Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 80

Thread: PC Patch Released - 1.01.748.0 - May 22th 2013

  1. #26
    Sadly, I am experiencing a drop in frame rate on the latest patch & drivers. I think I'll wait.

    Edit: Just ran benchmarks on a couple of old versions

    13.5B2 - Tomb Raider v1.0.722.3
    MIN FPS: 21.4
    MAX FPS: 30.2
    AVG FPS: 25.9
    ---
    13.5B2 - Tomb Raider v1.1.730.0
    MIN FPS: 23.1
    MAX FPS: 34.0
    AVG FPS: 28.6
    ---
    13.5B2 - Tomb Raider v1.1.732.1
    MIN FPS: 22.0
    MAX FPS: 33.0
    AVG FPS: 28.0
    ---
    13.5B2 - Tomb Raider v1.1.743.0
    MIN FPS: 22.6
    MAX FPS: 33.1
    AVG FPS: 28.4
    ---
    13.5B2 - Tomb Raider v1.1.748.0
    MIN FPS: 9.5
    MAX FPS: 30.2
    AVG FPS: 25.1
    ---
    signature image

  2. #27
    Sorry to see you experiencing this drop. What hardware are you running this on, and on what settings?

  3. #28
    I can't explain it further than a jerk. The problem is consistent jerking after a second each.

    The video captured was in a low jerk zone so you're only going to see 2 or 3 before the blackout. Don't look at what the user is doing just watch the screen generally.

    Most YouTube videos were captured prepatch. The issue didn't exist prepatch.

    Also exists on ati

  4. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixxes View Post
    Sorry to see you experiencing this drop. What hardware are you running this on, and on what settings?
    My system isn't exactly "all that" which I know very well however I am able to play the game just fine on older patches. But it appears that the frame rate is too low for me to play on the latest patch.

    GPU: AMD Radeon HD 7640G
    CPU: AMD A8-4500M (4CPUs) (1.9GHz (2.8GHz Turbo))
    RAM: 8GB

    Settings:

    Resolution: 1366x768
    Texture Quality: Normal
    Texture Filter: Anisotropic 4X
    Anti-Aliasing: Off
    Shadows: Normal
    Shadow Resoltion: Normal
    Level Of Detail: Normal
    Hair Quality: Normal
    Reflections: Normal
    Depth Of Field: Normal
    SSAO: Normal
    Post Processing: On
    Hig Precision: Off
    Tessellation: Off

    ----

    The thing that eats my performance the most is Post Processing, not sure though probably needs a bit of optimization.

    Cheers.
    signature image

  5. #30
    Mr blade,

    Shadows are a little demanding. If you don't mind too much, you could totally disable shadows.

  6. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by daaceking View Post
    Mr blade,

    Shadows are a little demanding. If you don't mind too much, you could totally disable shadows.
    Performance doesn't increase much when I remove the shadows so I may as well leave them on I guess. Thanks for the suggestion.
    signature image

  7. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixxes View Post
    I'm still not sure what quality settings and resolution you are running at. You may want to just keep the LOD Quality setting at normal, since are only running on an i3. The i3 is probably your bottleneck there.
    Maybe. I've noticed if I put the game to low settings, it removes the lag.

    But come on, on a PC that can play most modern games on high with 60fps, I have to settle for low settings with no shadows?

    There are tons of other games, with tons of fancy weather effects going on where I still get 60fps. There are tons of other games with a wide field of view where my FPS doesn't drop all the way down to 40fps.

    What is this game doing that's so special that you need more than an i3?

    Afterall, I get 60fps in the benchmark on high all the way through.

  8. #33
    I get best perofmance with patch 1.732 with registry tweak.All patches after that reduced my performance.I just have that patch installed.

  9. #34
    Pcgamer,

    i3 should be fine. It's a powerful CPU. Tomb raider is multicore too. Although knowing the model/clock speed would help with if it can be a bottleneck.

  10. #35
    Character selection - New Game + still not available?
    Nope... Thanks though...
    signature image

  11. #36

    Improving, but still can get better

    Hello, i´m running on an i7 975 (4 cores ) overclocked to 4,33 GHz and a crossfire of HD7980, the thing is that i could´t get Tomb Raider with constant 60 FPS until this patch working on ultra general configuration.

    The thing is that there´s still a few spots where the game goes down to 40-45 fps no matter what happens:

    -Shanty Town where you encounter Grim and has to fight a lot of bad guys and the view of a gate and monastery is on the sky

    - First battle in shanty Town just after Lara goes out of the hellicopter.

    - The caves behind the Windmill, when you´re coming out of the caves and viewing the landscape.

    - All these places run better FPS when there´s not bad guys around, i mean when you return later and nobody´s there, but still is not 60 FPS

    I still cannot use just one HD7980 and run the game at 60 FPS, i need the crossfire to get the mentioned results. So the question is, do you have still room for improving? what PC do i need to run this game at 60FPS all the time in ultra? My processor is good but there better ones, is this a matter of processor? It seems to me that the design of the ultra setting should have in mind getting 60 FPS more or less constant in a high end PC.

    Anyway, thanks for your time. Excellent game indeed.

  12. #37
    Here's another area with the FPS will drop all the way down to the 30's and 40's...



    This is with the latest drivers and everything. I don't see anything special going on that games that run at a constant 60fps haven't done.

    Again, I get 60fps in the benchmark. And also 60fps with games with much more going on. So why the FPS drop?

    I would guess it's a software issue.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,321
    I would guess so too, because in that part my FPS drops from 20 to 8

  14. #39
    If you guys want to improve performance in those areas simply put LOD Quality from Ultra to either High or Normal, it will likely improve quite a bit. This especially if you are on a relatively weak CPU like an i3.

    Perhaps the LOD Quality option at Ultra is a bit overagressive, costing a lot of CPU power for not a lot of gain, but since you have it all under your own control that doesn't seem like a big problem.

  15. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixxes View Post
    If you guys want to improve performance in those areas simply put LOD Quality from Ultra to either High or Normal, it will likely improve quite a bit. This especially if you are on a relatively weak CPU like an i3.

    Perhaps the LOD Quality option at Ultra is a bit overagressive, costing a lot of CPU power for not a lot of gain, but since you have it all under your own control that doesn't seem like a big problem.
    Any chance for a feature which will automatically lower the lod quality if the performance dips significantly in those areas?
    signature image

  16. #41
    I don't see any difference with LOD at ultra or normal.Difference is very subtle.If Nixxes secretly makes normal lod ultra with a patch, i bet 90 percent of user won't notice a thing.

    Same goes to ultra shadows.Hardly see any difference with them on normal or ultra in forest.But the FPS kill is massive.Developers should really stop adding such useless effects which takes so much gpu power without giving that much visual improvement.

  17. #42
    it's to do with realistic graphics. they're always boosting how real graphics look. i agree that they're performance hogs but hardware is always improving and before you know it, the next graphic card you buy (assuming you wait a few generations) will give minor performance hits for the same tech. however, it is vital to further improve graphics.

    i also think tressfx is a piece of garbage. it isn't going to be widely adopted in future games or prioritised in terms of gpu architecture

  18. #43

    improving but can get better

    Hello Nixes thanks for answering, the thing is that i still believe that the mentioned specific áreas still have problema with the CPU perfomance. It doesn´t seem fair to me that we have to lower Level of Detail only in these specific spots when the rest of the time the game runs well. Any chance for future patch addressing this?

    Just one more question if you don´t mind, which processor it´s necessary to run these áreas at 60 FPS in the current versión (1.01.748.0)? have you tested it? i´d like to know for having a reference of the best results possible.


    Thanks. for the assistance

  19. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixxes View Post
    If you guys want to improve performance in those areas simply put LOD Quality from Ultra to either High or Normal, it will likely improve quite a bit. This especially if you are on a relatively weak CPU like an i3.

    Perhaps the LOD Quality option at Ultra is a bit overagressive, costing a lot of CPU power for not a lot of gain, but since you have it all under your own control that doesn't seem like a big problem.
    I guess. But I may just buy console ports on consoles from now on.

    Frankly, I don't see the need to upgrade my CPU to just play a console port.

    I might even just whip out my 360 and buy the console version. I'd rather play at a smooth 30fps than not get 60fps at all times.

    Unfortunately, not everyone can afford an i7 and a GTX 680 to play one game at 60fps at all times.

    And I do mean one game. Because these drops do not occur in other games.

  20. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixxes View Post
    If you guys want to improve performance in those areas simply put LOD Quality from Ultra to either High or Normal, it will likely improve quite a bit. This especially if you are on a relatively weak CPU like an i3.

    Perhaps the LOD Quality option at Ultra is a bit overagressive, costing a lot of CPU power for not a lot of gain, but since you have it all under your own control that doesn't seem like a big problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by PCgamer2013 View Post
    I guess. But I may just buy console ports on consoles from now on.

    Frankly, I don't see the need to upgrade my CPU to just play a console port.

    I might even just whip out my 360 and buy the console version. I'd rather play at a smooth 30fps than not get 60fps at all times.

    Unfortunately, not everyone can afford an i7 and a GTX 680 to play one game at 60fps at all times.

    And I do mean one game. Because these drops do not occur in other games.



    I agree with PCgamer2013 that one great thing of PC games are the 60 FPS and i think this has to be possible in a high end PC, or in lower specs PCs depending on software optimization. This is why in my humble oponion Tomb Raider is in the way but it´s not there yet. These areas are not well optimized yet. Imposible to have a HD 7890 crossfire and i7 975X running at 60 FPS all the time, except for the 40-45 FPS here and have "hardware limitations". I would love to have a patch addressing this to honor PC gamers and a great game.

    Thanks again for your time.

  21. #46
    What you get on PC is flexibility and options. Do you want to run 60fps? Don't put everything to Ultra if your machine is not up to the task.

    On PC you can upgrade visual quality (in both major or more minor ways) using a variety of options. On console you are roughly running with everything at 'Normal', everything else is an upgrade to that. So you could leave your settings at that and enjoy a much higher framerate on most machines. But quite some of you can probably upgrade a large number of settings and still run 60fps.

    If you upgrade settings even higher you may start dropping frames. So if you want to hit 60fps minimum, don't do that. We see no reason to arbitrarily restrict quality options so you can't do that.

    Setting LOD quality to High or Ultra will keep rendering (small) objects even when they are at larger distances, when they otherwise may turn off, or continue rendering at more detail. It effectively disables optimizations to gain some arguable visual quality. If it is not worth the difference in performance for you, don't use it, you will still be playing at a quality far exceeding console.

  22. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixxes View Post
    What you get on PC is flexibility and options. Do you want to run 60fps? Don't put everything to Ultra if your machine is not up to the task.

    On PC you can upgrade visual quality (in both major or more minor ways) using a variety of options. On console you are roughly running with everything at 'Normal', everything else is an upgrade to that. So you could leave your settings at that and enjoy a much higher framerate on most machines. But quite some of you can probably upgrade a large number of settings and still run 60fps.

    If you upgrade settings even higher you may start dropping frames. So if you want to hit 60fps minimum, don't do that. We see no reason to arbitrarily restrict quality options so you can't do that.

    Setting LOD quality to High or Ultra will keep rendering (small) objects even when they are at larger distances, when they otherwise may turn off, or continue rendering at more detail. It effectively disables optimizations to gain some arguable visual quality. If it is not worth the difference in performance for you, don't use it, you will still be playing at a quality far exceeding console.
    But it's not even on ultra settings. It's on high. And as I've stated I get 60fps in the benchmark on high at 1080p.

    Heck, the first section of the game runs at solid 60fps no slowdown or nothing. Then that rainy section comes and my frames are dropping into the 30's and 40's. Turning it to lowest gets rid of the lag.

    But a computer that handle BF3 in 1080p with 60fps, Just Cause 2 with 60fps, Bioshock Infinite with 60fps and even Crysis 3 with 60fps, has to settle with blurry textures and no shadows to maintain 60fps? In that case I'd rather just play for console, which the game is more optimized for. And play games like BF3, which is properly optimized, on PC.

    It may be my CPU; but that doesn't take away from the fact that the game may not be properly optimized. It's hit it or miss I guess, so if most games run fine for my HD 7850 + Core i3 setup and one game has bad fps drops, I'm just gonna be like "Oh well, another console port".

    I mean, there are games that look better than this that rarely drop below 60fps. There are games with more intense weather effects that rarely drop below 60fps. There are games with more detailed environments that run at 60fps.

    So I guess I'll settle for low with no shadows to get 60fps on a computer that plays BF3 on high.

  23. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixxes View Post
    What you get on PC is flexibility and options. Do you want to run 60fps? Don't put everything to Ultra if your machine is not up to the task.

    On PC you can upgrade visual quality (in both major or more minor ways) using a variety of options. On console you are roughly running with everything at 'Normal', everything else is an upgrade to that. So you could leave your settings at that and enjoy a much higher framerate on most machines. But quite some of you can probably upgrade a large number of settings and still run 60fps.

    If you upgrade settings even higher you may start dropping frames. So if you want to hit 60fps minimum, don't do that. We see no reason to arbitrarily restrict quality options so you can't do that.

    Setting LOD quality to High or Ultra will keep rendering (small) objects even when they are at larger distances, when they otherwise may turn off, or continue rendering at more detail. It effectively disables optimizations to gain some arguable visual quality. If it is not worth the difference in performance for you, don't use it, you will still be playing at a quality far exceeding console.
    Thanks for making this great point about PC gaming, I think a lot of people do not realise that you can't always run everything at max even if you have a decent PC since some setting requre a beast of a gaming rig.

    Secondly most people often don't realise that leaving it on normal still gives you great visual quality, still better than consoles. When I play the game on my laptop I have it on normal and it still looks stunning at 1080p.

  24. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by PCgamer2013 View Post
    But it's not even on ultra settings. It's on high. And as I've stated I get 60fps in the benchmark on high at 1080p.

    Heck, the first section of the game runs at solid 60fps no slowdown or nothing. Then that rainy section comes and my frames are dropping into the 30's and 40's. Turning it to lowest gets rid of the lag.

    But a computer that handle BF3 in 1080p with 60fps, Just Cause 2 with 60fps, Bioshock Infinite with 60fps and even Crysis 3 with 60fps, has to settle with blurry textures and no shadows to maintain 60fps? In that case I'd rather just play for console, which the game is more optimized for. And play games like BF3, which is properly optimized, on PC.

    It may be my CPU; but that doesn't take away from the fact that the game may not be properly optimized. It's hit it or miss I guess, so if most games run fine for my HD 7850 + Core i3 setup and one game has bad fps drops, I'm just gonna be like "Oh well, another console port".

    I mean, there are games that look better than this that rarely drop below 60fps. There are games with more intense weather effects that rarely drop below 60fps. There are games with more detailed environments that run at 60fps.

    So I guess I'll settle for low with no shadows to get 60fps on a computer that plays BF3 on high.
    You can't be comparing different games that are built on different engines and use different ways of utilising system resources.

    Some games are more GPU intensive some more CPU intensive and some need ton more ram than others. Each game has different requirements, and even when you can run some game like BF3 or Crysis on high with just an i3 then perhaps they are built to be less CPU and more GPU intensive.

    But I don't know what you expect with just an i3 which is a crappy CPU when it comes to high quality gaming, get an i7 and you would probably see a huge improvement.
    I was playing on a laptop most of the time and have just a 6770m gpu there but an i7 CPU and I never noticed any frame drops.

  25. #50
    My i7 at 3.5 single thread can handle the game on ultra. Considering prepatch was single thread.

    An i3 dual which added together, equaling 3.5 should be decent enough.

    For a fair comparison you need to know the cache and how many threads tomb raider can handle.

    In conclusion i3 isn't bad. i3 would usually suffer under encoding/ emulation etc. For a gamer with a decent i3, you don't need a better CPU.

    Although I must reiterate, I do need to know the i3 model and I need to know how many threads tomb raider works on as of this patch

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •