• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Witcher 2: Performance Thread [Enhanced Edition Patch - New content & 100+ fixes]

Truant

Member
Anyone have an SLI profile I can use? I was getting 60fps in one area, but the rest of the game is 20-35, and I'm on a GTX295. Tips?
 
Truant said:
Anyone have an SLI profile I can use? I was getting 60fps in one area, but the rest of the game is 20-35, and I'm on a GTX295. Tips?

The latest beta drivers are supposed to download the profile automatically.
 
Great. My GTX 470 is barely managing to stay above 30. Time to run out and buy a 580 or something.

Also resolution seems to be having the bigest impact on my FPS. Changing between ultra/high/medium barely effects the frame rate. But if I drop it down from 1080 to 720 it jumps to 80fps.
 

Salaadin

Member
Lostconfused said:
Great. My GTX 470 is barely managing to stay above 30. Time to run out and buy a 580 or something.

Also resolution seems to be having the bigest impact on my FPS. Changing between ultra/high/medium barely effects the frame rate. But if I drop it down from 1080 to 720 it jumps to 80fps.

Have you tried tweaking individual settings yet? Disabling ubersampling, DoF, and SSAO seem to be the most popular options to get rid of for performance gains.
 

Truant

Member
boundedseven said:
The latest beta drivers are supposed to download the profile automatically.

Yeah, but it didn't make any difference. Still 30-ish all the time. Had the same problem with Crysis 2, and some MSI guy made a custom SLI profile for some forum users, and that skyrocketed my FPS.
 
I get horrid framerates no matter what. Always about 25-30. There's something wrong.

Playing at 1680x1050, as said i5 750, gtx480, 4gb ram.

I just tried disabling all DoF, SSAO, ubersampling, and motion blur. Still 25-30. No v-sync.

If that's how it runs, I'll just stick with ultra.
 

Salaadin

Member
metareferential said:
I get horrid framerates no matter what. Always about 25-30. There's something wrong.

Playing at 1680x1050, as said i5 750, gtx480, 4gb ram.

I just tried disabling all DoF, SSAO, ubersampling, and motion blur. Still 25-30. No v-sync.

If that's how it runs, I'll just stick with ultra.

Using the latest Nvidia beta drivers?
http://www.geforce.com/#/News/articles/r275-driver

Some people are getting performance gains with them. Im ATI so I wouldnt know.
 

JohngPR

Member
cleveridea said:
versus what? plus how much worse does it look without SSAO?

Sorry, my results were in the 1st post.

:p

I auto detected and had most settings on high. I just took those and turned off SSAO and motion blur and got a 5 FPS bump.

It doesn't look that much worse really. SSAO just adds extra lighting and shadows, but the difference isn't profound.
 

MrOogieBoogie

BioShock Infinite is like playing some homeless guy's vivid imagination
metareferential said:
I get horrid framerates no matter what. Always about 25-30. There's something wrong.

Playing at 1680x1050, as said i5 750, gtx480, 4gb ram.

I just tried disabling all DoF, SSAO, ubersampling, and motion blur. Still 25-30. No v-sync.

If that's how it runs, I'll just stick with ultra.

Why is it that changing the video options seem to do NOTHING? I am consistently getting 15 fps no matter what I do.
 

TheExodu5

Banned
cleveridea said:
versus what? plus how much worse does it look without SSAO?

I often prefer my games without SSAO (like Risen). Too often, they apply far too much SSAO around characters, making it far less subtle than it should be. SSAO, when properly implemented, should make the scene seem more three dimensional by adding light occlusion (reliant on the fact that much of the light in an environment comes from ambient reflections, and not the light source itself).
 

TheExodu5

Banned
metareferential said:
I get horrid framerates no matter what. Always about 25-30. There's something wrong.

Playing at 1680x1050, as said i5 750, gtx480, 4gb ram.

I just tried disabling all DoF, SSAO, ubersampling, and motion blur. Still 25-30. No v-sync.

If that's how it runs, I'll just stick with ultra.

Does changing the resolution affect your framerate? If not, it might indicate a CPU bottleneck. And if so, that is a scary prospect, considering that you're running a fairly fast quad core.
 

longdi

Banned
this game does not use too much cpu, less than 20% usage on 4 cores with i7 at 3.8ghz.

i prefer the SSAO look but AMD gpu drops tons of fps with it on. :(

playing with 360 controller works great, need to have rumble patched in, also need a real 1920x1200 patch.

i missed the pulled back camera of TW1.
 
TheExodu5 said:
Does changing the resolution affect your framerate? If not, it might indicate a CPU bottleneck. And if so, that is a scary prospect, considering that you're running a fairly fast quad core.
No. I have a first generation i5 as well. I can get 60 fps or above by turning all the graphical settings as low as they will go.

Edit: Some one convince me to not run out and buy a GTX580 right now.
 

Salaadin

Member
Gully State said:
What does texture memory budget and downscale texture factor do?

I dont know what texture memory budget does but I set it to max.
Downscale texture factor made my textures look like ass.
 

Locke562

Member
Lostconfused said:
Great. My GTX 470 is barely managing to stay above 30. Time to run out and buy a 580 or something.

Also resolution seems to be having the bigest impact on my FPS. Changing between ultra/high/medium barely effects the frame rate. But if I drop it down from 1080 to 720 it jumps to 80fps.
It's true! I'm able to run uber with my 9800GTM at 800x600 perfectly. :p
 

Easy_D

never left the stone age
Wake me up when someone with an E8500 finds settings that manage to keep it at 30 fps minimum. That or give me large amounts of money so I can upgrade :(

(I suck at tweaking and I have other things to do so I can't fiddle on my own)
 

kage

Member
Invert Gamepad Y Axis:

First of all, make sure you're editing the ini's in the Documents/Witcher 2/Config folder, NOT the game installation folder (this took me hours to figure out :<...)

Anyways, open the User.ini file under ...\Documents\Witcher 2\Config

check the KeyboardLayout= property, for most people it should be QWERTY. close the file without saving.

Assuming it is QWERTY, open the input_QWERTY.ini in the same folder, find the IK_Pad_RightAxisY=(GameKey="GI_AxisRightY",Value=1) and change the value to -1.

IK_Pad_RightAxisY=(GameKey="GI_AxisRightY",Value=-1)

Save and exit. I tried this and it worked for me.
 

mattiewheels

And then the LORD David Bowie saith to his Son, Jonny Depp: 'Go, and spread my image amongst the cosmos. For every living thing is in anguish and only the LIGHT shall give them reprieve.'
Brannon said:
Damn it, my Radeon 4850 HD just isn't going to be enough. I shall have to be patient for now.
My 4650 needs replacing now I guess :(
 
Personally, I can't tell much different between 1900 and 1600 resolutions (I know that is heresy in PC land), so i prefer to bump up all the effects and slighly lower the resolution.

Thus I ended up with everything cranked up all the way at the second tier resolution setting at a very stable framerate.

I am running the following:

2 Radeon 6870s Crossfired
Intell i7930 Processor overclocked to 3.0GHZ
6GB RAM
80GB Solid State Drive

Does anyone know when a patch will be out for the Crossfire Radeons? I know they aren't working right now.


I did find that completely lowering the mouse sensitivity settings to zero helps a lot with the controller settings.

However, I really don't understand the combat with the controller. I died in my first battle and it seems very odd. Any suggestions on what I should be doing? I get "A" for role and "X" for attack, but that is about all I understand at this point.
 
So I know the people who are playing have only been messing around with it for a few hours, but I'm at work and find myself fiending for some opinions. How is the inventory/skill system? Are the menus accessible enough with the controller? As a package, how does it seem to compare with the first game?
 

Easy_D

never left the stone age
Man, even on lowest settings the game dips massively in areas with a lot of NPCs. Guess I might as well uninstall the game and wait a few years until I can afford a proper CPU! I'm sad :(

C2D shouldn't even be mentioned in minimum spec, it's not acceptable. Blah.
I suppose I should wait until I can afford a new Mobo and a sandybridge, I guess :). Those should come down in price soon given there are new CPU offerings on the horizon.

longdi said:
how to see the fps?
I use Fraps.
 

Truant

Member
Definitive SLI issues here on my GTX295 using the latest beta drivers.

Setup 1:

Max settings @ 1080p - No Ubersampling

SLI: nVidia recommended multi-GPU
FPS: 25-35
GPU 1 Load: 56%
GPU 2 Load: 56%

Setup 2:

Max settings @ 1080p - No Ubersampling

SLI: Single GPU mode
FPS: 25-35
GPU 1 Load: 99%
GPU 2 Load: 0%

Seems that the SLI modes wont let the GPUs work efficiently. With the right SLI profile, Crysis 2 uses both GPUs at 90% +

I've tried both the Force Alternate Frame Rendering settings, 1 and 2. No difference.

I'm using the nVidia control panel to change the settings, MSI Afterburner to monitor GPU load, and FRAPS to monitor FPS.
 
Anyone with a ATI 4890 have frame rates? Will i get sub 30 fps at 1080p? I don't really care if i don't get 60 fps since this isn't a shooter.
 
Will this in any way run on my 8800 GT? I have 4 GB of RAM and an Intel Core Quad with 2.4 GHz (Q6600). I did see the graphic in the OT but I assume this is with graphics on Ultra.
 
MrOogieBoogie said:
Guys, this game is destroying my PC.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 5600+ @ 2.9 GHz
ATI HD Radeon 4670 1GB
4GB DDR2 667 RAM

The game auto-detects to low settings. I've fumbled with the resolution (max: 1680x1050), bringing as far down as 1280x800, but nothing seems to help. In fact, I think I was getting better frames when selecting medium settings over low.

So, based off my specs, what advanced graphics options should I stay completely clear from? I don't know what a lot of them mean, like texture downscaling, texture memory, etc. Right now I'm average 15 fps no matter what I do it seems.

Thoughts?

CPU limited, i'm having the same issue. Dual cores just don't cut it anymore.
 

Minsc

Gold Member
Technosteve said:
Anyone with a ATI 4890 have frame rates? Will i get sub 30 fps at 1080p? I don't really care if i don't get 60 fps since this isn't a shooter.

There's a couple people with 4870s, you could go by that and figure a slightly better result, but no concrete fps are reported by the people with the 4870s, just "decent" or "tolerable."
 

Minsc

Gold Member
snoopeasystreet said:
How big is the download for this bad boy?

Steam is ~16GB (bonus content bundled in)
GOG/D2D is ~9.5GB with bonus content available as separate downloads.
 

wwm0nkey

Member
Ok so did anyone else using a GTX 400 series card get a decent frame boost with the new beta drivers? Also disabling SSAO and motion blur help right? It says my reccomened is high but it still likes to have sub par FPS :/
 

Vlodril

Member
With

Quad core at 2.6
8 GB RAM
ATI 6950

I play on Ultra without ubersampling at 40-45 fps. More than good enough for me.

If only my g35 worked but no.. i ll have to use my surround but later on it will be a problem.
 

Easy_D

never left the stone age
Dual Core 3.16
HD5870 1gB
Low settings
23-70 FPS

Yeah, fuck you old dualcore. I'll wait until I have hardware that can do this game justice.
 
someone should force developers to use and test on dual core CPU, GTX 260's

This game is coming out for console at some point FFS, no reason to be such a bad performance on people's hardware.

having said that, I am hoping this is GOTY. I am installing to SSD, the only game to have that honor. Dont let me down W2!
 

Tain

Member
Sounds and looks like a genuine "PC first, worry about consoles later" release.

The best kind of release!
 

Echoplx

Member
cleveridea said:
someone should force developers to use and test on dual core CPU, GTX 260's

This game is coming out for console at some point FFS, no reason to be such a bad performance on people's hardware.

having said that, I am hoping this is GOTY. I am installing to SSD, the only game to have that honor. Dont let me down W2!

Yeah, at sub HD resolutions and running on graphics close to medium/low
 

Corky

Nine out of ten orphans can't tell the difference.
3chopl0x said:
Yeah, at sub HD resolutions and running on graphics close to medium/low

hey as long as it doesn't affect ( which it obviously won't since the pc version is out the gates ) the pc version then I'm all for console releases so more people can play it and more money goes to the devs.
 

MrOogieBoogie

BioShock Infinite is like playing some homeless guy's vivid imagination
fizzelopeguss said:
CPU limited, i'm having the same issue. Dual cores just don't cut it anymore.

Wow, really? Damn. So is there basically nothing I can to improve my performance besides buying a new CPU?
 

Corky

Nine out of ten orphans can't tell the difference.
MrOogieBoogie said:
Wow, really? Damn. So is there basically nothing I can to improve my performance besides buying a new CPU?

big juicy OC?
 

Truant

Member
Truant said:
Definitive SLI issues here on my GTX295 using the latest beta drivers.

Setup 1:

Max settings @ 1080p - No Ubersampling

SLI: nVidia recommended multi-GPU
FPS: 25-35
GPU 1 Load: 56%
GPU 2 Load: 56%

Setup 2:

Max settings @ 1080p - No Ubersampling

SLI: Single GPU mode
FPS: 25-35
GPU 1 Load: 99%
GPU 2 Load: 0%

Seems that the SLI modes wont let the GPUs work efficiently. With the right SLI profile, Crysis 2 uses both GPUs at 90% +

I've tried both the Force Alternate Frame Rendering settings, 1 and 2. No difference.

I'm using the nVidia control panel to change the settings, MSI Afterburner to monitor GPU load, and FRAPS to monitor FPS.

Did some more testing.

Turned off V-Sync and Tripple Buffering, the main menu runs at 2500 FPS and the load on both GPUs went up to 99%. The actual game still runs at 25-35 with loads at roughly 50%.

Something is definitely up.

Ugh.
 
Top Bottom