The game runs at very low FPS

[Turb0_DorK]

I'm running the game on an AMD Ryzen 3700X and a Radeon 5700XT @ 1440p resolution and getting only 13-14 fps.
The gameplay lag is massive and when I move the mouse the camera moves in about 1-2 seconds later due to the lag.
Is it normal for a Combat Mission game to run at this low FPS?
At this performance I find the game really unplayable.
I just want to see if this is an isolated incident on my side or everyone is getting crappy performance.

[Thurgret]

I have an i7-9700k and RTX 2070. Think the CPU is the bottleneck here. Small engagements run at 50-60FPS in real-time, while large ones run at around 30 FPS. However, if I switch to turn-based, both run at 50-60FPS.

[Thewood]

It runs on older OpenGL libraries and is also very CPU bottlenecked. But even with that, I would expect 30-35 fps. It might be your resolution being high. You can try turning down the graphics setting in-game a little. But don't expect 120 fps ever.

On the Battlefront forums, there are a number of threads around optimization. Good luck.

[TyrannicalTeabag]

It is a "choppy" game, but it runs pretty smoothly on my end, same with the other games of the series, though i have had some problems with the Red Thunder game, but thats also a bit outdated as they are focusing on other titles

[Mace]

I came to ask this too. I've only tried the demo and it runs as bad as the first Shock Force did for me years ago (with a different PC). I thought this second iteration would be fine as I'm over the recommended specs but nope, runs like tar. What settings are we supposed to run at to get the devs recommended specs to work at a decent FPS?

[TyrannicalTeabag]

Originally posted by Mace:

I came to ask this too. I've only tried the demo and it runs as bad as the first Shock Force did for me years ago (with a different PC). I thought this second iteration would be fine as I'm over the recommended specs but nope, runs like tar. What settings are we supposed to run at to get the devs recommended specs to work at a decent FPS?

DO NOT TRUST THE DEMO!!!! Its outdated as hell, and they dont want to update it for some reason :I But the game runs fine on a lot of systems, honestly not a problem.

and again, cant stress this enough, DO NOT TRUST THE DEMO!

[pimpingbunny]

i play turn base mode and the calculation is quite fast

[Jaxk]

Run the game on these settings:
3D model quality: Fastest
3D texture quality: Best

Try change antialias off see if that helps if the above doesn't run well.

The game isn't very well optimised but playing on fastest model quality will help a lot.

It's not your PC its the game and there is nothing that can be done about it.

[Randy Lahey]

I recently downgraded to my 1060 3GB card (with Ryzen 3600) after selling my 1070 in anticpation of the new cards, and it runs very smooth on high settings, Huge battle at 1440p. Could be an AMD driver issue? Not sure. CM games run a little choppy no matter what, that's just the VERY old game engine at work.

[Mace]

Originally posted by Tyrannical TeaBag:

Originally posted by Mace:

I came to ask this too. I've only tried the demo and it runs as bad as the first Shock Force did for me years ago (with a different PC). I thought this second iteration would be fine as I'm over the recommended specs but nope, runs like tar. What settings are we supposed to run at to get the devs recommended specs to work at a decent FPS?

DO NOT TRUST THE DEMO!!!! Its outdated as hell, and they dont want to update it for some reason :I But the game runs fine on a lot of systems, honestly not a problem.

and again, cant stress this enough, DO NOT TRUST THE DEMO!

I might be wrong but I think you don't want me to trust the demo?... 😆 Lol I'll give it a go.

[Buborn]

Try this, I use this on all combat mission titles and it improves the performance by a good bit.

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/96330-some-performance-and-quality-tips-for-nvidia-users/page/5/#comment-1680194

[zenos]

the game runs on OpenGL and AMD performance is not great, apparently because of their drivers

[bufo]

Don't change the 3D model quality and 3D texture quality from the default "balanced" settings. The game uses a quite old opengl version.

[Adam Beckett]

CPU: AMD 2700X (8/16x4.3GHz)
GPU: GTX 1060 6GB
MSI Gaming Carbon Pro X370
16 GB RAM 3200
Windows 10 64-bit 1204
USB Mouse and Keyboard

All graphic options on max + AA + in-game VSync = 7-32FPS (1080p)

All graphic options on lowest settings + noAA + no VSync = constant 30FPS (1024x768) single-core 2GHz.

==========

I am usually hypercritical when it comes to old game engines, but not with this title.

I play it in turn-based mode and it has the same occasional framerate quirks like the old CM games (CMBO/CMAK) when moving the camera with the keyboard while also using the mouse, but it usually does not last more than a few tens of a second. 99% of the time, the graphics are smooth (just to mention this for those who are reading this thread and now scared to try this game).

The game (and UI size) look almost the same in 1024x768 as is does in 1920x1080 - so higher resolution does not do much good (try it).

The game runs the same on a throttled single CPU core (2GHz) as it does with 16 cores at 4.5GHz (=no real need to run it on 'beefier' hardware). It runs the same 11 threads and also only uses like 300-350MB System Memory. Basically, this game could run on a 5-year old smart phone, spec-wise.

30-ish FPS is good enough for a game like this, since it is not a fast paced RTS like CoH or a shooter like ARMA3.

Also, while I love to buy modern AAA games just to gaze at the excellency of their rendering engines, I can live with this game having just the rudimentary representations of 3D objects and units. Not important?

[TyrannicalTeabag]

Originally posted by Mace:

Originally posted by Tyrannical TeaBag:

DO NOT TRUST THE DEMO!!!! Its outdated as hell, and they dont want to update it for some reason :I But the game runs fine on a lot of systems, honestly not a problem.

and again, cant stress this enough, DO NOT TRUST THE DEMO!

I might be wrong but I think you don't want me to trust the demo?... 😆 Lol I'll give it a go.

Hahah yeah,its just the Demo is from a old V.3 or something like that, and we are currently at above V.4, and the Demo is just really poorly optimized and done gennerally

[Thewood]

Originally posted by Adam Beckett:

CPU: AMD 2700X (8/16x4.3GHz)
GPU: GTX 1060 6GB
MSI Gaming Carbon Pro X370
16 GB RAM 3200
Windows 10 64-bit 1204
USB Mouse and Keyboard

All graphic options on max + AA + in-game VSync = 7-32FPS (1080p)

All graphic options on lowest settings + noAA + no VSync = constant 30FPS (1024x768) single-core 2GHz.

==========

I am usually hypercritical when it comes to old game engines, but not with this title.

I play it in turn-based mode and it has the same occasional framerate quirks like the old CM games (CMBO/CMAK) when moving the camera with the keyboard while also using the mouse, but it usually does not last more than a few tens of a second. 99% of the time, the graphics are smooth (just to mention this for those who are reading this thread and now scared to try this game).

The game (and UI size) look almost the same in 1024x768 as is does in 1920x1080 - so higher resolution does not do much good (try it).

The game runs the same on a throttled single CPU core (2GHz) as it does with 16 cores at 4.5GHz (=no real need to run it on 'beefier' hardware). It runs the same 11 threads and also only uses like 300-350MB System Memory. Basically, this game could run on a 5-year old smart phone, spec-wise.

30-ish FPS is good enough for a game like this, since it is not a fast paced RTS like CoH or a shooter like ARMA3.

Also, while I love to buy modern AAA games just to gaze at the excellency of their rendering engines, I can live with this game having just the rudimentary representations of 3D objects and units. Not important?

That is a good perspective to live with.