The drivers work for all cards as far back as the 8 series. The 38% figure with the 680 is only used because a) its the flagship card in the latest series b) it probably has the largest performance gains with the new drivers.
-
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.
Far Cry 3 PC performance thread
- Thread starter Salsa
- Start date
The drivers work for all cards as far back as the 8 series. The 38% figure with the 680 is only used because a) its the flagship card in the latest series b) it probably has the largest performance gains with the new drivers.
I would presume that a performance boost between 6% and 38% would be logical, but I have idea if their performance enhancing black magics operate.
That is fantastic news. I knew I played it smart when deciding to hold out on buying the game. I have a 680 and I'm looking forward to buying FC3 together with Bioshock Infinite sometime in the next couple months.
What driver did you have before, 310.70?
So I just put together my first capable gaming PC and even with my modest rig (i5 2500k stock, Radeon 7850 2gb on 1080p plasma) this game looks amazing to me. I started with the default settings and it looked and played great. Bumped it up to Ultra and it still ran great, but I was getting some pretty bad screen tearing. So new to this I don't even know what settings to be adjusting. Really enjoying it though.
I have a pretty unusual and serious problem, with Far Cry 3. After roughly 30 minutes of playing, the game will crash and my PC will restart at the same time.
My card is the Gigabyte Windforce GTX670 OC.
I have MSI Afterburner installed. Should i try underclocking and if so, what exactly should i change?
For the record. Absolutely everything in my PC is running at stock and I've checked the tempratures while playing the game and they're very low.
Thank in advance.
My card is the Gigabyte Windforce GTX670 OC.
I have MSI Afterburner installed. Should i try underclocking and if so, what exactly should i change?
For the record. Absolutely everything in my PC is running at stock and I've checked the tempratures while playing the game and they're very low.
Thank in advance.
evilernLeGG
Member
I have been trying ALL NIGHT to get this game to play correctly on my machine:
AMD 1090t @ 4GHz
16GB DDR3
AMD 5970 (crossfire on)
It runs at like, it runs OK 60% of the time, but when i look down from a mountain or from a tower or even random parts of the ground it starts stuttering and the audio starts getting a lot of static. Is there a fix for this, or is there a setting I'm overlooking. This happens on about every setting from medium and up.
AMD 1090t @ 4GHz
16GB DDR3
AMD 5970 (crossfire on)
It runs at like, it runs OK 60% of the time, but when i look down from a mountain or from a tower or even random parts of the ground it starts stuttering and the audio starts getting a lot of static. Is there a fix for this, or is there a setting I'm overlooking. This happens on about every setting from medium and up.
Temperatures where? In the GPU? Because this game runs pretty hot on my 680, even with PostFX turned down. The fan speed increase is noticeable.
I did have some problems with Afterburner not actually ramping up the fan like it's supposed to, resulting the card overheating every now and then. Nothing quite so bad as you describe, but enough to piss me off. I switched to EVGA Precision after that.
First bet would be to check the bios version of the gigabyte 670 you have. Most likely needs to be flashed to a bug free version. I had to do the same the other week, no crashes since and have been running heaven,prime,gaming,browsing etc.
http://www.techpowerup.com/170032/G...date-for-GeForce-GTX-670-WindForce-3X-OC.html
It's really simple.
Basically:
1.Download atbios
2.Backup original bios
3.Identify current bios
4.Flash correct bios
Also, what is that avatar from? I recognise the detective. Korean detective movie yes?Cheers
Thanks very much for the advice.
The movie is Memories of Murder. One of my all time favorite films. Kang-ho Song, who's the actor in the avatar, is also one of my all time favorite actors. I've watched nearly everything, he's been in.
54C is the hottest the GPU will get in Far Cry 3. 52C for the CPU. I ran around for about 20 minutes and got in a bunch of firefights, to test that.
I have a Cooler Master HAF 932 and it's always been great at keeping my components cool. Except for my previous Graphics card, which was a GTX580. That bastard always ran very hot for me.
Few more details, which may help. I'm running a 2500k at stock, i'm on the 310.90 Nvidia drivers and my Far Cry 3 is definitely up to date.
Thanks for all the help so far guys and sorry for the spam. I should have made my two most recent posts, just one. I wasn't trying to bump.
Fahrenheit
Banned
Anyone else set PostFxQuality to false? All I miss out is a DOF effect that blurs things in the distance right? Gave me 10ish FPS boot and with MSAAx2 and Shadows bumped down to high I get 50fps 99% of the time on my GTX570 at 1080P.
Also i'm sure thing has been asked to death, whats up with the FOV slider? Is it 1:1 now? I have it set at 90, which seems to be perfect for me..
Also i'm sure thing has been asked to death, whats up with the FOV slider? Is it 1:1 now? I have it set at 90, which seems to be perfect for me..
SlaughterX
Banned
I will post some benchmarks tomorrow after my new PC gets here. Just bought the game today, kinda hard not to install it right now, but I know it would run pretty shitty on my current rig at the resolution I would want to play it at.
Some interesting charts and graphs for you folks.
In the second graph here, there are some weird outliers with 4200MHz. I ran this same benchmark in three total series, and each one there were two outliers similar to 4200MHz. I'm going to try my hand at it again tonight, but this is the most consistent data I've been able to get so far.
This is 60 seconds of gameplay, which includes driving, shooting, and jumping off a cliff into water. All settings (other than AA) were at Ultra or highest possible.
I ran the test in 200MHz steps from 3600MHz (stock clock) to 4600MHz.
So this measures frame latency. Rather than averaging all of the frames rendered in a second, it looks at every single frame and gives you a time, in milliseconds, it took to render each frame.
Test system:
3570K
Gigabyte Z77X-UP7
ASUS RoG Matrix 7970 (running at 1100MHz)
8GB Samsung DDR3 1600MHz
Corsair AX650
For reference, 16.7ms = 60fps, 33.3 = 30fps
As you can see, as the frequency increases, the size of the spikes are reduced pretty heavily. From a subjective standpoint, the difference in smoothness was night and day, especially in the sub-4.0GHz range.
Now for your standard data. What I would like you guys and gals to pay close attention to here is that this is the same exact data as the set you are seeing above, but it is the standard FPS data which is polled every second. You definitely see something a bit off here at 4200MHz still, but the extent of the wonkiness is very much concealed. This is why these metrics are very inaccurate and should not be considered standard for measuring game performance.
In the second graph here, there are some weird outliers with 4200MHz. I ran this same benchmark in three total series, and each one there were two outliers similar to 4200MHz. I'm going to try my hand at it again tonight, but this is the most consistent data I've been able to get so far.
This is 60 seconds of gameplay, which includes driving, shooting, and jumping off a cliff into water. All settings (other than AA) were at Ultra or highest possible.
I ran the test in 200MHz steps from 3600MHz (stock clock) to 4600MHz.
So this measures frame latency. Rather than averaging all of the frames rendered in a second, it looks at every single frame and gives you a time, in milliseconds, it took to render each frame.
Test system:
3570K
Gigabyte Z77X-UP7
ASUS RoG Matrix 7970 (running at 1100MHz)
8GB Samsung DDR3 1600MHz
Corsair AX650
For reference, 16.7ms = 60fps, 33.3 = 30fps
As you can see, as the frequency increases, the size of the spikes are reduced pretty heavily. From a subjective standpoint, the difference in smoothness was night and day, especially in the sub-4.0GHz range.
Now for your standard data. What I would like you guys and gals to pay close attention to here is that this is the same exact data as the set you are seeing above, but it is the standard FPS data which is polled every second. You definitely see something a bit off here at 4200MHz still, but the extent of the wonkiness is very much concealed. This is why these metrics are very inaccurate and should not be considered standard for measuring game performance.
SnakeswithLasers
Member
I think that's just the dubstep.
DX11 is a known issue with crashing. i checked out DX9 but all the cool gfx effects are gonna and the game is less pretty. i went back to DX11 and underclocked my card to recommended factory settings and no crashes when i played. got a new monitor recently and i think i may need to lower the gfx settings for the higher 2560 res, heh
My game runs great with two exceptions (so far). Played through to the town with all the people dancing.
Core i7-860 (stock 2.8ghz)
7850
I can run it at very high settings in DX11 and be totally smooth, but the intro where they're partying and skydiving, etc., runs like total shit. Like 10fps. Seems glitchy, choppy, skipping frames, etc. Then the cage scene runs fine, all the way up through escaping through the forest until you fall into the water is all perfect. Then when the "Far Cry 3" title comes up it drops to total shit again. It took like 20 seconds for the "Far Cry 3" title sequence to run from start to finish. Basically went to a crawl, freezes, sound skipping. Seemed like it was 1 fps. Then when the guy woke me up in his hut right after everything was fine again.
Anyone else run into this? Any setting I can turn down/off that would be causing those two sequences to run SO much worse than everything else? Not sure what it could be.
Core i7-860 (stock 2.8ghz)
7850
I can run it at very high settings in DX11 and be totally smooth, but the intro where they're partying and skydiving, etc., runs like total shit. Like 10fps. Seems glitchy, choppy, skipping frames, etc. Then the cage scene runs fine, all the way up through escaping through the forest until you fall into the water is all perfect. Then when the "Far Cry 3" title comes up it drops to total shit again. It took like 20 seconds for the "Far Cry 3" title sequence to run from start to finish. Basically went to a crawl, freezes, sound skipping. Seemed like it was 1 fps. Then when the guy woke me up in his hut right after everything was fine again.
Anyone else run into this? Any setting I can turn down/off that would be causing those two sequences to run SO much worse than everything else? Not sure what it could be.
If memory serves me right. Those scenes you're describing, are all pre rendered cutscenes and aren't the actual game. It sounds like there's something wrong with the videos playing, for you. I'm afraid i can't be of any more help, than that.
EDIT: Using google. I can find plenty of threads, on other boards, with people explaining the same problem. But i can't find any solutions. One shot in the dark, i'd recommend, is turning off VSync, if you have it on.
I'm not sure how Far Cry 3 plays it's pre rendered videos. But perhaps there's some software that needs updated, related to it.
Nappuccino
Member
Game seems to run a tad bit worse since I updated.
660 GT here, anyone else get the same?
660 GT here, anyone else get the same?
Thanks the quality was so poor I didn't even realize they weren't in game graphics. I think I figured it out. I have TuneUp Utilities and had it on 'turbo mode' which must have disabled some kind of 2d / video processing functions. Once I turned it off I was good to go.
Look at my charts above. You need to OC that processor.
Yeah you're prolly right. Just upgraded GPU from a 4890. Guess I'll bump it to 3.5-ish ghz to reduce bottleneck on the 7850.
Odd issue: I tried switching to DX9 to see if I could squeeze higher settings with no framerate hit. But it actually runs worse. And if I look at a light source (like the sun), I get a very serious framerate hit (~15fps). Runs no problem in DX11 (1080p@60fps), but I have to knock a most settings down to high and very high (and PostFX to Medium).
Specs:
i5 3570K @4.4
HD 7870 (stock)
8GB RAM 1600Mhz
Is it possible there's some Catalyst-related setting that's to blame? Something else I might be overlooking? Why would it take such a huge hit with light sources in DX9? Might that be a sign that my CPU is doing something funky?
Specs:
i5 3570K @4.4
HD 7870 (stock)
8GB RAM 1600Mhz
Is it possible there's some Catalyst-related setting that's to blame? Something else I might be overlooking? Why would it take such a huge hit with light sources in DX9? Might that be a sign that my CPU is doing something funky?
Hmm strange.
I was getting approx 8-90 FPS on ultra on my 670 after installing the new drivers a couple of days ago. Gone on to day for the first time since and now I'm getting 30 FPS. Haven't changed a thing.
I'm confused. All my other games are playing at there usual FPS.
I was getting approx 8-90 FPS on ultra on my 670 after installing the new drivers a couple of days ago. Gone on to day for the first time since and now I'm getting 30 FPS. Haven't changed a thing.
I'm confused. All my other games are playing at there usual FPS.
Those drivers specifically gave a massive boost to Far Cry 3. Nvidia said that the performance gain is around 28%, if I remember correctly.
Yeah and I noticed a big improvement after installing the new drivers. My fps jumped about 20-30 frames. But after not playing the game for a few days I went on today and I cant get about 35 fps. Doesn't make any sense to me.
stryker1138
Member
This was happening to me in both Far Cry 3 and AC III. I accidentally discovered that having the Task Manager open in the background brought performance back to where it should be. CPU utilization would be at 100% when I first opened the performance tab, then drop way down for as long as Task Manager was running. These are the only games I've ever noticed that issue with. Both are Ubisoft Montreal productions. What the hell?
30% increase iirc for your card
noomi
Member
That's what I thought, I guess I'll pass on these for now then.
Someone previously mentioned a rather nice performance boost when updating to these drivers. That person must have not had the 310.70 drivers when updating to 310.90 in that case.
Thanks for clarifying.
Sorry, PC drivers are not always a easy thing to cope with. Perhaps the next one will actually improve performance.
I also have the same problem. I have a Hd6970 and the game is unplayable.....
I have the same combo, so here's some tips to boost your fps with minimal image impact:
Set res to 1920x1080 and put all settings a max
Reduce Shadows to High
Reduce Post Process FX to Medium
Reduce Water to Medium
Use standard SSAO
Set Vsync to 1
No MXAA
My fps hovers between 45 and 60 depending on the load, and the game looks gorgeous.
The AMD Phenom X4 965 Black Ed. really holds its own, especially considering the price-to-performance ratio. I'd love to have one of the better i5 processors, but I can't simply justify the price based on the small amount of gain my games would get.
catapult37
Member
Is this what's meant by stuttering? FRAPs shows that I rarely dip below 55fps, but just looking at the screen, it is often extremely choppy seeming, especially when looking at a vista or hang gliding.
Is it my crossfire setup ?(2x6950s) My drivers? (up to date). DirectX (switched to 9, not much help). My i5's clocked at 4.7!
Heck, I would actually lock as low as 30 if the frame rate would just be CONSISTENT. FRAPs actually says it is pretty consistent, so why does it play like it's dipping into the 30s and 40s constantly?
Is it my crossfire setup ?(2x6950s) My drivers? (up to date). DirectX (switched to 9, not much help). My i5's clocked at 4.7!
Heck, I would actually lock as low as 30 if the frame rate would just be CONSISTENT. FRAPs actually says it is pretty consistent, so why does it play like it's dipping into the 30s and 40s constantly?
Tried changing SSAO setting? I also recommend lowering MSAA. It's smooth for me at 4 or below. When I punched it up to 8 it became a lil choppy.
Look at my charts on the last page.
FPS has recently (in the last few months or so) been uncovered as a really bad metric for looking at performance.
In my own testing, I found that Tribes: Ascend shows basically a 2 frame per second difference here between the highest and lowest clock.
That's a pretty high average FPS as well. The thing about FPS is that it is polled every second, so within that second, a number of frames may be rendered with a very high latency. These high latency frames are averaged out with the others to provide a fairly consistent FPS number despite poor performance.
Now this is a much better look at average FPS. We throw out the ends of the bell curve and look at how long, in milliseconds, it took to render 99% of all frames.
Here, we see a nearly 1:1 correlation betweeen increased 99th percentile frame rate and CPU frequency. In addition to that, we are seeing these frames times at 9.5ms (105 FPS) and 12.08ms (82 FPS), which is drastically different than the average frame rates.
If we take a look at FPS over time, this is what the lines look like.
There is one dramatic dip in there, but it is still only to just under 105FPS. However, if we take a look at the frame latency over time, you again see a wildly different picture.
For reference, 11.1ms = 90FPS. There are a huge number of frames being rendered over that time, which is where you see stuttering. I've counted them for easy reference.
So you have a pretty substantial number of frames that are dipping well below 2/3 of the listed average FPS.
Granted, it's a lot more difficult to get this information out than simply looking at a number listed for FPS in the top of the screen, but that FPS metric is just woefully inaccurate for when things aren't working out 100% smoothly, which is most of the time.
catapult37
Member
Thanks. I did read your post, as well as one a while back that I can't quite remember... someone on GAF posted it. From HardOCP or something, about this very topic and needing to abandon fps as a metric and move on to individual frame rendering time. If anyone remembers that article, please help me out... google is failing me atm. [Edit: here it is: Inside the Second: A New Look at Game Benchmarking (Techreport.com, Sept 2011)]
Anyway, that article was one thing that convinced me that my next build needs to be single-card. But other than that, what might you prescribe in my situation to smooth things out?
One thing I'm sure I need to do is go check my BIOS and make sure I'm still oc'd. I think I may have clocked down to stock for some reason a while back. I hope that's the case... it might solve this entirely)
Anyway, that article was one thing that convinced me that my next build needs to be single-card. But other than that, what might you prescribe in my situation to smooth things out?
One thing I'm sure I need to do is go check my BIOS and make sure I'm still oc'd. I think I may have clocked down to stock for some reason a while back. I hope that's the case... it might solve this entirely)