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
10% CPU
2% GPU
When there is a ton of destruction the game will heavily load only a handful of cores\threads so your 32-thread CPU will overall have an extremely low average usage, while maybe only one to four "cores" are at 80-90% which causes performance to drop.
It is always a CPU bottleneck when destruction causes performance to drop.
Can we PLEASE have a sticky to explain this? 90% of the performance complaints could be addressed by telling people this.
You can be fairly certain it isn't a GPU bottleneck if you can look at the ground or sky and still have poor frame rates... which is exactly what happens when there's a lot of destruction going on. The only solution is to use less janky mods while also using performance mods that reduce debris.
8-12 thread CPUs with higher per-thread performance will most likely perform better during lots of destruction than CPUs with 32 threads and lower boost clocks.