EDO Update9: how is your performance?

Deleted member 182079

D
I've not had time to try it on my laptop since yesterday to be able to offer a view... Fingers crossed for you!
Ha thanks. I very much expect an unplayable stutterfest even on low settings, and will have to install Horizons instead to accompany me through the next few weeks, but that nagging curiousity was too much in the end. For science, eh.
 
Also, straight from reddit
1639148449875.png


A second tip from reddit is to enable GPU Scheduling in windows, beyond deleting the graphics config folder
 
Last edited:
I've had a better chance to try this out now, and performance has increased a lot.

My lowest frame rate in station now is 60 - max is 110
On foot - 90(ish)
In SRV -90+

Space, and settlements, yet to try.

N.B. I am Using NIS, using res of 2924x1224, which is 3440 x 1440
RTX3070

Everything feels smoother, and the GFX look wonderful - I'm a happy bunny.

I may go mad and try VR again, which to be honest was good after update 8, so who knows with 9. Not sure I can use NIS with VR, but hey hum, hopefully the FPS increase will be enough.

EDIT: Forgot to say - frame rate in worst places = min 15-20FPS more, sometime, even in station (of foot in the bar), I was getting 100+ FPS!
EDIT:EDIT - I love this game. Ive not hit any of the bugs introduced in 9, but hopefully 9.1 will sort those. Off to buy a Scorpion and give it a whirl
EDIT:EDIT:EDIT - I think Ive now got to the point where I'm going to turn off my FPS counter, and just enjoy the game. If I hit any slow areas, then I may turn it back on.
You can get obsessed with FPS, rather than just enjoying it.
Can you let us know how VR went using NIS? I was going to try the same thing but can't get into the game atm due to real life .. if I do manage to try it I'll report.
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
CPU - Intel Core i7 9700K @ 4.90 GHz
RAM - 32GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200MHz
GFX - GeForce RTX 3080 GAMING OC 10G
Win 10, all latest drivers
2560x1440 on all maxxed out + some settings modified beyond Ultra in config file + ReShade

Got 50-60 FPS everywhere apart from ground CZ's, with ocassional drops to 30-40.
Ground CZ's - unplayable with 20-30 FPS and ocassional drops do <20. After the CZ was done, FPS would rise to 40-50.
 
GTX 1080, i5 4690k

Things were absoutely fine (apart from sub-50 fps) before update 9. It's almost certainly a CPU bottleneck.
The 4690K is the minimum CPU (or close), isn't it?

The CPU bottleneck seems to be a bit weird on surfaces - I find, when I come out of glide and in to land at the settlement, that the client now hits my CPU hard, on both my laptop and my desktop. I get a temperature and usage spike that lasts a minute or so, then it sorts itself out and usages drop back.

I bumped the supersampling up to 1.25 on my desktop and didn't notice any difference in performance. 2.0 SS (effectively 4K) did... not go well. I'm not sure of the reasons; I think it might be related to vRAM, but I don't know because I wasn't monitoring vRAM usage. I'll try 1.5SS after my meeting in half an hour, and make sure I have Afterburner writing its logs this time.

Who in their right mind organises a meeting for 4PM on a Friday!?
Ha thanks. I very much expect an unplayable stutterfest even on low settings, and will have to install Horizons instead to accompany me through the next few weeks, but that nagging curiousity was too much in the end. For science, eh.
You might be surprised - the 6700 is by no means a bad mobile CPU - 4c/8t, 3.5GHz boost. You might be able to get a steady 30 at 1280x720. The 960m handles 1080p/medium in Horizons OK.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 182079

D
You might be surprised - the 6700 is by no means a bad mobile CPU - 4c/8t, 3.5GHz boost. You might be able to get a steady 30 at 1280x720. The 960m handles 1080p/medium in Horizons OK.
720p... oof. Last time I played at those settings was during my Playstation 3 days. But yes, the CPU is definitely the stronger component... the 960 wasn't my primary choice but the price differential to the next level was unjustifiable. Will never buy a laptop for gaming again I have to say.

I can't remember quite well but I used to run Horizons at High/Ultra settings at 1080p - though I'd set the fps limiter at 30 or 45. And this was only really necessary planetside. It's almost finished downloading so will be able to try it out soon.
 
AMD Ryzen 5 4500H
16 gigs ram
1650 gpu

I have to say, update 9 is the best Odyssey has ever run on my laptop. With medium settings, I can now get a pretty steady 40-45 FPS on concourses and 35-45 on planet bases in 1920x1200 resolution. There are some dips to 30 or so, but it rarely seems to go below that. If I'm willing to lower the resolution, I can even get somewhere around 30-35 FPS on high settings, but there are dips to mid 20's.

Combat zones can still tank the FPS to mid 20s, but it never got under that this time around.

So, all in all, while there's clearly room for improvement, it has gotten better for me.
 
I'm finding it much better.

I've recently moved to using a 4k LG oled TV as my monitor, and had been having to force a widescreen resolution to get decent frames (I'd come from a widescreen anyway, so I didn't really mind that.)

I can now get reliable frame rates at the full 4k though (sits about 60fps in stations etc, dropped to about 38 during a fight on the ground, was always about 120 in space), and it looks glorious to be honest!

10700k
3090 FE
32 GB Ram.
 
On my surprise... pretty good.

currently running it on my laptop, i[m in the UK for work.

I7-8750H
32Gb ddr4 3200
2.5tb nvme ssds
rtx-2080 max-q
144hz 1080p ips

i did clear my config file, but the game is running pretty much smootly all around, been doing a mix of everything and it just consistently worked.

so far so good, let see..
 
Ryzen 2600X
Radeon 5600XT
32GB DDR4-3000
M.2 SSD

In general framerates are improved on foot. I have a new issue though that I just can't pinpoint or resolve. It happens in space and on foot. ...random fps drops for no apparent reason. Unlocked, I run around 120fps (which seems quit a bit lower than U8 BTW) while in SC. On a straight line trip, say from star A1 to star A2 (30,000 ls), I get sudden, seemingly random and frequent drops to 90fps. These drops last for less than a second. VRR does not help during these drops. Here's the kicker. If I set a fps limit of 90, it will drop into the 70s. If I lock the framerate to 60, it will drop into the 50s. Lock it to 30fps and it will drop well into the 20s. The system monitoring I've done offers no insight into a cause and doesn't point to a HW problem. I have one more thing I'm going to try tonight. If it doesn't offer any relief I think I'm just going to play Halo I and Forza H for a couple of months. ...both run like butter. I expect fps issues while on foot but I've never had any problem while shipboard.
 
So, I checked everything. Also I removed files from graphics folder. Nah, not good.

GTX1060 Max-Q 6GB
16GB Ram
i5-8300H

1080p
Everything on high settings except both shadows - set to medium.
Framerate capped to 60. Upscaling set to normal.

Around stations and in space: 60 FPS
Inside the stations: 45-60 FPS
In concourses: (It depens on type and my possition) 25-55 FPS
Planetary settlements: (It depends on size and NPC presence and my possition): 18-40 PFS
I didn't check surface combat zones... and I don't want to. It seems that nothing changed from U8 and maybe it's a little worse.
 
My previous test at the end of October is here:

CPU: i5-4590
GPU: GTX960
RAM: 12gb
SSD Hard drive

Display: 1920 x 1080
Quality: Medium
Model Draw Distance: 50% on slider
Texture Filter Quality: Anisotropic x16
Directional Shadow Quality: Medium
Spot Shadow Quality: Medium
Bloom: Medium
Blur: On
Anti-Alisaing: SMAA
Supersampling: Ultra Quality
Upscaling: AMD FSR 1.0
Ambient Occlusion: Medium
Environment Quality: High
FX Quality: Low
Depth of Field: Off
Material Quality: Medium
Terrain Quality: Medium
Terrain LOD Blending: High
Terrain Work: 0----------
Terrain Material Quality: Medium
Terrain Sampler Quality: Medium
Volumetric Effects Quality: Medium

Wyrd: Vonaburg Station
Min: 26fps
Max: 42fps

Verse: Various settlements
Min: 25fps
Max: 40fps

Verse: SRV outside settlements
Min: 35fps
Max: 45fps

Current results with the same settings - Im running at almost bang on the minimum spec but the settings are above where they should be (IIRC it recommends 720p not 1080p)

CPU: i5-4590
GPU: GTX960
RAM: 12gb
SSD Hard drive

Display: 1920 x 1080
Quality: Medium
Model Draw Distance: 50% on slider
Texture Filter Quality: Anisotropic x16
Directional Shadow Quality: Medium
Spot Shadow Quality: Medium
Bloom: Medium
Blur: On
Anti-Alisaing: SMAA
Supersampling: Ultra Quality
Upscaling: AMD FSR 1.0
Ambient Occlusion: Medium
Environment Quality: High
FX Quality: Low
Depth of Field: Off
Material Quality: Medium
Terrain Quality: Medium
Terrain LOD Blending: High
Terrain Work: 0----------
Terrain Material Quality: Medium
Terrain Sampler Quality: Medium
Volumetric Effects Quality: Medium

Wyrd: Vonaburg Station
Min: 35fps
Max: 55fps
Change: +10fps - althougn importantly the framerate was much more consistent and was often running at a steady 40fps.

Verse: Various settlements
Min: 28fps
Max: 45fps
Change: +5fps - again the framerate was much more solid and I didn't have any hitching whilst moving about.

Verse: SRV outside settlements
Min: 45fps
Max: 55fps
Change: +10fps on average - I could even bump up some of the settings and still get a playable 35fps to 45fps.

The Good:
Definite improvement all round, especially approaching planets where previously the texture quality got very wonky, it looks really nice now. Flying low over planets also held up at 40-50fps with a little hitching but otherwise ok. Approaches to and inside of stations was a solid 40-50fps. Overall space and settlements were better to the point of me not wanting to up the graphics quality on one and turn it down in another to get a consistant frame rate and quality.

I did notice in Wyrd (Blanco Industrual Settlement) that facing one way gave me 41fps, facing 90 degress the other (at a building) caused the frame rate to drop 10fps, as below.
xMuNREv.png


WcGuvz5.png

The Not So Good:
It's still running via the AMD FSR 1.0 setting, and not the Normal one, which takes the shine off the graphics, especially on the text resolution. Switching back to normal knocks about 10fps on the above numbers, so I'd guess there's still some work to do to get it running on consoles. Overall though good to see some progress being made, game still looks lovely and is a marvel. Nothing comes close to it.

Here's hoping for another 10fps ;)
 
Last edited:
GTX 1080, i5 4690k

Things were absoutely fine (apart from sub-50 fps) before update 9. It's almost certainly a CPU bottleneck.
That is something that confuses me. If you (and other players that are into programming) can determine this why hasn't this been addressed and resolved already by FD? I thought that's what these updates were supposed to resolve? Especially Update 9.

FYI, in Horizons I ran everything at Ultra settings and never had an issue. With update 9 I was expecting that this "CPU bottleneck" would finally get addressed so we could just set things back on Ultra again and just continue playing. Instead of playing today I spent two hours this morning fiddling with one setting after another in graphics, setting first on "high" graphics and then dropping one individual setting after another a little bit at a time until I finally achieved around 35-40 FPS in station. Sure glad to see that the stuttering on planet approach was fixed and nice to see the station appear all at once upon arrival there instead of seeing 3 individual segments pop into view one after the other. And it sure is nice to get a new SRV.

Would be nice if that CPU bottleneck would be fixed once and for all so we can just set graphics to Ultra or High again and just play.
Sorry for the long rant :cautious:
 

Deleted member 182079

D
Well well well. Finally managed to boot up the game on my laptop (i7 6700, GTX960m 4GB, 8GB RAM, latest GPU drivers just to be sure). This plays Horizons at a very stable 30-45fps locked at ~High settings and 1080p. I'm not expecting miracles.

Docked in the station (in Solo, just to make sure there's no network interference), and reducing settings to medium (0.5SS applied by default?! - took that back to 1.0, aliasing is already bad enough as it is, this makes text almost unreadable) - because that is as low as I'm prepared to go in terms of eye-candy - it barely hits 30. Okay. Concourse, similar with more frequent drops into the red zone, down to 20 quite often. Going up and down like a yoyo but never above 30. The input lag and stutter is immense, as I'm used to my g-sync monitor smoothening out things quite a bit as EDO is anything but consistent anywhere really. Back to ship and framerate goes up to 50, then down to 30ish. And everything looks just horrible. Can't see the wood from the jaggies at times.

Off into SC to visit a nearby settlement. There, it can hit 60fps, but only just about, and only briefly. it drops to around 30ish intermittently, very very janky and inconsistent, I can't tell why, maybe the new planet tech? But it looks so low-res and poor. Approach to settlement is accompanied by lots of stutter and micro-freezes. The closer to the surface I get, the lower the framerate drops. Once docked, and walking around the settlement, it settles (hur dur) at around 11-12fps. I quit to desktop at that stage and will never boot up EDO on this machine again. Even if it ran at a steady framerate at those settings, it looks so absolutely terrible I wouldn't really want to play this, and certainly not over Horizons.

I mean, I realise the laptop isn't top spec but this is a bit too much. It's quite literally unplayable, at medium settings, as I was fumbling the settlement approach due to input lag and accidentally boosted into the landing pad (instead of getting the landing gear out - XBO pad here). While everything (and I do mean, everything) looks like complete arx, awful aliasing combined with artifacts and whatnot. It's not merely almost, but 100% comical.

If I had played the Alpha on this computer, which was my Elite machine no problemo for the past years before I upgraded to my desktop (which I can see now seems to be doing a lot of heavy lifting particularly my g-sync monitor!), this would've been an insta-refund. And performance is supposed to be a fair bit better now! Boy oh boy.

I guess there's three takeaways from this.

1) I will not play Odyssey for a few weeks (can't bring my desktop with me... no big deal as such, X4 runs just fine on high settings) and Horizons will have to do for my Elite itch, even if it's just to quickly grab any free Arx should they feature again this Christmas
2) I do feel for those PC players who were misled by the minimum/recommended specs - and as for consoles, well... "oof" is all I will say.
3) There really is no need to change my CMDR name anytime soon ;)
Screenshot_0052.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I did say 1280x720 (and I genuinely aver that you won't notice much difference on a laptop screen.)

The 960m is below the minimum GPU (1050 Ti), so yeah.

With all that said, stop trying to play at 1080p. And don't expect miracles.
 
Would be nice if that CPU bottleneck would be fixed once and for all

Easier said than done.

I'm not much of a programmer (C64 BASIC doesn't count for this) and I have next to no knowledge of the inner workings of the Cobra engine, but I do know that just conjuring more parallelism out of legacy game code is not often straightforward and that a lot can go wrong (and evidently has) in satisfying various dependencies.
 
Back
Top Bottom