I had stable 60 fps during all kinds of scenarios a year ago with dx 12. Now Im back and the game is unplayable during hordes because of crazy fps drops.
Shadows off, only textures are high rest are low or off.
what could be causing this is my hardware not enough for this game?
This game proved to be poorly optimized on my experience. I have 1060 6GB, i7-4770 and 16gb ram (also SSD) and my game still is played with 45-50 fps most of the time on hordes with disgusting fps drops at some specific locations which are many. Funnily enough even if I put everything to the lowest my fps doesn’t even change that much (1-5 avg fps difference), so I just stick to high textures same as you.
I’ve seen many people complaining about around the same performance as you or me, yet they have systems build around 2080 gpu. It’s just the way it is and the overall poor optimization has been mentioned by many people over the years, so I’d advice you to get used to it. I don’t see this changing any time soon, sadly, but I can only dream about smooth Vermintide gameplay.
CPU overclocked to 4.7 Ghz Uncore OC to 4.3 Ghz +0.045 Vcore offset on adaptive voltage.
Does not thermal throttle as I monitor through Hwi monitor. CPU core usage goe max 93/94%
GPU memory load max around 80/85%
CPU max pack temp 84 average 60 Celcius degrees
GPU 60 max Celcius degrees.
Thermal throttle, power throttle all negative(does not occur)
There is nothing in the logs that would explain a substantial drop in FPS. If every solution in the article linked above has been unsuccessful I can only suspect either a deeper rooted issue that is likely to be outside of our area of expertise, or simply poor optimisation on our end.
I think I can chime in as I guess my CPU is close to yours, a 3930K at 4.4 and per some benchmark site the numbers are very close to an 4.8 clocked 8600k.
Depending on the scenery my frames drop to below 60 and sometimes below 50, but that needs an open space like some angles in The Pit where all the horde waves are coming from roughly the field of view, or something similar.
Our graphics settings are quite different and I am running a 1070 (which I doubt makes just about any difference).
If you also posted this to the steam forums by a similar name you mentioned having 1x8 gb stick of RAM in single channel. I can tell you that in general single channel vs dual channel e.g. 2x4 gb vs 1x8gb of RAM has a performance impact of roughly 30% in general, but it can be as bad as 50% as you see here in this example in Battlefield V with an 8600k even when you’re using only 6GB of the RAM.
with low CPU demanding settings, it should be more than enough for stable 60. You might be able to improve performance in other ways (not sure what you’ve tried already), but dual channel RAM should be a big boost for FPS.
The example I showed was one of the more extreme cases of RAM bottlenecking (around 50%) and for a different game (so you can’t expect the same for VT2), but like I mentioned, in general you can expect 30% worse performance with single channel memory vs dual channel of the same capacity and speed. (it will vary depending on game, amount of memory and memory speed, but you can check benchmarks for single vs dual channel online to check for yourself).
Here is the only VT2 single channel vs dual channel comparison I could find, but it uses VT2 benchmark which is not very demanding because there aren’t really any hordes in it.
Has to be. If my near 10 yr old CPU pulls 50+ on the worst (vanilla game) visibility situations then new ones have to be able to perform the same in less time, except if there is a limiting factor in the engine.
But, given every MHz gotten out from OC and every mem speed increase has given better and more stable FPS it should be a sign that some good CPUs can pull it off.