7800xt, 5600x, 32gb of ddr4 ram, ssd, frame drops all over the place.

[ShadowlessNexus]

Oh yea no I'm sorry. It was very foolish and entitled of me to expect the game to actually function and be playable.

you know. 1440p high settings. fsr quality. that's wayy too high a goal to reach for a 7800xt. and a 5600x? wow. I'm delusional To think the game would run on that old pos. I should be grateful it even booted.

a terrible looking and feeling 80fps without frame generation(i refuse to use that ghosting, laggy joke that they are calling "frame generation.) that cant even remain consistent in gameplay scenes and cutscenes for 15 seconds without dropping harder than the sickest beat I've ever heard is amazing and fantastic for my ancient, outdated, terrible hardware. I mean the last time I had a game that ran above 120fps was cyberpunk. with 1440p. ultra/high settings. and some dips. sometimes. not very often. and then with the fsr3 mod it was above 220fps. at 1440p. ultra/high settings. so I turned on some better stuff. and kept it at about 165 my monitors refresh rate. But that game is ancient. and it looks nothing like the CUTTING EDGE AND AMAZING LOOKING graphics that the devs have chosen to bless us entitled, unworthy gamers with. I mean if you just go look up cyberpunk 2077 1440p ultra settings gameplay and look at it. wow. how *ugly and outdated*. not like this game. that looks 8 TIMES BETTER. than world and rise. so so so much better.

You know what though. I'll be more *realistic* with my *terrible old hardware*. I'll run the game at *1080p low settings*. im sure it won't lag spike and make me get motion sickness by how jarring and uncomfortable it is to watch this game try to do anything at all.

Oh whats that? its THE EXACT. SAME. PERFORMANCE.

oh well I guess my *5600x* is just wayy too weak to run this game. wow how *stupid* of me to think i could just PLAY THE GAME. AT 60FPS. and not have my stomach *flip* due to the outrageous frame drops and lag that made it impossible to properly play during the beta. I mean. Geez. I should have a 50core nasa cpu and 2 5090's to even think. of having a playable experience.

I'm sorry capcom. I apologize. I beg your forgiveness.








fix your ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ mess. I'll see you in 12 months when I buy the game on discount when you finished making it.

Oh but this is just the benchmark. I'm sure you'll have me playing at 170fps ultra upscaled to 8k with just a couple quick patches for release *this month*

I'm not even going to bother playing the second playtest. Waste of my time. I shudder to think what people with actual mid level gpu's are experiencing.


we went from old games that didnt run super well but were playable. to fast loading games. easy 60fps.

to slow loading ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ games that dont run very well. and are barely playable sometimes.

[RotGoblin]

Hey bud, I don't want to disrupt your well written rant but... here's my results and settings for 5600X and 7800XT.

1440p high/medium, no frame gen

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3421733702

My settings are on here;

https://steamcommunity.com/app/2246340/discussions/0/597391905481858672/

[ShadowlessNexus]

Originally posted by Goblin:

Hey bud, I don't want to disrupt your well written rant but... here's my results and settings for 5600X and 7800XT.

1440p high/medium, no frame gen

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3421733702

My settings are on here;

https://steamcommunity.com/app/2246340/discussions/0/597391905481858672/

My results were *very similar*

the issue isnt hitting high frames. the issue is that it drops whenever your doing anything, lags, and feels terrible. this is the case for me. even at 1080p low. which has the same fps.

I'd hit 90 fps in the beta. and with the terrible frame gen I'd have like 110 fps to as high as 140. That was never the problem. The problem is actually keeping that fps when your just. playing the game. and having it play smoothly. the frame timings were awful. It was very delayed.

[RotGoblin]

Originally posted by ShadowlessNexus:

My results were *very similar*

the issue isnt hitting high frames. the issue is that it drops whenever your doing anything, lags, and feels terrible. this is the case for me. even at 1080p low. which has the same fps.

I'd hit 90 fps in the beta. and with the terrible frame gen I'd have like 110 fps to as high as 140. That was never the problem. The problem is actually keeping that fps when your just. playing the game. and having it play smoothly. the frame timings were awful. It was very delayed.

Well I'm afraid that you won't like the answer... Our 5600X is too slow now. We could both get quite a bit more performance out of the 7800XT with an X3D CPU.

But it's good enough for now, the game runs smooth enough even with frame dips for me to be fine with the odd 50fps dip.

I'm hoping to grab a 9600X when they come down in price, or even if they release a 9500. The IPC improvements are just huge.

[ShadowlessNexus]

Originally posted by Goblin:

Originally posted by ShadowlessNexus:

My results were *very similar*

the issue isnt hitting high frames. the issue is that it drops whenever your doing anything, lags, and feels terrible. this is the case for me. even at 1080p low. which has the same fps.

I'd hit 90 fps in the beta. and with the terrible frame gen I'd have like 110 fps to as high as 140. That was never the problem. The problem is actually keeping that fps when your just. playing the game. and having it play smoothly. the frame timings were awful. It was very delayed.

Well I'm afraid that you won't like the answer... Our 5600X is too slow now. We could both get quite a bit more performance out of the 7800XT with an X3D CPU.

But it's good enough for now, the game runs smooth enough even with frame dips for me to be fine with the odd 50fps dip.

I'm hoping to grab a 9600X when they come down in price, or even if they release a 9500. The IPC improvements are just huge.

No Thats really just not true.
There are simply too many games. that are newer, or have had updates in the last few years. that look far far better. and run far better. even some older games look WAY better and run better.

cyberpunk is 140fps+ on high/ultra with fsr3 mod consistently little dips for me. thats just putting fsr3 in the game. at 1440p high/ultra.

stalker 2 outside of cities even. for all the problems it has. is 140fps usually after their performance patches. and that game was a mess and a joke. at launch it was 100fps with dips. and it sure as hell felt much better. that game is new. and they literally are developing it in a warzone. So that one time. I gave them a bit of a break.

stalker 2 is pretty new. and its running on the mess that is ue5.

I just expect *60fps* from this game with no problems. It cannot do that.

You cannot say the 5600x is not good enough. It's factually incorrect. Stalker 2 looks much better than this. and as of now. even in the relatively laggy towns. I get 70fps consistently. and like 140 ish outside of towns with frame gen. and without its 80 outside of towns. and 50 inside of towns ish. it should not feel so much better.

I'm absolutely not saying the 5600x is a strong cpu. I am saying its more than capable of running modern games. at 60fps. and very often significantly more.

I'm not upgrading because the devs want to charge me 90 canadian dollars for a frankly not all that significant graphical upgrade. and 2x worse performance than the last game. which I run world 90 fps 1440p high/ultra.

[ShadowlessNexus]

Originally posted by ShadowlessNexus:

Originally posted by Goblin:

Well I'm afraid that you won't like the answer... Our 5600X is too slow now. We could both get quite a bit more performance out of the 7800XT with an X3D CPU.

But it's good enough for now, the game runs smooth enough even with frame dips for me to be fine with the odd 50fps dip.

I'm hoping to grab a 9600X when they come down in price, or even if they release a 9500. The IPC improvements are just huge.

No Thats really just not true.
There are simply too many games. that are newer, or have had updates in the last few years. that look far far better. and run far better. even some older games look WAY better and run better.

cyberpunk is 140fps+ on high/ultra with fsr3 mod consistently little dips for me. thats just putting fsr3 in the game. at 1440p high/ultra.

stalker 2 outside of cities even. for all the problems it has. is 140fps usually after their performance patches. and that game was a mess and a joke. at launch it was 100fps with dips. and it sure as hell felt much better. that game is new. and they literally are developing it in a warzone. So that one time. I gave them a bit of a break.

stalker 2 is pretty new. and its running on the mess that is ue5.

I just expect *60fps* from this game with no problems. It cannot do that.

You cannot say the 5600x is not good enough. It's factually incorrect. Stalker 2 looks much better than this. and as of now. even in the relatively laggy towns. I get 70fps consistently. and like 140 ish outside of towns with frame gen. and without its 80 outside of towns. and 50 inside of towns ish. it should not feel so much better.

I'm absolutely not saying the 5600x is a strong cpu. I am saying its more than capable of running modern games. at 60fps. and very often significantly more.

I'm not upgrading because the devs want to charge me 90 canadian dollars for a frankly not all that significant graphical upgrade. and 2x worse performance than the last game. which I run world 90 fps 1440p high/ultra.

sorry just wanted to add. Its a given no path tracing. I wouldn't try to run that in cyberpunk lol.

[del_bosque_dol]

Originally posted by Goblin:

Originally posted by ShadowlessNexus:

My results were *very similar*

the issue isnt hitting high frames. the issue is that it drops whenever your doing anything, lags, and feels terrible. this is the case for me. even at 1080p low. which has the same fps.

I'd hit 90 fps in the beta. and with the terrible frame gen I'd have like 110 fps to as high as 140. That was never the problem. The problem is actually keeping that fps when your just. playing the game. and having it play smoothly. the frame timings were awful. It was very delayed.

Well I'm afraid that you won't like the answer... Our 5600X is too slow now. We could both get quite a bit more performance out of the 7800XT with an X3D CPU.

But it's good enough for now, the game runs smooth enough even with frame dips for me to be fine with the odd 50fps dip.

I'm hoping to grab a 9600X when they come down in price, or even if they release a 9500. The IPC improvements are just huge.

I have got 9700x with 7800xt and it outperformed my initial expectation.
If you do not mind the heating, 7700x should work well.

[ShadowlessNexus]

Originally posted by del_bosque_dol:

Originally posted by Goblin:

Well I'm afraid that you won't like the answer... Our 5600X is too slow now. We could both get quite a bit more performance out of the 7800XT with an X3D CPU.

But it's good enough for now, the game runs smooth enough even with frame dips for me to be fine with the odd 50fps dip.

I'm hoping to grab a 9600X when they come down in price, or even if they release a 9500. The IPC improvements are just huge.

I have got 9700x with 7800xt and it outperformed my initial expectation.
If you do not mind the heating, 7700x should work well.

Like I said in my reply. I'm not upgrading my cpu because the devs cant make the game not dip to 30fps every 15 seconds on my setup. hell. My friend has a 7900x cpu. He's getting bad frame dips on the game. he has a 3090. Its like. No. I won't accept that. I'm not asking for 165. I'm not asking for 120. I'm asking for 60. Other games are easily able to do this. without struggling to so much as have a monster move.

[RotGoblin]

Originally posted by ShadowlessNexus:

No Thats really just not true.
There are simply too many games. that are newer, or have had updates in the last few years. that look far far better. and run far better. even some older games look WAY better and run better.

cyberpunk is 140fps+ on high/ultra with fsr3 mod consistently little dips for me. thats just putting fsr3 in the game. at 1440p high/ultra.

stalker 2 outside of cities even. for all the problems it has. is 140fps usually after their performance patches. and that game was a mess and a joke. at launch it was 100fps with dips. and it sure as hell felt much better. that game is new. and they literally are developing it in a warzone. So that one time. I gave them a bit of a break.

stalker 2 is pretty new. and its running on the mess that is ue5.

I just expect *60fps* from this game with no problems. It cannot do that.

You cannot say the 5600x is not good enough. It's factually incorrect. Stalker 2 looks much better than this. and as of now. even in the relatively laggy towns. I get 70fps consistently. and like 140 ish outside of towns with frame gen. and without its 80 outside of towns. and 50 inside of towns ish. it should not feel so much better.

I'm absolutely not saying the 5600x is a strong cpu. I am saying its more than capable of running modern games. at 60fps. and very often significantly more.

I'm not upgrading because the devs want to charge me 90 canadian dollars for a frankly not all that significant graphical upgrade. and 2x worse performance than the last game. which I run world 90 fps 1440p high/ultra.

But none of those are CPU limited games.

Those are GPU limited.

We get away with having a 4 year old low/midrange processor because most games are GPU limited, not CPU limited.

It's simply a different kind of game.

The 5600X was a bottleneck for my GPU before I bought it, it already limits frames in most titles, but this one is especially CPU heavy, more like an MMO title.

The problem you have is... you simply had/have unrealistic expectations of what a low/midrange CPU can do in a CPU limited scenario.

[ShadowlessNexus]

Originally posted by Goblin:

Originally posted by ShadowlessNexus:

No Thats really just not true.
There are simply too many games. that are newer, or have had updates in the last few years. that look far far better. and run far better. even some older games look WAY better and run better.

cyberpunk is 140fps+ on high/ultra with fsr3 mod consistently little dips for me. thats just putting fsr3 in the game. at 1440p high/ultra.

stalker 2 outside of cities even. for all the problems it has. is 140fps usually after their performance patches. and that game was a mess and a joke. at launch it was 100fps with dips. and it sure as hell felt much better. that game is new. and they literally are developing it in a warzone. So that one time. I gave them a bit of a break.

stalker 2 is pretty new. and its running on the mess that is ue5.

I just expect *60fps* from this game with no problems. It cannot do that.

You cannot say the 5600x is not good enough. It's factually incorrect. Stalker 2 looks much better than this. and as of now. even in the relatively laggy towns. I get 70fps consistently. and like 140 ish outside of towns with frame gen. and without its 80 outside of towns. and 50 inside of towns ish. it should not feel so much better.

I'm absolutely not saying the 5600x is a strong cpu. I am saying its more than capable of running modern games. at 60fps. and very often significantly more.

I'm not upgrading because the devs want to charge me 90 canadian dollars for a frankly not all that significant graphical upgrade. and 2x worse performance than the last game. which I run world 90 fps 1440p high/ultra.

But none of those are CPU limited games.

Those are GPU limited.

We get away with having a 4 year old low/midrange processor because most games are GPU limited, not CPU limited.

It's simply a different kind of game.

The 5600X was a bottleneck for my GPU before I bought it, it already limits frames in most titles, but this one is especially CPU heavy, more like an MMO title.

The problem you have is... you simply had/have unrealistic expectations of what a low/midrange CPU can do in a CPU limited scenario.

I dont see how thats my problem honestly. And your wrong cyberpunk is demanding on the cpu. go look at benchmarks and such.

Regardless of that. They are asking me. for 90 canadian dollars. with no major graphical improvements over the previous game. open world sure. That's cool and all. Cyberpunk is also an open world. and has no loading zones. there are none. in the entire game. you can walk from your apartment. to the streets to any building. no loading zones. doesnt run terribly on my system.

I'm sorry bud. You're just not going to convince me of anything here. There is no reason. that this game should run so poorly in comparison.

Also as I said in the reply to the other guy.

My friend has a 7900x cpu. This is a significantly better cpu than mine.. It is running poorly for him as well. With the same bad frame dips, lag, and delays.

It runs poorly on consoles too. There is no excuse. They should have done things differently then If they were not able to get it to run acceptably. That's the fact at the end of the day.

[RotGoblin]

Originally posted by ShadowlessNexus:

I'm sorry bud. You're just not going to convince me of anything here.

And that's the problem, you can't reason with someone who drew a line in the sand and refuses to budge.

Guess we won't see you in the Wilds then, ciao.

[Anna]

i have a 5600X and an RX 6600 and didn't experience any 1% dips into 30s with upscaling set to Native AA...

[DOY]

Originally posted by Goblin:

Originally posted by ShadowlessNexus:

My results were *very similar*

the issue isnt hitting high frames. the issue is that it drops whenever your doing anything, lags, and feels terrible. this is the case for me. even at 1080p low. which has the same fps.

I'd hit 90 fps in the beta. and with the terrible frame gen I'd have like 110 fps to as high as 140. That was never the problem. The problem is actually keeping that fps when your just. playing the game. and having it play smoothly. the frame timings were awful. It was very delayed.

Well I'm afraid that you won't like the answer... Our 5600X is too slow now. We could both get quite a bit more performance out of the 7800XT with an X3D CPU.

But it's good enough for now, the game runs smooth enough even with frame dips for me to be fine with the odd 50fps dip.

I'm hoping to grab a 9600X when they come down in price, or even if they release a 9500. The IPC improvements are just huge.

Post your GPU usage via AMD andrenalin. If its between 95 to 100% usage you aren't CPU bottle necked.

[RotGoblin]

Originally posted by DOY:

Post your GPU usage via AMD andrenalin. If its between 95 to 100% usage you aren't CPU bottle necked.

Well i'm in my BG3 playthrough right now, but that only runs at 78% util.

Like I said, I know that the 5600X is a LARGE bottleneck for the 7800XT. I bought the 7800XT fully expecting to upgrade the CPU.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

So? Use medium and FSR FG?

You state you dont like FG but you used FG in your cyberpunk cause thats what the FSR mod does? :P

[JustABody]

Completly agree. 70fps average with drops below 60 isn't "good", it's "playable" at best.
Super misleading benchmark.
Frame gen doesn't 2x fps. It always has a base cost. Enableing it will drop actual framerate even lower below 60fps.
9800x3d (Fastes gaming CPU on the market) drops below 60fps in the benchmark that doesn't even include other players, online functions or actual monster encounter...
Performance is still busted on any CPU.