So, frame-rates since the patch, how are yours?

[Cosmo Bozo]

If they ultimately merge Horizons into Odyssey then I believe they will lose a lot of players.
From what I have read and experienced myself there seems to be a 50%+ drop in frames between the two versions.
After the many months and 8 patches, Odyssey basically sucks and will never port over to our console Commanders.

I don't know, I've found I can carry on flying a spaceship around with no issues at all on a ten year old computer.
It's only when you get out of the ship at a settlement in my experience and then only certain ones. If you stick to doing horizons stuff it's pretty much like horizons.

 

[londonx]

If they ultimately merge Horizons into Odyssey then I believe they will lose a lot of players.
From what I have read and experienced myself there seems to be a 50%+ drop in frames between the two versions.
After the many months and 8 patches, Odyssey basically sucks and will never port over to our console Commanders.

Hmmm Hyperbole? There is no difference in FPS in Space and Space Stations between the two versions and the planet tech you could say was "twice as good" and what activity on Horizons planets with Horizons missions requires 60fps on 8 year old hardware? Shooting at skimmers?

 

[Deleted member 182079]

Hmmm Hyperbole? There is no difference in FPS in Space and Space Stations between the two versions and the planet tech you could say was "twice as good" and what activity on Horizons planets with Horizons missions requires 60fps on 8 year old hardware? Shooting at skimmers?

Have you ever unlocked your framerate? Last time I tried (which in fairness is a few patches back now) it was significantly lower in EDO vs EDH - it's just that if you lock your framerate to say 60 (which I normally do) you wouldn't notice this. And yes, I do notice the difference between 120 and 60fps, absolutely. Though 60 is good enough for me in general.

 

[LeoBartlet]

I've not been anywhere near a planet since U8 but I have noticed an increase in my fps in space and in stations/outposts.

 

[londonx]

Have you ever unlocked your framerate? Last time I tried (which in fairness is a few patches back now) it was significantly lower in EDO vs EDH - it's just that if you lock your framerate to say 60 (which I normally do) you wouldn't notice this. And yes, I do notice the difference between 120 and 60fps, absolutely. Though 60 is good enough for me in general.

Well I doubt I would notice any difference between 60 and 100 fps in space, I get the obsession over fps but I would say at some point it starts to become a bit of a hardware junkie thing, a bit like the debate over unleaded fuel decades ago. So I highly doubt the OPs claim there would be a mass exodus for the typical ED player. Its worth also pointing out I dont see much difference flying over or driving over the landscapes in Odyssey either with Horizons even though they look much better terrain-feature and variety wise, its mainly the on foot bit on max details where the extra texture detail impacts which isnt applicable to Horizons owners.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

Well, you may not see the difference but many others do, otherwise I imagine there would be no point in manufacturers building displays that offer such refresh rates.

I'm even going to double down and say that it's even more noticeable when using a head tracker (TrackIR here) - that's tied to a 120hz refresh rate so anything that deviates from that (which is why I don't play Elite at 144fps which is the max my monitor can display) will introduce microstutters.

 

[zombieapocalypse]

Well, you may not see the difference but many others do, otherwise I imagine there would be no point in manufacturers building displays that offer such refresh rates.

I used to think think same way and then I bought a high refresh rate monitor

 

[Deleted member 182079]

I used to think think same way and then I bought a high refresh rate monitor

I used to play on a potato 1080/60 panel from the early 2010s (I don't like tossing gear that still works, but it started to show some wear & tear so made the upgrade last year). It was a huge improvement - not only a bigger screen (22" to 27") but the higher resolution, refresh rate (smoooooooooth operator!) and g-sync on top which works quite well for games where I prefer quality over performance was well worth the money.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

It shouldn't really have that much of an influence, but since a lot of people have SSDs now, studios seem to have gotten spoiled and bother less and less with compression (the size of Odyssey seemingly being another example of that). Odyssey, however, seems to dump a lot of used memory when you jump to SC and needs to load up all the station/settlement assets again when you approach one. It's probably still a better idea to have it installed on an SSD.

That would probably explain why it was less of a problem for me as I have an SSD, albeit oldish.
But it does beg the question: what about the older consoles??

 

[blairlf]

Hi guys well I am hating the update
I have found the frame rates dropped from 80 plus fps in update 7 not in update 8.01 I am getting 5 to 40 but not stable just jumping all over the place and my GPU only gets to be about 30 to 40 % used !!!
Also I was doing a whole lot of Power Up Settlements missions and you can not complete them so that sucks too

 

[CaptainPugwash]

I find that the settlements which are a stuttering disaster settle down and run alright eventually, there was one last night that was like a slideshow for a few minutes, then it suddenly settled down and ran totally smoothly..
Like the game is taking a while to sort itself out...

Nah, it’s them Gremlins, they got bored and went over to @ObiW ’s PC.

 

[Frop]

That would probably explain why it was less of a problem for me as I have an SSD, albeit oldish.
But it does beg the question: what about the older consoles??

I'm not an expert, so I don't know if it's a best practice to dump so much stuff from the memory instantly. If there's a certain cooldown on unused assets in the memory I'd understand it, but it seems like waste of perfectly good I/O.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

I don't know, I've found I can carry on flying a spaceship around with no issues at all on a ten year old computer.
It's only when you get out of the ship at a settlement in my experience and then only certain ones. If you stick to doing horizons stuff it's pretty much like horizons.

Agreed, as long as your PC had decent headroom available in horizons. My 8 year old PC is fine too in flat screen in space, but the fans can be heard continuously whereas in horizons it runs cool.

 

[the100thmonkey]

Anyone had any luck with this Windows 10 feature, I thought it gave me a small FPS increase in a specfic situation in the game but now not so sure! NVidia enabled it with Pascal Chipsets (the GTX 10 series) and later and AMD have added it to their drivers also. Free to do and just requires a reboot. Not seen anyone mention it in the forums and I noticed it was turned off by default, the same menu also has a power setting that can be tuned per application which might be useful for some on a laptop for example but I havent noticed a difference yet.

View attachment 271736

I'd just note that in this picture, you've set the launcher to run in high-performance graphics mode, not the game executable.

You need to navigate to the Elite Dangerous\Products\FORC-FDEV-DO-1000\ folder and choose the EliteDangerous64.exe.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

There is no difference in FPS in Space and Space Stations between the two versions

What!?
I can safely say that I have at least 50% more FPS in horizons, and I will wager that I am by no means the only one, in fact I am part of the vast majority.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

I used to play on a potato 1080/60 panel from the early 2010s (I don't like tossing gear that still works, but it started to show some wear & tear so made the upgrade last year). It was a huge improvement - not only a bigger screen (22" to 27") but the higher resolution, refresh rate (smoooooooooth operator!) and g-sync on top which works quite well for games where I prefer quality over performance was well worth the money.

Yeah, I find even 30fps is ok as long as vsync is ON, in fact I now fly around in space with a limit of 45fps just to save a bit of power (the monitor is 32” 144hz 2k

 

[r3per]

//
Really no difference. Fine in some areas, tank to singles in others. Doubt any improvements were done. Need to go back to pre-Patch 6 for best results. Adding the dumb ship battles to foot CZs is when those starting tanking as well. Here is a short vid of some settlement FPS.
//

 

[Frop]

I'm trying to compare more situations on Low versus High (no downscaling) presets and although Low still gives me slightly more FPS on average, there are more and more instances where there is almost no difference whatsoever anymore. I'm in a medium sized Agricultural settlement at the moment and with all the NPCs still alive, I'm getting the same minimal FPS of 40 on Low as I was getting yesterday on High. As ever, FPS improves by some margin once all the NPCs are dead.

Edit: Different settlement (medium sized Industrial), same story. The FPS just dips down to 30-40 on Low as well.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

Nah, it’s them Gremlins, they got bored and went over to @ObiW ’s PC.

Balls.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

Yeah, I find even 30fps is ok as long as vsync is ON, in fact I now fly around in space with a limit of 45fps just to save a bit of power (the monitor is 32” 144hz 2k

I used to lock Horizons to 30/45fps on my laptop as I was restricted more in terms of hardware... since I have my desktop and gotten used to 60fps I can't go back to that, also because the aforementioned TrackIR will make things a lot more choppy if I go below 60 (though g-sync helps somewhat). I do have MSFS locked at 40fps in my Nvidia settings, seems to be the sweet spot performance wise (and gsync seems to work quite well at that) as I run Ultra settings at 2k - game is stunning to look at and since it's not a fast paced game a lower framerate is ok there.