Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2010 low fps.

I think this is a horribly unoptimized game.

It runs slow no matter what I do.

I have an 8800gt and a AMD Athlonx2 5200+ 2.7ghz.

I have tried lowering the settings but there are still big drops in frame rate.

The best I get is around 27-30fps but there are big drops at certain points that go to 14fps.

A console game shouldn't run this bad on a system that is around 3 times the power of it.

And the game doesn't even look good.

Dirt 2 looks much better and runs much better.

its probably cpu heavy, and that cpu isnt that great.

Your CPU is the problem. Its rather outdated.

Which means it is unoptimized.

the minimum requirements was a 2.4ghz amd dual core.

and the recommended is only 3.0ghz amd dual core.

So I guess there minimum means just running slideshow.

I barely use 30% of my gpu and I am not even maxing my cpu out when racing.

It is at 89%.

Dirt 2 runs well with everything maxed except reflection on ultra instead of ultra high.

I wish the devs weren't so stupid and knew how to make a PC game.

Your CPU is the problem. Its rather outdated.

desertpython

It's better than a console cpu.

And I can practically max out games like Dirt 2.

My cpu is not the problem the devs are the problem, they created an unoptimized trash heap of a game.

Why should a console game run bad?

The console hardware is far outdated.

Plus I wasn't even maxing the cpu when getting low fps.

It was at 89% most of the time.

Which means it is unoptimized.

the minimum requirements was a 2.4 amd dual core.

and the recommended is only 3.0ghz amd dual core.

So I guess there minimum means just running slideshow.

I barely use 30% of my gpu and I am not even maxing my cpu out when racing.

It is at 89%.

Dirt 2 runs well with everything maxed except reflection on ultra instead of ultra high.

I wish the devs weren't so stupid and knew how to make a PC game.

Hakkai007

The developers didn't code a game for an obsolete CPU - that would be a new amd dual core.

The developers didn't code a game for an obsolete CPU - that would be a new amd dual core.

desertpython

Then tell me why Dirt 2 runs excellent on near max settings?

It's the devs fault who made a trashy game.

They coded it for obsolete console hardware and they should be able to do the same for an older CPU.

Especially when it passed the requirements.

[QUOTE="desertpython"]

The developers didn't code a game for an obsolete CPU - that would be a new amd dual core.

Hakkai007

Then tell me why Dirt 2 runs excellent on near max settings?

It's the devs fault who made a trashy game.

They coded it for obsolete console hardware and they should be able to do the same for an older CPU.

Especially when it passed the requirements.

Need for Speed demands more from your CPU than Dirt 2. It depends on the game engine.

Need for Speed demands more from your CPU than Dirt 2. It depends on the game engine.

desertpython

Then how can a 5 year old outdated console run it well?

Sounds like a crappy game engine that should be thrown away.

Dirt 2 looks many many times better and runs better.

I guess Dirt 2 just uses a much better game engine.

And what is worse is that there was no PC demo.

They said my CPU should run the game fine but they lied.

I hope their game gets pirated and fails.

Need for Speed demands more from your CPU than Dirt 2. It depends on the game engine.

desertpython

[QUOTE="desertpython"]Need for Speed demands more from your CPU than Dirt 2. It depends on the game engine.

millerlight89

No its the updated physics engine that has glitches.

People are so quick to blame the engine. My friends picked it up and it plays beautifully on their PCs which are somewhat current. That CPU is just too old for a brand new game. Not everything can be offloaded to the GPU, the CPU still plays a vital roll in games.

Why does it run well on a 5 year old system? Because the graphics are not as good on those systems, it is running at only 720p, and it is a closed system.

[QUOTE="desertpython"]

Need for Speed demands more from your CPU than Dirt 2. It depends on the game engine.

Hakkai007

Then how can a 5 year old outdated console run it well?

Sounds like a crappy game engine that should be thrown away.

Dirt 2 looks many many times better and runs better.

I guess Dirt 2 just uses a much better game engine.

And what is worse is that there was no PC demo.

They said my CPU should run the game fine but they lied.

I hope their game gets pirated and fails.

Each and every part in a console is streamlined to work with each other better than how most computers of greater strength run. Then there's the fact that the game was developed for a console, which is easy to limit the problems. They didn't lie. I'm willing to bet that chances are there is something on your computer that is interfering with how the game is running.

I doubt you'll listen to me though because you just sound like you want to blame people, so go ahead.

Each and every part in a console is streamlined to work with each other better than how most computers of greater strength run. Then there's the fact that the game was developed for a console, which is easy to limit the problems. They didn't lie. I'm willing to bet that chances are there is something on your computer that is interfering with how the game is running.

I doubt you'll listen to me though because you just sound like you want to blame people, so go ahead.

theafiguy

So basically I was correct when I said it was a horrible port.

They did lie if they said a 2.4ghz could run it.

And no nothing is wrong with my computer.

I have been using computers since the late 1980s and building them since the mid 1990s.

I know enough to see a bad port.

If all my other games run perfectly fine whether new or old then this shows that they did not optimize the game for a PC.

They don't even let you change much in settings except shadows and the option for high res textures.

I tried everything on low and I still get the same fps.

This is when I can see piracy being justified.

They release no demo and then release requirements which my computer passes and then I purchase it and it runs like crap.

So your saying my CPU is weaker than a consoles'? If not then that means the game is unoptimized.

Simple as that.

This is when I can see piracy being justified.Hakkai007

Umm...I'll go with what everyone else said, maybe the reason why a PC demo wasn't released. On another note, Is this game any good?? I played the demos on both 360 and PS3, I thought it was ok..graphics were a big shame IMO. Any better on PC?ShadowDeathX

Here is how it looks maxed on PC.

Not that good at all.

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]This is when I can see piracy being justified.millerlight89

It is when the company never releases a demo and then lies about the Pc requirements.

Wrong; you don't meet the recommended specs and barely meet the minimum specs. You shouldn't have bothered to buy this on an outdated system, regardless of the engine, so stop whining about it:

http://www.needforspeed.com/post/need-speed-hot-pursuit-minimum-pc-specs

Wrong; you don't meet the recommended specs and barely meet the minimum specs. You shouldn't have bothered to buy this on an outdated system, regardless of the engine, so stop whining about it:

http://www.needforspeed.com/post/need-speed-hot-pursuit-minimum-pc-specs

desertpython

The recommended is barely any better than mine.

2.7ghz cpu vs 3.0ghz.

They should not even have the minimum requirements then.

Why should I have not bothered to buy it when it says I could run it and it is a console game.

The console cpus are much weaker.

My system can play most games near max or max settings.

Are you saying a computer that is around 3 times the power of a console shouldn't be able to run a console game?

[QUOTE="theafiguy"]

Each and every part in a console is streamlined to work with each other better than how most computers of greater strength run. Then there's the fact that the game was developed for a console, which is easy to limit the problems. They didn't lie. I'm willing to bet that chances are there is something on your computer that is interfering with how the game is running.

I doubt you'll listen to me though because you just sound like you want to blame people, so go ahead.

Hakkai007

So basically I was correct when I said it was a horrible port.

They did lie if they said a 2.4ghz could run it.

And no nothing is wrong with my computer.

I have been using computers since the late 1980s and building them since the mid 1990s.

I know enough to see a bad port.

If all my other games run perfectly fine whether new or old then this shows that they did not optimize the game for a PC.

They don't even let you change much in settings except shadows and the option for high res textures.

I tried everything on low and I still get the same fps.

This is when I can see piracy being justified.

They release no demo and then release requirements which my computer passes and then I purchase it and it runs like crap.

So your saying my CPU is weaker than a consoles'? If not then that means the game is unoptimized.

Simple as that.

Just because you've been using computers for a long time doesn't mean something can't go wrong, and if you continue to have that mentality, then you're going to find yourself in a bad spot one day, but I digress.

I never said it wasn't a poor port though, since most of the NFS games are pretty poor ports. Demo's don't really mean much, whether or not one is released doesn't decrease the value of a game at all.

What I was getting at with the CPU's is this, the CPU is built specifically to work with THAT RAM, and THAT GPU, and THAT mobo, so on and so forth. They are computers, and they need to be build the same way. It's entirely possible to upgrade them, if you can magically get the drivers for new hardware, so on and so forth. Also, the Xbox 360 has a 3.2 tri-core and the PS3 has a CPU of similar power, other than it can handle loads in a completely different way. So your CPU is WEAKER than the consoles, not better. Lrn2information.

The console cpus are much weakerHakkai007

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]The console cpus are much weakermillerlight89

I have my task manager open to see all of the processes running.

Nothing is taking up cpu usage except audio and the game.

They should of scaled the game better for Pc and allowed you to turn off what was causing low fps.

The game will run smooth around 25-30 but there are certain spots where it drops randomly to 14fps for a few seconds.

It is quite annoying.

Hakkai, you said maxed out but there is no AA in those screenshots. Does the game support AA?

So your CPU is WEAKER than the consoles, not better. Lrn2information.

theafiguy

Wrong my CPU is better.

It's funny you think a console could compete with a cpu that was around 400USD on release in 2006 (mine version was 2007).

You need to Lrn2information.

Hakkai, you said maxed out but there is no AA in those screenshots. Does the game support AA?

subyman

Nope there is no AA.

I tried forcing it in the Nvidia control panel and it still didn't work.

[QUOTE="theafiguy"]

So your CPU is WEAKER than the consoles, not better. Lrn2information.

Hakkai007

Wrong my CPU is better.

It's funny you think a console could compete with a cpu that was around 400USD on release in 2006 (mine version was 2007).

You need to Lrn2information.

You have 1 less core and 500MHz slower clock speed. Derp.

You have 1 less core and 500MHz slower clock speed. Derp.

theafiguy

That doesn't matter. It's not all about cores and clock speed.

The architecture of the CPU matters too.

Console cpus are weaker.

You have 1 less core and 500MHz slower clock speed. Derp.

theafiguy

That would be like saying my CPU is stronger than a Core 2 Duo E6700 or E6600 which is completely false.

Okay buddy. Have fun in Denial Land, just south of I'm Always Right River.theafiguy

And you have fun in ignorance land, just east of I know nothing hill.

Looks like AA can be forced through Catalyst drivers. Here is a screen with AA enabled. Are you sure you are using max textures OP, because this screen looks amazing:

Looks like AA can be forced through Catalyst drivers. Here is a screen with AA enabled. Are you sure you are using max textures OP, because this screen looks amazing:

subyman

That screen is very small so it hides some stuff.

But yes i am using high res textures and everything else is maxed in the pics.

I guess Nvidia drivers can't force the AA and Nhancer doesn't work for any new Nvidia drivers....

Hey man, at least my games work and I don't make poor purchases.theafiguy

All of my games work too, just not that unoptimized piece of crap.

Also it is not a poor purchase because I am going to try selling it to a friend.

But it still pisses me off that they lied about the requirements and didn't release a demo.

They need better devs like the one Capcom has for ports.

Lost Planet 2 worked wonderfully at the highest settings and so did other games like RE5 and Devil May Cry 4.

Well atleast I got Dirt 2 at max except ultra reflections instead of ultra high.

Dirt 2 is a much better game anyway.

Here is a link to the full screen shot, the guy was using 3 monitors so you get to see a ton:

http://i.imgur.com/PJqtp.jpg

People were having luck with Nvidia inspector, might want to give that a try.

[QUOTE="theafiguy"]Hey man, at least my games work and I don't make poor purchases.Hakkai007

All of my games work too, just not that unoptimized piece of crap.

Also it is not a poor purchase because I am going to try selling it to a friend.

But it still pisses me off that they lied about the requirements and didn't release a demo.

They need better devs like the one Capcom has for ports.

Lost Planet 2 worked wonderfully at the highest settings and so did other games like RE5 and Devil May Cry 4.

Well atleast I got Dirt 2 at max except ultra reflections instead of ultra high.

Dirt 2 is a much better game anyway.

I doubt they lied about the requirements, the companies have no real reason to do that. It's not like it's asking for a whole lot of power, dumbing down requirements would do little for sales, especially on PC. AAA games typically tend to be really good ports, save for GTAIV (that was so bad). They have their test machines, and I'm sure they worked fine on those machines, can't blame them for not anticipating a very vague issue. Also, didn't this like...JUST come out? I would give it time, Shift was bad when it was first released, but the later patches were wonderous for the game.

People were having luck with Nvidia inspector, might want to give that a try.

subyman

Thanks I will see if that works tomorrow.

I doubt they lied about the requirements, the companies have no real reason to do that. It's not like it's asking for a whole lot of power, dumbing down requirements would do little for sales, especially on PC. AAA games typically tend to be really good ports, save for GTAIV (that was so bad). They have their test machines, and I'm sure they worked fine on those machines, can't blame them for not anticipating a very vague issue. Also, didn't this like...JUST come out? I would give it time, Shift was bad when it was first released, but the later patches were wonderous for the game.

theafiguy

Well you are right about Shift being bad on release. I hope they do release patches for Hot Pursuit since Shift does run well on my PC now.

They listed an AMD CPU in the same series with lower specs as minimum and one that is barely stronger as recommended.

GTAIV actually runs better than this game on my PC.

.

I will be building a new PC early next year for games like Shogun 2, Crysis 2, and The Witcher 2.

But there is no reason to upgrade a small part of my PC when just about every game can be run near max or at max.

[QUOTE="desertpython"]

Wrong; you don't meet the recommended specs and barely meet the minimum specs. You shouldn't have bothered to buy this on an outdated system, regardless of the engine, so stop whining about it:

http://www.needforspeed.com/post/need-speed-hot-pursuit-minimum-pc-specs

Hakkai007

The recommended is barely any better than mine.

2.7ghz cpu vs 3.0ghz.

They should not even have the minimum requirements then.

Why should I have not bothered to buy it when it says I could run it and it is a console game.

The console cpus are much weaker.

My system can play most games near max or max settings.

Are you saying a computer that is around 3 times the power of a console shouldn't be able to run a console game?

Hakkai your game looks worse then mine, force 16xq AA and 16af in your driver panel it looks much better without jaggies. And this game isn't horribly optimised, I stay locked at 60fps and dont dip below 50 with a gtx 260 and a dual core. Plus my gpu usage is only 60% with this gameSPBoss

I tried forcing AA and AF and it didn't work.

Also it is horribly optimized. My GPU usage is lower than yours.

I wonder how much fps I would get with a GTX 470 and a X4 965, since I'm planning on gettingthis.

I wonder how much fps I would get with a GTX 470 and a X4 965, since I'm planning on gettingthis.

Animatronic64

Your setup will run super smooth with no problems.

I wonder how much fps I would get with a GTX 470 and a X4 965, since I'm planning on gettingthis.

Animatronic64

[QUOTE="SPBoss"]Hakkai your game looks worse then mine, force 16xq AA and 16af in your driver panel it looks much better without jaggies. And this game isn't horribly optimised, I stay locked at 60fps and dont dip below 50 with a gtx 260 and a dual core. Plus my gpu usage is only 60% with this gameHakkai007

I tried forcing AA and AF and it didn't work.

Also it is horribly optimized. My GPU usage is lower than yours.

[QUOTE="Animatronic64"]

I wonder how much fps I would get with a GTX 470 and a X4 965, since I'm planning on gettingthis.

SPBoss

i dint get the game but i think its just cpu intensive.even the nfs undercover was abit cpu intensive.and theres no need to be talking about consoles.the ps3 and xbox 360 were made with future high fps games in mind.i think you should seriously try overclocking your cpu if u have a good cooling system then it should be easy.

Pretty much any mainstream CPU sold in the last 2-3 years should run this fine. I don't think that is much to ask for. Looking at those graphics, if someone with a midrange Core Duo can max it at 60fps then it seems pretty optimized. Unoptimized is GTA4 where you need a overclocked quad-core beast to even play at 40fps haha.

Pretty much any mainstream CPU sold in the last 2-3 years should run this fine. I don't think that is much to ask for. Looking at those graphics, if someone with a midrange Core Duo can max it at 60fps then it seems pretty optimized. Unoptimized is GTA4 where you need a overclocked quad-core beast to even play at 40fps haha.

subyman