Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Skyrim Low Performance?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 18, 2011 8:34:02 PM

Hello,
I recently bought Skyrim (extremely fun, btw. :3) And I noticed that on my GTX460s in SLI, that in forest areas (such as the area when you leave the cave at the start) and in some buildings and towns, especially Markarth, that my frames become choppy, and dip down to about 20-30. While I don't expect ABSOLUTE MEGA AWESOME FRAMES, I;m not sure if this is the performance I should be getting? I play on Max with 2x AA and 16xAF. Other components in my rig are an i7 950 at stock, and 8GB of RAM. Any help?

More about : skyrim low performance

December 18, 2011 8:56:37 PM

Noash123 said:
Hello,
I recently bought Skyrim (extremely fun, btw. :3) And I noticed that on my GTX460s in SLI, that in forest areas (such as the area when you leave the cave at the start) and in some buildings and towns, especially Markarth, that my frames become choppy, and dip down to about 20-30. While I don't expect ABSOLUTE MEGA AWESOME FRAMES, I;m not sure if this is the performance I should be getting? I play on Max with 2x AA and 16xAF. Other components in my rig are an i7 950 at stock, and 8GB of RAM. Any help?



Have you tried using the 4gb patch? It will allow Skyrim to use up to 4gb, at the moment it will only use 2gb. http://games.softpedia.com/get/Patch/The-Elder-Scrolls-...


December 19, 2011 6:03:02 AM

Tried it. While loading times are better, not helping the frames. :/ 
Related resources
December 19, 2011 7:58:14 AM

I have also been disappointed with performance in Skyrim. I am running an i7 860, GTX 580 with 16GB RAM and the game is installed on an SSD. The 4K patch seems to greatly improve stability but not with the fps. It's my opinion that Bethesda simply have not optimized the game for PC. It stinks. Having said this, it's also the best rpg I have played in ages. If enough people complain about this issue on the steam forums we might see a patch that improves performance...fingers crossed.
a c 290 U Graphics card
December 19, 2011 9:26:53 AM

Trist_58 said:
I have also been disappointed with performance in Skyrim. I am running an i7 860, GTX 580 with 16GB RAM and the game is installed on an SSD. The 4K patch seems to greatly improve stability but not with the fps. It's my opinion that Bethesda simply have not optimized the game for PC. It stinks. Having said this, it's also the best rpg I have played in ages. If enough people complain about this issue on the steam forums we might see a patch that improves performance...fingers crossed.


What kind of bad performance are you experiencing? I'm maxing it out with a single GTX 560 Ti @ 1080p.
December 19, 2011 12:43:17 PM

Hey Sunius,

I'll give Skyrim a spin now, maxed out @1080p in Markath. Won't take long...
December 19, 2011 12:56:06 PM

Ok, running around in Markarth I achieved anything between 20 to 90fps. Loving the 90's but gets a bit choppy in the 20's. I have read that Skyrim is very CPU intensive and mine is a few generations old - very annoying as I just bought this card largely for games like this...what's the CPU in your rig?
a c 290 U Graphics card
December 19, 2011 1:02:47 PM

Might be it... I am running i5 2500k @ 4.3 GHz :S Though I NEVER noticed a dip in fps, averaging around 40, and it's not dropping in cities.
December 19, 2011 1:08:46 PM

Yeah, my 860 is running @ a lowly 2.8 GHz. :( 

Might be time to get some cooling and overclock tha beyach.
December 19, 2011 1:16:13 PM

No dips, even in Whiterun?
a c 290 U Graphics card
December 19, 2011 1:27:02 PM

No dips at all.
December 19, 2011 1:31:23 PM

You're one of the "lucky" ones I would say. I have read accounts of many who are dissatisfied...bugger, I hope my 580 isn't faulty. I doubt it though, must be the CPU.
a c 290 U Graphics card
December 19, 2011 1:37:20 PM

It probably is processor, idk though. I never got higher than 45 fps mark on skyrim, yet it never dropped below 35 fps, even in cities its at 37-38. In caves I get around 41-42 fps, and I know for a fact that it's my graphics card that doesn't allow me to go higher than that. With GTX 580, 90 fps is a lot, comparing to my overclocked 560 Ti, though, I am not surprised.. Try running some benchmarks, that way you can test your card.
a c 130 U Graphics card
December 19, 2011 1:40:15 PM

Don't know about Frames as I never check unless I have an issue which I don't.

I'm running with a single 5850 and a Phenom II 555 at stock with 4Gb ram no ram patch either.
The game detected and set Maximum graphics and i have not looked back.


Mactronix
December 19, 2011 1:46:04 PM

Interesting, in caves and indoors I commonly get well over 120 fps. Perhaps it's like I initially thought - just a game poorly optimized for the PC. But that's just a sign of the times I spose.

Actually, it would make more sense if the game made the CPU take the load when you enter cities and the GPU more so in caves or outdoors etc. That would explain why you're getting results that are not consistent with my own experience.
a c 130 U Graphics card
December 19, 2011 1:53:10 PM

Just tested and i seem to be bouncing off of 60 so im going to check for V-sync now. Application preference is set so does Skyrim run with V-sync as standard ?
Could the V-sync be the issue ?

Mactronix :) 
December 19, 2011 2:01:58 PM

I believe that V-sync is turned on as standard. You would have to force-off in the graphics card control panel. I currently have V-sync forced off in NVIDIA game settings.
a c 130 U Graphics card
December 19, 2011 2:43:44 PM

Trist_58 said:
I believe that V-sync is turned on as standard. You would have to force-off in the graphics card control panel. I currently have V-sync forced off in NVIDIA game settings.


Can you do me a favour and try it with V-sync ON.
In case people didn't realise its a funny beast and can in fact help or hinder depending on the set up being used.
I would be very interested to know how you system runs with it on.

Mactronix :) 
December 19, 2011 2:45:41 PM

Ok, no probs. Back in a few...
December 19, 2011 3:02:21 PM

Can't say that I noticed a difference. The screen tearing seemed to be less of an issue so I might actually keep v-sync on. Having said this I am not 100% sure that the NDIVIA setting for this actually worked because it won't let me select the actual skyrim executable, I had to use the 4K exe or steam itself. Also, I used MSI Afterburner to monitor the fps and it still displayed well over 60 of them even when v-sync was supposed to be limiting to 60 (as per my monitor htz).
December 19, 2011 6:31:36 PM

I'm keeping an eye on this thread, but maybe I can give some input too.

I play on 1920x1080 and get anywhere from 40-60 fps with all settings on max/ultra, with occasional dips into 30's during crazy scenes. This is on a single GTX 460 overclocked to 830MHz... i5 2500k 4.4GHz, ASRock Z68 Extreme 3, 8GB DDR3 1333, thermaltake 850W.

I have noticed something very weird during gameplay that happens rarely. I am outdoors getting ~50 frames, walk into a house (game loads briefly) and frames are still fine (~50). I walk out and frames drop to ~30, I walk back indoors and frames drop again ~12, so i quicksave, close Skyrim to the desktop and relaunch. When the game loads I'm back at ~50 frames and everything is chipper again for another hour until the cycle starts back...
a c 290 U Graphics card
December 19, 2011 6:49:22 PM

hmm strange. The only times (happened 3 times since Skyrim's release) I had to restart the game was when the water went invisible. It never reduced fps like that.
December 19, 2011 9:38:59 PM

Well, I'm hoping that the game is just poorly optimized and I'm not having faults. Can't afford to replace a fault if thats the case.
December 19, 2011 9:40:36 PM

I'm also noticing a lot of you have single cards. I havn't actually tried Skyrim while SLI is disabled. Maybe the game isn't properly supportive of SLI yet? I'll try in a bit. (Playing Crysis 2 :p )
a c 290 U Graphics card
December 20, 2011 6:16:31 AM

Yea that might be. I know for sure Crossfire doesn't properly work. Try running a single card, go ahead!
!