So when can i play Odyssey with decent framerates?

[Oztig]

I'm terrible, I've never changed my thermal paste in the 3 years+ I've had my current PC, in fact I very rarely clean out the inside... maybe I should.

Hmm - I've never replaced my Thermal paste, or clean the interior of my PC, unless I change a component.
I'm obviously very bad!
My new PC setup is under 6 months old, so at least 5 years until it gets a clean, unless I can get an update to my RX 2060 Super before then, at under £12 trillion

 

[Oztig]

Big enough to do the job, yes
View attachment 243621

You live on a barge - Nice !

 

[VR Nupol]

Update:

FHD 1920x1080 SS1.0 / inside concourse in a Station on High settings 18-20fps, Ultra 10-12fps

with a frametime of ~45ms
One Core fluctuates but stil goes to 100% mostly

CPU is NOT overclocked and got a Dark Rock Pro 4 slapped on it

3900x / 32GB / 3060ti / SSD latest bios / driver

 

[CMDR-ss47ply]

someone needs to make us a frame rate avatar I dont know how lol

 

[Erei]

someone needs to make us a frame rate avatar I dont know how lol

Like this ?

 

[Mogen Teras]

Just share what you have and keep updating us.. why wait?

And y'all were so confident that the ONE sem-transparent statement from the devs was a "promising sign of their future work ethic."

and yet here we are, waiting on them to throw us SOME shred of information, only for them to just tell us to come back in a week.

 

[Alexium67]

AMD RX480 4Gb user here. I want share my experience from the Odyssey. I will write it as steps.
1. Loading game. In the ship on the station. 60 fps (v-sync).
2. Disembarking, running to the lift. 50-60 fps.
3. Entering the social hub. 30 fps max. Sometimes 25.
4. Returning to the ship.
5. Sitting in the ship. 45 fps.

Did I lose 15 frames in the bar?

 

[LKx]

AMD RX480 4Gb user here. I want share my experience from the Odyssey. I will write it as steps.
1. Loading game. In the ship on the station. 60 fps (v-sync).
2. Disembarking, running to the lift. 50-60 fps.
3. Entering the social hub. 30 fps max. Sometimes 25.
4. Returning to the ship.
5. Sitting in the ship. 45 fps.

Did I lose 15 frames in the bar?

That happens when you get drunk... oh wait...

 

[Ronzer]

Is it really working fine though? How does it run compared to Horizons if you completely unlock your frames? How many FPS do you get in Horizons on a planet surface and how many FPS do you get in EDO?

To me it's working fine...but I just used the xbox overlay thing for the first time and yeah there's a drop for ground stuff for sure. I was only referencing space/supercruise because compared to Horizons it's the same...60fps for both. Well, in Horizons I get 60 fps for everything, SRV, planet entry, sitting at starport or planetary ports.

In EDO, in space/supercruise it's 60 fps, but then getting near a planet it drops to 42. Landing and driving around in the SRV, it drops more to 32.
Went to a planetary port and had 48 fps while in cockpit. Disembarking and running around the hangar I had 42. In the concourse I had between 26 and 42...in front of glass, which is almost everywhere, it's like 26-29, but without glass, rare to find, 40-42.
Went to do a ground battle. I do these all the time, and am fine with it. But this is the first time having that fps overlay. A whopping 17-19 fps when enemy AI was around, and 22 after the victory.

Im ok with this, because I've stepped up, oh yeah, from my i3 to an i5. So, for me, Horizons is actually running better than before, and I can tolerate EDO because Im quite used to low frame rates.

Funny testing this out, as its more apparent that while in the same spot, on a planet, due to the planet tech, it's like you're in a different place...they could make a game out of that.

 

[Sublime]

To me it's working fine...but I just used the xbox overlay thing for the first time and yeah there's a drop for ground stuff for sure. I was only referencing space/supercruise because compared to Horizons it's the same...60fps for both. Well, in Horizons I get 60 fps for everything, SRV, planet entry, sitting at starport or planetary ports.

In EDO, in space/supercruise it's 60 fps, but then getting near a planet it drops to 42. Landing and driving around in the SRV, it drops more to 32.
Went to a planetary port and had 48 fps while in cockpit. Disembarking and running around the hangar I had 42. In the concourse I had between 26 and 42...in front of glass, which is almost everywhere, it's like 26-29, but without glass, rare to find, 40-42.
Went to do a ground battle. I do these all the time, and am fine with it. But this is the first time having that fps overlay. A whopping 17-19 fps when enemy AI was around, and 22 after the victory.

Im ok with this, because I've stepped up, oh yeah, from my i3 to an i5. So, for me, Horizons is actually running better than before, and I can tolerate EDO because Im quite used to low frame rates.

Funny testing this out, as its more apparent that while in the same spot, on a planet, due to the planet tech, it's like you're in a different place...they could make a game out of that.

That really sounds like you have your FPS limited to 60, but if you were to remove the limit you would see that if you hit 60 FPS in Odyssey, in Horizons it would be much higher in that same situation. This is important even if you don’t see the difference because your monitor may not be displaying anything above 60 FPS anyways.

A lot of people used to playing in VR or 4K so if there is a 2/3 FPS loss in Odyssey, it makes that pretty unplayable.

On top of that, to actually enjoy most of the Odyssey content you have to go down to a planet where you say so yourself, the performance is pretty bad. Players should not just “get used to it”, they should rightfully expect similar performance to what they had in Horizons and on that front Odyssey is utterly broken and has to be fixed.

 

[Ronzer]

That really sounds like you have your FPS limited to 60, but if you were to remove the limit you would see that if you hit 60 FPS in Odyssey, in Horizons it would be much higher in that same situation. This is important even if you don’t see the difference because your monitor may not be displaying anything above 60 FPS anyways.

A lot of people used to playing in VR or 4K so if there is a 2/3 FPS loss in Odyssey, it makes that pretty unplayable.

On top of that, to actually enjoy most of the Odyssey content you have to go down to a planet where you say so yourself, the performance is pretty bad. Players should not just “get used to it”, they should rightfully expect similar performance to what they had in Horizons and on that front Odyssey is utterly broken and has to be fixed.

I'll check the limit thing out tonight. That may be some default, since I dont really touch those settings.

People shouldn't get used to it, and should definitely keep wanting more/better. But the low fps and bad LOD stuff, to me, seems like something they didnt know about. Beige planets was a thing, for years, then they fixed it. I hope they figure out the LOD issues and low fps stuff sooner than that.

I haven't tried this in VR yet. I do enjoy the VR in Horizons, but seeing these numbers makes me not want to rush into that.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

But the low fps and bad LOD stuff, to me, seems like something they didnt know about.

I don't believe this for a second.

They weren't perhaps able to identify the problem, or at least in time before launch (we're 4 patches in and it's only marginally improved, even gotten worse in some areas so not sure if this is a time constraint issue at this point).

But they must've known. If they really didn't then that suggests their testing either didn't happen at all or was inadequate.

 

[PRORABBIT67]

 

[VR Nupol]

I don't believe this for a second.

They weren't perhaps able to identify the problem, or at least in time before launch (we're 4 patches in and it's only marginally improved, even gotten worse in some areas so not sure if this is a time constraint issue at this point).

But they must've known. If they really didn't then that suggests their testing either didn't happen at all or was inadequate.

They definitely knew!

 

[CMDR ZerØ]

Hmm - I've never replaced my Thermal paste, or clean the interior of my PC, unless I change a component.
I'm obviously very bad!
My new PC setup is under 6 months old, so at least 5 years until it gets a clean, unless I can get an update to my RX 2060 Super before then, at under £12 trillion

Tbh replacing your thermal compound isn't really necessary unless you're having temperature issues - contrary to what most people seem to believe it's not actually that thermally conductive, it mainly serves to fill in the tiny gaps between your IHS and the cold plate on your cooler for better heat transfer (this is also the reason for not using much paste). But cleaning the dust out periodically is always good practice - I run positive internal pressure with all filtered intakes and still need to get the compressed air out every few months

 

[LKx]

I don't believe this for a second.

They weren't perhaps able to identify the problem, or at least in time before launch (we're 4 patches in and it's only marginally improved, even gotten worse in some areas so not sure if this is a time constraint issue at this point).

But they must've known. If they really didn't then that suggests their testing either didn't happen at all or was inadequate.

I'm thinking that they might not even have reached the phase of aggressive optimization, but they are still messing around fixing things and to see what works and what doesn't.
That might be the reason why they say that after update 5 they will focus on performances and console, maybe because they plan to have a code stable enough with update 5 to begin aggressive optimization

 

[galahad2069]

they are still messing around fixing things and to see what works and what doesn't.

They seem to have discovered quite a lot of things of the second kind.

 

[dubsdj]

At console release.

They can't leave it that long, that'll be the worst decision ever made if they did that. Still hoping patch 5 might sort this out.

 

[SlickPBW]

For me I don’t understand it but I am surprised. I have a 980 TI and in space mostly 60 FPS with occasional dips to 50. In settlements mostly 45-55, with short periods at 60 and also short periods 25-35. All on ultra settings. It’s definitely playable but not ideal and I’m surprised at the performance I’m seeing on a 6+ year old card.

 

[Sublime]

For me I don’t understand it but I am surprised. I have a 980 TI and in space mostly 60 FPS with occasional dips to 50. In settlements mostly 45-55, with short periods at 60 and also short periods 25-35. All on ultra settings. It’s definitely playable but not ideal and I’m surprised at the performance I’m seeing on a 6+ year old card.

You’re probably not used to playing at 4K and have 80+ FPS everywhere you go. I can play EDO at 1080P fine (with settlement FPS dropping in the 50s) as well, but when you compare it to Horizons in 4K (especially on a large screen) the low resolution is jarring, and the aliasing is just horrible.

In Horizons I never had any drops below 60 FPS at all. So Horizons runs much better at 4K resolutions than EDO runs at 1080P. How is that not utterly and completely broken?