• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Metro: Last Light PC performance thread

kitanii said:
What about an SLI-setup with a pair of 680s. For example.
How does the card hold up against that? Out of curiosity. Used in a multi monitor setup that is.
Click to expand...

I dunno, there are tons of articles out there. 2 680s are faster than a single Titan but I'm sure you already knew that.

Some people don't want to mess with sli. Some people dont want the extra heat or extra power requirements. Some people want a good compute card in addition to the fastest single GPU. There's nothing wrong with that.
 
The game has been Re-Benchmarked with the AMD Patch. Resulting in a quite Massive improvement.

lastlight1.png


lastlight2.png
 
I get 46fps @very high,1920x1200 with my OC'ed 7950 and old ass 955BE, so that's definitely a big improvement compared to when the game came out.
 
I've started having crashes, post patch. Not a system crash, just the game locks up and i have to close it in task manager. Played many hours before the patch, without any problems. Now i can't go more than 20 minutes.
 
I'm not sure if it's just placebo effect but I'm pretty sure my game smoothed out after uninstalling Classic Shell (on Windows 8 x64).

I did this after the latest patch which did help with performance but it seems so much better now. I should note I've not done another big outdoors section but I got stutter everywhere.
 
My i5 3570k, 8 gig ram, geforce 580 (asus directcu II) sli system just crashed in metro last light. I have experienced the green squares freeze before with obvious visible squares in black ops 2, and this was the same thing. The crash occurred during the stage performance. I am using the latest nvidia drivers that were released today.

So ... I guess voltage hacking with msi afterburner is back. The geforce 500 series is as useless as ever.
 
I'm amazed at this game's performance, especially after just playing Metro 2033 with, well, shitty optimization. Everything maxed out, SSAO off (I honestly don't see the need for it, I have a hard time spotting bad jaggies) at 1200p and things are running smoothly. 50-60fps average, dips in combat.

570
i52500k
 
Just got my new computer and I wanted to test it.

CPU: i7 4770k @ 4.1Ghz
GPU: GTX Titan
RAM: 16GB DDR3 2133Mhz

SSAA OFF:

AP0RQE6.jpg


SSAA ON:

dYPw7OA.jpg
 
Performance wise the game runs beautifully for me, very pleasantly surprised given that I have an extremely old processor.

Core2Quad Q8200 (I think) @ 2.4 Ghz
4 GB DDR2
GTX 660 Ti 2GB

Running it at very high at 1680x1050 with High Tessellation and PhysX on.


However I have had a pair of CTDs where I got a popup saying my graphics driver had crashed and had to be recovered. I'm using the latest 320.18 drivers. I also have random minor shadow flickering with the flashlight. Nothing major.

I was having massive artifacting with the 320.14 beta drivers for some reason but going up to the official release fixed that.
 
I got to Venice and now I keep getting all kinds of different crashes. This game ran flawlessly till Saturday night with almost max settings @ 1080p. Not sure what happened here.

I had the most updated NVIDIA drivers and then went to beta 320.49 which haven't helped either on my EVGA 770.

I even uninstalled the game and reinstalled. I even did the repair in Steam.

One of the error messages that I am getting is

"Previous Launch was unsuccessful. Would You like to start in safe mode."
 
This game's performance is kind of strange, it seems to perform flawlessly during certain parts that look like they should be taxing but then it chugs during parts that aren't so complex. I even have Advanced Physx and Tesselation turned off and I still get these odd dips.

Luckily for the most part it's really smooth, certainly better than Metro 2033, but I still find the dips to be a bit random.
 
Cannon Goose said:
This game's performance is kind of strange, it seems to perform flawlessly during certain parts that look like they should be taxing but then it chugs during parts that aren't so complex. I even have Advanced Physx and Tesselation turned off and I still get these odd dips.

Luckily for the most part it's really smooth, certainly better than Metro 2033, but I still find the dips to be a bit random.
Click to expand...

I turned everything off for now to see if it does anything, but with the 770, there should be no issues.
 
I just started this game. I'm using a 680m gpu, and whenever I started the first hour I was getting a steady 45fps with the settings I had. I then decided to upgrade my drivers to the current ones because I have upgraded in awhile. Now whenever I play, there are some spots that drop down to a steady 13fps. It is pretty much unplayable and annoying. It is really this unoptimized?
 
FuzzyNorman said:
I just started this game. I'm using a 680m gpu, and whenever I started the first hour I was getting a steady 45fps with the settings I had. I then decided to upgrade my drivers to the current ones because I have upgraded in awhile. Now whenever I play, there are some spots that drop down to a steady 13fps. It is pretty much unplayable and annoying. It is really this unoptimized?
Click to expand...

Try reinstalling the drivers with the custom > clean option.
 
puzl said:
I think most people expect some kind of visual anomalies with larger fov's, especially with player models/guns so it's not such a big deal. I'm just happy knowing we can eventually change it so it makes the game less vomit inducing.

I do wish these devs would learn that 90 is a much better fixed FOV than 60/70 though. The line about performance is very telling and it's obvious they designed the narrow FOV with console limitations in mind.
Click to expand...

The reason they put it so low is because they develop for consoles, and consoles you generally don't play at arm's length like PC games.
 
So i've been getting a really stupid problem. Tried reinstalling/cleaning out all my drivers too. I have a GTX 770 and if I turn on PhysX in this game after a few seconds of the game running it seems like something loads up in the game engine and causes it to lag for no obvious reason. It was running fine for awhile, so not sure what the cause is but I'd really like to be able to make use of the card I have. This PhysX shit should be cake for it.
 
I just ran the benchmark for shits and giggles:

Options: Resolution: 1920 x 1200; DirectX: DirectX 10; Quality: Very High; Texture filtering: AF 16X; Advanced PhysX: Disabled; Tesselation: Not supported; Motion Blur: Low; SSAA: OFF;
Click to expand...

Physx because I'm running an HD4890 (also DDR3 and an i5 3570k @ 4.2), and I only have a 10.1 card and will have one for the foreseeable future (at least till the end of the year most likely), and motion blur low because motion blur sucks. SSAA also for the same reason I'm running an HD4890

Total Frames: 6541, Total Time: 171.2408 sec
Average Framerate: 38.23
Max. Framerate: 73.12 (Frame: 25)
Min. Framerate: 7.29 (Frame: 150)
Click to expand...

What isn't shown here, in most cases I was getting 35-45fps and some cases a consistent 50+ fps. With my aging hardware, this is very very impressive.
 
Apologies for the bump. Posted in the Steam thread before I saw this one:

Getting horrible performance no matter what I do - even low settings on 720p with no AA - the game eventually goes to about 15-20fps and stays there. Same thing on very high settings/1080p. I'll get nearly 60fps and it's great but after a few minutes it locks at a really low framerate. HD7950, i52500k, using the latest Catalyst beta because it's supposed to improve LL performance... anyone have any ideas? :(
 
Hey guys, I was wondering if I could get the most ultra settings and get around 45 fps with my rig. 60 fps is no requirement, everything between 40-45 will be golden. Will I get that with a:

i5 2500k 3.3 ghz (NOT overclocked)
8 GB ram
GTX 770 2 gig
Playing at 1920 x 1080

Thanks!
 
Dries said:
Hey guys, I was wondering if I could get the most ultra settings and get around 45 fps with my rig. 60 fps is no requirement, everything between 40-45 will be golden. Will I get that with a:

i5 2500k 3.3 ghz (NOT overclocked)
8 GB ram
GTX 770 2 gig
Playing at 1920 x 1080

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I have the same card. I can run everything at max save for Supersampling, which is one of those "Fuck your rig" type of settings that I'd wager most people will not be enabling, let alone maxing. I can enable it and get 45-50 most of the time at 2x but can't really go any higher.
 
Corpekata said:
I have the same card. I can run everything at max save for Supersampling, which is one of those "Fuck your rig" type of settings that I'd wager most people will not be enabling, let alone maxing. I can enable it and get 45-50 most of the time at 2x but can't really go any higher.
Click to expand...

Sounds sweet. Are you also using the same CPU as me?
 
i7 4770
16gb ram
GTX670

This game runs like ass. The original did too. Changing settings didnt seem to fix much. Initially out in the field I was getting 60fps there abouts, as soon as I am indoors, less than 30fps, at times I reckon I would be lucky to hold 20fps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GOG adds the originals (non redux) Metro 2033 and Last Light to their preservation program
0
111
Guilty_AI replied
007 First Light - Reviews Thread
6 7 8 9 10
481
3K
Sticks replied
PC Technical Performance & Optimisation Tierlist, who does it the best?
18
179
winjer replied
Digital Foundry: 007 First Light PS5/PS5 Pro Review - Performance, Features, Mode + More
2 3
147
3K
Stafford replied
  • Poll
007 First Light: No Path Tracing at Launch & Full PC Requirements
2
81
1K
blastprocessor replied
Top Bottom