292 replies to this topic

[Vexx]

Intel i2500k @ 3.3GHz, HD7850, 8GB DDR3 1600MHz, everything maxed at 1920x1080 and I haven't had it drop below 50 FPS even in large WvW fights since optimisation happened around BWE3.

[Lycan89]

my performance of this game has always been top quality I've never experienced any FPS or graphical issues and my settings are set to high, here is my pc spec's :
CPU - amd phenom 2.8ghz 6 core
GPU - GTX 560 1gb
memory - 12gb ram DDR2

[Shock_Treatment]

I have a pretty beast computer but yeah... 60 fps everywhere 50ish in larger WvWvW battles.  1920x1080 set to high quality.

[amasokin]

SSD, 580 GTX and i7. Ultra, no supersampling, 2560x1600. I DON'T have constant 60 FPS but it is totally playable. I have a steady 60 FPS when not too much is happening on screen, but in big WvWvW fights I have severe FPS drops, sometimes to 25-30 FPS. It's much better than in previous BWEs though.

Hope they'll be able to optimize it a bit more. From what I've seen even really recent games don't handle too well 2560x1600.

Edited by amasokin, 21 August 2012 - 11:54 AM.

[Milennin]

I run Guild Wars 2 pretty well at highest settings with a mid+ range PC.
But performance drops a lot with lots of people on the screen.

Edited by Milennin, 21 August 2012 - 11:55 AM.

[StaalDK]

Using an I5-3570k OC'ed to 4.5ghz, 8GB Ram, 560 TI, 1920x1200 and getting around 60FPS on highest settings, No SSD here.
I am quite happy with the outcome, I have not tried it in WvW yet, mainly because I always get too impatient with the long queue's.

Edited by StaalDK, 21 August 2012 - 11:57 AM.

[Sueisfine]

Splice, on 21 August 2012 - 11:16 AM, said:

Your problem is likely due to poor optimization (so you should be fine for launch) or CPU, whereas graphics cards are the most important in other games mmos also guzzle CPU so if it's not up to date then you may get issues.
I myself can run it fine on max spare a few things that I just don't feel are unnecessary like vertical sync.

Please don't take my comment as paternalizing or anything like that but I just wanted to give a heads-up and mention that having vertical sync ON is always a good idea because:

1) it is in fact a quality setting (it eliminates the screen tearing effect)
and
2) it also keeps your card from overheating in certain cases, mostly when you have a fast machine that is able to pump 80 or 100fps in certain areas of the game (alone looking at a wall/floor for example).  If you have a normal 60hz screen, having the card produce 100 frames in one second will only add to heat since only 60 frames are gonna be displayed in that time anyway.  And I noticed several threads where people are seeing considerably high temperatures on their cards while playing so it could be useful to keep this in mind.

just my 2 cents

[Eqo]

My machine is 3 years old and it performs well with everything on medium and a few options on max. When I put everything to max I can still play, but I get far fewer FPS.

[esteray13]

StaalDK, on 21 August 2012 - 11:57 AM, said:

Using an I5-3570k OC'ed to 4.5ghz, 8GB Ram, 560 TI, 1920x1200 and getting around 60FPS on highest settings, No SSD here.
I am quite happy with the outcome, I have not tried it in WvW yet, mainly because I always get too impatient with the long queue's.

is that 60fps with or without vsync? that pc sounds like it should get  higher is all

[rrkrueck]

Mine runs it just fine. However, I have dual AMD Radeon 6800 series graphics card, and a quad-core AMD Phenom II with 8 gigs of ram on a 64 bit OS.

I just got the second vid card, one thing I did notice was that with a Radeon, the game was pushing it hard and overheating it (on max graphics). So I bought a second one to balance the load.

[Red_Falcon]

I play on ultra but honestly there isn't so much difference than playing on medium with high textures.

[The Comfy Chair]

No-one in the world can get a constant 60fps minimum in GW2 in large scale WvW battles (talking 100+ people) in the current state of the game that we've had access too (final build is potentially another matter...). But, considering the kind of rendering going on, i'm not marking the game down too much on it.

Most of the time you'd be looking at 40-45fps with an overclocked i5-2500K and a good GPU alongside it in larger PvE fights Normal PvE is generally ok to get up to 60+ if a very, very powerful CPU (again, talking OC'd i5-2500Ks/i5-3570Ks here) is there to back up a GPU like a gtx560 Ti/HD5870 and you don't use supersampling. If you're using supersampling, it's either gtx670/hd7950/hd7970/gtx680 and dual card varients or bust for 60fps. No, the gtx660 Ti doesn't join that club of cards due to memory bandwidth limitations. If the final game uses a more optimized version of SS, the gtx660 Ti will struggle.

I'm not particularly worried about it though, the game will run better when we get to play using the final version of the engine at launch.

There have been plenty of performance threads from people who know how the benchmark down in tech support, which people will find far more useful than hand waving 'oh, i get 80fps minimum or so' (which is a case of: sure, if you stand in a corner the entire game).

Edited by The Comfy Chair, 21 August 2012 - 12:18 PM.

[Adam2190]

My performance is poor just now on a GTX 570 and i5 2500K but I expect the next Nvidia GPU drivers to fix that.

Edited by Adam2190, 21 August 2012 - 12:07 PM.

[kyletolley]

I run max without supersampling and get no frame rate drop. Got an i5 2500k @ 4.5 and a radeon 6870 hd.

[Nanfoodle]

I have a ATI HD 5770. Its an older card but still has good specs. My PC has a i7: 6 core 2.4 and 8 gig of ram. I can run the game on max settings and its smooth as butter. Even in sPvP I dont have a problem.

Edited by Nanfoodle, 21 August 2012 - 12:08 PM.

[dss_live]

The Comfy Chair, on 21 August 2012 - 12:06 PM, said:

No-one in the world can get a constant 60fps minimum in GW2 in large scale WvW battles (talking 100+ people) in the current state of the game that we'be had access too (final build is another matter...). But, considering the kind of rendering going on, i'm not marking the game down too much on it.

Most of the time you'd be looking at 40-45fps with an overclocked i5-2500K and a good GPU alongside it in larger PvE fights

I'm not particularly worried about it though, the game will run better when we get to play using the final version of the engine at launch.

I didn't really check my fps, but i didn't notice a single bit of lag in massive fights and liek i said earlier my cpu is an i5-2400 (not overclocked, no idea what that is lol, but i know it's not ) and an HD6670

[Andicus]

1) Nvidia users can supposedly get a nice boost from the 304.xx beta drivers
2) Nvidia users are rumoured to be getting a shiney new WHQL driver with GW2 specific stuff very soon

3) Optimisation seems to be lacking particularly lacking with regard to player models.
I investigated this a bit with a performance monitor in the last stress test and found that at a keep seige I was getting 16fps, BUT, GPU utilisation was only 20%, 3 CPU cores were only at ~33% and one CPU core was at 80+%
That implies that something to do with player models is not optimised as well as it should be yet.

Still, I have no intention of panicing until we are playing the release build with a specific driver

EDIT:  Optimisation outside of player models and WvW zones seems much better.  Spell effects and/or pve zones are fairly smooth.

Edited by Andicus, 21 August 2012 - 12:10 PM.

[StaalDK]

esteray13, on 21 August 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

is that 60fps with or without vsync? that pc sounds like it should get  higher is all

Using Vsync.
But I only check the fps now and then in the options screen, tonight I will try and keep FPS on, also I am still using the Nvidia 304.79 drivers, so that should hinder my performance a bit as well as far as I know.

[RamzaBehoulve]

Enforcer, on 21 August 2012 - 11:43 AM, said:

before everyone else post that the dont have a single prob with their so called not so high end rig, please be reminded that most of the people
that have problem here are playing on  ultra with resolution of 1080p the least. so dont give me the god damn my low end rig can play gw2
fine. it doesnt help at all.

@op, might wanna wait for full release optimization and the new drivers that had being said to be able to boost your fps while playing gw2.

I've got a medium rig, 3.5 Ghz 6 cores AMD with a GTX 460. I get 60+ all the time with shadows on low because I don't care about them.

The problem is not only from the game, but the newest hardware drivers being completely off. Even though I'm not a 500+ GTX user, even for me the 304.x+ beta drivers boosted FPS in a lot of beta games I'm playing such as Firefall.

Edited by RamzaBehoulve, 21 August 2012 - 12:15 PM.

[dss_live]

esteray13, on 21 August 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

is that 60fps with or without vsync? that pc sounds like it should get  higher is all

I always wondered, what does vsync really do?

[The Comfy Chair]

dss_live, on 21 August 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

I didn't really check my fps, but i didn't notice a single bit of lag in massive fights and liek i said earlier my cpu is an i5-2400 (not overclocked, no idea what that is lol, but i know it's not ) and an HD6670

Which is why we can't use hand wavey 'it seemed ok' anecdotal evidence for this kind of thing I know for a fact i wouldn't stand the kind of performance you would have been getting as a main gaming PC. You'll have been playing at a lower resolution too i assume though, which would have helped performance a little.

So raw, hard data is what is required. Because different people have different standards, so they need to know the raw data to see what lives up to those standards

dss_live, on 21 August 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

I always wondered, what does vsync really do?

In laymans terms, it waits until the screen is ready to render the image before it sends it the image. It prevents 'tearing' where two images are on screen at once, normally 'chopped' about half way down.

Older versions of VSync lock the framerate to multiples/factors of the refresh rate of the screen, so for most users it was 15/30/60/120fps, obviously this wans't popular as jumping from 30-60 is quite annoying! As is only having 30fps when you could have 59fps. More recent versions don't lock to framerates*

*Except, of course, the refresh of the screen, because it wont let the GPU render 'useless' frames.

Edited by The Comfy Chair, 21 August 2012 - 12:16 PM.

[Bahadur]

dss_live, on 21 August 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

I always wondered, what does vsync really do?

it caps your fps to the same as your monitors refresh rate.

if your monitor is 60hhz, then vsync will put fps to 60. It's just a clumsy (and relatively simple) way of eliminating screen tearing (where there are more frames per monitor refresh rate)

Anyway for performance. I'm running with a:
cpu - I5-3570k turbo'd to 4.2Ghz
gpu - Radeon HD 6870 OC
mobo - asus p8z77 v-lx

everything maxed out (except supersampling, which is left at default), and i am getting around 80 fps, even in places like divinity's reach, however in large wvw battles, it will drop to around the mid 40s-50

Edited by Bahadur, 21 August 2012 - 12:18 PM.

[Sunzzofman]

dss_live, on 21 August 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

I always wondered, what does vsync really do?

vsync basicly stops your fps going over your refresh rate and stops tearing etc like on walls when u move they sometimes tear.

[Samhax]

I've no problems at all. Got at least 70+ fps with everything maxed in zergs. I'm using a Gtx 690 in Quad SLI and an i7 3770 @4,5ghz

[Erenod]

i have no problems at all too, tri-sli 580 gtx hydro copper. 60-70 fps even in zergz.

[Azhrarn]

My 3-year old PC is doing fine with the game maxed at 1920x1200 with AA off (FXAA is far from efficient, and at that res, mostly pointless).

Sure it's not a steady 60 FPS, instead it's 40-60 usually, with dips to around 30 when things get really busy, but that's perfectly playable for me.

[The Comfy Chair]

Samhax, on 21 August 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

I've no problems at all. Got at least 70+ fps with everything maxed in zergs. I'm using a Gtx 690 in Quad SLI and an i7 3770 @4,5ghz

Erenod, on 21 August 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

i have no problems at all too, tri-sli 580 gtx hydro copper. 60-70 fps even in zergz.

I'm entirely unsurprised The game is a bit steep on systems in beta, but you can definitely overcome it by sheer brute force,

[dss_live]

The Comfy Chair, on 21 August 2012 - 12:13 PM, said:

Which is why we can't use hand wavey 'it seemed ok' anecdotal evidence for this kind of thing I know for a fact i wouldn't stand the kind of performance you would have been getting as a main gaming PC. You'll have been playing at a lower resolution too i assume though, which would have helped performance a little.

So raw, hard data is what is required. Because different people have different standards, so they need to know the raw data to see what lives up to those standards

but.. but.. I like handwaving

more seriously, i played on a 1080x1920 resolution . But yea, i have no hard data ^^ i can barely do more than use google and turn my pc off and on

[The Comfy Chair]

dss_live, on 21 August 2012 - 12:20 PM, said:

but.. but.. I like handwaving

more seriously, i played on a 1080x1920 resolution . But yea, i have no hard data ^^ i can barely do more than use google and turn my pc off and on

*waves*

I wouldn't worry too much, if you're happy with how the game is performing, it's all good. You'll be in for a nice surprise at launch anyway hopefully when performance is better.

[Eijolend]

I always wonder about the people complaining, that they can get only around 40 FPS in a large fight. It's not like 40 FPS is bad - I'd say that's pretty good, not breathtakingly great, but still good. Hell, I'd say it's a great feat, they managed to optimize the system so I still got around 30 FPS with all the players spamming flashy animations in Divinity's Reach at the end of the last stress test. To me that sounds like an awesome thing to pull off and not something to panic about, because some number is below 90 but the game still plays fluently.
-----------------------------
With my system I had no problems whatsoever, getting 90+ FPS (both on middle and highest setting) alone out in the PvE zones and still very fluent in sPvP. I didn't try WvW since BWE1 but I noticed no particularly bad performance then.

Intel i7-2600 3.4 GHz
16 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6900