PerezDeCorcho
Member
Anybody still rocking a 670?
-
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.
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor PC Performance Thread
- Thread starter batman2million
- Start date
grandwizard
Member
I think people might be finding the controls laggy because there are so many functions in this game set to hold conditions on the buttons, so the game has to wait a second to trigger an action to figure out if you are holding it or just tapping it. To me it's another sign we need some real innovation in controllers especially wrt button layout.
Allnamestakenlol
Member
I'm rocking two at the moment. Runs well at 1440p and very high. Even when I was only using one card last night I could still get 60fps with mostly high settings at 1080p.
So I've finally got my custom work PC up and running, however I noticed that the current setup doesn't seem to launch the game. I know the obvious answer will be the GTX 295, but I was wondering if it would at all be possible to bypass the check and see what kind of performance it will give?
Specs:
GTX 295 4GB
i5 2500k
8GB 1600MHz RAM
I'm planning on getting a 970 for my home PC when the prices calm down (Australia is getting majorly ripped off), so I'll be able to supplement the 295 for 770 but I am intrigued on whether the game can run.
Specs:
GTX 295 4GB
i5 2500k
8GB 1600MHz RAM
I'm planning on getting a 970 for my home PC when the prices calm down (Australia is getting majorly ripped off), so I'll be able to supplement the 295 for 770 but I am intrigued on whether the game can run.
My 970 is giving amazing performance, but I keep getting screen tearing in only one spot on my screen with vsync enabled. I tried forcing triple buffer from the nvidia program, but I can't get this one line of screen tearing to go away. Shows up every single time I adjust the camera.
There's no DX10 support for this game; it's 11 only.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
DX11 only game possibly - the 200 series are DX10 graphics cards.
Alright so I did a test to increase performance and noticed that the mesh settings seems to affect performance the most. I changed from Ultra to high and gained 20fps. Nothing else seems to really affect the framerate as much.
Edit: Also my VRAM usage went from 3800 down to 2800 just from switching to high on mesh.
Edit: Also my VRAM usage went from 3800 down to 2800 just from switching to high on mesh.
Spiritreaver
Member
Man can't wait for proper Crossfire support. The game runs surprisingly well on a single 7970. Getting around 40-55ish on 1080p max, it could be lower though that's completely eyeball as none of my FPS tools aren't working atm. (lol)
Definitely some hitching though during camera turns. Anyway can't wait for some drivers to hit. Are AMD's 15.0 drivers going to hit soon?
Definitely some hitching though during camera turns. Anyway can't wait for some drivers to hit. Are AMD's 15.0 drivers going to hit soon?
lordfuzzybutt
Member
14.9 just hit if you haven't tried that one out.
Prophet Steve
Member
So, did people with 4GB of VRAM and without a 9-series Nvidia GPU have trouble with hitches on ultra textures? I am trying to figure out why they recommended 6GB and it doesn't make a lot of sense if it runs perfectly with 4GB.
SLI doesn't work in the game although works perfect in the benchmark. To achieve good performance scale is necessary to activate SLI flag 12, but that flag produces flickering in the rain and distant shadows.
Devs have to detect multigpu systems and disable rain particles cache. Distant shadows are cached too.
Devs have to detect multigpu systems and disable rain particles cache. Distant shadows are cached too.
I5 750
ATI 5870 1GB
16 GB Ram
Target 30FPS - Maxed Out w/ Textures: Medium - Shadows: High
http://i.minus.com/iOoEutCehT4uT.png
http://i.minus.com/i55nXar90YSWM.png
http://i.minus.com/ibzVKz6kJAHXRb.png
Campaign mode, free roam section, i've an average of 35FPS without stuttering or FPS drop. I'm so happy, thank you Monolith! T_T
ATI 5870 1GB
16 GB Ram
Target 30FPS - Maxed Out w/ Textures: Medium - Shadows: High
http://i.minus.com/iOoEutCehT4uT.png
http://i.minus.com/i55nXar90YSWM.png
http://i.minus.com/ibzVKz6kJAHXRb.png
Campaign mode, free roam section, i've an average of 35FPS without stuttering or FPS drop. I'm so happy, thank you Monolith! T_T
Yeah, they really need to provide options based on viewing distance for more games.
A low FOV works well enough when you're sitting back a ways from a TV but when you have your face pressed up to a monitor it's terrible. I'm using a 32" PC monitor now and these low FOV games feel almost suffocating when playing on it whereas sitting back on the couch using the TV feels totally fine.
poopninjamvc3mk
I sucked six dicks to get this tag.
Got to try it off my friend's account game on my 2gb r9 270x .
Maxed out everything 1080p but textures(left it on high) and benchmark said average fps of 59.43 so I'm happy and it ran better once it was ingame. Looking forward to buying the game soon after I get my smash 3ds copy
Maxed out everything 1080p but textures(left it on high) and benchmark said average fps of 59.43 so I'm happy and it ran better once it was ingame. Looking forward to buying the game soon after I get my smash 3ds copy
Gipsy Danger
Member
i5 2500K @ OC 4.0GHz
GTX 980 @ 4GB VRAM
8GB RAM
Getting a steady 60fps around 90-95% of the time with all settings Ultra. Textures also set to Ultra and not getting any noticeable stuttering. Game seems to run incredibly well. No supersampling though.
GTX 980 @ 4GB VRAM
8GB RAM
Getting a steady 60fps around 90-95% of the time with all settings Ultra. Textures also set to Ultra and not getting any noticeable stuttering. Game seems to run incredibly well. No supersampling though.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Has anyone compared the FEAR 3 and Batman Arkham Origins SLI bits?
@Maldo - do these bits really not work in game? That's really odd if so.
@Maldo - do these bits really not work in game? That's really odd if so.
DarkoMaledictus
Tier Whore
Wow love the game, but the game would benefit from a HUGE difficulty spike! Game is way too easy, been going into strongholds and taking on 2-3 captains at a time... somehow I feel I should not be this powerful in the beginning of the game 
.
.Hyrule Warrior
Member
Did the benchmark twice, once with textures on ultra, and with textures on medium. I honestly didn't notice much visual different in the benchmark between the 2 settings, but at medium, I was getting above 60fps, and at ultra, I was getting a consistent 30fps.
Guess I can't complain too much, still looks good. Everything else is maxed except textures.
In case anyone wants to know, I'm running a gtx 760 2gb, with a core i5, and 8gb of system ram.
Guess I can't complain too much, still looks good. Everything else is maxed except textures.
In case anyone wants to know, I'm running a gtx 760 2gb, with a core i5, and 8gb of system ram.
Lord Phol
Member
i5 (Ivy Bridge) @ 3,5Ghz
GTX 680 @ 2GB VRAM
16GB RAM
Got everything but shadows on High and it's pretty much 60 fps 90% of the time. Looks and runs great. Only thing bothering me is the game not always identifying the triple buffering I'm forcing through the nvidia control panel.
GTX 680 @ 2GB VRAM
16GB RAM
Got everything but shadows on High and it's pretty much 60 fps 90% of the time. Looks and runs great. Only thing bothering me is the game not always identifying the triple buffering I'm forcing through the nvidia control panel.
d00d3n
Member
How did these settings work in actual gameplay? Rain combat during the intro? Open world traversal?
Ahhh, interesting. There still seems to be a performance benefit from running sli during normal gameplay, but the scaling does appear to be much worse compared with the benchmark. Hmmm, probably hard to say, but I guess that it will take a couple of weeks at least to implement and test a fix like that (if they even bother doing it)?
CyanideFuse
Member
Yes. My problem at the moment is I am still waiting for the game to download. The cups with string can only handle so much data down them.
Once I have it downloaded I will post my numbers.
Snakethesniper
Member
What should I expect from my config?
- i5 2500 at 3.30Ghz
- HD6950 2 GB OC PE
- 8 GB RAM DDR3
I don't expect to run it on ultra, but maybe 60 fps with medium/low settings?
- i5 2500 at 3.30Ghz
- HD6950 2 GB OC PE
- 8 GB RAM DDR3
I don't expect to run it on ultra, but maybe 60 fps with medium/low settings?
Prophet Steve
Member
All I know is likely an average of around 30 FPS with ultra. So maybe you can reach 60 FPS with low settings.
Happy so see i'm not the only one still rocking an OC'd 2500k. That chip might just have been the best component purchase i've ever made. Completely juxtaposed by the 2GB 770 i'm running which is without a doubt the worst purchase I made.
Fallout-NL
Member
Yeah, it's pretty awful.
Any help would be appreciated. I ran the benchmark with everything set to max except textures and AO on high. This at 1680x1050. As a result I got an average of 59FPS. The problem is that with each explosion or fire the framerate drops to ~30FPS and stays there until it is no longer rendered. Otherwise it's 60FPS upwards. I have GTX 680 2GB on 344.11 drivers.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Occasionally a bit choppy, so I tuned it down a bit. Lightning looks rather weird too.
Monolith is working in a fix (from steam discussions)
MonolithAndy developer said:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/241930/discussions/0/613937306863973441/#c613937306865041765
my bro is. with a 3570 hes rocking the game on ultra textures, no motion blur and shadows on high. never dips below 30 fps
I have an i5 2500K @ 4,1 ghz, the same card but not OC'ed, same amount of ram and got 47 fps with a mix of high and medium, no tesselation at 2560x1080.
Turin Turambar
Member
Is that in the benchmark or in the game? Do you have vsync on?
If your performance is around 50 fps the best workaround is to use a 50 hz screen refreshrate with adaptative-vsync on. So you will have smooth 50 fps most of the time with a few tearing when framerate is under 50. Fluidity will be good.
For all the Radeon users out there.
Everything maxed out and activated @1080p. Only Textures on high.
Ran the Benchmark a few times
Average FPS: 81.5
Max FPS : 211.2
Min FPS : 37.1
CPU: i5 2500k OC @4Ghz
GPU: R9 290 4GB Custom OC @1075Mhz, 5.6Ghz VRam
Ram: 8 GB DDR3 @ 1333Mhz
edit: Oh in game performance is a constant 60 FPS with very few drops down to 55 FPS or so, never saw something below 50 FPS till now.
Everything maxed out and activated @1080p. Only Textures on high.
Ran the Benchmark a few times
Average FPS: 81.5
Max FPS : 211.2
Min FPS : 37.1
CPU: i5 2500k OC @4Ghz
GPU: R9 290 4GB Custom OC @1075Mhz, 5.6Ghz VRam
Ram: 8 GB DDR3 @ 1333Mhz
edit: Oh in game performance is a constant 60 FPS with very few drops down to 55 FPS or so, never saw something below 50 FPS till now.
d00d3n
Member
That is great news! I am putting the game on hold until the fix is released (probably later this week).
How exactly do you get the HD textures to show up for you to download?
My 970 handles this pretty well on ultimate @ 1080p besides textures. Seem to get some slight slowdown during the finishing moves. Funnily enough 1080p showed up fine despite have DSR enabled and I seem to have no issues with vsync even in full screen mode.
My 970 handles this pretty well on ultimate @ 1080p besides textures. Seem to get some slight slowdown during the finishing moves. Funnily enough 1080p showed up fine despite have DSR enabled and I seem to have no issues with vsync even in full screen mode.
Burgess_101
Member
I seemingly managed to fixed my crashing,. I disabled my overclock and there was no freezing. Its odd because on every other game it works 100% no issues.
I don't know why I keep following this thread even when I don't have the slightest intention to get the game Well maybe I'll snatch this from the eventual steam sale next year.
What's the oldest GPU tested here with playable settings? Someone had a 1GB 5870 which I just upgraded, seems that the game isn't that demanding if you're not looking to achieve the ultra level.
Well maybe I'll snatch this from the eventual steam sale next year.What's the oldest GPU tested here with playable settings? Someone had a 1GB 5870 which I just upgraded, seems that the game isn't that demanding if you're not looking to achieve the ultra level.
SLESS
Member
I have a i5 3570, 16 GB DDR3, Sapphire R290x 4GB
I ran the benchmark with all Ultra + Ultra textures and 1080p, it averaged 97 FPS.
Playing it looks beautiful is rock solid 60FPS I have to vsync it was tearing like crazy otherwise. Gollum and the orcs are photo realistic if that's a thing.
I love my PC
I ran the benchmark with all Ultra + Ultra textures and 1080p, it averaged 97 FPS.
Playing it looks beautiful is rock solid 60FPS I have to vsync it was tearing like crazy otherwise. Gollum and the orcs are photo realistic if that's a thing.
I love my PC
Excellent, I've been waiting to see feedback like this. I too have an i5 2500, with a 6950 flashed to 6970 and slightly oc'd. I'll only be running it at 1680x1050, and occasionally 1080p, so it's great to hear you're getting such reasonable performance. Allays my need to grab a 970 anyway!
Set this up last night on my SLI 970's on my 1440p monitor. All set to ultra apart from the textures which were on high. I set this to use vsync so it locks to 60fps. I pushed the resolution up to 150% and it looks really really great - 60fps nailed so far in the opening area.
Link to screenshot below.
Link to screenshot below.
I had Vsync on and I was talking about benchmark although I got similiar results in campaign as well. Disabling Vsync I was able to get rid of the drop to 30. It only now goes to 50-55 with fire and explosions which is manageable. I'm just little confused where I should go from here. I do not want tearing or fluctuating FPS but apparently Vsync isn't the way to go here.
Is enabling Adaptive VSync through drivers a bad idea?