Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
Hozzászólási szabályok és irányelvek
Hozzászólás jelentése
I feel you straight into this problem.Last patch and driver did almost nothing but maybe just maybe bring some stability on framerates like the ones we are getting like more stable 40-45 fps for example but we still dont gain more fps.Both did nothing here for me.I even have a GTX660Ti 2GB and compare to your card we almost have the same power in cards yet that was disapointment again.
Huge areas like Shanty Town are 35-45 fps with tressfx and tesselation on then all else max (including new ultra shadows) only DOF set to normal.Without tressfx its averaging around 40-50 (only5-7 fps gain).Framerates are more or less the same as before.
Thankfully Nixxes said this after he quoted my post:
http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=135416
Its the 2nd last comment on that page.He says this:
Performance is still a focus for us here, as well as for NVIDIA, so future patches or drivers could very well still improve this also.
So that means we will be having more performance patches and Nvidia drivers in the future and lets hope they make it right.
Yeah well not everyone can go for 690 and i kinda getting jealous there (you lucky guy) but developers need to learn that to max even a todays game out you dont have to go for a card like yours.That would be a disaster.I mean a 690 isnt a graphics card for everyone to own not only by economical matter but also its way powerful than just being used for games so its a hardware thats not needed and even a 660Ti or 670 or 680 should be able to max easily such games yet they cant and they bleed to death and cannot reach a 60 fps at most times and situations so you are forced to go buy a card like 690 or titan but that would be unfair.
If they clearly starting to push us there into buying such cards just to max a game out i can already tell the gaming industry isnt going very well and will keep getting worse.Thats not support but disaster.Such cards isnt an everyday thing to buy like you are buying a gum everyday.From 100 ppl only 20 of them have a 690 or titan.
Me too.
Using the benchmark, I compared the last patch with old drivers to this patch and new drivers with my SLI 570s.
Ultimate Graphics, Depth of Field Ultra, SSAO Normal, FXAA On
--- SLI
------ TressFX Off - Gained 30.6 FPS (120.2, post-patch vs. 89.6 with old patch/driver)
------ TressFX On - Gained 14.4 FPS (74.4, post-patch vs. 60 with old patch/driver)
--- Single-GPU
------ TressFX Off - Gained 17.4 FPS (63.5, post-patch vs. 46.1 with old patch/driver)
------ TressFX On - Gained 7.5 FPS (37.9, post-patch vs. 30.4 with old patch/driver)
Ultimate Graphics, Depth of Field Off, SSAO Normal, FXAA On
--- SLI
------ TressFX Off - Gained 17.9 FPS (158.8, post-patch vs. 142.9 with old patch/driver)
------ TressFX On - Gained 6.3 FPS (86.9, post-patch vs. 80.6 with old patch/driver)
As you can see, using GTX 570s, this game runs very well.
I'm unsure why some 6xx users are still having troubles, and I definitely don't know why the OP's GTX 580 has such low "freams" unless you two are still using SSAA x4. If so, turn that off.
LOL.im not using SSAA not even going near it and the in-game benchmark option is a joke.Wheres the hard reading on that benchmark?Some open empty see in a narrow small path.I can hit 60 fps in that thing without tressfx like breakfast in the morning.The camera btw gets up close in that benchmark from the very start ti'll it finishes and if you use tressfx on it the closer you get while having tressfx ON the less fps you have as the game is right now because i bet even with the newest drivers Nvidia must NOT still supporting tressfx fully because from what i remember no one mentioned or said anything yet till now if they support tressfx at all.
Basically i think this benchmark has been made only to have the camera up close as it is and using tressfx with it so it can do some real testing.Thats in my opinion the whole reason this benchmark was set up like this.
The benchmark is the only way to get reliable readings with multiple computers viewing the same in-game setting.
It also shows DoF (if enabled), post-processing, TressFX, SSAO, Tesselation, AA, AF... it has all of the basic graphic requirements available to be able to swap in and out and see how settings affect framerates.
Here is the only thing Nvidia has said about TressFX:
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/532853/geforce-drivers/nvidia-driver-support-for-tressfx-realistic-hair-in-tomb-raider-2013-/post/3749599/#3749599
Using the release version of the game and initial drivers, players running GTX 680s (who were able to get the game to run) were performing virtually as well as AMD's 7850 cards with TressFX on.
With the 1.00.722.3 patch, I don't know how well top-end Nvidia and AMD cards perform. But with the jumps my 570s have made, I like to think players with 6xx-series cards will see a very large increase too as long as the game runs for them. They might even be better than AMD cards now.
For previous performance data, search in the Steam community forums for "Compare FPS TressFX On vs. Off".
(Edit, corrected statement about Nvidia saying they would support TressFX... they never actually said it)
Ditto.
The developer DID say that some of the graphic features would only be useful to those with 'high end systems'. After all, people that invested $1000-2000 in multiple 680's, 690's or Titans want games that push their rigs too.
I plan on replacing my 570's next year with Titans or the 700 series.
Are these your average frames or your max frames per second? With the same settings as the first on my two 580s I get avrg 101.9 with a max fps of 120.6. New drivers and TR newest patch.
Also, Migz, I'd like to know what framerates you get in the open areas, mountain camp for example. My frames drop to around 40 or less from around 60-100 and my GPU load drops as well. Do you think that is normal? This happens in all the other open areas.