was there an optimisation pass at all?

zombieapocalypse

zombieapocalypse
Well, the performance is definitely improved over the alpha for me. I can now play with the settings on high at 2k res. In space, I'm pretty much getting what I do in Horizons (100+ FPS). On surfaces, I'm getting between 50-80fps, though it does get a little funky around fires and some other random locations. Not perfect, but it's certainly playable (so far)!

I'm rocking i7-7700k@4.7Ghz, GTX 2060 (6GB), 32GB RAM (no water cooling 🤣)
 
Last edited:

Caydran

Caydran
I'm not seeing these big drops in fps in Odyssey, but I know why.

It's just not GPU's and Processors folks, but also motherboards and solid state drives.

Some motherboards support Nvme 2.0 Gen-4 with peak reads of 7,100MB/s and writes of 6,600MB/s.

My combo is a B570 MB which supports Gen-4 on the 2.0 MvMe, provided you get an Nvme with Gen-4 capability for the board.

You also need to load the OS and Data partitions on the Mvme for which to install and run Elite/Horizons/Odyssey.

As well, a wad of on-board memory of DDR-4 3600 or above does not hurt.

This allows your GPU to do it's performance thing while the data reads it needs happen at the peak of the Nvme's capabilities.

So, if you build a PC, it's just not GPU's and CPU's, but planning for the fastest R/W access to the data you need. It does not hurt to have the OS taking advantage of that R/W access as well.

Simple SSD's are not enough in high powered boxes when faster R/W access is so much better on NvMe's attached to a MB designed to support them.
 

Welsh Wizard

Welsh Wizard
I would accept that argument if it said on the recommended specs for Odyssey that a Nvme 2.0 Gen-4 SSD was required.

Nowhere does it say that.

The fact is on the recommended spec system Odyssey plays like garbage. There is no-one else to blame for disappointment other than Frontier, who wrote those recommended specs. I hope they are prepared to start processing refunds in the morning because this is not a good situation at all.
 
Last edited:

Gungan

G
Paul Eddington said:
I'm not seeing these big drops in fps in Odyssey, but I know why.

It's just not GPU's and Processors folks, but also motherboards and solid state drives.

Some motherboards support Nvme 2.0 Gen-4 with peak reads of 7,100MB/s and writes of 6,600MB/s.

My combo is a B570 MB which supports Gen-4 on the 2.0 MvMe, provided you get an Nvme with Gen-4 capability for the board.

You also need to load the OS and Data partitions on the Mvme for which to install and run Elite/Horizons/Odyssey.

As well, a wad of on-board memory of DDR-4 3600 or above does not hurt.

This allows your GPU to do it's performance thing while the data reads it needs happen at the peak of the Nvme's capabilities.

So, if you build a PC, it's just not GPU's and CPU's, but planning for the fastest R/W access to the data you need. It does not hurt to have the OS taking advantage of that R/W access as well.

Simple SSD's are not enough in high powered boxes when faster R/W access is so much better on NvMe's attached to a MB designed to support them.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. I have a Gen 4 NVME and I get 50% performance cut moving to Horizons. You only need to load assets once, then it stays in RAM and VRAM. Once loaded your storage has nothing to do with FPS.
 

Boltzmann Brain

B
Old Duck said:
1990 graphics with 2090 hardware requirements, LOL

(bring on the flames, baby!) 🔥
Click to expand...
You're very much right.
I've been saying this during Alpha, but gave them the benefit of the doubt, since it could have been CPU bound.
But it's pretty much as you said: maybe 2005 graphics instead of 1990, looking good but nowhere near contemporary PC games, still running on DirectX 11 (lol 2021 and not having DirectX 12) and by all standards this stuff should be butter smooth on any decent GPU, bar toasters that some people have.
 

danteuk

danteuk
Gungan said:
Nonsense. I have a Gen 4 NVME and I get 50% performance cut moving to Horizons. You only need to load assets once, then it stays in RAM and VRAM. Once loaded your storage has nothing to do with FPS.
Click to expand...
Definitely not true - lots of games stream in assets and textures because there is just not enough Ram or VRam for all the assets in the area. Cyberpunk does this a lot - drive really fast and stop then watch the textures load in - then turn around and drive back where you came from and watch those textures load back in again. ( unless you have a good motherboard and installed the game on an SSD )
Odyssey has around 50-60gbs of assets now - so it will definitely be streaming some elements dynamically as they are required. The bases are probably not the problem, lots of simple repeated textures, it's a terrain textures outside that will be the issue.

My frames drop from 60 in space to 25-30 on a planet - then if NPC's are running around shooting, it will drop lower.
I got almost exactly the same FPS in the Alpha - I'm seeing little to no improvement in the release.

CP 2077 does run smoother on my machine than Odyssey - and I've only got a Nvidia 1060!! ( I run both games at 1920 )
 

Drelthar

Drelthar
Mogen Teras said:
This is why I am absolutely convinced someone forgot to implement the Occlusion and Frustrum Cullling.

I've played a few Early Access games that give you access to dev controls that allow you to disable things on the fly, one such being Occlusion and Frustrum culling. I did testing myself plenty of times with those. You wanna know what happens?

With culling turned on, you can be glistening along at 120fps, disable culling, and suddenly you're looking at 40fps.

This kind of behaviour in Odyssey REALLY makes me think they messed up the culling, because when even a 3080 can't keep the game above 60fps regardless of resolution, something is clearly wrong.
Click to expand...

Well... they could be doing "silly" stuff with the shaders too, using multiple different ones when they could use the same one for multiple objects.

There's... I mean... 2 hundred million optimisation options
 

Revelation_jeff

Revelation_jeff
Can someone confirm did Frontier change their specs during or after the alpha testing phase? Was the recent specs larger from the original specs listed when we purchased?
 

Joe Akeem

Joe Akeem
I have a strong feeling culling is not fully up to speed. It makes no sense with these poor performance stats on the big league rigs.

I have an equally strong feeling that our dear FD knows about that. It was a matter of shipping the product in time. Not a super cool move but hey, that's business. On the bright side I think we can expect some dramatic changes in performance very soon because, like I said: The framerate defies all logic. There is no way in hell those concourse/hub assets takes such a toll on our systems.

It's simply a waiting game for now. I'm not worried.
 

Lulzwhat

Lulzwhat
The Chairmaker said:
It was optimised quite a bit from Alpha, however it will still tax older systems.

Will need a lot of work to be able to work on the legacy consoles. At present it would need a next gen console eg ps5 to get decent performance. I wonder if it will end up being a next gen console only exclusive.
Click to expand...

There is no Odyssey for legacy console.
 

Gungan

G
danteuk said:
Definitely not true - lots of games stream in assets and textures because there is just not enough Ram or VRam for all the assets in the area. Cyberpunk does this a lot - drive really fast and stop then watch the textures load in - then turn around and drive back where you came from and watch those textures load back in again. ( unless you have a good motherboard and installed the game on an SSD )
Odyssey has around 50-60gbs of assets now - so it will definitely be streaming some elements dynamically as they are required. The bases are probably not the problem, lots of simple repeated textures, it's a terrain textures outside that will be the issue.

My frames drop from 60 in space to 25-30 on a planet - then if NPC's are running around shooting, it will drop lower.
I got almost exactly the same FPS in the Alpha - I'm seeing little to no improvement in the release.

CP 2077 does run smoother on my machine than Odyssey - and I've only got a Nvidia 1060!! ( I run both games at 1920 )
Click to expand...
Pretty sure it doesn't have that many assets all in one place.
 

Junglepants

J
From my experience it seems to be the character models which are the worst culprits. Inside stations I can walk around and basically having more than about two characters on screen at once just drops the FPS down into the teens. Staring at a wall gets me a consistent 50 FPS. Up to two on screen keep me above 40 FPS. Staring at the bar just turns into a slide show. Looking at the elevator lobby area with 5-6 NPCs gets me about 20FPS.

The tutorial also ran fairly smoothly, (Excepting the fire section) up until the combat started. When the first group of enemies dropped there was a notciable slow down, but the game was playable. When the second group dropped it degraded to the point where the last couple of kills required me to basically walk up to the enemies so they filled the whole screen and fire, hoping I'd hit them. Aiming was impossible.

All that said, there are also a number of odd slow downs even in space. Jumping into the space around a station drops my frames into the 20s for several seconds, I assume while something loads in(even though my drive usage is next to nothing) Planetary bases never go above 30 FPS. Looking around from the cockpit at different things causes wild FPS fluctuations. This is worse than my experience during the Alpha.

System Stats: Ryzen 3600, Radeon RX 560, 32GB ram. Game installed on SSD. All settings on lowest. Resolution 1080p downscaled to 75%. I was able to run Horizons very comfortably with no slow downs on medium settings at 100% resolution. Graphics card does need an upgrade, admittedly, but everyone knows the situation. That won't be happening any time soon.
 

Morbad

Morbad
Paul Eddington said:
It's just not GPU's and Processors folks, but also motherboards and solid state drives.
Click to expand...

lefty1117 said:
I think that similar to another Space Game that I won't mention, the server performance is a constraining factor on frame rates.
Click to expand...

No, excepting a few outliers, I don't think so.

Vandal71 said:
Yamiks showed a 50% decrease in performance between Horizons and Odyssey, just sitting in a station looking at the mail slot. So not even showing a planet you get your frames cut in half? A switch to PBR textures doesn't do that. The graphics system is broken.
Click to expand...

Textures are easy. It's all those vertices that will get ya.
 

Bonsaipanda

Bonsaipanda
Running i7 7800X (3.5GHz, 6/12), 32GB of quad channel memory, 980GTX at 2560 x 1080 / 60Hz

I'm not seeing any performance issues whatsoever. I have no idea what you guys are on about. Now, let's do some on-foot combat!
/s

performance.jpg
 

TiberiusDuval

T
Well now I tested somewhat more. Changed game location to solid state drive. Well that did not boost FPS. Changed supersampling to 1x. That did boost performance. At first. From 18-20 at station lobby to 30-40 after change. And at deep space 120. Then decided to land to some icy planet. And disembark. At first 30-40 like in station. But then after some playing performance tanked. It started to drop down, first to high 20's, then 18, and at last to 15. Performance staid at 15 fps even after I lifted off and ran to deep space. Seems to be some kind of memory leak perhaps?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom