Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

The Witcher 2 low FPS with a R7970

Last response: in Video Games
Share
March 11, 2012 9:39:39 PM

So Battlefield 3 runs great at ultra 4x msaa at avg around 65-75 fps with my 7970 but the witcher 2 with these setting runs not so great:
All ultra, no texture downscaling, lod distance normal, bloom light shafts AA SSAO all of that stuff enabled, no ubersampling no vert sync high spec decals motion blur disabled, with these setting in an outside environment this was the fps i was getting: [1920x1080]

By fattypatty at 2012-03-10

When it rains it dips down to about 35 avg and goes under 30 all the time

More about : witcher low fps r7970

March 11, 2012 9:43:51 PM

Have you installed the latest driver?
m
0
l
March 11, 2012 9:49:11 PM

xxyougotownedzz said:
Have you installed the latest driver?
its not the drivers 12.2 up to date i only have the drivers no CCC or anything like that as i said BF3 runs fine is the witcher 2 more graphical intensive?
m
0
l
Related resources
March 11, 2012 10:31:12 PM

Well I did play witcher 2 a bit for fps checks with ubersampling enabled on my 570 and averaged about 25-30 fps at 1920x1080 so my guess would be that you're on the low side but this could be an issue of compatibility between the new drivers, your card, and witcher 2. Witcher 2 definitely has the potential to be extremely demanding even without ubersampling.
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 12:20:43 AM

FattyPatty said:
well its these benchmarks that made me question my fps i dont know if they are legit though http://www.techspot.com/review/481-amd-radeon-7970/page...


Remember that those are not showing you the minimums. The 7970 is perfectly capable of spiking mid 100's for FPS in witcher in some scenes, and that will offset a lot of -35 dips. Also they don't give you the criteria for their benchmark sadly =/. You could potentially be benching off a more demanding segment of the game.
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 12:23:10 AM

casualcolors said:
Remember that those are not showing you the minimums. The 7970 is perfectly capable of spiking mid 100's for FPS in witcher in some scenes, and that will offset a lot of -35 dips. Also they don't give you the criteria for their benchmark sadly =/. You could potentially be benching off a more demanding segment of the game.
yea i noticed that D: but i guess ill just turn down the graphics and wait for new drivers and hope i can maintain atleast 50 fps

m
0
l
March 12, 2012 12:26:38 AM

It could be something like, they had negative LOD enabled and you don't. The other conclusion that unfortunately pops into my head given your run of issues with BF3 as well, is that you could have a faulty card.
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 12:28:33 AM

casualcolors said:
It could be something like, they had negative LOD enabled and you don't. The other conclusion that unfortunately pops into my head given your run of issues with BF3 as well, is that you could have a faulty card.
possibly i tihkn i voided the warrenty with the small overclock i did though i didnt raise voltgage ill have to check that out
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 12:32:20 AM

FattyPatty said:
possibly i tihkn i voided the warrenty with the small overclock i did though i didnt raise voltgage ill have to check that out


If you didn't touch the voltage you didn't void the warranty.
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 12:38:15 AM

casualcolors said:
If you didn't touch the voltage you didn't void the warranty.
alright i opened a ticket to get help from them
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 2:38:23 AM

LOL look at this i uninstalled the drivers and ran The Witcher 2 without them and these were my results in the same spot same settings

By fattypatty at 2012-03-11
then battlefield and unigen both run with low fps with no drivers D:
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 3:17:51 AM

Where do i get driver sweeper is it still being used? becuase the link on guru3d has been discontinued. Im gonna wait til the drivers dont suck because im running bf3 at 100 fps now >.< the only thing that runs lower is unigen
m
0
l
May 5, 2012 9:00:38 PM

FattyPatty said:
So Battlefield 3 runs great at ultra 4x msaa at avg around 65-75 fps with my 7970 but the witcher 2 with these setting runs not so great:
All ultra, no texture downscaling, lod distance normal, bloom light shafts AA SSAO all of that stuff enabled, no ubersampling no vert sync high spec decals motion blur disabled, with these setting in an outside environment this was the fps i was getting: [1920x1080]
http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/50/witcher2avgfps.png
By fattypatty at 2012-03-10

When it rains it dips down to about 35 avg and goes under 30 all the time


Lemme put it to you this way: My Rig with two GTX680s in SLI runs BF3 at 1080p (metro map) at 150-200fps, the same map runs from 65fps - 90fps in 5760X1080p in triple screen and running fraps, every once in a blue moon when 32 vs. 32 are all at the same choke point frag-effing each other it'll dip below that.

Witcher 2 runs from 60-110fps with ubersampling off and everything else sent to far,ultra/highest settings (because remember even at ultra settings a few things are turned down while uber is turned up). Also, when I use ubersampling, it runs at about 40. I personally think Witcher 2 is more demanding than BF3, it's better looking too, even though it doesn't utilize dx11. Additionally, BF3 employs its own FPS counter while Witcher 2 has to rely on FRAPs. I know people say the human eye cannot detect higher than 60 FPS, but I know my game runs smoother without FRAPS. Another example of FRAPS destroying a game with a ton of detail is Two Worlds II; runs smoother than butter but with fraps it plummets below 30. I'd guess it's easily 70 fps in Triple screen without FRAPS but that's just eyeballing it.

So,

-If you're using FRAPS in Witcher 2, that's a big deal.
-The environmental effects in Witcher 2, bloom, water running on walls during storms, lightning, etc. are super demanding.
-Tons of more intelligent AI (I had over 200 loot bags in the Dwarven City Laying around), and there are a ton of other effects (fire in almost every scene, water, dripping, spell effects, etc.)
-And like Casual said, some areas are way more demanding than others in the game. The Eternal Battle Scene comes to mind, The skyline alone would bring systems from 4 years ago to a crawl.

One final note, I saw that benchie you put up too and I was a bit pissed that the game runs as smooth on two GTX 580s in SLI as it does my 680s. There are other benchies that seem more realistic than that one that show the two 580s running it in 1080 in the 60s and 70s. So,to cite Casual again, they probably ran the Benchmark at a very forgiving scene, possibly the jailbreak scene with little lighting effects.


Edit: The one thing I will note, is that the game seemed to run at a higher FPS when my main screen at the main DVI port (a 23" 120hz display) than when I'm using my 47" running out of the accessory port on my card... this may be because it's an accessory port... the hz are irrelevant as vsync is off, but I'm wondering if that's why my #s aren't overwhelming compared to other titles.
m
0
l
May 7, 2012 12:17:38 AM

I would also like to note that the prologue is by far the most demanding part of the game. When you walk out of the tent you will see some major dips in FPS. However, after you leave the city, things turn around and get much better.
m
0
l
May 7, 2012 12:25:22 AM

bystander said:
I would also like to note that the prologue is by far the most demanding part of the game. When you walk out of the tent you will see some major dips in FPS. However, after you leave the city, things turn around and get much better.


Agreed, there's a ton going on during the initial part of the game. On a sidenote, I just beat the game again, unbelievable... potentially top 3 RPGs all time IMO.
m
0
l
!