Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt
...What i'm trying to say is, i'd rather have a steady 40 FPS than 60 FPS that fluctuates down to the mid 20s at times. It's the same reason many demanding flight sims have been using FPS limiters in the past (FSX is a notable example), if the sim knows it will need to render less frames for a given time it's easier to keep ahead of the curve and render them in time, instead of giving you 50 FPS when looking over sea and then dropping to 20 FPS when you look back towards land.
I can't really know if 5FPS is something that should push you over the edge because i don't know your starting average FPS. If you're getting 40-50 FPS then it's a trivial matter, if you're getting 25-30 FPS then losing 5 FPS can be an issue.
I also don't know what kind of settings you are running but i'll go out on a limb here and suggest the easiest performance fix available.
The best advice i can offer you is to lower your texture size in the graphics options. It's the setting with the highest impact (along with SSAO) in terms of FPS and to be honest with you, dropping it less than two notches results in minimal, almost imperceptible quality loss. Original size textures are just that, the original, unscaled, unoptimized, raw textures, they use up tons of VRAM.
Try this and tell me if it helps, just drop your texture size a notch and you might not have to lower anything else.
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great post, thanks. It prompted me to try settings I've so long left switched off and ignored. Taking your advice I have lowered textures to medium and have discovered that I can run the beta patch with everything else at maximum including SSAO at an acceptable frame rate and it looks (and sounds) fantastic. It runs with textures left on original but is choppy.
Sorry there's no proof or scientific information to back this up, I will try and remedy this in case it provides some incentive for people to pick up this beautiful simulation.
Thanks again