4K performance since 2.1

ilmostro · Jun 7, 2016

Hi all,

I normally play on a 4K TV, which I got about 18 months ago when they dropped in price. Gfx card is a Nvidia 960, and it ran pretty well once optimised, giving 60fps in space, and a bit of a hit in asteroid belts, but nothing I couldn't live with. Inside space stations FPS dropped to 30, but was never really an issue, since you don't need 60 FPS to land and navigate menus.

Since 2.1 I've noticed that when opening for example the mission boards the FPS can drop as low as 2 for 30 secs or so, and everything is generally unresponsive, whereas before everything was pretty slick. But then it will go back to normal. I've reverted to 1080p and everything seems fine all the time, so the issue is related to running in 4K. I suspect that the issue could be the new NPC avatars eating up more memory on the card?

So my question is is anyone else who plays in 4K seeing a performance drop?

Long Star · Jun 7, 2016

GTX960 is not a 4K card. It only has 2GB of VRAM. Your system is probably using system ram to fuel performance in the stations and that may be why it is running slower. Perhaps try a card with more VRAM.

EValve · Jun 7, 2016

Sorry to burst your bubble [haha] you're not and never have played in 4k resolution. At best I suppose whenever you get those FPS drops to 2 is when something in your system goes "lets try 4k".

ilmostro · Jun 7, 2016

Well, whether or not you guys think it's 4K or not, the point is has anyone running a display at 3840 x 2160 seen a performance hit? I was perfectly happy with it before.

Brett C · Jun 7, 2016

One thing here to note is that you say '4k TV'. Many TV's that i've seen advertise 4k being supported, but it's still a downscaled 2k or 1080p screen. Happen to have the make & model of the TV?

Also, the 960, VR support needs a fair lot of VRAM. In which, the 960 doesn't have much of. You'd need to update your GPU to a newer model for that.

BeTeK · Jun 7, 2016

Well I have 4k display (BenQ 32" BL3201PT) and gtx 970 and I can tell that elite is unplayable with 4k. I have also HTC vive and it's ok to play. Sometimes in ground there are some dips in fps but usually solid 90fps when some details are dropped.

I have preordered asus strix gtx 1080 and lets see if that can run with ultra with vive

ilmostro · Jun 7, 2016

Brett C said:
One thing here to note is that you say '4k TV'. Many TV's that i've seen advertise 4k being supported, but it's still a downscaled 2k or 1080p screen. Happen to have the make & model of the TV?

Also, the 960, VR support needs a fair lot of VRAM. In which, the 960 doesn't have much of. You'd need to update your GPU to a newer model for that.

Thanks for replying Brett.

TV's an LG 42UB820V-ZH. It's definitely displaying at full resolution and going to 1080p, you can clearly tell it's going though a scalar. I do get a bit or texture popping in the stations even before, which I realise will be due to the lack of VRAM (I know I should have got a 4GB card [sad]). I'm not running it in 3D or anything, I just prefer the extra crispness of the higher res. BTW I turn antialiasing off.

As I said, everything was acceptable to me in 2.0 (even planetary landings), I just wondered why it seems to randomly drop so low (2 FPS) than jump back to 30 FPS.

Some1else · Jun 7, 2016

I've seen a hit on FPS also. I have an ASUS GTX 970 with 4G GDDR, and play on a Samsung 55" curve 120Hz UHD 4k TV. Never had a problem until 2.1. The only place I have a real problem is when driving the SRV. It's reads I'm getting 30 FPS and up, but it sure doesn't look like it. Looks more like in the teens. I've tried dropping many of the texture and draw distance settings, but it still looks very "gitterie".

Any help would be appreciated!

LLaP

S1E

buffy · Jun 7, 2016

I am running a 290oc Tri-x card and also took a performance hit at 4k (running ultra settings). I turned AA to 2XMSAA and now its much smoother game play. You dont need much AA at 4k as the pixels are so small anyway.

OriginalBadBoy · Jun 7, 2016

4K gaming (at 60fps anyway) really isn't a thing at the moment. Even a Nvidia 1080 is going to struggle with most games to get above 40fps.

Give it a couple of years and you might be able to do it.

ilmostro · Jun 7, 2016

buffy said:
You dont need much AA at 4k as the pixels are so small anyway.

Exactly - the hardly noticable difference isn't worth the FPS hit.

avow555 · Jun 7, 2016

Taken a bit of a hit in the SRV but in general it's been smooth.
Not been in any heavy asteroid belts yet so must check that next time on.

See signature for hardware, vsync at 60hz.

Rimsplitter · Jun 7, 2016

OP, I play at 2560x1440 through AMD's VSR using two HD7970s and an i7-4790K on a 1080p plasma. Prior to 2.1 it was silky smooth, rock solid 60 FPS at all times according to FRAPS. Since 2.1 there has been a major drop in performance when there's a lot on screen. E.g. when I'm inside a docking station if I swing the ship to line up with a landing pad then there's a slight pause before the view lurches round to where it should be. FRAPS shows FPS dropping into the 30s when that happens. On approach to Coriolis stations they often appear to skip round instead of spinning smoothly. That never previously happened.

I found that in the new .02 settings menu enabling "reduce camera shake" makes a noticeable difference but there are still those pauses when a lot of data needs to be shunted around.

I haven't changed my hardware, drivers or manual graphics config file edits but the post-2.1 drop in performance is real and documentable. Don't let anyone gaslight you into thinking you're imagining it.

FX2K · Jun 7, 2016

I'm running @ 4k, using 980 ti's in SLI.

I have noticed the occasional stutter when entering a station, but that's all.
No FPS problems here. A steady 60 and using G-sync. I also noticed (at least so far) the light flickering issue (darkside of planets etc), related to SLi is now fixed.. cool!

Pretty much everything at max settings, including the terrain work setting (can't remember the name of it)

Edit: I'm also using EDFX 2.5 Interstellar full effects, black edition, with one or two minor tweaks.

iFred · Jun 7, 2016

4K since October with GTX 970, 60 Hz, having 60 FPS in Space, 45 in station and 30 on planets until 2.2, now its slightly lower (50/30/25). But 1080 on the list for summer

Conch · Jun 7, 2016

ilmostro said:
Well, whether or not you guys think it's 4K or not, the point is has anyone running a display at 3840 x 2160 seen a performance hit? I was perfectly happy with it before.

i found that the game runs allot better since 2.1

running the game on 7680x1440.

nick_j_bacon · Jun 7, 2016

Just to jump in here, I'm running an 970 SLI build on a 4k monitor and I've noticed framerate drops of the same magnitude (<10fps) when opening station services menus...... Was fine pre 2.1 (Beta was fine as well)

FiddenUK · Jun 7, 2016

Ice asteroid belts are really slowing down the fps when you're mining (we had a similar issue in other asteroid belts in the past, but that was fixed). Hopefully this can be fixed for ice also (that is on 1920x1080).

ilmostro · Jun 7, 2016

The first video is a longer one, showing the FPS is ok up until 4m25s, when it drops to 2-3 FPS briefly.

[video=youtube;-wog9YVFE10]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wog9YVFE10[/video]

The next shorter video is a more extreme example of it.

[video=youtube;OPxpLd6mxGc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPxpLd6mxGc[/video]

Sergei Pavlov · Jun 7, 2016

My performance has actually improved significantly since 2.1. I am running everything on ultra, high bloom, occlusion and all that jazz. 1440p 144Hz monitor on a 780Ti. I have 200+ FPS in space, 90+ on planets, asteroids and stations. When I capped FPS in-game to 120, performance was even smoother.

Noticed a couple of issues though. When I enter stations there's often a sudden freeze for a fraction of a second. I think it's the lighting effects kicking in. When mining very close to an ice asteroid my FPS can drop down to 30 (and feels like 5-10), but usually stays at 50. Don't have any issues with the station menu, but contacts' pictures take ages to load. I have often checked all the missions before they do (I have a 300Mbps fiber optic connection, so it's not my network).