XCOM 2
Windows 95 Feb 17, 2016 @ 4:19pm
Gpu usage
I have a 980 ti why the hell is gpu usage at 98 percent?
< >
Showing 1-15 of 25 comments
JKacala127 Feb 17, 2016 @ 5:38pm 
Watch this video, the guy uses the same card as you and explains how to get the settings right. The game is optmized very poorly, which for a direct to PC release that they spent money on is a suprise, because they should know we are going to ♥♥♥♥♥.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cI4GgGtkeU

I hope that helps
Windows 95 Feb 17, 2016 @ 5:41pm 
we really got ♥♥♥♥♥♥ didnt we?
JKacala127 Feb 21, 2016 @ 3:12am 
Yep, pretty much. I'm sure you saw that guys computer stats which are crazy, thata's a 4 grand rig. As he said he should be able to crush the game, a lot of us should be able to crush it as well even with much lower rigs. Heck a mid tier rig should be able to do fine.

I been playing metal gear solid which is more of a graphic intense game, everything looks great. I don't think we were expecting jaw dropping graphics, but the performance issues aren't great. The game is playable, I haven't had a crash, I had game breaks but that's do to mods.

I feel like it's a beta, which I think we would have been fine with if they came out and said, hey this is an early release...But honestly there hasn't been much said from the dev's about things being resolved. Maybe they were so open with the workshop from day one because they wanted us to solve it.

In the end for a non demanding game, when we see someone with a crazy rig and they can't even get it to run smoothly, something is off.

Originally posted by Something funny:
we really got ♥♥♥♥♥♥ didnt we?
Mormacil Feb 21, 2016 @ 3:15am 
Another nice performance issue is CPU usage. I have a i7 @3.4GHz. Not state of the art but a pretty good CPU. After a battle or two or a really long one my CPU idles at 50% during my turn when I'm not issueing orders. During the AI turn it spikes up to 90-100%
I never seen 100% CPU usage on my rig outside bugs and baking lightmaps in Unity or rendering a video in 3DS Max.
JKacala127 Feb 21, 2016 @ 6:17pm 
I have a new gen I5 that is 3.3-3.4. I wanted an I7 but this computer was a deal just because it didn't have windows 10 installed.

If you watch that video above the guy has an I7 that does 4.ghz and he shows how is cpu and gpu almost get maxed out before he tweeks it. I personally haven't seen the AI take extremly long, I'm betting you have a good card, prolly better than mine. I would try playing with your settings, and making sure your virtural memory is clear.

I understand the AI spiking a little, maybe 2-3% because the AI is something they actually got right. It may be due to the fact that the maps are random and the presets on most baddies are sort of lifted. I don't know, just guessing but I wouldn't expect that big of a jump.

At the end of a day the game is amazingly poorly optimized.
Lilkinsly Feb 21, 2016 @ 6:29pm 
Does it really matter? I mean if you can't play it, that is one thing. I have a decent computer and it only runs at 35-40 FPS, and it really does not matter. Playing with everything maxed, it doesn't stutter or skip, nothing gets hung. The game plays smooth.

Sure it would be nice if my fps number said 90 fps, but nothing would change with game play.
Windows 95 Feb 21, 2016 @ 6:30pm 
Originally posted by lilkinsly:
Does it really matter? I mean if you can't play it, that is one thing. I have a decent computer and it only runs at 35-40 FPS, and it really does not matter. Playing with everything maxed, it doesn't stutter or skip, nothing gets hung. The game plays smooth.

Sure it would be nice if my fps number said 90 fps, but nothing would change with game play.
Sorry my standards arent ♥♥♥♥.
Denimdude Feb 21, 2016 @ 6:55pm 
To be fair the actual missions run fine for me. It's the damn Base building part that murders my performance. In mission it sits around 40-60FPS and rarely dips below 30 (it usually has good reason to). The base view can and has gone down to 5FPS and often lingers around 10-20FPS. I turned AA off and it barely did anything.
MrBananaGrabber Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:03pm 
They released a bug filled, terribly optimised, unfinished game and because all the mainstream reviewers gave it a free pass we purchased it. I won't make the mistake of buying a game at release again.

It's sad (and pathetic) to see so many idiots still so keen to lick clean Fixathis Game's rear end.
Lilkinsly Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:16pm 
Originally posted by Something funny:
Originally posted by lilkinsly:
Does it really matter? I mean if you can't play it, that is one thing. I have a decent computer and it only runs at 35-40 FPS, and it really does not matter. Playing with everything maxed, it doesn't stutter or skip, nothing gets hung. The game plays smooth.

Sure it would be nice if my fps number said 90 fps, but nothing would change with game play.
Sorry my standards arent ♥♥♥♥.

Nobody is saying it doesn't need optimization. However, if a game runs fine and has zero problems or stutter, then that meets my expectations. The fact is that 40 fps is fine with a game like XCOM. Your like somebody who buys a stock Cadillac because you have "standards that are not ♥♥♥♥," ignoring the fact that you could get a fully loaded, more reliable care for less money.
Windows 95 Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:22pm 
Originally posted by lilkinsly:
Originally posted by Something funny:
Sorry my standards arent ♥♥♥♥.

Nobody is saying it doesn't need optimization. However, if a game runs fine and has zero problems or stutter, then that meets my expectations. The fact is that 40 fps is fine with a game like XCOM. Your like somebody who buys a stock Cadillac because you have "standards that are not ♥♥♥♥," ignoring the fact that you could get a fully loaded, more reliable care for less money.
sorry that I dont like it when games are unpolished and unoptimized
Lilkinsly Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:29pm 
Originally posted by Something funny:
Originally posted by lilkinsly:

Nobody is saying it doesn't need optimization. However, if a game runs fine and has zero problems or stutter, then that meets my expectations. The fact is that 40 fps is fine with a game like XCOM. Your like somebody who buys a stock Cadillac because you have "standards that are not ♥♥♥♥," ignoring the fact that you could get a fully loaded, more reliable care for less money.
sorry that I dont like it when games are unpolished and unoptimized

And that is the difference. Real XCOM fans are happy to play a new Xcom title, it has been a while. As long as the game is playable and runs decent we are happy. It will be improved and get better. We far prefer this then to say waiting another 6 months for it. People who don't really give a crap about Xcom will get upset if they don't hit some "standard" number that makes then feel better.
Denimdude Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:31pm 
Originally posted by lilkinsly:
Originally posted by Something funny:
sorry that I dont like it when games are unpolished and unoptimized

And that is the difference. Real XCOM fans are happy to play a new Xcom title, it has been a while. As long as the game is playable and runs decent we are happy. It will be improved and get better. We far prefer this then to say waiting another 6 months for it. People who don't really give a crap about Xcom will get upset if they don't hit some "standard" number that makes then feel better.

Im gonna pop in again and point out that i am probably classed as a "real" XCOM fan, i adore the series and its my favourite of its genre. But it still isn't tolerable when the game runs like complete arse (half the time, in my experience).

Minor edit: Will also point out i expect pretty much every game to run at 40-60FPS at least on default settings without me pushing it any higher. Unfortunately XCOM 2's default makes the base section run like utter garbage, and even when i toned down the AA it didn't do much to help. I am perfectly happy with any good title so long as it runs above 30FPS on average. Preferably near or above 60 if possible. This, i feel, is pretty reasonable to expect from a PC exclusive title that had to be delayed a little to be worked on.
Last edited by Denimdude; Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:36pm
Windows 95 Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:36pm 
Originally posted by lilkinsly:
Originally posted by Something funny:
sorry that I dont like it when games are unpolished and unoptimized

And that is the difference. Real XCOM fans are happy to play a new Xcom title, it has been a while. As long as the game is playable and runs decent we are happy. It will be improved and get better. We far prefer this then to say waiting another 6 months for it. People who don't really give a crap about Xcom will get upset if they don't hit some "standard" number that makes then feel better.
nice fanboyism there m8
Metal Izanagi Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:41pm 
Originally posted by lilkinsly:
Originally posted by Something funny:
sorry that I dont like it when games are unpolished and unoptimized

And that is the difference. Real XCOM fans are happy to play a new Xcom title, it has been a while. As long as the game is playable and runs decent we are happy. It will be improved and get better. We far prefer this then to say waiting another 6 months for it. People who don't really give a crap about Xcom will get upset if they don't hit some "standard" number that makes then feel better.

No. Real X-COM fans want a game to be optimized, and treated with the love that the series deserves. It's clear that Firaxis cares about the series, but releasing the game in the state that they did is unacceptable, and puts a black mark on the series. Not as black of a mark as Enforcer, of course, but a mark nonetheless.

In the future, don't act as though you speak for the entire fanbase. You don't.

Thanks.
Last edited by Metal Izanagi; Feb 21, 2016 @ 7:42pm
< >
Showing 1-15 of 25 comments
Per page: 1530 50

Date Posted: Feb 17, 2016 @ 4:19pm
Posts: 25