performance question

**I_damian** · 07-12-2014, 20:10

Originally Posted by Tux

As in you won't get 40-60fps most of the time and it can be a bit laggy sometimes, that on max settings of course.

Are you really saying EB2 is going to be more challenging for my machine than Rome 2 with everything maxed out and max unit sized, where I get 40-60 FPS ALL the time?

**Tux** · 07-12-2014, 23:09

Originally Posted by I_damian

Are you really saying EB2 is going to be more challenging for my machine than Rome 2 with everything maxed out and max unit sized, where I get 40-60 FPS ALL the time?

Yes, I presume so.

It's an old game not optimized for multi-core or latest graphic cards.

**QuintusSertorius** · 07-13-2014, 16:42

Originally Posted by Tux

Yes, I presume so.

It's an old game not optimized for multi-core or latest graphic cards.

It may not be optimised for multi-core, but can't you use the same trick as for EB1 of moving the game onto a different core to everything else?

**Tux** · 07-13-2014, 18:07

Guys, relax, I'm not saying it will run horrible and you'll need to have high-end pc to be able to enjoy it.
We're pushing the engines limits here, we increased polycount on the campaign map and battlefield, increased the texture size.

I've personally even worked on a enhancement mod that will ship with the release.

All that was done so don't feel you'll be playing a game from 2007, but all those cost performance. I'm sure you've seen the improvements in the screenshots and videos and noticed this.

So the only thing I'm saying don't expect 40+ fps in big battles with thousands of soldiers.

As a guideline with my specs: Core i7 2600k, Ati HD 6850, 16GB RAM, all settings maxed out, I have 20-40fps(30-50 w/o the graphics mod) on the campaign map.
And 20-40fps(30-50 w/o the mod), with lows of 15fps(18 w/o the mod) in the middle of a battle of 5000.

**I_damian** · 07-13-2014, 19:35

To be honest I'll probably play it without the graphics mod (though I will undoubtedly try it some time). Graphics have never been a big deal for me. I installed Medieval 2 + Kingdoms a few days ago ready for EB2, it's just the vanilla game with no mods and I've been playing it quite heavily over the last few days and I'm loving it. The graphics still look amazing to me. I've been gaming since Tetris on the Gameboy and my top 10 favourite games of all time come mostly from the late 90's, so yeah, graphics just aren't an issue here. I'd rather have worse graphics and 60 FPS than better graphics and 20 FPS.

**QuintusSertorius** · 07-13-2014, 22:18

I'm the same, as long as I can play on Huge Unit Scale, I don't really care much about the graphics. Since I'll spend most of the battle zoomed out far enough that I won't be able to appreciate the finer details anyway.

**Eastern Foot-Rocker** · 07-14-2014, 11:43

Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius

I'm the same, as long as I can play on Huge Unit Scale, I don't really care much about the graphics. Since I'll spend most of the battle zoomed out far enough that I won't be able to appreciate the finer details anyway.

In stainless steel i made the experiance that even a large unit scale is too large for most defense structures on battlefield, and it is to be feared that it will be the same in EB2. I recommend to play with normal untit scale.

**gstephenopolous** · 07-14-2014, 05:49

Originally Posted by Tux

Guys, relax, I'm not saying it will run horrible and you'll need to have high-end pc to be able to enjoy it.
We're pushing the engines limits here, we increased polycount on the campaign map and battlefield, increased the texture size.

I've personally even worked on a enhancement mod that will ship with the release.

All that was done so don't feel you'll be playing a game from 2007, but all those cost performance. I'm sure you've seen the improvements in the screenshots and videos and noticed this.

So the only thing I'm saying don't expect 40+ fps in big battles with thousands of soldiers.

As a guideline with my specs: Core i7 2600k, Ati HD 6850, 16GB RAM, all settings maxed out, I have 20-40fps(30-50 w/o the graphics mod) on the campaign map.
And 20-40fps(30-50 w/o the mod), with lows of 15fps(18 w/o the mod) in the middle of a battle of 5000.

Doesn't sound bad actually, Tux. Thanks for your work by the way.

**sonnet** · 07-23-2014, 16:06

Originally Posted by Tux

As a guideline with my specs: Core i7 2600k, Ati HD 6850, 16GB RAM, all settings maxed out, I have 20-40fps(30-50 w/o the graphics mod) on the campaign map.
And 20-40fps(30-50 w/o the mod), with lows of 15fps(18 w/o the mod) in the middle of a battle of 5000.

@Tux
You have a overclockable cpu, 20-30 fps is with cpu default or overclocked? (it the second ,how much?)
If it's the former, maybe can you try to overclock the cpu to check if the cpu is being a bottleneck with your conf?

**Tux** · 07-26-2014, 14:06

Yes, just with the plain turbo boost(@3.8GHz). I will try that and let you know.
However I'm pretty sure for my case it's the GPU, like I said we don't have any LODs made for the first release.

**gstephenopolous** · 07-13-2014, 08:25

Originally Posted by I_damian

Are you really saying EB2 is going to be more challenging for my machine than Rome 2 with everything maxed out and max unit sized, where I get 40-60 FPS ALL the time?

Nah, if you can run Rome 2 then you can definitely run this. Rome 2 is about as unoptimized as anything out there. M2TW performance was actually much better, on the old engine. I haven't seen anything high-res enough in the previews to warrant any fears about performance. As a test run Kingdoms with no LOD and all the pajama warriors you can fit into one battle. Not 120hz kind of performance, but that's always been the case when you make the computer render ten of thousand models at once.