has been implemented is patently incorrect. As a developer and someone who has worked on games (not nearly to the scale of OWI though), I found the notion insulting and hoped that it was not your intention and offered a phrase which I felt expresses what you meant while still being respectful of the work of others. 10 hours ago, Root said: Would you actually call the optimization we have gotten "the real" optimization we're going to get later on when their intent isn't even to offer that just yet (because of alpha status)? No, I should think you wouldn't, unless you have an uber computer and the poor optimization we have right now doesn't bother you whatsoever You are correct in saying that there hasn't been "real" optimizations if you in fact mean final optimization passes, but those two words are in reality fundamentally different, and just because future RC focused optimization passes may occur, it does not detract from the real optimization work that was done to optimize the game in its current state. Looking at what the devs have focused on optimizing so far, the majority of it is applicable all the way to RC (while a small number may be stop gap measures applied to in-progress gameplay elements), but I agree that there should be and probably will be more and perhaps bigger optimization passes in the future. I just take issue with the mischaracterization of someone's work as not "real" -Note to mods: I would be happy to continue the discussion with Root in a different thread if these posts could be moved over, but if this is the end of it and you don't mind the 3-4 back and forth posts, I won't be commenting on the issue anymore as I've said my piece. Edited December 11, 2017 by Psyrus Added mod note Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
moppel Posted December 11, 2017 @Chew the only software issue (in regards of performance)i have on my PC is Squad since i deletet ARK :-p If you look at the GPU and CPU utilization in this screen you can see GPU utilzation and Clock/Voltagestep --> indicating that there is a massive Bottleneck on the CPU side , looking a CPU utilization my guess would be a drawcall bottleneck but this is just a guess without proper monitoring tools. @Root when you actually look at the screenshot you`ll see there is neighter a Temp. or a Powerlimit issue. Sqauds sensitivity for Driver versions is part of this bad performance but iam in iam not willing to choose a particularly one for one alpha title i hardly play currently. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eatenbyghouls Posted December 22, 2017 Windows 10 Geforce Gtx 1050 @2.50ghz I5-7300HQ 8gb ram And if it will run what settings could i play on where id get decent fps (60+ preferably) but minimum fps 30-45 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jellib0wl Posted December 22, 2017 11 minutes ago, Eatenbyghouls said: Windows 10 Geforce Gtx 1050 @2.50ghz I5-7300HQ 8gb ram And if it will run what settings could i play on where id get decent fps (60+ preferably) but minimum fps 30-45 I have that exact setup on my laptop and I can run Squad at 50-60 fps with rare freezes, on lowest, If you do put the settings up to medium - high you will get around 30-35 fps. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voice Posted January 6, 2018 (edited) Intel Core i7 6700 / 3.4 GHz Skylake Processor Tray - LGA1151 Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo - 120mm 9-31dBA ASUS MAXIMUS VIII RANGER - ATX LGA1151 Kingston HyperX FURY - 2x8GB DDR4 2133MHz PC4-17000 CL14 EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti SC Black - 11GB Seagate Desktop HDD ST2000DM001 - 3.5″ SATA-600 2TB Samsung 850 PRO MZ-7KE256BW - 2.5″ SATA-600 256GB Cooler Master CM Storm Enforcer - ATX 3440x1440 and running 68-100 fps, and a lot of the time its capping my Acer predator x34. The new 1080ti is amazing. Edited January 6, 2018 by Voice Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Van Darkholme Posted January 9, 2018 I capped my FPS to 60 FPS (I use a Dell U2711), I'm likely getting somewhere in the 70-100 range, never noticed anything below 60, at least. Playing on Ultra/Epic at 2560x1440, no super-sampling or pre-loading all textures. Intel i5-760 OC'd to 4GHz (on a stock cooler, and running at great temps!) Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UDH5 G.Skill Ripjaws 16GB (2x8GB) DDR3 1600MHz 250GB Samsung Evo 850 SSD Gigabyte GTX 1080ti Gaming OC 11G The 1080ti is truly a beast of a card, I got it from a friend at a (very) low price. Prior to that, I had a GTX 470 and then was gifted a GTX 660, and could only play Squad on minimum settings at 1280x720. In terms of raw FPS, my CPU is likely bottle-necking the card a bit (although from similar builds, it's not too bad), however seeing as my monitor is really the ultimate bottleneck, it doesn't really matter to me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teeshq Posted February 5, 2018 FPS : 40-60 CPU : i5-3570K,@ 4400 MHz (44 x 100) GPU : GTX 670 RAM : Vengeance Pro Series — 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3 DRAM 1866MHz C9 Settings High / shadow med Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oTec Posted February 6, 2018 GTX 1050 Ti GT OC i7-4790 @ 3.6ghz 12gb ddr3 1600 No SSD W8.1 45-90fps on lowest settings depending on map. Used to be higher, like 2 weeks ago. Sad times. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
infamousplayer Posted February 6, 2018 i5 7400 , GTX 1070 8gb, 8gb DDR4 full texture off , AA Txaa , supersampling 1.5x, all in high shadow medium, let's go 50-80 FPS average 60 on full server Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
banOkay Posted February 6, 2018 For the game to not look like an oil painting I have to play at 1.25 super sampling and AA despite running at 1440p. The end result was 40-100 fps average about 70 on Yero and Narva. I guess the meme about animations being a huge load is over. The visual fidelity and performance has a long way to go. 6700k 4.5Ghz, 1080Ti, 16GB DDR4 3200Mhz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
