lol!
I normally play all my games on Xbox, including Elite. No reason to upgrade, yet. I'll wait and see if AMD manages to deliver a GPU to catch up with nVidia next year.
The Star Citizen Thread v9
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
lol!
I normally play all my games on Xbox, including Elite. No reason to upgrade, yet. I'll wait and see if AMD manages to deliver a GPU to catch up with nVidia next year.
Meh - this afternoon isn't turning out quite as planned - so no 3.4 for me.
I has a sad.
Last edited:
To me, personally, SC is not a game. Because it's alpha, you are supposed to test it, not play it - a any gameplay will get wiped. For the same reason, alphas and betas to me aren't games (in "computer game" sense, in broader "game" they are - but then anything can be game, right now I am in a middle of an arguing game, for example). Just to clarify - Early Access to me IS a game, because the devs then say "It's buggy, but you are supposed to play, not test".
So when I played WoT beta, WoWs beta, etc - I had some fun, but I wasn't playing the game, I was testing. I also wasn't playing as I later played in the release versions. I don't do the same stuff in Elite betas as I do on live Elite branch. To me, this is the difference.
So when I played WoT beta, WoWs beta, etc - I had some fun, but I wasn't playing the game, I was testing. I also wasn't playing as I later played in the release versions. I don't do the same stuff in Elite betas as I do on live Elite branch. To me, this is the difference.
@star Breaker: What software are you using to get your computer data like that, and how did you overlay in on SC?
I will be honest here. While I hand built my computer with all the latest parts back then, I don't really know all about optimization and software.
My specs are: Looking on my about screen:
Processor: Intel core i7-6700K CPU @ 4.ooGHz
Installed Ram: 16.0 GB
GPU: Geforce GTX 1080
Drives: 1) Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB (for windows only)
2) Samsung SSD 860 EVO 1TB (for games and work stuff storage)
3) HHD 2TB for back up
Monitor: I use to have the 49" Samsung Gaming monitor, until my Yeti fell into it and cracked the LCD. I've been wanting another Ultra-Wide ever since. But, I use a 43" Samsung 4K gaming monitor, which is better looking in certain areas in games, but, I miss the refresh rate of the gaming monitor.
I run at Very High setting with max Field of View too. I usually get around 30 FPS, with v-synch on.
Again, when it comes to optimizing, v-synchs, etc. I honestly don't know exactly what I'm doing.
when I open up task manager, some times my GPU is 100% and Ram at 50%. So it loves those resources.
Oh and I have fiber optic cable ran to the house, and wired the house with cat 6 cable.
I will be honest here. While I hand built my computer with all the latest parts back then, I don't really know all about optimization and software.
My specs are: Looking on my about screen:
Processor: Intel core i7-6700K CPU @ 4.ooGHz
Installed Ram: 16.0 GB
GPU: Geforce GTX 1080
Drives: 1) Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB (for windows only)
2) Samsung SSD 860 EVO 1TB (for games and work stuff storage)
3) HHD 2TB for back up
Monitor: I use to have the 49" Samsung Gaming monitor, until my Yeti fell into it and cracked the LCD. I've been wanting another Ultra-Wide ever since. But, I use a 43" Samsung 4K gaming monitor, which is better looking in certain areas in games, but, I miss the refresh rate of the gaming monitor.
I run at Very High setting with max Field of View too. I usually get around 30 FPS, with v-synch on.
Again, when it comes to optimizing, v-synchs, etc. I honestly don't know exactly what I'm doing.
when I open up task manager, some times my GPU is 100% and Ram at 50%. So it loves those resources.
Oh and I have fiber optic cable ran to the house, and wired the house with cat 6 cable.
Its also worth remembering, if you criticise SC, the backers are often quick to remind you that you are not playing the game, but testing it.
Except when you are praising it, then its the BDSSE.
Sovapid cheered..... woo hoo.
An outstanding achievement. Normal FPS flying above an icy planet. Never seen that done before. BDSSE!!!!! Chris Roberts does it again! I'm going to buy an Idris now.
V I D E O S pleeeeeease or it didn't happen
Dude, what privacy are you talking about? You're presumably using a username that bears no relation to your real name. I can assure you my real name is nothing like Agony Aunt.
Come on, release the tapes Hilary! Erm... i mean, jpm470.
As for the specs, if you go back a bit, or just read my post, i said that my specs are below minimum. But it plays, and as i noted, my criticism wasn't based on the performance. It was based on the gameplay experienced.
Unless you want to tell my than when I died or got disconnected, that i lost my ship due to being below spec? Or when I got to the planet, i couldn't QT down because my PC is below spec? Or that my opinion of the flight and walk models are bad, because my PC is below spec? (and just to remind you, my FPS was ok in space or walking around on my ship... not great, but bearable).
Does one other machine have a spare NIC? Or can be fitted with a dirt cheap one, even a USB3-Gigabit adapter will do. If so - cable them, assign static IP's to those ports on a different subnet, put their IP's and hostnames into the hosts file on the corresponding ends, job done. Multihomed networking in about 5 minutes. Or just pick up another switch for cheap and cascade it from the first router. Or plug the routers together and get creative
Not a bad idea.
I've thought about it a few times - but basically nobody wants to watch triple screen output unless they have triple screens themselves.
Plus I can't be bothered
Yep, had a reply to a YT video earlier today saying pretty much that.
I highlighted the bit that actually made me laugh out loud. This really should be used as a tagline for the project as a whole!
I was going to explain that if they were genuinely interested in us testing systems, say like mining, then they wouldn't have hidden them behind the paywall of having to buy the only ships actually capable of doing this effectively with real money. They could have done something crazy like having a period of time where the developers really want feedback on mining for the next month or two. They then offer all the ships up that can do this for free, unlimited rebuys etc. and get as many people giving feedback on this mechanic so that they can go "Right, that's mining done for a v1 release." and then move on to some other mechanic. But nothing is complete, nothing looks like it will ever be complete due to constant refactoring, they still ask for money hand over fist and get it too which just has to be the work of the Devil, but that's okay 'cause we shouldn't expect gameplay.
Last edited:
You can check the performance of the community here. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/telemetry
I get 40 to 120 outside of Lorville with my 2015 Asus ROG laptop. Inside 20 to 30. My frames doubled at min and tripled at max. Most of the community had a performance boost due to OCS and NBC.
Lorville is getting its own perf improvements in the coming updates.
I get 40 to 120 outside of Lorville with my 2015 Asus ROG laptop. Inside 20 to 30. My frames doubled at min and tripled at max. Most of the community had a performance boost due to OCS and NBC.
Lorville is getting its own perf improvements in the coming updates.
The thing there is, my dear Mr Nowak, is that table claims I am getting 57.4 FPS, whereas other tools tell a different story, load times are completely inconsistent with their own clientside logs, performance looks abysmal everywhere on the grid, and the whole thing is about as trustworthy as their funding tracker.
Code:
CLIENT STATS
Loading times
Avg 48 sec.
Max 1166 sec.
Min 0 sec.Client still doesn't query it's environment properly.
Code:
<19:32:56> GPU: Architecture =
<19:32:56> GPU: Compute Core Count = 3072
<19:32:56> GPU: Core Clock MHz = 0
<19:32:56> GPU: Memory Clock MHz = 0
<19:32:56> GPU: Teraflops (Calculated from iCoreClock * iNumCUs * 64 Pixels/clk * 2 instructions/MAD) = 0.000000
<19:32:56> GPU: NVidia-Surround or AMD-Eyefinity = Disabled
<19:32:56> [Aftermath] Initialized.
<19:32:58> Font initialization
<19:32:58> Network initialization
<19:32:58> network hostname: Lulzbucket
<19:32:58> ip:10.0.1.18
<19:32:58> [Network Version]: RELEASE DEVELOPMENT BUILD
<19:32:58> Lobby initialization
<19:32:58> MovieSystem initialization
<19:32:58> Console initialization
<19:32:58> Time initialization
<19:32:58> Input initialization
<19:32:58> Initializing Animation System
<19:32:58> Initializing 3D Engine
<19:32:58> Initializing default materials...
<19:32:58> Script System Initialization
<19:32:58> Entity system initialization
<19:32:58> Initializing AI System
<19:32:58> Floating point exceptions disabled.
<19:32:59> [DataCore] Binary Data Loaded. Total Time took 0.349709s
<19:32:59> [DataCore] Game Post Load. Total Time took 0.083265s
<19:32:59> [DataCore] Game Data Loaded. Game.dcb. Total Time took 0.433043s
Last edited:
Perhaps, and I'm not bothered to check their metrics.
But...
I saw this and nearly spilled my beer laughing.
There are absolute standards for that, there's no excuse for that falling over at literally step one.
Your network hostname made me laugh
Do CIG's metrics not record or report min and max frames? It's just taking an average? Every benchmark on the planet reports min and max, given the disparity of framerates between different areas of the map this isn't providing anything particularly helpful or useful.
Initialising AI system took <1 second.
*Slaps PC case* "This bad boy packs 0.000000 Tflops"
It's nice that they were so accurate though... Have you tried tweaking your GPU core clock up to 1Hz? It might just do the trick...
If that player spent the 30 minute chunk in a heavy traffic Lorville. Yea they might get that. If you spend it anywhere else that's not the performance you get.
So the fps reporting requires a disclaimer based on an assumption.
How scientific of them.