why does this game run like crap?

[NoName]

specs:
gtx 960m 4gb ddr5 vram
i7-6700HQ
8gb ddr4 ram
windows 10 home 64-bit

im getting 15-20 fps maxed settings at 1080p while arkham knight runs with 40-50 fps maxed settings at 1080p, i mean wtf ... does it just not work properly with windows 10?

[NoName]

same problem with arkham asylum btw

[Moe]

your laptop can not max out arkham city. it simply isn't powerful enough. so turn some settings down if you want higher fps.

btw... Arkham Knight is a newer game... it runs off a more optimized game engine. hence the reason you see better frames. this is PC 101 Knowledge.

[s1att]

Originally posted by Willie Stroker:

your laptop can not max out arkham city. it simply isn't powerful enough. so turn some settings down if you want higher fps.

btw... Arkham Knight is a newer game... it runs off a more optimized game engine. hence the reason you see better frames. this is PC 101 Knowledge.

Wow... you're so wrong. That GPU is the mobile equivalent of a GTX 960, which is a little less powerful than a GTX 950. The i7 is a Skylake, which is also powerful for a laptop. You sound like an idiot.

[Moe]

Originally posted by kale:

Originally posted by Willie Stroker:

your laptop can not max out arkham city. it simply isn't powerful enough. so turn some settings down if you want higher fps.

btw... Arkham Knight is a newer game... it runs off a more optimized game engine. hence the reason you see better frames. this is PC 101 Knowledge.

Wow... you're so wrong. That GPU is the mobile equivalent of a GTX 960, which is a little less powerful than a GTX 950. The i7 is a Skylake, which is also powerful for a laptop. You sound like an idiot.

you claim that a GTX 960m is comparable to a GTX 960 which is "slightly less powerful as a GTX 950" yet you call me the idiot? do you know ANYTHING about computers? Also, just because the CPU says "Skylake" doesn't automatically make it Good for gaming. that CPU actually gets beat out by a 4 year old AMD FX8350 or the 4 year old i7 2600k when it comes to term of processessing power. i build computers for a living, kid. go do some research before you comment. now for the numbers...

GTX 960m Passmark Score - 1769
GTX 950 Passmark Score - 5241
(the GTX 950 is literally 3x more powerful than a 960m)

Batman Arkham City Minimum Requirements

CPU: Dual-Core CPU 2.5 GHz.
RAM: 4GB.
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 or ATI Radeon HD 6850 with 768MB+ of VRAM
Sound: Microsoft Windows XP/Vista or 7 compatible sound card (100 per cent DirectX 9.0c-compatible)
DVD-ROM: Quad-speed (4x) DVD-ROM drive.

GTX 460 Passmark Score - 2639
HD 6850 Passmark Score - 2240
GTX 960m Passmark - 1769 (that 960m gets beat out by the minimum required GPU's to play the game.)

Conclusion: Go learn a thing or two before you post stupid comments. it makes save you from looking like an "Idiot".

OP - your laptop isn't strong enough to play the game at max settings / 60fps. common sense and simple research shows this.

Sources -

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+960M
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+950
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2600K+%40+3.40GHz
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+HD+6850
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+460

[s1att]

Originally posted by Willie Stroker:

Originally posted by kale:

Wow... you're so wrong. That GPU is the mobile equivalent of a GTX 960, which is a little less powerful than a GTX 950. The i7 is a Skylake, which is also powerful for a laptop. You sound like an idiot.

you're claiming that a GTX 960m is comparable / slightly less powerful as a GTX 950... yet you call me the idiot? do you know ANYTHING about computers? Also, just because the CPU is a skylake doesn't make it "Good" for gaming. that CPU is LESS powerful than an AMD FX8350 or the 4 year old i7 2600k when it comes to term of processessing power. i build computers for a living, kid. go do some research before you comment.

GTX 960m Passmark Score - 1769
GTX 950 Passmark Score - 5241

Batman Arkham City Minimum Requirements

CPU: Dual-Core CPU 2.5 GHz.
RAM: 4GB.
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 or ATI Radeon HD 6850 with 768MB+ of VRAM
Sound: Microsoft Windows XP/Vista or 7 compatible sound card (100 per cent DirectX 9.0c-compatible)
DVD-ROM: Quad-speed (4x) DVD-ROM drive.

GTX 460 Passmark Score - 2639
HD 6850 Passmark Score - 2240
GTX 960m Passmark - 1769

Go learn a thing or two before you call anyone an idiot. #rekt

Sources -

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+960M
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+950
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2600K+%40+3.40GHz
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+HD+6850
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+460

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffeFpnIPjGQ
The CPU is still powerful enough for a five year old game to handle. You build computers for a living? I feel bad for you.

[Moe]

Originally posted by kale:

Originally posted by Willie Stroker:

you're claiming that a GTX 960m is comparable / slightly less powerful as a GTX 950... yet you call me the idiot? do you know ANYTHING about computers? Also, just because the CPU is a skylake doesn't make it "Good" for gaming. that CPU is LESS powerful than an AMD FX8350 or the 4 year old i7 2600k when it comes to term of processessing power. i build computers for a living, kid. go do some research before you comment.

GTX 960m Passmark Score - 1769
GTX 950 Passmark Score - 5241

Batman Arkham City Minimum Requirements

CPU: Dual-Core CPU 2.5 GHz.
RAM: 4GB.
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 or ATI Radeon HD 6850 with 768MB+ of VRAM
Sound: Microsoft Windows XP/Vista or 7 compatible sound card (100 per cent DirectX 9.0c-compatible)
DVD-ROM: Quad-speed (4x) DVD-ROM drive.

GTX 460 Passmark Score - 2639
HD 6850 Passmark Score - 2240
GTX 960m Passmark - 1769

Go learn a thing or two before you call anyone an idiot. #rekt

Sources -

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+960M
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+950
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2600K+%40+3.40GHz
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+HD+6850
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+460

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffeFpnIPjGQ
The CPU is still powerful enough for a five year old game to handle. You build computers for a living? I feel bad for you.

i dont give a crap about the cpu as that's not the issue here. that's not whats holding OP back. its the fact that the crappy 960m is literally weaker than GPU's from 6-7 years ago. and for you to claim that 960m is comparable to a 950 / 960 just goes to show the knowledge you have when it comes to PC Hardware.

[Moe]

Here... i'll try to explain this in simpler terms.

GTS 450 - this 6 year old GPU was never intended for gaming. its just to damn weak in terms of performance. this goes for practically all GTS / GT cards. they were never really meant for gaming.

GTS 450 Passmark Score - 1551
GTX 960m Passmark Score - 1769

Make sense yet? No?... let me clue you in. The GTX 960m is only SLIGHTLY more powerful than a general purpose GPU which was never intended for gaming. it's literally comparable to a General Purpose GPU from 2010.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=GeForce+GTS+450

[s1att]

Originally posted by Willie Stroker:

Here... i'll try to explain this in simpler terms.

GTS 450 - this 6 year old GPU was never intended for gaming. its just to damn weak in terms of performance. this goes for practically all GTS / GT cards. they were never really meant for gaming.

GTS 450 Passmark Score - 1551
GTX 960m Passmark Score - 1769

Make sense yet? No?... let me clue you in. The GTX 960m is only SLIGHTLY more powerful than a general purpose GPU which was never intended for gaming. it's literally comparable to a General Purpose GPU from 2010.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=GeForce+GTS+450

Did you not see the video I just showed you? It shows the game running @ 1080p with the only settings turned down being msaa --> fxaa (high) and dx11 features turned off. OP said max, so he could just turn those settings off/down.

[Moe]

Originally posted by kale:

Originally posted by Willie Stroker:

Here... i'll try to explain this in simpler terms.

GTS 450 - this 6 year old GPU was never intended for gaming. its just to damn weak in terms of performance. this goes for practically all GTS / GT cards. they were never really meant for gaming.

GTS 450 Passmark Score - 1551
GTX 960m Passmark Score - 1769

Make sense yet? No?... let me clue you in. The GTX 960m is only SLIGHTLY more powerful than a general purpose GPU which was never intended for gaming. it's literally comparable to a General Purpose GPU from 2010.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=GeForce+GTS+450

Did you not see the video I just showed you? It shows the game running @ 1080p with the only settings turned down being msaa --> fxaa (high) and dx11 features turned off. OP said max, so he could just turn those settings off/down.

that is literally what i've been trying to say. did you NOT read my very first comment here? this will be my last response on this post. i think OP got the point by now.

/Unsubscribed.

[s1att]

Originally posted by Willie Stroker:

Originally posted by kale:

Did you not see the video I just showed you? It shows the game running @ 1080p with the only settings turned down being msaa --> fxaa (high) and dx11 features turned off. OP said max, so he could just turn those settings off/down.

that is literally what i've been trying to say. did you NOT read my very first comment here? this will be my last response on this post. i think OP got the point by now.

/Unsubscribed.

Originally posted by Willie Stroker:

Originally posted by kale:

Did you not see the video I just showed you? It shows the game running @ 1080p with the only settings turned down being msaa --> fxaa (high) and dx11 features turned off. OP said max, so he could just turn those settings off/down.

that is literally what i've been trying to say. did you NOT read my very first comment here? this will be my last response on this post. i think OP got the point by now.

/Unsubscribed.

Still doesn't explain why he gets 3x better performance in a more graphically intensive game. Optimization doesn't make a game run 3x better while looking better.

[NoName]

ffs dude if the gtx 960m is so bad like you claimed why can i run witcher 3 on ultra with constant 40 fps at 1080p?

[NoName]

and arkham city not... that is kinda weird for me

[RossDBrown]

Willie S was right - the 960m is not as good as a 460.

However, he's wrong when he says that the 960m doesn't meet the minimum requirements. The 460 is the 'recommended'.

The minimum is a GeForce 8800, and a 960m beats the pants off that card.

I also have to strongly disagree with the statement

btw... Arkham Knight is a newer game... it runs off a more optimized game engine. hence the reason you see better frames. this is PC 101 Knowledge.

That's not right at all. Knight has MUCH higher system requirements than City, so that's no explanation at all.

If modern games required LESS tech to run than 2012 games, why would we even bother getting more powerful hardware!!

Sorry OP, don't have many ideas. Seen some people having problems when DX11 wasn't turned on. Look for 'Bmlauncher' in the game folders. Other than that, there's not a massive difference in visuals by dropping to medium settings.

[NoName]

Originally posted by Ewok:

Willie S was right - the 960m is not as good as a 460.

However, he's wrong when he says that the 960m doesn't meet the minimum requirements. The 460 is the 'recommended'.

The minimum is a GeForce 8800, and a 960m beats the pants off that card.

I also have to strongly disagree with the statement

btw... Arkham Knight is a newer game... it runs off a more optimized game engine. hence the reason you see better frames. this is PC 101 Knowledge.

That's not right at all. Knight has MUCH higher system requirements than City, so that's no explanation at all.

If modern games required LESS tech to run than 2012 games, why would we even bother getting more powerful hardware!!

Sorry OP, don't have many ideas. Seen some people having problems when DX11 wasn't turned on. Look for 'Bmlauncher' in the game folders. Other than that, there's not a massive difference in visuals by dropping to medium settings.

dude i run also witcher 3 on high settings mixed with few ultra settings @ 1080p, so if the gtx960m doesnt even beat the gtx 460 how the fk can this be when the gtx 460 is under the minmum requirements

[NoName]

i turned the resolution down to 1600x900 and it runs with constant 60 fps now