Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

getting poor FPS with a 5870Follow

#1 Sep 29 2010 at 9:07 PM Rating: Decent
14 posts
Ok my important sysmtem specs are listed below.
Sapphire HD5870
AMD Phenom II 955 @ 3.2ghz
Running at 1920 x 1080

I am getting 20-25 fps in big areas that there are no crowds and the moment theres a large crowd it dramatically drops. Any help would be appreciated :)
#2 Sep 29 2010 at 9:23 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,448 posts
Settings play a big role. Unfortunately, you did not provide enough information for anyone to help you properly. It would help if you could tell us the following:

1.) Settings you play the game with. (Resolution, DepthOfField on/off, Ambient occlusion on/off, texture&shadow settings, multisampling settings, windowed or fullscreen)

2.) Have you updated your drivers to the newest set? I don't have an ATI card but I believe it's either 10.8 or 10.9. These are supposedly much better than the previous ones.

3.) If you -are- using the most up-to-date drivers, try rolling back to 10.5 or 10.6. I believe a lot of people had good/best luck with one of those two.
____________________________
Currently Playing: FFXIV:ARR
Lacaan Vasiim:Cactuar
Free Company:Cactuar Corp<CCorp>
catwho wrote:
If you need a bard to get "good exp" in a merit party, you're the weakest link.
#3 Sep 29 2010 at 9:27 PM Rating: Good
*
71 posts
Also, Ambient Occlusion is insanely over-taxing for what it actually accomplishes. At high-res that could easily tax a 5870. As the previous poster said, though, it could be a variety of issues, if you could give more info, it would help!
#4 Sep 29 2010 at 9:27 PM Rating: Default
Sage
*
221 posts
Quote:
Sapphire HD5870
AMD Phenom II 955 @ 3.2ghz
Running at 1920 x 1080



It's your CPU that's the bottleneck. FF XIV is unusually CPU intensive compared to most modern PC games. You basically got a great video card in a system that's keeping it from it's full potential.

I'm running on a Radeon HD5850 which is a little less then your HD5870 in terms of GPU power. My CPU is a Core I5 750 (Quad) @ 2.66 GHz . I'm running both GPU and CPU at stock speeds - no overclock. In most open areas of FF XIV I'm seeing a silky smooth 60fps with FRAPS.

I built my system from scratch about 6 months ago for well under a thousand - a nice full-size HAF case, power supply, CPU, memory, video card, hard drives, etc. for well under $1000. You already have a case, hard drives, video card, and a power supply that's obviously good enough to power your HD5870. You can upgrade your motherboard & CPU to a nice core I5 or core I7 for a good price online - don't get the absolute "best" or "fastest" CPU, they are always horribly overpriced compared the next CPU in line. Just look for the CPU that's in the "sweet spot" in terms of price/performance currently. I think you'll need some DDR3 memory as well, but you can pick up 4 gig for pretty cheap these days as well.

That would be my recommendation for upgrade.
____________________________

#5 Sep 29 2010 at 9:31 PM Rating: Good
**
472 posts
skip to the draw distance. Most will not get a consistent 30 fps in this game for a long time. Imagine being halfway across the world from the servers. If someone says the word "bottleneck" try not to take too much seriously.

http://ffxiv.zam.com/forum.html?game=268;mid=128536051236599131;page=1#m128536051236599131

Edited, Sep 29th 2010 11:32pm by Parsalyn
#6 Sep 29 2010 at 9:40 PM Rating: Decent
14 posts
FenrirXIII wrote:
Settings play a big role. Unfortunately, you did not provide enough information for anyone to help you properly. It would help if you could tell us the following:

1.) Settings you play the game with. (Resolution, DepthOfField on/off, Ambient occlusion on/off, texture&shadow settings, multisampling settings, windowed or fullscreen)

2.) Have you updated your drivers to the newest set? I don't have an ATI card but I believe it's either 10.8 or 10.9. These are supposedly much better than the previous ones.

3.) If you -are- using the most up-to-date drivers, try rolling back to 10.5 or 10.6. I believe a lot of people had good/best luck with one of those two.



Ok i didnt reply because i was updating my ATI card to the latest drivers(10.9). I was using the older drivers earlier like 10.3

Alright sorry for the lack of information but here it is :
resolution is 1920 x 1080
No AA
Buffer size - resolution
Shadows - normal

texture and texture filtering = high/highest.

Don't have anything else turned on(ambient occlusion depth of field etc etc.


Regarding my CPU being a bottleneck, i highly doubt so. Im getting much better FPS in games like Crysis which is also pretty CPU intensive. The AMD phenom II is simply another quadcore and the bechmarks do not show the intel CPU's massively outperforming the AMD phenom CPU's, maybe a 5 FPS difference.

Edited, Sep 29th 2010 11:44pm by Kadesh3000
#7 Sep 29 2010 at 9:52 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
802 posts
A general thingy guys.

As long your resolution is 1920x1080 and above, any game, the processing power will cme from the GPU.

search above tomshardware and anandtech, they did some experiments some time back.
____________________________


#8 Sep 29 2010 at 9:56 PM Rating: Decent
*
71 posts
Yeah, I have to agree with the earlier poster about your CPU choking things up (since some people seem to not like the term "bottleneck.") If you want to see if this is true, run the game on lower resolutions, down to maybe 720 v.res, I would venture a guess that lowering to 1680x1050 or even 1440x900 would have no effect on your FPS. If you run at these lower resolutions, and you are getting the same FPS, then you know that your CPU or RAM is the weak link. If you have more than 4GB of decently speeded RAM (1333 or better) and I would think that you do, then you might be running into a CPU problem. If you lower the resolution and do see decent performance gains (+5-10 FPS per lower res) then its your GPU and that is an entirely different set of fixes.

This isn't because the 955 is slow, it is a great proc, particularly for the price, but FFXIV has really sub-par optimization right now, particularly with CPU generated effects.
#9 Sep 29 2010 at 9:59 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
If your benchmark scores on low and high are extremely close to each other, then yes your CPU is a bottleneck. I doubt it though.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#10 Sep 29 2010 at 10:13 PM Rating: Good
**
472 posts
Exactly like many have said, this game is poorly optimized. Don't go out and buy something if you have a fairly decent PC. Instead look for things that bring you up to about 30 fps most of the time. Draw distance and physx turned off will provide what you need. The graphics in this game really are not that ground breaking. I keep finding it odd when I see people posting that it is over the top. FPS is directly related to your pc's capabilities and the game you are playing, as well as how fast you can get data from the game servers.

FFXIV in the graphic configuration .exe has very little configuration. I haven't seen so little video options in a game, since... well I cannot think of anything at the moment. Nintendo 64 maybe?
#11 Sep 29 2010 at 10:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Parsalyn wrote:
FPS is directly related to your pc's capabilities and the game you are playing, as well as how fast you can get data from the game servers.
Uh, no. Not sure why you'd think that latency has impact on framerate, but I assure you it doesn't. You can have a silky smooth 60 fps but see nothing on the screen walking around because you're timing out.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#12 Sep 29 2010 at 10:18 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
135 posts
Have you tried updating motherboard chipset? That actually helped me.

As well, how many programs do you have running? Check your system tray and end any non-essential programs.

Also how much RAM do you have?
#13 Sep 29 2010 at 10:48 PM Rating: Decent
**
472 posts
bsphil wrote:
Parsalyn wrote:
FPS is directly related to your pc's capabilities and the game you are playing, as well as how fast you can get data from the game servers.
Uh, no. Not sure why you'd think that latency has impact on framerate, but I assure you it doesn't. You can have a silky smooth 60 fps but see nothing on the screen walking around because you're timing out.


Actually you proved my point. If your hardware isn't the problem then your ISP might be. 60 frames of the same thing is an excellent example of latency.

#14 Sep 29 2010 at 10:49 PM Rating: Decent
13 posts
OP, like someone posted earlier. Dont worry about your fps. This game needs optimized very badly. It's probably the most poorly optimized game i've ever seen in 25+ years of PC gaming. It's that terrible.

Everyone seems to think the game is just ground-breaking, and it really does require top-end equipment. Even SE seems to think their game does, as they list recommended hardware was top-end. They obviously have no idea what they're doing.

But i assure you, it is just that poorly optimized. If they ever decide to put some work into it, i would start playing it. There's a large majority who have already recognized how horribly the game runs during open beta and are waiting until they fix it, if they ever do.
#15 Sep 29 2010 at 10:51 PM Rating: Default
13 posts
Parsalyn wrote:
bsphil wrote:
Parsalyn wrote:
FPS is directly related to your pc's capabilities and the game you are playing, as well as how fast you can get data from the game servers.
Uh, no. Not sure why you'd think that latency has impact on framerate, but I assure you it doesn't. You can have a silky smooth 60 fps but see nothing on the screen walking around because you're timing out.


Actually you proved my point. If your hardware isn't the problem then your ISP might be. 60 frames of the same thing is an excellent example of latency.



Latency will rarely ever affect your fps. You might think your fps drops because youre lagging like ****. But look on FRAPS, it will still be running the same.
#16 Sep 29 2010 at 10:53 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Parsalyn wrote:
bsphil wrote:
Parsalyn wrote:
FPS is directly related to your pc's capabilities and the game you are playing, as well as how fast you can get data from the game servers.
Uh, no. Not sure why you'd think that latency has impact on framerate, but I assure you it doesn't. You can have a silky smooth 60 fps but see nothing on the screen walking around because you're timing out.


Actually you proved my point. If your hardware isn't the problem then your ISP might be. 60 frames of the same thing is an excellent example of latency.
60 fps is 60 fps. Latency may stop the characters from moving, but they'll still be breathing/blinking/standing at 60 fps. They are completely unrelated terms.



Edited, Sep 29th 2010 11:54pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#17 Sep 29 2010 at 11:05 PM Rating: Decent
**
924 posts
bsphil wrote:
If your benchmark scores on low and high are extremely close to each other, then yes your CPU is a bottleneck. I doubt it though.


I have this:
AMD Athlon 7750 Black Edition Dual Core (2.7GHz)
4GB Corsair XMS DDR2(800MHz)
500GB Seagate Barracude SATA 3Gb/s
XFX GTS 250 512MB

No matter what my resolution I get 10-12fps @ town/crystals and maybe upto 55 on the boat :)
My Scores:
Low: 2100
High: 1857

I know its my CPU /wrists/ I plan on getting the i5-760 or 950(depending on which special is going on for Intel's retail edge this Christmas). 4GB 1333 ram and a Asus 5850.

So based on previous posts I should be sitting around 60? :D
____________________________
http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/story.html?story=18309
Quote:
Like Final Fantasy XI, the game specs will be extremely high for the time, but in about 5 years, an average machine can run it on max settings with little to no issues. Tanaka also expressed interest in making a benchmark program available.

FilthMcNasty wrote:
I endorse this thread.
#18 Sep 29 2010 at 11:09 PM Rating: Decent
14 posts
The funny thing is that sometimes i would even get 40FPS and the game runs silky smooth even with a few people. But when it gets to a large crowd it drops. This happened after my game crashed though.

If i recall this happened in FFXI even with the top hardware and that game was locked to strangely 29FPS and not 30.
#19 Sep 29 2010 at 11:13 PM Rating: Decent
**
924 posts
It was locked at that, because the PS2 and TV's at the time as far as I know couldn't render beyond that anyway :) It was also a crappy port to PC >.> I don't know how anyone played it at decent settings on the average gaming computer in the early years :P
____________________________
http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/story.html?story=18309
Quote:
Like Final Fantasy XI, the game specs will be extremely high for the time, but in about 5 years, an average machine can run it on max settings with little to no issues. Tanaka also expressed interest in making a benchmark program available.

FilthMcNasty wrote:
I endorse this thread.
#20 Sep 29 2010 at 11:19 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
135 posts
On Benchmark:
Low:3100
High:1100

Q6700 (Quad core 2.67)
Radeon 4850
4 Gigs ram (only 800Mhz - was thinking of upgrading but **** DDR2 is not worth the $)

I get anywhere from 15-29ish FPS in a town in windowed mode 1280x768 with everything on high and 4xAA and in the wilderness I get 30+ usually

On full screen at 1920x1080 with everything on low (and aa off) I get about the same FPS

Meh, ordered a 5870 - Will let you know how it works out for me
#21 Sep 29 2010 at 11:26 PM Rating: Good
**
472 posts
OK so prove that FPS has nothing to do with your connection. Log into FFXIV and look at a complicated landscape that has no real game players in front of you.

Next look at players around you. Why did your framerate decrease?

Now reread what I stated. Both of you stretched my statements.

Let me restate: "60 frames of the same thing is an excellent example of latency." How can you misinterpret this?

If you can't get a reliable connection with the game servers, guess what, you will have latency and it won't matter what FRAPS tells you.


Edited, Sep 30th 2010 1:30am by Parsalyn
#22 Sep 29 2010 at 11:38 PM Rating: Decent
14 posts
Alright one more thing i forgot to add. I do have 3 gigs of ram but thats because im still on windows xp 32 bit.

Honestly i think this is probably the worst optimized game next to crysis and the fact that FFXIV's graphics are not groundbreaking when compared to other games(for an MMO, imo it is) like Uncharted 2, Crysis, Killzone 2. Crysis has vastly superior graphics but runs almost the same as FFXIV. That only leads me to believe that FFXIV's optimization and coding is even poorer than Crysis.
#23 Sep 29 2010 at 11:51 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
135 posts
#24 Sep 29 2010 at 11:52 PM Rating: Decent
Party Pooper
*****
12,232 posts
zpanda wrote:
Quote:
Sapphire HD5870
AMD Phenom II 955 @ 3.2ghz
Running at 1920 x 1080



It's your CPU that's the bottleneck. FF XIV is unusually CPU intensive compared to most modern PC games. You basically got a great video card in a system that's keeping it from it's full potential.

I'm running on a Radeon HD5850 which is a little less then your HD5870 in terms of GPU power. My CPU is a Core I5 750 (Quad) @ 2.66 GHz .


What?

lol

The Phenom II 955 is a Quad core.

His > Yours. Ok, so that last part is because I hate Intel, but it IS a quad core

Edited, Sep 29th 2010 10:55pm by FlixEffect
____________________________
[sm]FFXI: Flix 75THF/RNG/NIN/WAR/MNK/DRK/SAM/DRG/BLM Retired: Sept 2009.
SW:TOR Maim (Assassin) Sai'kou (Sniper) GM: Ultimatum. Retired: When 1.2 failed miserably.
FFXIV: Flix Skyfall (Behemoth) 50BRD: River of Blood for dayzzzzzz


#25 Sep 30 2010 at 12:00 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
135 posts
FlixEffect wrote:
zpanda wrote:
Quote:
Sapphire HD5870
AMD Phenom II 955 @ 3.2ghz
Running at 1920 x 1080



It's your CPU that's the bottleneck. FF XIV is unusually CPU intensive compared to most modern PC games. You basically got a great video card in a system that's keeping it from it's full potential.

I'm running on a Radeon HD5850 which is a little less then your HD5870 in terms of GPU power. My CPU is a Core I5 750 (Quad) @ 2.66 GHz .


What?

lol

The Phenom II 955 is a Quad core.

His > Yours. Ok, so that last part is because I hate Intel, but it IS a quad core

Edited, Sep 29th 2010 10:55pm by FlixEffect


Where did he say it wasn't a quad core? he just said his was a better CPU - which it is
#26 Sep 30 2010 at 1:14 AM Rating: Good
*
155 posts
Er.... win xp 32 bit with that system? Get a new OS that can properly utilise your hardware.
____________________________
In this life you are nothing without someone else to think so.

#27 Sep 30 2010 at 1:57 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
315 posts
I get 30 FPS in cities and 60 in field. have a i7 860 quad core (runs the game at 20%) and a crappy radeon HD 4850 :D

running at 1440x900 with every thing at max except ambient occlusion. before i updated my cpu (had an old dual core) the game got 10-15 fps and maybe 20 in the fields with the same graphic card on lower settings.. The game is really cpu intensive but can be managed with a crappy GPU by just adjusting settings.

____________________________
FFXI 2003-2007: Elaron ~Phoenix
FFXIV 2010-> : Gus Morgan ~Wutai

#28 Sep 30 2010 at 4:07 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
421 posts
Kadesh3000 wrote:
Ok my important sysmtem specs are listed below.
Sapphire HD5870
AMD Phenom II 955 @ 3.2ghz
Running at 1920 x 1080

I am getting 20-25 fps in big areas that there are no crowds and the moment theres a large crowd it dramatically drops. Any help would be appreciated :)


maybe you should invest in some good cooling and overclock it to 3.8ghz, or just clock it to 3.6 as is with no voltage adjustments so heat won't change.
____________________________

#29 Sep 30 2010 at 7:15 AM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
Elionara wrote:
It was locked at that, because the PS2 and TV's at the time as far as I know couldn't render beyond that anyway :) It was also a crappy port to PC >.> I don't know how anyone played it at decent settings on the average gaming computer in the early years :P


The PS2 version actually ran at 60 FPS. It ran in interlaced mode, but interlaced video, contrary to popular opinion, isn't actually 30 FPS video with each frame split over two fields - it's actually 60 FPS with half of each frame discarded. This is why if you move the camera quickly on FFXI PS2 version you get combing artifacts.

And the PS2 actually supports refresh rates as high as 85 Hz, but to do that it needs to be set to a VESA graphics mode and connected to a PC monitor, which, to my knowledge, no games actually support.
#30 Sep 30 2010 at 7:23 AM Rating: Good
I use the same chip, overclocked to 3.5ghz with a sapphire 5770. I run at 1280x720 and in town and at camps I get 25-30 fps, outside of congested areas I get 45-60 fps. I'm on the 10.7 drivers. I also am using Windows 7 64bit with 4GB of 1333 ram. If you're on XP, my bet is that is a big part of the issue.

Edit:

I use the following settings:

Depth of Field
Buffer: Resolution
Textures: High/Highest
Shadows: Standard

Everything else is default settings.

Edited, Sep 30th 2010 11:26am by Edalya
____________________________
FFXI: Edalya, Valefor Server 99WAR/99PLD/99DNC/75DRG (Retired)
FFXIV: Edalya Evenstar, Excalibur Server 46DRG
#31 Sep 30 2010 at 8:02 AM Rating: Decent
9 posts
On my i7-920, ati 5850 system, running at 1920x1200 or 1680x1050 with the buffer size set to "resolution" makes the game look great, but at around 10-15fps with laggy controls. Switching the buffer size to "three quarters" makes it feel like 60fps and very responsive. You may want to try that. If we're lucky, perhaps SE will improve the performance in a patch next year so that higher buffer sizes will be playable.
#32 Sep 30 2010 at 6:37 PM Rating: Decent
14 posts
Alright, but you're running an overclocked CPU(same model right) and running the game at 1280 x 720. Im running it at stock speed but at a full HD resolution 1920 x 1080.

It MAY be the OS but im not upgrading too soon. Hopefully i do it soon enough to see if it does make a difference or not.
#33 Sep 30 2010 at 7:03 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Brandson2 wrote:
feel like 60fps
Smiley: dubious

For what it's worth, I have a less powerful system than you and I'm able to run the game better at 1920x1080, so I'd expect that there's just some explicit problem with your system (and the OP's), because it's definitely not uniform.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#34 Oct 01 2010 at 6:08 PM Rating: Decent
14 posts
bsphil wrote:
Brandson2 wrote:
feel like 60fps
Smiley: dubious

For what it's worth, I have a less powerful system than you and I'm able to run the game better at 1920x1080, so I'd expect that there's just some explicit problem with your system (and the OP's), because it's definitely not uniform.


What kind of problems exactly?
#35 Oct 01 2010 at 7:24 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
421 posts
Kadesh, if you're using XP you might need to get the amd cpu driver for XP, there was a problem with clock syncing when the phenom's were realeased with XP.

it might be part of your problem, I have that same processor, its clocked at 3.8ghz, but you can get yours to 3.6 on stock voltage just bumping the multiplier up in the bios, just make sure you manually set your voltage to 1.35.

I get 60 fps out in the open areas using only one of my 5770's so I have a feeling it might be XP thats is your problem. try the driver/optimizer and see if it helps out. you have a great card and a good processor, you should be fine.
____________________________

#36 Oct 05 2010 at 2:25 AM Rating: Decent
1 post
Sorry to bumb the thread, but I googled my problem and found this thread.

AMD Phenom II X4 965 (stock 3.4, overclocked to 3.9GHz)
ATI HD5870 (Catalyst 10.9, cleanly installed... no positive difference from 10.8)
8GB DDR3-1333 ram

I got the same problem as Kadesh3000. I have from 19-35 FPS depending on where and how many there is. I get the same FPS whether I'm on highest or lowest settings and resolutions.
In the FFXIV Benchmark I get about 4700 Points on both high and low setting. It really seems like a CPU bottleneck, but as I have had no problems in other Benchmarks and games, and the overclock of my CPU didn't seem to help, and as there seem to be people with similar CPU and card with no problems... I don't know!? anyone?
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 12 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (12)