Tomb Raider 2013 runs like manure

I just bought a copy of the Tomb Raider 2013 game.
I've been playing for a while and made it through 30% percent of the game. But from the beginning though, I've been experiencing some very bad lagging. The FPS would be at 100 at one point, and then suddenly drop to the low 40s. This keeps on happening and the FPS most of the time isn't good either. I've turned Hair setting to normal from TressFX and tried running on absolute lowest settings.
My config:
I3 540@ 3.06 ghz
GTX 1060 3g Gigabyte OC
8 GB DDr3 RAM
Now while I know my i3 is very weak I also know that it's enough for the game. What's causing this?
 

ThomasKK

Reputable
May 1, 2016
536
1
5,360
Alright, so here is your CPU: http://ark.intel.com/products/46473/Intel-Core-i3-540-Processor-4M-Cache-3_06-GHz

i3-540 is a simple low-end CPU from early 2010. The Tomb Raider is from 2013. Do you know how does the PC render the graphics of the game you see on the screen? First of all, the CPU creates some kind of a frame with instructions on how the frame should be filled with graphics, later, this info is transferred to the GPU processor and the GPU fills up these pre-rendered frames and sends them to your screen and the amount of them done in 1 second is the number we call fps. Something like that. So your CPU is not strong enough and it cannot prepare as many pre-frames as your GPU can work with. The GPU is fantastic tho, but the CPU simply cannot keep up - i3 has been named "low-end" in 2010 and after 3 years you can't simply expect it to run AAA games fluently :/

Also, i have a i5-4690K and it's a beast - bought it 3 years ago - but after 3 years the newest games do have problems. I've seen battlefield 1 "lagging" on the same processor (i5-4690K is a bottleneck in some cases), so if a high-end/beast tier CPU after 3 years cannot run all games - a low-end chip won't do that either. So the only problem is the CPU (bruh it's 7.5 years old!).
 

helloworld1066

Prominent
May 17, 2017
34
0
540


The cpu is the problem im afraid. It may be the case that in some areas of tomb raider the cpu needs more processing power which it doesn't have. Your lucky its as good as it is considering how bad it is. Passmark software gives it a rating of 2694 and that's hopeless this day and age.
 


I'm sorry, but there's an odd 5 people out of 5 telling you it's the CPU, yet you're refusing to believe it.
You should be getting way more on FC3 maxed out, my old GTX 680 2700k rig ran FX3 maxed at 1080p easily above 100FPS, that says a lot...
 


According to Game Debate the specs I have are enough. It requires an i5 750s at the recommended. I know it's very stupid to get this pair and now I realize it, but spending 190$ which is way more than the PC cost I think I deserve at least a bit of performance.
Anyways, I can't squeeze in a new processor currently so I'll just have to wait for a bit though.
I've seen a benchmark anyway so I am sure that is how much I should get in Fc3, the 2700k is far more superior than the i3 540, it may be that FC3 is more CPU Intensive too, oh well, my fault.
 
Game debate is full of it, and even they recognize your CPU doesn't meet the minimum.
$190 for an i5 750s? what are you saying?
Save up and get a Ryzen 1400 and B350 board with 8GB of DDR4, only way to improve performance, no easy out here.

FC3 isn't very CPU intensive, and the point was the 680 is about half the performance of the 1060 and it was getting three times the frames maxed out. It's not that the CPU was strong, it's that it wasn't bottlenecking anything.
Your CPU is an extreme bottleneck, stuttering and very poor FPS are going to follow.