Widescreen Gaming Forum

Performance seems awful. 25-35 FPS in the first mission (kill 6 ghouls) at 5760x1080 using ultra or even high with regular AA. Must be a serious problem with Eyefinity or Crossfire or both. Both GPUs show max usage, though that doesn't necessarily mean it's being used wisely.

For comparison, I get 60-70 FPS in BC2 with max settings and 200+ FPS in Half Life 2 at the same resolution. Something's not right. It looks sort of pretty, but it sure as hell isn't Crysis.

Yea I'm corius to what other peoples performance was like, after playing the beta alot this weekend, I do like it, and I'd definitely consider pre-ordering this now, if it wasn't for this horrid performance.

With a 2600k @ 4.5 and 2x6970's and getting mid 40 fps, on high ish settings at 5292x1050, albeit with big slow downs.
Crossfire seems to just add an extreme amount of microstutter too, more than I've seen in any other game.

On a single screen it was better but still not what I'd expect with the specc of my PC.

I'm trying to get the game to run at 6028x1200 rez. It's Nvidia Surround (triple monitor, but not 3D). The possibility looks available thru the in-game settings however the selection for resolutions literally goes off the margin of the screen (on the bottom) and there is no way to scroll to it. So it's there just out of reach so to speak. How are you getting it to run???

Is there a .ini file or any other file that will help me?

I'm trying to get the game to run at 6028x1200 rez. It's Nvidia Surround (triple monitor, but not 3D). The possibility looks available thru the in-game settings however the selection for resolutions literally goes off the margin of the screen (on the bottom) and there is no way to scroll to it. So it's there just out of reach so to speak. How are you getting it to run???

Is there a .ini file or any other file that will help me?

Ok, I stumbled upon the solution. I had to run in Fullscreen Windowed mode and that then made the game default to the native desktop resolution which is the 6028x1200.

I will say I'm very disappointed with performance. I'm using 2-460's OC'ed to 810 core clock and shader clock at 1620. Memory is 1GB per card and running at 1900 clock. On MEDIUM settings I'm getting an avg of 19 FPS...frankly medium settings blow and to have it running at 19 FPS is a double whammy. When doing 1920x1200 I can set things to ULTRA and stay above 30 FPS.

Am I really underpowered or should I be making tweaks I don't know about.

I've been in every Beta since the first one. Fps has been an issue from the start.
The first couple of betas the fps sucked, but as each beta came and went, the fps increased.
Back then, it wasn't optimized for multi-cores either. That has since been corrected.
It is improving, we just don't know if this is it; were they running things in the background (debugging, etc.); or there's more tweaking that can/will be done. I'm not trying to defend the game, just stating what I've seen during the betas and what's been "rumored".

Your computer - I would say your video cards aren't so much underpowered, but are lacking in memory. True, you have 1gb per card, but it's not considered 2gbs combined. It's just 1gb, with each card utilizing the 1gb they have.

Uldred

Ehh.. I'll wait till it has moved on to the free to play business model. Gone are the days where I'm dying to get into a buggy as hell launch again. Every MMO disappoints out of the gate. It takes at least a year for significant polishing to occur to make the games enjoyable for mid/end game content. As long as their is a level grind, all MMO launches focus on the leveling content and leave the end game for future patches. Which is not worth the $$$ and time imo.

Running decent on 3 480's at 5760x1080 with high settings. Haven't tried any big groups or anything yet, but so far its very playable in the 50s-70's of FPS.

Running decent on 3 480's at 5760x1080 with high settings. Haven't tried any big groups or anything yet, but so far its very playable in the 50s-70's of FPS.

Tbh, if i were using 3x480's I'd never expect to even mention its playable, a game should work fine with that amount of horsepower.

2x 580's @ 6020 x 1200

NumFrames; 3162
MinFPS; 39
MaxFPS; 69
AvgFPS; 52

Min CPU U%; 13
Max CPU U%; 45
Avg CPU U%; 25

2x 580's @ 6020 x 1200

NumFrames; 3162
MinFPS; 39
MaxFPS; 69
AvgFPS; 52

Min CPU U%; 13
Max CPU U%; 45
Avg CPU U%; 25

In game settings please? High, Medium, Ultra, Custom? V-sync? AA?

Ultra setting . no aa,

I have 2-460's 1GB each superclocked and when I run at 6020x1200 with my U2410's it's HORRID. When I change everything to medium settings, I'm still getting 19FPS. And if you don't know, medium settings blow! I'm really disappointed, I thought when I got the 460's 6 months ago they'd be somewhat future proof. Now I have to figure out how to upgrade without my wife knowing :(

Sorry to tell you, but the 1GB framebuffer is hardly enough to run that resolution. You would need at least 2GB on each card. Try lowering the resolution and see if it runs better. I'll bet that if you run GPU-Z and look at the memory usage that it'll be pegged at full capacity the entire time.

That's too bad. When I got the cards, I thought 1 GB was overkill and if not overkill would atleast future proof me a little bit. So now I'm spending a ton of time in Rift on one screen even though I have a Nvidia Surround set up :(

I'm frustrated and not sure what to do.

The 460 is no slouch at gaming performance, don't get me wrong. The fact of the matter is that the higher the resolution, the more VRAM is required to render a scene to the framebuffer, especially with AA. When there is no more on-die memory available it then goes to the swap file, which is a magnitude slower than graphics memory, and thrashing occurs. This is thankfully a problem being recognized by redistributors going forward and is being tackled currently by Palit and Gainward. Hopefully reference cards will have a minimum of 2GB of memory in the near future. I would watch for sales of the GTX 560 Ti 2GB if you ever get the need to upgrade. You can always see if the manufacturer of your 460s offers an upgrade program of some sort, so you can trade them in for 2GB 460s or 560s.

I have been playing the game since beta.. running 2 6970's 2gb (xfx) Crossfired.. and no matter if I have one card or both enabled.. I get around 25-30fps. This is on three screens. Now if I go down to one screen I get 50-60fps. IS this normal for the raw power of these cards ? I am concerned that even crossfired both GPU's will go to 85-90 % on use.. but doesnt seem to effect frame rates with one or two cards. I am using the latest 11.2 drivers. These are a new upgrade on a new install of windows on raided SSD's so the system has known no other driver or card.

Just seems to me with the raw power these cards have, that I am being short changed. As I just upgraded my wifes rig to a 6850 1gb version and she is getting 45fps on a 24 inch 1080p monitor.

Some more screen shots

http://beermemckie.home.comcast.net/~beermemckie/rift/rift.htm

Ok, sweet, I've got it working. I had to reduce the rez to 4017x1024. Doing so, I'm able to keep the settings on high and stay above 30 FPS. I can tell a difference, but not enough for me to go back to single monitor or sell my cards for an upgrade. Here are some pics.

http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197972604470/screenshot/576664839901795871/?
http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197972604470/screenshot/576664839901794046/?

Would anyone be able to post a screenshot or two in portrait mode for their eyefinity setup (preferably the same folks that posted the landscape SS's). I'd like to see the perspective difference between the 5760x1200/1080 vs 3600/3240x1920.

Anyone have this game working with CF? CF scaling is poor and then disappears to 0% scaling within a few minutes every time.

This has also taught me that when AMD cards are concerned, at least, the GPU usage meters don't mean shit. Both of them are in the 80% range but the FPS is equivalent to single-GPU performance.

i think i am really enjoying the GFX of this game, looks more ... harry potter like ... rather than WOW's cartoony feel. the texture mnaps in game sure beats WOW, WOW's look like "cheap" pixels, not to be rude, but like in photoshop how we zoom in to edit pixels, the RIFT graphics looks like it still has so much more zoomability, the texture maps have so much detail to accomodate the zoom in views.

i just got my thermaltake FRIO to try some CPU frying n a new casing, hopefully next week i can try some Asus EAH6950. any1 wanna recommend me something else to try? im all ears.