Why new engine performance is so poor?

[Resine 120]

Could someone please explain what is going on? Let's ignore login issues what's done is done, maybe next one we will get to test it ourselves.

But, from the people that did got in, they had around 60FPS on high end gaming setups, wherever there were people around them with massive drop to 20FPS when anyone joined district,

but scrolling through Matt's threads, there are lots of charts of 150+ FPS, so did something broke? Or we are lied again about the actual performance?

 

I do know it was a BETA, to test things, but having half of the performance of old build, when we heard months ago that it's going to be released in weeks, makes me worried.

[AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 5365]

37 minutes ago, Resine said:

I do know it was a BETA, to test things, but having half of the performance of old build, when we heard months ago that it's going to be released in weeks, makes me worried.

i think it was roughly 8 or 9 weeks to this beta release from mattscott's "weeks" quote, which seems like a pretty fair time frame to use weeks for imo

 

performance could have been poor because there were so many people on at once (i saw some people mention 150 players online, which is a much larger sample size than the 10-20 closed beta testers), in which case now not only does orbit know but they have data to work off

 

i have no idea how things are linked behind the scenes, maybe it was the sheer amount of people trying to log in at once or the copy/pasting of everyone's accounts as they did so

 

you state you know it's a beta, but you're worried about something the beta was specifically intended to help address, seems weird

 

 

Edited June 28 by 404
typo

[Gusvato3080 61]

you know, there is this box in the settings called "smooth framerate" that caps your fps to 62.

At least in my game it was checked by default

[Snubnose 631]

2 hours ago, Resine said:

Or we are lied again about the actual performance?

found the 0.453kg viewer KEK

 

 

36 minutes ago, Gusvato3080 said:

you know, there is this box in the settings called "smooth framerate" that caps your fps to 62.

At least in my game it was checked by default

 

this.
turn off v-sync and smooth framerate to unlock FPS above 60. also, the FPS drops to 20 you are talking about happen when a player joins in the district, and it's just for a very short time. it's also a known issue and will most likely be fixed before the full release - REMEMBER, THIS IS A BETA.

 

 

 

[Thornecroft 39]

With a Ryzen 5 3600 and a 2080 Super in Fightclub, I was still getting pretty poor performance. Vsync off and smooth framerate turned off, I'd still get 60-80 fps. Normally over 100fps.

Naturally this is fine for this stage in the process, however it's not like OP isn't true in what he is saying.

[Kast2 24]

4 hours ago, Resine said:

Could someone please explain what is going on? Let's ignore login issues what's done is done, maybe next one we will get to test it ourselves.

But, from the people that did got in, they had around 60FPS on high end gaming setups, wherever there were people around them with massive drop to 20FPS when anyone joined district,

but scrolling through Matt's threads, there are lots of charts of 150+ FPS, so did something broke? Or we are lied again about the actual performance?

 

I do know it was a BETA, to test things, but having half of the performance of old build, when we heard months ago that it's going to be released in weeks, makes me worried.

I had a framerate with everything on Ultra at 80-120 fps which in my opinion is not bad at all, the problem itself is the HUD, if disabled the lag problem disappears, so mainly the cause of the fps drops is that.

[Resine 120]

3 hours ago, Gusvato3080 said:

you know, there is this box in the settings called "smooth framerate" that caps your fps to 62.

At least in my game it was checked by default

 

2 hours ago, Snubnose said:

turn off v-sync and smooth framerate to unlock FPS above 60.

 

... I don't even know want to say to this,..

2 hours ago, Thornecroft said:

 however it's not like OP isn't true in what he is saying.

Thank you,

 

It bothers me, because when I go through Matt's thread about the engine, he got some 150+FPS charts, when in reality there was half of this on the district with 20-30 people, and I do wonder what's the cause of huuuge error in their data vs real test? Also it's an Open Beta stage ffs, soon to be released has major issue with performance and I get down voted for pointing this shit out?

If this shit won't get resolved and they go live with 60FPS game on high end specs, it's as good as dead for me.

Since I don't know the cause of the issue, pretty sure they don't know it either since they didn't fix it yet, I have really low expectation for a miraculous fix that will boost performance 3 times, so the new Engine will catch up to the old one.

[StunStick 116]

1 hour ago, Resine said:

 

 

... I don't even know want to say to this,..

 

How about "Thank you for explaining my problem"?

 

Sounds like a reasonable response.

 

 

In response to the rest of your reply, I think you're greatly misunderstanding the point of the beta test yesterday. The purpose of the test yesterday was to STRESS TEST. They can't do that with 20-30 people. This is an important step before release.

Edited June 28 by StunStick
Explanation

[Vnight 140]

The community tools making all kind of excuses as usual.

[Genobee 129]

It definitely worries me too. Out of the people I spoke to it seemed to be almost on par or running significantly slower. It didn't even really look much different, certainly not better by any real stretch.

 

I'd have hoped that by now the engine upgrade would've been in a better state. At the very least look better or run faster, but it doesn't seem to. Instead it appeared to be struggling to match the frankensteined tower of spaghetti code we have on live now.

 

Maybe there was some sort of bizarre issue with the test?

Edited June 28 by Genobee

[Uhtdred 169]

1 hour ago, Genobee said:

It definitely worries me too. Out of the people I spoke to it seemed to be almost on par or running significantly slower. It didn't even really look much different, certainly not better by any real stretch.

 

I'd have hoped that by now the engine upgrade would've been in a better state. At the very least look or run faster, but it doesn't seem to. Instead it appeared to be struggling to match the frankensteined tower of spaghetti code we have on live now.

 

Maybe there was some sort of bizarre issue with the test?

beta game opens really fast tho.

 

 

[SelttikS 223]

The problem with an engine update is you are taking something that was never really finished and forcing it into a new engine with the same problems at its foundations. So they have to fix all the issues that have been around and then address all the issues with the new engine and a complete lack of any optimization having happened for either engine. The engine update was Never going to be the Unicorn that saves the game that people keep thinking it is going to be.

[Resine 120]

4 hours ago, StunStick said:

How about "Thank you for explaining my problem"?

 

Sounds like a reasonable response.

Both of them were wrong, it was stupid response. Once people joined, everyone dropped from 140FPS to 60-80.

[CookiePuss 4942]

Player experiences varied greatly, even once they were able to log in.

Data was gathered, and no doubt lessons are being learned.

 

This is how testing goes: we break it, they fix it, we break it again, they fix it again, over and over until nothing breaks it.

The next test will explore other problems I'm sure. Please don't look at the beta as just being about playing the new engine early, there are reasons it isn't live.

This is your chance to help us break it some more.

This is testing and thank you all for your help.

 

[StunStick 116]

49 minutes ago, Resine said:

Both of them were wrong, it was stupid response. Once people joined, everyone dropped from 140FPS to 60-80.

Ok, but they're still trying to help you, no need to be rude.

 

Additional question: what are the specs on your computer?

 

I looked at the FPS quotes and most of the computers were quite beefy and most people shouldn't expect FPS that high.

[gogeo 26]

Hopefully the final release will have something done about the color palettes, they're just as awful as the console version now. 

[Pwnimon 43]

The EU is so unfinished, EA tried to publish it!

Edited June 29 by Pwnimon

[HighSociety 108]

On 6/28/2020 at 1:40 PM, 404 said:

seems like a pretty fair time frame to use weeks for imo

 Reloaded "Q1 2014" also just ~ 321 weeks ago.

Seems legit.

[AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 5365]

5 minutes ago, HighSociety said:

 Reloaded "Q1 2014" also just ~ 321 weeks ago.

Seems legit.

comparing a 9 week wait to a 321 week wait

seems legit

[Nabiki 37]

On 6/28/2020 at 6:14 AM, Resine said:

Could someone please explain what is going on? Let's ignore login issues what's done is done, maybe next one we will get to test it ourselves.

But, from the people that did got in, they had around 60FPS on high end gaming setups, wherever there were people around them with massive drop to 20FPS when anyone joined district,

but scrolling through Matt's threads, there are lots of charts of 150+ FPS, so did something broke? Or we are lied again about the actual performance?

 

I do know it was a BETA, to test things, but having half of the performance of old build, when we heard months ago that it's going to be released in weeks, makes me worried.

So Let me say this if you experienced low FPS and you have a machine 9 years or older you are most likely not going to see frames above 20-60.   So perhaps you may wish to upgrade your hardware, after that it comes down to how many people are on the server, and how good the isp you have between you and the server are.

[Resine 120]

4 minutes ago, Nabiki said:

So Let me say this if you experienced low FPS and you have a machine 9 years or older you are most likely not going to see frames above 20-60.   So perhaps you may wish to upgrade your hardware, after that it comes down to how many people are on the server, and how good the isp you have between you and the server are.

I run the game on NVMe SSD with I7 - 7700k OC(4.9Ghz), water cooled at 32GB RAM with RTX 2080, with Optic fiber ISP, cable, high quality router connected.

Who the hell told you that I run the game at 9 years or older machine? Sadly, I couldn't test FPS because they login was fucked up,

But what I have seen from people that did stream and my friends with quite similar build, once district got some players in there was massive performance issue.

Again, I do know it was BETA, but we are quite late in the game atm and I simply have HIGH DOUBTS, that LO can fix this at all, and I am quite sure they won't be able to make that FIX quickly.

 

Like, look at the current time line, It's the end of June, new engine performance is bananas, nowhere near launch ready and we talk about small Asylum map with limited player pool, all I am saying that "weeks" are hugely overestimated timeline and if this build will be released without resolving the performance issues, it would be another heavy nail into APB's coffin.

[AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 5365]

11 minutes ago, Resine said:

all I am saying that "weeks" are hugely overestimated timeline

the "weeks" timeline has already been met

[KyoukiDotExe 175]

Depending on the preset being used / system specs - the performance may be better or worse. The newer engine has higher quality options and some features work and some don't.

Matt has made posts before with numbers and I highly recommend looking into those. I would love to see more captures of the performance on other systems/system specs, once they open up or are able to tackle the login situation.

 

There is currently still a bit of loading in of textures but that might smooth out overtime. It's far from how the Live situation is, and the best of all is there are barely to no stutters that hiccup your game.

 

"Very high" is the preset that is equal to Live's max.

"Ultra" is a lot higher/has more features and more intensive resource use/usage.

 

The system with a AMD R9 3950x and 1080 Ti is my setup, it's extremely overkill but the new engine loves to use more cores and threads and it certainty benefits from that.

 

Keep in mind that everything is a work in progress / beta and a lot of optimization is left to do.

[Resine 120]

37 minutes ago, KyoukiDotExe said:

Matt has made posts before with numbers and I highly recommend looking into those.

I did, I was hyped for the new performance, but it wasn't delivered.

[SquirrelFace 360]

1 hour ago, Nabiki said:

So Let me say this if you experienced low FPS and you have a machine 9 years or older you are most likely not going to see frames above 20-60.   So perhaps you may wish to upgrade your hardware, after that it comes down to how many people are on the server, and how good the isp you have between you and the server are.

If you have 9 year or older machine it won't launch the game because the devs require AVX support, something 99% of the gaming industry does not require. Besides, 6-core Intel CPUs from 2010 can run the current game over 120fps with very little tweaking. No reason it wouldn't run the EU. If anything, requiring AVX could be hurting performance depending on how each user has Intel's Turbo feature configured.