COH 2 unoptimised?

COh2 unlocked today, played a bit after fiddling with the graphics. Wow, at medium settings I only get ave 30fps, @ high I get like 18fps. Just upgraded to a gtx 660 last week too.

How's your experience and i'm especially interested to hear from amd users.

I wouldn't be too surprised at your performance. I suspect CoH to be a pretty demanding game, and a 660 is a good card, but not exactly "high-end" anymore.

COh2 unlocked today, played a bit after fiddling with the graphics. Wow, at medium settings I only get ave 30fps, @ high I get like 18fps. Just upgraded to a gtx 660 last week too.

How's your experience and i'm especially interested to hear from amd users.

DefconRave

Hmm I had no trouble running it maxed out 60fps in the MP beta 1080p. Is SP more demanding? Maybe it is a CPU bottleneck? My CPU is similar in power to yours, but it is overclocked.

works fine for me maxed out on every setting, 1080p with a 570 SSC and an AMD 1100t X6.  Even works at 1400p if I force that.  Never had any lagging or skipping even in 4v4

Check your settings. You may want to turn down shadows/AA/Ambient Occlusion. I have'nt actually played COH2, but shadows are usually a killer in RTS (and everything).

Edit:

Of course, it may simply be a recently introduced bug ;)

GTX 660 here, and while I hear on the forums nvidia isn't the greatest choice for COH2, I'll admit as a midrange card it just might not be up to the task. 

AA on low, image quality to higher (the one before max) and I'm getting 60 FPS. Any drops are unnoticeable imo. For the hell of it, I put it on max AA/image quality, and it chugged embarassingly during a 2v2 against comps. This wasn't even on a winter map, either.

I haven't played it yet so I might be wrong but from what've seen and read so far, the graphics don't seem to be that much better than the first game. So I'm gonna guess that it has some performance issues and you might have to wait for a patch and/or new drivers. The 660 might be a midrage card but I highly doubt it can't handle COH2 at max settings.

Think it's cpu dependent. SAGE_OF_FIRE

RTS games usaully are because of the amount of AI stuff going on.

ok now my settings are: gameplay res: 100% image quality: higher AA: low v-sync: on Texture detail: high snow: medium physics: medium I lowered the physics from high to med and AA to low while increasing image quality and texture. Ave fps is maintaining at 32. Think I'll stick with this config for now. Thanks for your feedback guys. DefconRave

Running similar to this but with Physics at high and I'm averaging 53 fps (GTX 590), it's a hungry game

last night I maxed it out, with 0 fps minimum, and 5 fps average. Maxed

I turned down AA, same thing.  (this is all according to the performance test)

I am running on AM2+ with a phenom II quad at 3gh, 4gb ddr 2 RAM, and GTX570.  Old yes, but still shouldn't give me this amount of BS performance. I play many other games just fine, including BF3 on a mix between High, and Max. 

I could run COH 1 maxed out and it only slowed down when you brought the camera down to horizon level.

I am thinking either driver issue. Or there is definitely a bug. Maybe there is a glitch in the performance test. 

I haven't got to actually test it in gameplay, I got tired of messing with it last night, hopefully today will be much better.

I will try running the textures on high instead of higher. (but I don't think this will bring my average from 5fps up to something acceptable) 

I really shouldn't be having these issues with this setup.

I have drivers 314, might update to the newer 320. 

I will give the new beta's a try later.

I did download the new 320 whql drivers though.

Here is an update.

I adjusted some settings I am running at 1080p, vsync on, High settings, high snow, high texture, high physx.  In-game AA is off (I am running FXAA through Nvidia) Sound quality is set to medium. 

I get much more playable fps now.  Average is now in the 20s (as opposed to 5fps).  This is with the performance test, which is going to be some of the more stressing parts of the game (resource wise) and most of the game will not be that intense (and they had the camera ground level for most of it). I remember in COH1 your performance in the actual game was better than the performance test. Though, If it gets to be too heavy I will prolly reduce textures to medium.

So I will ride with this for now. Though I hope they release some patches that do increase perfomance. Along with some new drivers that do as well. 

I have an HD7950 and had some slowdown on highest settings at 1080p. It only slowed down when there was lots of smoke on screen. Turned AA down from high to medium (usually the first setting to go down for me) and it runs perfectly now.

I haven't played it yet so I might be wrong but from what've seen and read so far, the graphics don't seem to be that much better than the first game.

RazorGR

It looks a lot better than the first game, and it should too because the original is from 2006.

I have an HD7950 and had some slowdown on highest settings at 1080p. It only slowed down when there was lots of smoke on screen. Turned AA down from high to medium (usually the first setting to go down for me) and it runs perfectly now.

[QUOTE="RazorGR"]

I haven't played it yet so I might be wrong but from what've seen and read so far, the graphics don't seem to be that much better than the first game.

R4gn4r0k

It looks a lot better than the first game, and it should too because the original is from 2006.

It does look a bit better, and runs better too, at least for me.  CoH1 still chugs a lot.

ok now my settings are: gameplay res: 100% image quality: higher AA: low v-sync: on Texture detail: high snow: medium physics: medium I lowered the physics from high to med and AA to low while increasing image quality and texture. Ave fps is maintaining at 32. Think I'll stick with this config for now. Thanks for your feedback guys. DefconRave

Never use vsync unless the game runs flawlessly at a higher framerate than your monitor can display. 

Now running it at high settings no vsync (tearing isn't that noticeable in the areas where it counts) Only place it is real bad is in-game but when the computer has control of the camera, and it does steady slow paced pans across action. When the player controls camera, it doesn't stand out near as bad.

The performance over-all is better than COH1. Especially when you bring the camera down to horizon level.

But still haven't spent a whole lot of time with this game yet. Also the performance test seems to be bugged for me, it gets so slow it hangs up. (chugs even before it gets started good) It is no where near indicative of actual game performance. 

It seems to have a darker tone over-all than the first game (mainly speaking of campaign, haven't done 'much' MP or skirmish yet). Which is something I like. Music is better in this one compared to the first game.  Graphics aren't quite as gritty as the first game, and are cleaner, easier to see. Better color pallet. However it still seems to have a darker overtone than the first game. Especially the winter levels.  I like the visuals. I don't think it looks a ton better than the first game, however in action it seems far more life-like. Animations seem way better. 

My computer is 5 years old, even with upgrades its starting to slowly show its age over time. But this more than playable so far. I just hope a few more patches, and focused drivers will increase performance even more given a little time.

[QUOTE="DefconRave"]ok now my settings are: gameplay res: 100% image quality: higher AA: low v-sync: on Texture detail: high snow: medium physics: medium I lowered the physics from high to med and AA to low while increasing image quality and texture. Ave fps is maintaining at 32. Think I'll stick with this config for now. Thanks for your feedback guys. the_bi99man

Never use vsync unless the game runs flawlessly at a higher framerate than your monitor can display. 

[QUOTE="DefconRave"]ok now my settings are: gameplay res: 100% image quality: higher AA: low v-sync: on Texture detail: high snow: medium physics: medium I lowered the physics from high to med and AA to low while increasing image quality and texture. Ave fps is maintaining at 32. Think I'll stick with this config for now. Thanks for your feedback guys. the_bi99man

Never use vsync unless the game runs flawlessly at a higher framerate than your monitor can display. 

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

[QUOTE="DefconRave"]ok now my settings are: gameplay res: 100% image quality: higher AA: low v-sync: on Texture detail: high snow: medium physics: medium I lowered the physics from high to med and AA to low while increasing image quality and texture. Ave fps is maintaining at 32. Think I'll stick with this config for now. Thanks for your feedback guys. xsubtownerx

Never use vsync unless the game runs flawlessly at a higher framerate than your monitor can display. 

So every game that runs under 60 fps I should turn off vsync? Cos I thought vsync prevents the graphics card from overworking. Is there a way to show the fps in games part from fraps?DefconRave

the goal of vsync to to remove screen tearing when your framerate is higher than your monitor's refresh rate.  Unless you constantly run over 60fps in a game, it's only going to give you input lag and/or artificially low framerates

[QUOTE="DefconRave"]So every game that runs under 60 fps I should turn off vsync? Cos I thought vsync prevents the graphics card from overworking. Is there a way to show the fps in games part from fraps?wis3boi

the goal of vsync to to remove screen tearing when your framerate is higher than your monitor's refresh rate.  Unless you constantly run over 60fps in a game, it's only going to give you input lag and/or artificially low framerates

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"][QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

Never use vsync unless the game runs flawlessly at a higher framerate than your monitor can display. 

KHAndAnime

[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"][QUOTE="xsubtownerx"] I've tested with it on and off and get no increased FPS for having it off.xsubtownerx

I find screen tearing to be a small sacrifice compared to input lag. Icky :P

[QUOTE="wis3boi"]

[QUOTE="DefconRave"]So every game that runs under 60 fps I should turn off vsync? Cos I thought vsync prevents the graphics card from overworking. Is there a way to show the fps in games part from fraps?DefconRave

the goal of vsync to to remove screen tearing when your framerate is higher than your monitor's refresh rate.  Unless you constantly run over 60fps in a game, it's only going to give you input lag and/or artificially low framerates

[QUOTE="DefconRave"][QUOTE="wis3boi"]

the goal of vsync to to remove screen tearing when your framerate is higher than your monitor's refresh rate.  Unless you constantly run over 60fps in a game, it's only going to give you input lag and/or artificially low framerates

Elann2008

[QUOTE="Elann2008"][QUOTE="DefconRave"] Damn, i have left vsync on for almost all my games. Must go change the settings. Also is there an alternative to fraps?DefconRave

D3Doverrider comes with Rivaturner. 

D3Doverrider provides 3rd party Vsync, and triple buffering.

There has only been a few times where....

A) some games don't support it.

B) actually gives less performance than in-game vsync (although this is rare, I found a few games that the in-game Vsync hurt performance less, I want to say Diablo III was one of them)

That being said, as a whole D3Doverrider is my favorite vsync, because usually it doesn't hurt performance as much, and doesn't introduce (as much) input lag. When it works, and it usually does.

I usually have Vsync on. (usuing D3Doverrider) 

I haven't tried with CoH2 and D3Doverrider, as I was still getting it setup, however I will try it today to see if it lowers performance much, while removing the screen tearing.

Wow you need third party applications just to run this at an acceptable framerate? Did anyone actually buy CoH2? My God what a crap game.SKaREO

ahh yes, the one inspirational poster GS has... :roll:  With his usual genius posts.

[QUOTE="SKaREO"]Wow you need third party applications just to run this at an acceptable framerate? Did anyone actually buy CoH2? My God what a crap game.Lach0121

ahh yes, the one inspirational poster GS has... :roll:  With his usual genius posts.

"This game is crap" - every SKaREO post ever

[QUOTE="Lach0121"]

[QUOTE="SKaREO"]Wow you need third party applications just to run this at an acceptable framerate? Did anyone actually buy CoH2? My God what a crap game.R4gn4r0k

ahh yes, the one inspirational poster GS has... :roll:  With his usual genius posts.

"This game is crap" - every SKaREO post ever

It is definitely one of his 'greatest hits.'