Sleeping dogs fps concern

[sniper2606]

First of all here are my specs

Windows 8 64bit
EVGA GTX 670 2gb
8GB ram corsair vengance
i5 2500k OC to 4.5ghz

Anyways i been playing other games like Crysis 2 on ultra settings with DX11 on 1920x1080 resolution and i get over 60fps all the time BF3 the same on ultra max payne 3 the same, but whenever i play sleeping dogs the max FPS i get is 45 and and low of 23 on cuteness i know my pc is more than capable of running more fps, any reason on why this game is running such a crappy FPS?

 

[Supernova1138]

It is a new game, do you have the latest drivers for your video card? If you have an older driver revision, you may be getting bad framerates. If you don't have the Steam version, make sure the game is patched to the latest version.

 

[sniper2606]

It is a new game, do you have the latest drivers for your video card? If you have an older driver revision, you may be getting bad framerates. If you don't have the Steam version, make sure the game is patched to the latest version.

Yes sir got he 306.02 beta driver from nvidia, ill check if is patch

 

[miken2137]

You're not running SLI right?

But yeah, right now, the only drivers that support the game are in beta. Once better drivers come out, your rig should do fine.

 

[Sunius]

I found setting AA to extreme made the game unplayable. I'd suggest sticking to high AA settings.

 

[supersonic977]

for me setting FXAA = SSAA to extreme makes the game running slow at about 45 fps max turning it off made the game running at 60fps smoothly

 

[rtika]

h have same problem with this game , when reduce anti aliasing or make it off , the game became faster and can play it

 

[sniper2606]

Yeah i had the AA on extreme, i turn it down and its perfect now

 

[blakwidowrsa]

To the last 3 posts - you guys do know that AA is a FPS dropper ? And actually not necessary if monitor is at max resolution...just saying.

 

[sniper2606]

To the last 3 posts - you guys do know that AA is a FPS dropper ? And actually not necessary if monitor is at max resolution...just saying.

Really? So you're saying that at 1920 x 1080 is not necessary? i was not aware

 

[HEXiT]

its not entirley necisary but it will have a slight effect on improving image quality when your not moving around. things like thin wires will looks smoother further into the distance they wont suddenly dissapear and reapear at random instead you will get a smooth fade.
personally i think x4 fsaa is more than enough on 1080p often you can get away with just x2 if the screen is 24inches or less... on 27 inch or more then it is needed. as the pixels are markedly bigger...
if you have a 2500/1400 24 inch screen you defiantly dont need aa at all as the pixel density is so high. but again on larger screen area x2 or x4 fsaa is enough. the bigger the screen and the pixels the higher the aa you need to smooth out the jaggies.
on larger screens at low rez you will also need it. say you run a 1024/768 19inch screen you will definatly need x4 fsaa to get a smooth image. the same 19inch screen running at 800/600 you would need x8 fsaa to get a smoother image... but by this time your screen would generally be upscaling and bluring the image in the process. again fsaa comes to the rescue...

but as a rule of thum 1080p at 24 inches or less 2-4 fsaa, +24 inchs x4 fsaa
720p@19 inches+ x4 aa

 

[blakwidowrsa]

its not entirley necisary but it will have a slight effect on improving image quality when your not moving around. things like thin wires will looks smoother further into the distance they wont suddenly dissapear and reapear at random instead you will get a smooth fade.
personally i think x4 fsaa is more than enough on 1080p often you can get away with just x2 if the screen is 24inches or less... on 27 inch or more then it is needed. as the pixels are markedly bigger...
if you have a 2500/1400 24 inch screen you defiantly dont need aa at all as the pixel density is so high. but again on larger screen area x2 or x4 fsaa is enough. the bigger the screen and the pixels the higher the aa you need to smooth out the jaggies.
on larger screens at low rez you will also need it. say you run a 1024/768 19inch screen you will definatly need x4 fsaa to get a smooth image. the same 19inch screen running at 800/600 you would need x8 fsaa to get a smoother image... but by this time your screen would generally be upscaling and bluring the image in the process. again fsaa comes to the rescue...

but as a rule of thum 1080p at 24 inches or less 2-4 fsaa, +24 inchs x4 fsaa
720p@19 inches+ x4 aa

+1

 

[sniper2606]

its not entirley necisary but it will have a slight effect on improving image quality when your not moving around. things like thin wires will looks smoother further into the distance they wont suddenly dissapear and reapear at random instead you will get a smooth fade.
personally i think x4 fsaa is more than enough on 1080p often you can get away with just x2 if the screen is 24inches or less... on 27 inch or more then it is needed. as the pixels are markedly bigger...
if you have a 2500/1400 24 inch screen you defiantly dont need aa at all as the pixel density is so high. but again on larger screen area x2 or x4 fsaa is enough. the bigger the screen and the pixels the higher the aa you need to smooth out the jaggies.
on larger screens at low rez you will also need it. say you run a 1024/768 19inch screen you will definatly need x4 fsaa to get a smooth image. the same 19inch screen running at 800/600 you would need x8 fsaa to get a smoother image... but by this time your screen would generally be upscaling and bluring the image in the process. again fsaa comes to the rescue...

but as a rule of thum 1080p at 24 inches or less 2-4 fsaa, +24 inchs x4 fsaa
720p@19 inches+ x4 aa

So basically i dont need AA on my Asus 23' 120hz monitor? not using HDMI btw just dvi cable, i been told that dvi looks better than 1080p.

 

[Sunius]

It looks the same .

 

[blakwidowrsa]

yes, hdmi is actually a diff schape dvi.