Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I'm still not sure how you see higher then 1080 lol mine stops at 1080 despite my 4k monitor lol
The only issue with that logic is that Troy campaign map runs amazing on the same engine. And don't start with 'but TWW3 is bigger'. Like I said, its been a problem for the series since forever, with Attila and ToB being the most egregious examples of the issue. In those games, you're lucky to get 50fps and it doesn't even use 70% of my gpu.
Don't always cover for CA, they ♥♥♥♥ up or cut corners like anyone else.
Explanation can be only one. Game has some optimisation/code problems and it just doesnt use your GPU properly. 7800x3d is powerfull GPU which should handle this game even on 4k. Especially if you dont have all settings maxed out.
Also I see that your problems regards only campaign. So did mine. Even if fps during campaign were going obscenically low I had around 200 during battles. Untill I turned on V-Sync as mine PC seemed to early overheat during campaign. Which is hilarious given that I got 3 x 140mm case fans, mesh as front of case and cold flat.
Best, CA_Nova
Personally, a lot of the stuttering/ sudden frame dips have been improved. I think the campaign map is just really resource intensive, which 'probably' isn't something that can be fixed user-side aside from lowering settings or upgrading. Though I'm not the OP, I appreciate the response.
Odd thing about that, and I dunno if it's just me...
But while I can get a wide spread of average and max fps in battles playing with settings and res (5800X, 6800XT, 32 Gb RAM, 3440x1440) the campaign fps is pretty much always within a more narrow window (40-50 fps on average maybe) across all of those and is more prone to drops than battles as well (down to 20-25 fps if crowded/scrolling fast)
On the bright side it's 'just' the campaign map I guess... while I was at one point a few years ago running WH2 at 30-40 fps battles and campaign, 20 fps in battles would be a definite nope even if 45 fps stable would be ok imo for this type/genre of game.
It's kind of a turntables thing tbh cos back when I ran WH2 (on another, better PC than the above mention, 65 fps in battles) it was more often battles that dropped more and further than the campaign map. A step forward and another back elsewhere it would seem is to be expected for what's left of this series... where you might be forgiven for thinking that after some seven years CA might be a bit better at doing this.
Don't. Do. it.
Then my FPS drops from like 550 on Low settings to 14-15 fps.
What's most amazing is that the GPU usage actually DROPS from 70% to anything from 1-7%. I think writing this comment actually utilizes more FPS than that. It's like GPU doesn't throttle, but instead it goes into Idling mode. I could swear it's like I'm switching to built-in GPU, you know, the UHD Graphics 770 or whatever.
So I suggest checking - does it always run like ass? Or only when you have a hero chosen?