PC Performance - 4k awful

[SurvivalUK]

Actually it would cost me having to find a pc since my pitiful phone can't see the scrunchy numbers, and considering is drop is surely related to something on his local machine than in game anyway, it's just not that big of a deal to me. =)
Bottom line is, I'm on an inferior system, but a CLEAN one (not streaming from, no anti virus, hell I don't even install Adobe products or anything else that updates in the background) and suffer NO performance issues.

Coincidence? Nope. Just good clean pc fun.

So an 80 to 40 /could/ be the game, but an 80 to 4 is more likely an actual issue.

And since 99% of the people complaining about performance don't post their specs, or don't post their drops, I find it pretty amusing that there are so many people complaining, and not actually trying to help themselves, or others, by doing so.

...this game is NEVER GOING to see a baked game's performance. It's simply too CPU heavy... But people like to install ark (last alphas bitchfest always compared to ark) or b5 (seen a few mentions in this years bitchfest) and think it's an apples to apples comparison.

...when the truth is, the game runs fine on properly tuned systems.

(Or does it... I guess we will never really know?)

- - - Updated - - -

Point in case. 30 fps is VERY playable, and that gpu is a few gens old, and wasn't a very good one even then.

Not picking on you hadecro, but what is unplayable about 30 fps?

So to sum up.

You're suggesting by-enlarge the issue is not with A17e (the only consistency) but with configuration of each person reporting problems across a multitude of hardware / software configurations with no commonality. To add to that you find 30fps is VERY playable.

I'm glad we solved that one then .

 

[Guppycur]

No, I'm suggesting that people should start being part of the solution, instead of part of the problem. A large number of bugs get overlooked simply because of poor presentation... if you have 50 people reporting say, a sleeper spawner bug, and it's clear 45 of them simply don't realize that sleepers coming out of ceilings and cabinets is INTENDED, then the other 5 who are legitimately reporting seeing sleepers spawn right in front of them are going to get ignored.

...and yes, 30fps is completely playable.

 

[Guppycur]

Also, this happens EVERY alpha. The graphics improve, so the base line performance need increases, people whine about their FPS drop. Then, come to find out they're running 4k (see thread title), are not willing to drop their resolutions and will never, ever, admit their hardware is simply outdated. <shrug>

 

[Guppycur]

...right now there are 14791 players online who don't seem to have a problem with their "unplayable fps".

Just saying. =)

 

[gwhit]

Also, this happens EVERY alpha. The graphics improve, so the base line performance need increases, people whine about their FPS drop. Then, come to find out they're running 4k (see thread title), are not willing to drop their resolutions and will never, ever, admit their hardware is simply outdated. <shrug>

No kidding the OP 1080ti is so outdated I am surprised he can even run a web browser on it.

 

[arquebus]

...and yes, 30fps is completely playable.

Maybe it's because I used to be primarily a Mac gamer, and for two years my main Mac has been a Mac Mini from 2014, but seeing people complain about 30 fps is really strange. 30 fps looks fantastic to me. Hell, I can get by with 15 fps in a pinch (though I don't like to), but anything at 30 fps or higher is just an embarrassment of riches. People getting 80 fps and up and being upset about dropping to 30 or 40... what exactly are you seeing that's so radically different and unusable? How is a frame rate faster than film speed insufficient?

That said, I have a run of the mill HP Pavilion bought in January of this year, very middle of the road GPU (a Radeon RX 580), and I play 17e on Ultra plus full distant shadows at 1080p. I have no idea what my frame rate is (because unless it's a slideshow, I really don't care about the number), but it looks smooth to me even inside buildings.

 

[Guppycur]

No kidding the OP 1080ti is so outdated I am surprised he can even run a web browser on it.

And anyone rocking a 1080ti that isn't getting decent frames has other issues going on...

 

[unholyjoe]

And anyone rocking a 1080ti that isn't getting decent frames has other issues going on...

totally, i want a 1080ti and might... not sure but might get one this year.

ok so i am going to reveal my experience with 7dtd while i am testing.

point i am showcasing here is i had to drop back from 4k display to 1080 and i get damn nice fps and they will drop during heavy horde fights to about 20-30 pending where i am fighting them at. 25 fps is very playable but some people expect every game to run at 8k full bells and whistles.

in navezgane my lowest fps is 53 in diersville. there is a lot going on there and surrounded by the pine forest which also brings down fps (trees swaying all the time) but i still average 73 fps.

snow biome i average 75-135

desert average 65-98

burnt biome 55-88

i show screen shots of my video settings and i tweaked them until i got the fps i wanted... i as a tester tho have 2 browsers open firefox and chrome, sometimes skype and sometimes discord, i have one instance open for a17 exp to compare with our current test builds so i run 2 instances of 7dtd one on each monitor.

https://imgur.com/a/wrDMTs1

my specs

Windows 10 Home 64 bit, AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Eight-Core Processor OC @3.90GHz Liquid Cooled, 32G DDR4-2400 RAM, Nvidia GTX 1080 Amp Extreme 8G vram, 1TB SSD, game played @ 1920x1080 full screen on a 4K LED monitor default at DX11, 7dtd installed on 250G NVME.m2 drive

bottom line is... i can play with 4k and all settings maxed and looks superb, but with what i have to do, i prefer what i tweaked it to do now. 7dtd IMHO (and i state it again --- In My Humble Opinion) looks very good with graphics getting updated like the team is doing... but its not prime time for 4k yet. i am still very very happy with how it looks and yes it takes some getting used to streaming textures.

 

[Guppycur]

...and in your capacity as a tester, does "graphics suxors!" in any way help you test?

 

[Batman!]

Still doesn't change the fact that some people are having real problems running this build at settings that their hardware -should- allow them to, myself included.

 

[Guppycur]

What's the hardware, what's the fps? What are you running in the background?

 

[SurvivalUK]

No kidding the OP 1080ti is so outdated I am surprised he can even run a web browser on it.

A web browser! I've no chance, i believe the minimum spec for using the Internet is a 2080ti and even then only at 30 fps...

 

[SurvivalUK]

And anyone rocking a 1080ti that isn't getting decent frames has other issues going on...

Indeed and as noted in the first post no other games have performance issues inc 7DTD A16.4. A17e on the other hand seems broken for quite a number of people including myself.

 

[SurvivalUK]

bottom line is... i can play with 4k and all settings maxed and looks superb, but with what i have to do, i prefer what i tweaked it to do now. 7dtd IMHO (and i state it again --- In My Humble Opinion) looks very good with graphics getting updated like the team is doing... but its not prime time for 4k yet. i am still very very happy with how it looks and yes it takes some getting used to streaming textures.

Thanks detailed input Unholyjoe.

This is in a nutshell the point of my post and i'm sure for many others who are struggling. A17e has performance issues. In my case highlighted by the fact at 4k res and with the most cut back graphics settings possible (1/8th textures anyone!) performance exhibits seriously erratic behaviour.

Hopefully whatever is broken will be fixed before general release

 

[Yushatak]

Didn't read the entire thread, but I also have issues at 4K with speed and a fairly different setup. I have an i7 4770K w/ 16GB DDR3 and a GTX 1060 (390.77 drivers) on Win8.1. Runs smooth at 1080p unless something super-taxing is going on (huge horde going ape♥♥♥♥ and attacking blocks, collapsing giant structures, etc.) but 4K it can lag just inside of a regular POI house with no way to see out (boarded windows) and nothing going on to create a huge demand on the CPU or the graphics hardware (including it being night, so no light except a single source inside, seemingly no zombies around to even run AI for).

I run the game with the settings down a few notches in certain areas to speed things up when a complex scene is going on, especially outdoors, but it's barely playable at 4K for me now where I could muddle through on A16 if I wanted to (though I played 1080p mostly there too since I prefer the speed to the clarity if I have to choose).

If this were purely a hardware lack that's fine, but I'm pretty confident that at least some portion of this problem is specific to this engine - I think some optimization work is missing (culling from rendering queue based on distance/direction rather than just by chunk radius, for example, could cause this sort of slowdown, among hundreds of other potential explanations).

I code for a living in C# and have written a voxel game engine before, would love to take a crack at this for you guys (and maybe if you like my work I could find a job with you? I can dream..). I could also fix terrain generation bugs, I've worked with terrain generation before using noise algorithms and whatnot, and understand how to work with static things like POIs being integrated into procedural terrain (which is something you guys seem to struggle with sometimes, like the random structures that fall down when you near them for one of a few reasons).

 

[ricp]

4K ... * weeps slowly to himself * ... I'd just like to run it at more than 30fps at SD ... * continues to weep *

 

[Hadecro]

NO. You guys have completely missed the point of my post.

Constant jumping from 60 to 30 fps and back is not playable and never will be.

When you have constant 60 fps and enter the building and fps drops to 30 fps it feels like everything slowed down, aiming is 100% harder and game becomes unenjoyable.

I have played GTA V redux on high with my gtx970 4g gaming version with no problems whatsoever, dont you tell me that card ''wasnt really the best one'' Its one of the best in area where i live, not every nation on world has high money standards.

The only truth - A17 >INDOORS< is badly optimised so far. Something is wrong.

Lowering the details to minimum helps fps (still unenjoyable, drops from 110 fps to 50 fps but you get worst graphics possible)

Massive indoor fps drop happens >>>>> bug/bad optimisation.

 

[Guppycur]

So again, proving my point. On both instances.

Sorry guys, it is what it is, and comparing it to baked games isn't going to change that. Every voxel game is going to take a hit, especially when having to recalculate structutal integrity during horde nights, or entering a poi full of 1k textures where every block casts a shadow, and every time one breaks, those si and shadow calculations have to be redone.

Thankfully, there are plenty of video settings where you can turn OFF the need for those very calculations... Ssao, shadows, rendering distance... Grass... Reflections...

So yeh, the choice is yours. Either accept the VERY acceptable drop to 30 fps or turn down the settings until the fps becomes acceptable.

Don't expect the impossible, that's just ridiculous.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh and they ARE still optimizing. Welcome to experimental.

- - - Updated - - -

Indeed and as noted in the first post no other games have performance issues inc 7DTD A16.4. A17e on the other hand seems broken for quite a number of people including myself.

No other games including 16.4 had these major, major, graphical improvements. You are certainly welcome to tune the video settings to what was 16.4's max. 17's max is higher, and more demanding.

 

[punkindrublic]

I am loving the update but there are definitely issues with performance right now. I have a 1080ti 7700k 850 S EVO 16 gigs of decently fast ram and am seeing signficant frame rate issues especially indoors. I have tested the patch with the last 3 driver updates from nvidia and have seen the same results with each. Even at lower settings indoor performance is very sub par. With that said I have dropped most of my settings down and am running below native res right now to make the game what I consider playable because I am enjoying the update and willing to play around the performance issues. There are numerous reports of individuals with near top of the line systems having issues especially at higher resolutions. My guess right now is that the issues may be related to lighting or textures or might be related to drawing content that the player can't see it's possible as well that there are driver issues at play with nvidia that TFP needs to iron out. It's important we report the performance issues we are having so TFP is aware of possible issues and can tackle them as they move towards optimization stages of this patch deployment.

 

[Nugetti]

So yeh, the choice is yours. Either accept the VERY acceptable drop to 30 fps or turn down the settings until the fps becomes acceptable.
Don't expect the impossible, that's just ridiculous.

Before I say anything, sorry for the off-topic since this does not directly concern 4K performance as per thread title, but anyway:
I think a part of the problem people are having with their FPS for now has to do with:

- LOD distance does not do anything. Have it at 0% or 100%, nothing changes.

- SSAO cannot be turned off. To be exact, you can turn it off in the options menu but it will still be on in-game.

- Tree quality is bugged and controls LOD of other objects things like cars etc.

And yes, as Madmole has said, optimizations are coming.

But anyway, I'd like to point out that for some people, including myself, 30FPS does not cut it for a first person game where mouse control accuracy matters so much. Not the look, but the feel of the game.

I do get that you are "defending" A17 to get people to realize a few things and be constructive with the feedback (as it should be), since this is an experimental build for now. People have different standards for what is an acceptable framerate.

I've been holding up longer play sessions for now, since to achieve the FPS I want (50-60+ most of the time) I need to turn down resolution from 1920x1200 to 1440x900. This gives me eye strain, since everything looks blurry due to a non-native resolution, mostly because the in-game text also loses its' clarity. I never even use AA, DOF or motion blur in any game, I don't like how they look. I also never use v-sync since it makes the mouse feel weird for me.

To be clear here, my PC is clean, latest drivers, no background stuff (except Steam ofc), etc.

I know A16.4 was very different graphically, but I could happily run that with 60+ FPS most of the time on my native resolution with almost max settings, excluding the ones I mentioned earlier.

I can accept the FPS dips if there is a reason for it, like heavy combat in a complex environment. But if just chilling outside a simple house let alone going inside one drops my FPS from the 50s to 20s and no other setting (even textures from full -> quarter) than resolution makes things better, I'd say clearly something is still wrong with the rendering.

...and as I said, I'm just holding up the testing for now. I think history just repeats itself, A16E had performance problems, but stable ran well for me. I see no reason why it wouldn't be the case this time, especially since Madmole said that they are working on optimizations.