Is the game anything close to optimized?

[Snake]

I'm a bitterly disappoinged Ark player looking to migrate to another game because Ark is absolute garbage, performance-wise.

Is Conan fixed to a state where it runs reasonably well, considering how it looks?

I'm on an i5 3470 @ 3.2 / 3.6 ghz, 8 gb ram, RX 570 4GB.

Watching YT videos on similar setups gives me very little hope, game seems to choke and sputter to 30-something FPS on Ultra.

Do you lose a lot of gfx fidelity going to just High? Does High give a big fps boost?

[Sweet Briana 💋™]

GTX 1070
AMD 8370 8-core @ 4ghz
32gb ram
-Reshaded (check my screens), everything on max. I get 60-70fps usually, depends on where i am.

I like an open base with the crafting areas very open big tent and that creates massive lag for some, i get around 20-24 fps in these areas. But in the jungle, desert, highlands, etc, i am at 60+.

[Snake]

Thanks for the input, 1070 is a few notches above the 570 but I should be ok with a mix of ultra and high settings.

I just noticed the ultra preset also includes 6x AA, which probably kills a lot of frames and I can easily lower this to just 2x.

[Mercenaru]

Originally posted by Snake:

I'm a bitterly disappoinged Ark player looking to migrate to another game because Ark is absolute garbage, performance-wise.

Is Conan fixed to a state where it runs reasonably well, considering how it looks?

I'm on an i5 3470 @ 3.2 / 3.6 ghz, 8 gb ram, RX 570 4GB.

Watching YT videos on similar setups gives me very little hope, game seems to choke and sputter to 30-something FPS on Ultra.

Do you lose a lot of gfx fidelity going to just High? Does High give a big fps boost?

I will be short on this :

Core 2 Quad 9650, 3.2 Ghz
4 GB RAM, 800 Mhz (DDR2)
Nvidia 750 GTX 2 GB VRAM
HDD not SSD where Conan is installed, Windows 10

I play on Ultra with AA off and Textures to low, 1050p : 25-45 fps, 28-34 average. I can't raise texture higher because I don't have the required VRAM, with textures to ultra it works, but I get non-stop stutters as it keeps swapping with system RAM. But I am positive it would work with the same performance if I would to have a 4 GB video card.

Notice what ancient hardware I have. (though in all honesty, everything is "very-overclocked").
I believe you are fine to play all Ultra. The game can profit more if you would to install it on an SSD.


PS : I said I will be short. I failed. I appologies. :(

[Sweet Briana 💋™]

Originally posted by Mercenaru:

Originally posted by Snake:

I'm a bitterly disappoinged Ark player looking to migrate to another game because Ark is absolute garbage, performance-wise.

Is Conan fixed to a state where it runs reasonably well, considering how it looks?

I'm on an i5 3470 @ 3.2 / 3.6 ghz, 8 gb ram, RX 570 4GB.

Watching YT videos on similar setups gives me very little hope, game seems to choke and sputter to 30-something FPS on Ultra.

Do you lose a lot of gfx fidelity going to just High? Does High give a big fps boost?

I will be short on this :

Core 2 Quad 9650, 3.2 Ghz
4 GB RAM, 800 Mhz (DDR2)
Nvidia 750 GTX 2 GB VRAM
HDD not SSD where Conan is installed, Windows 10

I play on Ultra with AA off and Textures to low, 1050p : 25-45 fps, 28-34 average. I can't raise texture higher because I don't have the required VRAM, with textures to ultra it works, but I get non-stop stutters as it keeps swapping with system RAM.(

I started ARK and Conan with a 750Ti, 2gb vram, to reduce the stutters from "thrashing" - increase your Page file to something really high like 24,000 to 32,000mb. That will increase the swap file and reduce the thrashing tremendously.

When I added an SSD, i gained 10fps permanently to my ARK experience, and RAM added another 10-15fps, giving me nearly 40fps in ark on high settings using a 750.

But for now, increasing that page file makes a big difference. I also noticed crappy performance when my SSD was down to 30-60gb available.

[Futa Fanatic]

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6700K CPU @ 4.00GHz (4 CPUs), ~4.0GHz
16GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070+4GB

oddly enough for me its been working alot better lately >.< even an annoying mod bug seem's to have fixed itself.

[Hidden]

Originally posted by Snake:

I'm a bitterly disappoinged Ark player looking to migrate to another game because Ark is absolute garbage, performance-wise.

Is Conan fixed to a state where it runs reasonably well, considering how it looks?

I'm on an i5 3470 @ 3.2 / 3.6 ghz, 8 gb ram, RX 570 4GB.

Watching YT videos on similar setups gives me very little hope, game seems to choke and sputter to 30-something FPS on Ultra.

Do you lose a lot of gfx fidelity going to just High? Does High give a big fps boost?

Brother, i dont think conan exiles is your salvation.

This game plays like an alpha build, and lacks content. At this point me and my clan are literally making raids, building public map systems and starting camps to leave as a legacy.

Poor optimization
npcs falling through the map/floating to the sky
rubberbanding monster attacks (looking at you especially, sabertooth)
Chests/doors bugged. For extended periods of time. What a way to reward a player, huh?
random failure to place can ruin hours worth of investment
Getting stuck inside animals and dying
multiple game crashes
disappearing servers
glitched decay mechanics caused me to lose several structures the same day i built them on official servers, other players confirmed this was likely a bug
Poorly sized trigger boxes on lava flows have killed me several widths of the flow AWAY, as witnessed by my clanmate
My pets "attack" was actually represented as an artifact in it's inventory.
Nodes like star metal can become bugged and wont harvest.

This was all just in the past week, except for the lava flow incident. Looking at some of these bugs, like star metal nodes bugging and not being farmable, have been around for a year.

All of this in the face of the developers, continuing to crank out DLC's while falling drastically short on their promise for sorcery and mounts. I saw a forum post where one developer stated they were bailing on sorcery and mounts to polish combat.

Well. At least they kept their promise to not keep their promise. Still waiting on combat.

I keep hearing "games are a business, not a charity" as a weak justification for DLC situations like this... But who's really giving the charity if you end up paying 3 times for the same product, in the hopes it will be finished as promised?

My two cents. Might want to try another sandbox or switch from the genre, but I don't see much promise in this one.

[Snake]

Oh, I'm super casual and play for the fun of exploring, building a small base, taking in the sights and playing exclusively solo / singleplayer.

And so far the game has been delivering on that front.

After spending a few weeks with the Ark reddit / community / historical posts, I can tell you half the bugs you posted here manifest there in some way too. I don't think any of those games is close to feature-complete or ideal but at least Conan doesn't run like absolute ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

[Lerch Addams]

I believe it runs better than when i played about a year ago.

I think you can do it since you're properly aware of your hardware limitations.

Player generated content (just like the dino game) is where performance begins to suffer.

Since you're playing SP you have full control over that so go get your barbarian on.

[RAHZEN]

I think CONAN EXILES can be your salvation. FPS drops yea I get em in every game. Even 90's games that barley want to run on my rig. Buildings load faster now. The single player game session loads faster. You can skip the video a bit faster. IDK mods seem to effect it. The big drop in FPS for me, still tho is increasing player speed and moving from one biome to another. Textures noticeably load in slower at higher speeds, so do other resources like NPC's+CAMPS this is at 2x speed via admin panel.

Overall though the game has improved in optimization. I'm getting footprints in the sand and much better cloth and hair physics on high. All settings are on Ultra most of the time. Combat seems a bit jittery if I have spawned 100 enemies in my makeshift arena. But that's expected. There is little difference between Ultra and High settings. View distance can cause a little hiccup in FPS too say if you spinning around in circles really fast. I have mine set to High. Mind you I'm only running 8gb of ram. Before I had 16 and it was much faster. Pick up a few extra sticks if you got the coin will make a huge difference the more you have. I noticed the folks that complain have below average systems or mediocre. Most are on MP. So I'm speaking solely of SP. I got 1000's of hours in since launch, and I can say right well the optimization has improved. It's not perfect. But there is no map loading stops aside from dungeons... That's a lot of resources. Yes you can play this game on laptop mode. I tried it looks bad. But it doesn't change the fact that optimization aside the game is loads of fun. On a maxed out server with 32 or whatever it is players it might be a different story... CO-OP might be a different story also.

Hope you find your enjoyment with CE. It's the only survival sandbox game I care about. Since I was always into first person shooters always... It's the game Age of Conan Unchained wanted to be still amazing in it's own right. But for me just doesn't stack up to the graphics, physics, particle effects. It's hard on my GTX 1080ti sometimes bottlenecks but that's because of the ram like I said. Only if I could afford 128 gigs... But yea peace. OHHH WAIT. I had a 4K monitor back 6 months ago. And it was a significant improvement in many ways but all 4K at the time was 30fps. 1ms response time if you were lucky. I sold it back because I rather 4K & 8K and the eventual 16K come down in price and support 120fps. So the game can do 4K!!! Looked fantastic. But ran a bit slower. Can't say if it's been optimized further for 4k. I do know they are making 4k gaming monitors now but I'm not shelling out 1000's of dollars for that. Also got a chance to see this game on a projector UHD looked frickin awesome.