Cant play smooth DA:I low settings

[Nobody]

I have a laptop, windows 8.1 x64, Dx11 only installed, i3-3110m ~2.4 GHz (4 CPUs), 4096mb ram, geforce gt 630m with approx memory of 4026 mb. I can play DA: O and DA 2 with high settings smooth gaming but in DA:I even on lowest settings, i can still see some lags when there is too much spells or enemies and especially when using the frost step and blizzard. my hdd is only occupying 89 gb of 465 gb.

Can someone tell me some tweakings and other stuff to make it smooth but with a little visual quality?

[hodie]

DA:I I fear, is going to stretch your system whatever settings you have. You're cpu- which only has two true cores- and your gpu (1GB?) are going to balk at any post processing effects; as you've seen with the frame rate drops during the mage battles.

[Simple Man]

maybe ask on the actual DAI forums, so they can help you.

[WolfEisberg]

Originally posted by ghiin:

I have a laptop, windows 8.1 x64, Dx11 only installed, i3-3110m ~2.4 GHz (4 CPUs), 4096mb ram, geforce gt 630m with approx memory of 4026 mb. I can play DA: O and DA 2 with high settings smooth gaming but in DA:I even on lowest settings, i can still see some lags when there is too much spells or enemies and especially when using the frost step and blizzard. my hdd is only occupying 89 gb of 465 gb.

Can someone tell me some tweakings and other stuff to make it smooth but with a little visual quality?

Your system is below minimum requirements:

1- You have a dual core CPU, not a Quad Core CPU which is required for the game, having 4 threads is not the same as having a quad core:
http://ark.intel.com/products/65700/Intel-Core-i3-3110M-Processor-3M-Cache-2_40-GHz

2- Your video card is actually less powerful than the mimimum requirement of the Geforce 8800GT
http://ark.intel.com/products/65700/Intel-Core-i3-3110M-Processor-3M-Cache-2_40-GHz

At best you have to put everything to the lowest setting, and then keep on lowering the resolution till you get something that is acceptable.

For comparison, DA2 only needed a dual core CPU at 1.8 Ghz, and the minimum requirement for the video card puts your video card above. The difference between DA2 and DA I is huge, and your system is below minimum requirement for the game.

[Simple Man]

Originally posted by eisberg:

Your system is below minimum requirements:

1- You have a dual core CPU, not a Quad Core CPU which is required for the game, having 4 threads is not the same as having a quad core:
http://ark.intel.com/products/65700/Intel-Core-i3-3110M-Processor-3M-Cache-2_40-GHz

2- Your video card is actually less powerful than the mimimum requirement of the Geforce 8800GT
http://ark.intel.com/products/65700/Intel-Core-i3-3110M-Processor-3M-Cache-2_40-GHz

At best you have to put everything to the lowest setting, and then keep on lowering the resolution till you get something that is acceptable.

For comparison, DA2 only needed a dual core CPU at 1.8 Ghz, and the minimum requirement for the video card puts your video card above. The difference between DA2 and DA I is huge, and your system is below minimum requirement for the game.

Cool story bro.

Theres no "huge difference" anywhere tho. Battlefield 4 runs the same Frostbite engine and runs fine even on mediocre machines like OPs. The only thing that doesn't meet the minimum requirements is EA and their atrocious console ports.

[Simple Man]

I read you perfectly.

There is hardly any difference between hardware requirements for the two. Infact, it was Bioware that stated, that if you can run DA2 ok, you wil run DA:I ok as well. So much for that huh? even an i7 + 980 can't run DAI at a constant 60 fps, its poo.

And being the same engine means the world. Its Frostbite 3 on Battlefield 4 and DAI, its the EXACT same engine, and version. Just DAI is made for a console. Even controls like a console game.

And then i read that you are not even aware that this is a console port. ok then, i guess were done here.

[yberkurko]

Originally posted by spastic 101:

I read you perfectly.

There is hardly any difference between hardware requirements for the two. Infact, it was Bioware that stated, that if you can run DA2 ok, you wil run DA:I ok as well. So much for that huh? even an i7 + 980 can't run DAI at a constant 60 fps, its poo.

And being the same engine means the world. Its Frostbite 3 on Battlefield 4 and DAI, its the EXACT same engine, and version. Just DAI is made for a console. Even controls like a console game.

And then i read that you are not even aware that this is a console port. ok then, i guess were done here.

Damn Nvidia sucks for DA:I then... my r9 290 can keep 60 fps at mix of high and ultra settings and playable (arround 40fps+) at max (without MSAA though) and that's at 1440p. Do you play at over 1080p or downsample from higher reso? Can 980 suck so bad compared to r9 290 (that loses big time to gtx 980 in benchmarks)?
... oh i forgot that MSAA x4 option... perhaps some feel need to use it.

MSAA is huge resource hog, but it has quite little visual effect atleast on higher resolutions than 1080p.

Not sure when, where and who said that DA2 capable PC could run DA:I ok, should be quite clear from minimum specs that it isn't so. Recommended specs of DA2 are quite near minimum of DA:I.

[Simple Man]

Originally posted by yberkurko:

Damn Nvidia sucks for DA:I then... my r9 290 can keep 60 fps at mix of high and ultra settings and playable (arround 40fps+) at max (without MSAA though) and that's at 1440p. Do you play at over 1080p or downsample from higher reso? Can 980 suck so bad compared to r9 290 (that loses big time to gtx 980 in benchmarks)?
... oh i forgot that MSAA x4 option... perhaps some feel need to use it.

MSAA is huge resource hog, but it has quite little visual effect atleast on higher resolutions than 1080p.

Not sure when, where and who said that DA2 capable PC could run DA:I ok, should be quite clear from minimum specs that it isn't so. Recommended specs of DA2 are quite near minimum of DA:I.

And you consider playing a game on high, on a 350$ card, an achievment of some sort? it really isnt, if you dont demand better they just keep doing it. Even then, i dont buy that you get constant 60 fps. Or you can make a video of it, because you'd be the first. People with SLIs/crossfire can't achieve it, single 780s cant do it, single 980s dont do it. For me, kind of like OP it seems, fighting most of anything would register fps drops.

The statement about DA2 v DAI came from Bioware, i was trying to find some sort of link, an article, but i cannot. It was in their forums at the time, this was like a few months after the DA2 fiasco ("fiasco", because even that sold 1.5 million), when talks of DAI came around. People were "oh ok, thats nice".

The 980 runs frostbite 3 perfectly fine, more than fine, hell a GTX 750 runs BF4 1080p Ultra settings, just not at the high fps one would like in a competitive multiplayer. Huge player maps? easy. And lets not go into "oh but DAI this or that", because a large map with physics constatly at work, explosions everywhere, its just as hard on the hardware. DAI has huge areas of nothing, and will still lag, and then those hilarious playstation 3ish cutscenes, but thats another story.

Its an overall bad joke. The game banks on CPU like not many others, when on personal computers, a graphics card can be some 20 times faster for most things. Its consoles that need to "spread the load", giving us formidable dung ports, like Dead Space, GTA IV, Skyrim, this, etc etc.

All this kind of offtopic, to point out that its not so much OPs low specs that are the issue, but the game itself. Coding, whatever it is, it runs like crap.

Best part of my short lived DAI experience was the refund. No troubles getting it.

P.S.: as for the other guy, since i saw your last post, TLDR you can go type to a wall mate.

[Glistening]

Sorry but no amount of tweaking will make DA:I run smooth for you. Maybe if they patch it with some kind of MAJOR optimization fixes (unlikely). But, you are below minimum requirements.

That being the case, even a laptop twice as good may not help you. This game runs like crap, especially on laptops. I heard they just didn't optimize it for laptop GPU's, which is ridiculous because my GPU is more than above recommended specs.

These are my specs: Windows 8.1, AMD HD Radeon 8850M, 8GB RAM, Intel i5 2.6GHz, 1TB. According to the DA:I official site, I am just above recommended specs. And I can't even run the game on low.

Granted, the processor isn't great, but I'm factory overclocking so it's at least 3.0Ghz. These specs should be able to run this game on medium or high at least. The game runs badly no matter what. I've got everything turned on low, I've updated to the shiny new AMD beta drivers which are supposed to be optimized for DA:I, I've switched on Mantle, I'm overclocking, there is nothing else I can do, and the game runs appallingly. Even with the occasional blessing of 50FPS, it stutters to 5 at the drop of a hat. And for some reason playing with keyboard and mouse makes it feel like you're playing at 15FPS anyway, it's THAT sluggish. I'm still on the border of deciding whether it's unplayable or not (I would be playing right now if it hadn't crashed during a 35FPS cutscene).

I'll never believe this wasn't a console port. It feels like it. I'm sure it's a good port in many ways... but it's not a great one. Hopefully they'll patch it in the future.

[Simple Man]

Originally posted by ><FISH'>:

Sorry but no amount of tweaking will make DA:I run smooth for you. Maybe if they patch it with some kind of MAJOR optimization fixes (unlikely). But, you are below minimum requirements.

That being the case, even a laptop twice as good may not help you. This game runs like crap, especially on laptops. I heard they just didn't optimize it for laptop GPU's, which is ridiculous because my GPU is more than above recommended specs.

These are my specs: Windows 8.1, AMD HD Radeon 8850M, 8GB RAM, Intel i5 2.6GHz, 1TB. According to the DA:I official site, I am just above recommended specs. And I can't even run the game on low.

Granted, the processor isn't great, but I'm factory overclocking so it's at least 3.0Ghz. These specs should be able to run this game on medium or high at least. The game runs badly no matter what. I've got everything turned on low, I've updated to the shiny new AMD beta drivers which are supposed to be optimized for DA:I, I've switched on Mantle, I'm overclocking, there is nothing else I can do, and the game runs appallingly. Even with the occasional blessing of 50FPS, it stutters to 5 at the drop of a hat. And for some reason playing with keyboard and mouse makes it feel like you're playing at 15FPS anyway, it's THAT sluggish. I'm still on the border of deciding whether it's unplayable or not (I would be playing right now if it hadn't crashed during a 35FPS cutscene).

I'll never believe this wasn't a console port. It feels like it. I'm sure it's a good port in many ways... but it's not a great one. Hopefully they'll patch it in the future.

DAI is optimized for a console, and nothing else. Either that or it was monkeys that did the coding for this game. With its CPU abuse just giving it away, its a ♥♥♥♥ console port, even the controls are made around consoles. Its GTA IV all over again. PCs run on graphics cards for games, not a damn CPU, this isn't 2005 anymore, video cards have long passed CPUs in shear processing power. Bioware needs to take lessons from Digital Illusions.

Inquisition runs fine on a PS3, a decrepit 10 year old piece of hardware, granted, with washed out graphics. Inquisition runs at 1080p stable 30 fps on a PS4, that has the graphics power of an HD 7770, maybe a 7790, thats a 100$ card were talking about, and some entry level poo for a CPU despite the number of cores, yet with graphics that are the same as high on PC.

On PC tho, you NEED a quad-core processor just to start it, a dual core wont even get you past the main menu, or so i heard. You NEED a high end graphics card, so 300$+ to even see high settings and 40 or 50 fps. Wait, but it runs on a PS3, whats up with that?

People should boycott it, and like this one, others too. Sadly theres always going to be the village idiots actually standing behind these things sayin it works fine, that no way its a port. See posts above.

Inquisition even got game of the year! "mind blowing, best performance 2014 11/10" -IGN

[Glistening]

It probably is a good game, I just won't find out, because I can't run it. And that's really their own optimization blunder. I won't be buying the game in this state. A shame, I actually like both DA:O and DA2.

[Glistening]

I can accept that, technically, it's not a port, because I really don't know either way. But when it comes down to it, playing the game feels like a port, at least on my perfectly capable laptop. Even when the in-game counter is showing me 50FPS... I just can't believe it's 50FPS. It feels like 10. And at least if it's a port then I somewhat understand the lack of mobility support. But since it's not, then WTF?

And now I'm a bit extra annoyed because all the driver updates I did are causing havok on my system for some reason. Not the games fault, but still...

[WolfEisberg]

Originally posted by ><FISH'>:

I can accept that, technically, it's not a port, because I really don't know either way. But when it comes down to it, playing the game feels like a port, at least on my perfectly capable laptop. Even when the in-game counter is showing me 50FPS... I just can't believe it's 50FPS. It feels like 10. And at least if it's a port then I somewhat understand the lack of mobility support. But since it's not, then WTF?

And now I'm a bit extra annoyed because all the driver updates I did are causing havok on my system for some reason. Not the games fault, but still...

In general it seems like laptops have more issues with games than desktops do, this is going by the feedback on forums of crap ton of games over the years. So I stick to desktop for gaming for that reason, and because it is actually cheaper to upgrade my system over time.

But yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if they did not do a good job with optimizing for mobility products. Some developer/publishers in the past have actually stated in their system requirements that mobility wasn't supported, to bad EA didn't do the same thing.

[Glistening]

Usually, it's fine. I've never had much of a problem gaming on a laptop, compared to desktops, except for the lack of power in comparison. I got a pretty good laptop with confidence that I could play almost all games, and even newer games at medium or low settings, if not high. I'm not a hardcore gamer so this is all I'd need. DA:I has been the most problematic game by far, which just goes to show. I can appreciate they were going for a more impressive graphical experience, but come on... it's meant to be an RPG. Mass Effect 2 had impressive graphics and was amazingly optimized, I played that on a mid-range laptop without a single stutter throughout the whole game.

As a side-note, when I went to roll back drivers, I saw the name of my GPU in the device manager had changed to R9 270X... that's weird. But irrelevant now.

[WolfEisberg]

Originally posted by ><FISH'>:

Usually, it's fine. I've never had much of a problem gaming on a laptop, compared to desktops, except for the lack of power in comparison. I got a pretty good laptop with confidence that I could play almost all games, and even newer games at medium or low settings, if not high. I'm not a hardcore gamer so this is all I'd need. DA:I has been the most problematic game by far.

As a side-note, when I went to roll back drivers, I saw the name of my GPU in the device manager had changed to R9 270X... that's weird. But irrelevant now.

I believe the r9 270X desktop version was basically a Radeon 7870 renamed, you can even use the R9 270 and a Radeon 7870 in crossfire. Perhaps the Radeon 8850 was later renamed to the R9 270X Mobility?

[Clifford Jackson]

Originally posted by spastic 101:

Originally posted by ><FISH'>:

Sorry but no amount of tweaking will make DA:I run smooth for you. Maybe if they patch it with some kind of MAJOR optimization fixes (unlikely). But, you are below minimum requirements.

That being the case, even a laptop twice as good may not help you. This game runs like crap, especially on laptops. I heard they just didn't optimize it for laptop GPU's, which is ridiculous because my GPU is more than above recommended specs.

These are my specs: Windows 8.1, AMD HD Radeon 8850M, 8GB RAM, Intel i5 2.6GHz, 1TB. According to the DA:I official site, I am just above recommended specs. And I can't even run the game on low.

Granted, the processor isn't great, but I'm factory overclocking so it's at least 3.0Ghz. These specs should be able to run this game on medium or high at least. The game runs badly no matter what. I've got everything turned on low, I've updated to the shiny new AMD beta drivers which are supposed to be optimized for DA:I, I've switched on Mantle, I'm overclocking, there is nothing else I can do, and the game runs appallingly. Even with the occasional blessing of 50FPS, it stutters to 5 at the drop of a hat. And for some reason playing with keyboard and mouse makes it feel like you're playing at 15FPS anyway, it's THAT sluggish. I'm still on the border of deciding whether it's unplayable or not (I would be playing right now if it hadn't crashed during a 35FPS cutscene).

I'll never believe this wasn't a console port. It feels like it. I'm sure it's a good port in many ways... but it's not a great one. Hopefully they'll patch it in the future.

DAI is optimized for a console, and nothing else. Either that or it was monkeys that did the coding for this game. With its CPU abuse just giving it away, its a ♥♥♥♥ console port, even the controls are made around consoles. Its GTA IV all over again. PCs run on graphics cards for games, not a damn CPU, this isn't 2005 anymore, video cards have long passed CPUs in shear processing power. Bioware needs to take lessons from Digital Illusions.

Inquisition runs fine on a PS3, a decrepit 10 year old piece of hardware, granted, with washed out graphics. Inquisition runs at 1080p stable 30 fps on a PS4, that has the graphics power of an HD 7770, maybe a 7790, thats a 100$ card were talking about, and some entry level poo for a CPU despite the number of cores, yet with graphics that are the same as high on PC.

On PC tho, you NEED a quad-core processor just to start it, a dual core wont even get you past the main menu, or so i heard. You NEED a high end graphics card, so 300$+ to even see high settings and 40 or 50 fps. Wait, but it runs on a PS3, whats up with that?

People should boycott it, and like this one, others too. Sadly theres always going to be the village idiots actually standing behind these things sayin it works fine, that no way its a port. See posts above.

Inquisition even got game of the year! "mind blowing, best performance 2014 11/10" -IGN

what are u trying to achieve by randomly spazzing at people first then backing them up?