80% instead of 99% indoor. I don't doubt it can go even lower.
The game is not a mess, far from it, but it requires more grunt than necessary for what it looks like.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Dying Light PC Performance Thread
- Thread starter batman2million
- Start date
80% instead of 99% indoor. I don't doubt it can go even lower.
The game is not a mess, far from it, but it requires more grunt than necessary for what it looks like.
I would love to report on the performance of this game on my PC, but I should have known better. This game still has the same issues as Dead Island and Call of Juarez: Gunslinger. If your keyboard is set to any language different from your OS, all the text in the menus disappear:
I have my OS set to English but my keyboard to Spanish, so, welp. I could try to fix it, but it would require changing the settings back and forth every time I want to play the game.
My OS Language is set to English, my keyboard is set to Spanish and I recently played Dead Island and didn't face this issue.
You made me curious about it tho, will report tonight on dying light's behaviour.
Played it for roughly 3 hours now, maxed out @ 1440p.
The game is optimized for shit.
I have a i7 4770k @ 4.2GHz, 16GB DDR3 2133MHz, GTX Titan SC.
At this resolution at least there are areas that run decent and some that are 30ish. I don't think I ever get close to 60fps.
Even when I turned down the draw distance to 50% (can't tell because it's just a shitty slider), the frames don't improve for much, if anything at all - turned off AA, and even tried it for a moment without motion blur because it looks like someone put vaseline on the rim of the monitor - nothing helped.
Chalk one up for another poor port.
I understand I don't have a GTX 980 and I'm playing at a resolution that is not the norm (1440p), but to barely hit 30ish fps overall is just ridiculous, and the random slow downs only make it worse.
The game is optimized for shit.
I have a i7 4770k @ 4.2GHz, 16GB DDR3 2133MHz, GTX Titan SC.
At this resolution at least there are areas that run decent and some that are 30ish. I don't think I ever get close to 60fps.
Even when I turned down the draw distance to 50% (can't tell because it's just a shitty slider), the frames don't improve for much, if anything at all - turned off AA, and even tried it for a moment without motion blur because it looks like someone put vaseline on the rim of the monitor - nothing helped.
Chalk one up for another poor port.
I understand I don't have a GTX 980 and I'm playing at a resolution that is not the norm (1440p), but to barely hit 30ish fps overall is just ridiculous, and the random slow downs only make it worse.
Very strange. Maybe the game is abnormally sensitive to resolution. You do have the latest drivers optimized for the game ?
Anyway, I'm not mad at my performance but something is clearly wrong with this game.
Of course, latest drivers, got them when they came out Thursday.
Someone posted this on the steam forums, reminds me of unity, had a good chuckle.
4770K @ 4.4
780ti sc @ 1215
1080p everything max except medium shadows, v-sync in drivers
view distance around 60%
60fps with drops, drops everywhere - even when gpu usage is at like 45% and under max vram in some spots.
Game can look good but the lack of stability is a massive bummer.
780ti sc @ 1215
1080p everything max except medium shadows, v-sync in drivers
view distance around 60%
60fps with drops, drops everywhere - even when gpu usage is at like 45% and under max vram in some spots.
Game can look good but the lack of stability is a massive bummer.
Of course, latest drivers, got them when they came out Thursday.
Someone posted this on the steam forums, reminds me of unity, had a good chuckle.
Yeah I was playing coop earlier and one of the chicks hanging in the hub was smoking an invisible cigarette lol
I would say comparing this to Unity is far overblowing the issues though. The game is totally playable as is at launch, even with some lulzy texture glitches and some spotty performance seemingly due to a mutlithreading bug...whereas unity was totally broken for a lot of people for like a month+ after launch.
If they can get the multithreading working properly I think this end up being a good version of the game.
I would love to report on the performance of this game on my PC, but I should have known better. This game still has the same issues as Dead Island and Call of Juarez: Gunslinger. If your keyboard is set to any language different from your OS, all the text in the menus disappear:
I have my OS set to English but my keyboard to Spanish, so, welp. I could try to fix it, but it would require changing the settings back and forth every time I want to play the game.
does it help to set up two languages you can switch with alt-shift?
dampflokfreund
Banned
Additional Notes: Laptop versions of graphics cards may work but are NOT officially supported.
Is this becomming a bad trend? I thought only Ubisoft games are not supporting laptop cards..
Is this becomming a bad trend? I thought only Ubisoft games are not supporting laptop cards..
Snapshot King
Member
Yeah, somethings different. I played the preview build and performance was way better than this. It'd drop to the mid 40s when I was hauling ass through new areas with huge vistas behind it but now it's constantly jumping between 30 and 60.
I think something that they did recently broke multicore support, because at the moment that seems to be the bottleneck for everyone.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Anyone tried on SLI GTX 780s?
The game is all about the draw distance. I have the slider all the way down, that way I get 60 in some areas, 50-60 in most areas and 45+ when I look at some bigger scenes.
No other graphic options does anything, it's all the draw distance cause it is CPU bound, your GPU basically means nothing in this game if you have a decent one.
I run on an i5-2500k @4.6ghz and a GTX 970.
edit: To people talking about multicore support, just like Nvidia said, the game uses Core 1 at 95%-100% all the time and the others are used between 20-30%
No other graphic options does anything, it's all the draw distance cause it is CPU bound, your GPU basically means nothing in this game if you have a decent one.
I run on an i5-2500k @4.6ghz and a GTX 970.
edit: To people talking about multicore support, just like Nvidia said, the game uses Core 1 at 95%-100% all the time and the others are used between 20-30%
Your GPU has no meaning in this game once it is at a certain level.
It's CPU bound with all the objects and stuff in the draw distance.
Try lowering draw distance all the way down, it's what I did and it gives you enough frames to make the game properly playable.
icecold1983
Member
what are the clocks on your 970 at?
Every core needs some time.... on their own.Meh, thought it was all good since I was getting 60fps just fine in the tower but then I left the area and shit dipped to 40~60... unpleasant. Changing graphics options doesn't do much for performance either, very Ubisoft-esque and as such I guess it's the CPU 
4570 non-K / 970 / 16GB btw
But what I played was fun, hope it gets a few patches. Still have to finish FC4 anyway.
4570 non-K / 970 / 16GB btw
But what I played was fun, hope it gets a few patches. Still have to finish FC4 anyway.
martino
Member
-MD-
Member
970/3570k.
Performance isn't amazing but it's playable, I mostly get 50-60fps with everything on high (draw distance low) outside but sometimes it'll dip to ~40-45.
The more annoying problem is the stutter, the game mini-freezes frequently for me. Also holy shit the prologue is long.
Performance isn't amazing but it's playable, I mostly get 50-60fps with everything on high (draw distance low) outside but sometimes it'll dip to ~40-45.
The more annoying problem is the stutter, the game mini-freezes frequently for me. Also holy shit the prologue is long.
-MD-
Member
It's not a constant stutter it just happens fairly frequently. I picked up my dualshock 4 a couple times and didn't experience it as much or at all.
derExperte
Member
Going by the videos extremely low. And it still stutters and tears like a mofo in busy scenes.
Not exactly sure but going by the giantbomb quicklook it look like it's on the low side.
"Good." Did not like the performance I got with 50% view distance on max using a 970 and a 2500k@4.3GHz. Wonder how much the performance varies between newer CPUs.
With these settings @ 1080p it drops to ~40 looking in certain directions down at street level.
| Praxis |
Banned
Glad I didn't preorder this now. Steam sale ahoy!
martino
Member
I will but with one/two 7870XT
DualReaver
Banned
GTX 970
i5-4570
12 gigs of ram
50-60fps
All graphics settings maxed except motion blur which is turned off at 1920x1080. V-sync is also off.
i5-4570
12 gigs of ram
50-60fps
All graphics settings maxed except motion blur which is turned off at 1920x1080. V-sync is also off.
Performance dips considerably once you're outside on the ground.
martino
Member
Outdoor orindoor / tutorial zone...wait to be outdoor if first.
And on street level?
DarkArterialGore
Member
Oh look another Nvidia Gameworks title that runs like hot garbage and doesn't even look good.
I'm really worried about Witcher 3 now.
I'm really worried about Witcher 3 now.
icecold1983
Member
If you get a chance, see how high you can push the res before becoming gpu limited outdoors
Reckless Onion
Member
putting shadows on medium gives me a huge performance boost
nobodyshero
Banned
I pulled the trigger on that $20 for ps4 glitch at gamespots. Fuck this
Dictator93
Member
The shadows at Ultra or whatever are 4096X4096. It is unsurprising that they do not run that well.
I lowered the shadows and indeed it have me quite a boost even in outdoor...
DualReaver
Banned
Ouch, didn't expect the hit to be so severe. Around 50-60fps outside.
I have tried all settings in the outdoors.
The only thing that makes any tangible difference for my game is the draw distance.