Who plays on Extreme and what are your Hardware and Benchmark stats?

[♠ Thomas Cochrane ♠]

Straightforward, just wanted a comparison from someone else running this beautiful game at the max. You can see my rig below, and when I run the benchmark, I get between a 40fps and 50fps average. As we all know, this benchmark is pretty useless as it doesn't have any big combat moshes, and for me the fps is often lowest when that pesky deer is in the shot.

So is there anyone who is running it on extreme who isn't getting any serious lags? Mine is playable, but sieges and large open battles do get down to single figures most of the time. I would have expected better.... but then hopefully more optimisation will come.

I, for one, have had pretty good performance so far. I put that down to good quality gear and an Nvidia card

[Souka]

i54670k @ 3.4ghz, gtx 780 and 8gb 1600mzh ram. My average is around 44 on benchmark. Game is playable but lags when zoomed in. Would get some more fps if I clocked some hardware up but this game is just badly optimized.

[alQamar]

hello Thomas there is an existing thread, little hidden now, in the tech section. Please participate there and also invite people in this thread to do so. Please note "extreme" preset, as in every TW war, does unfortunately not represent the highest possible settings.

My existing thread offers you a good overview of all higher settings results. Please note: YOU NEED PATCH 3 (BETA) to run the benchmark, as with patch 2 it is bugged!

I really would love yours and others results in my benchmark thread. See you there!

[Humble Warrior]

i54670k @ 3.4ghz, gtx 780 and 8gb 1600mzh ram. My average is around 44 on benchmark. Game is playable but lags when zoomed in. Would get some more fps if I clocked some hardware up but this game is just badly optimized.

Isn`t that chip a `haswell` that CA were bleating on about in their propaganda? And you`re still getting lag?

I`m planning on getting a rig just like yours (not primarily for RTW2), but I`m surprised it still lags.

[AnimaMea]

Isn`t that chip a `haswell` that CA were bleating on about in their propaganda? And you`re still getting lag?

I`m planning on getting a rig just like yours (not primarily for RTW2), but I`m surprised it still lags.

i just got a laptop with the same card, and just 8gb of ram and it works perfectly, on Intel i5 with that annoying Optimus thing if that helps

[Swerg]

I can technically run the game on extreme settings. If there's more than a couple hundred units in a battle, the framerate tends to drop below 10 fps though

That's with my GTX 275, E8400 core 2 (3.1ghz) and 4 gigs of RAM.

She's served me well these past years, though its probably time to give the old girl an upgrade. Too bad I haven't got any money.

[th0ms]

Nobody plays the game happy and lag free on extreme .. Those who say they do is a filthy liar, the game simply can't utilize all the cores for a constant fluid gaming experience.

[Humble Warrior]

Nobody plays the game happy and lag free on extreme .. Those who say they do is a filthy liar, the game simply can't utilize all the cores for a constant fluid gaming experience.

So all that talk about Intel and this amazing `Haswell` chip hasn`t even been optimised to run RTW2. So you could waste your money getting a super PC if you got it just for RTW2.

Astonishing.

[Lord Ragnar]

Nobody plays the game happy and lag free on extreme .. Those who say they do is a filthy liar, the game simply can't utilize all the cores for a constant fluid gaming experience.

Ive just started RTW2 as the Roma, As ever the two nearest towns Ive attacked and taken. The mods add on have been are Radiuos_mod, CloseCombat_mod. Also changed unit size to 240. I can say IMHO ive not seen any lag yet. I will be keeping an eye on this, battles todate, are around 6000-8000 men, horses, birds, trees and the buildings LOL. My rig; ASUS r.o.g "CROSSHAIR V FORMULA-Z" motherboard/ AMD 8core Black 4.2mhz cpu / 32g RAM / CoolerMaster HAF case / Watercooled CPU / 680 GTX Asus Graphics Card / Complete with Windows 7 ultimate 64bit on a 240gb SSD / games etc held on 2x 1000gb HD. And have all 8 cores active. (a simple tick box in the control settings from 1 core to 8 sorts that)...... So far so good. lol

[Monsieur Alphonse]

Nobody plays the game happy and lag free on extreme .. Those who say they do is a filthy liar, the game simply can't utilize all the cores for a constant fluid gaming experience.

You can't judge that. I have almost the same rig except instead of a GTX 780 I have a GTX 770. Before patch 3 Beta I had no lag. Since patch 3 the game has become very unstable. At the one moment I can play battles with up to 14,000 men on the battlefield, the other moment I have some lag on both the battle map and the campaign map. And I play with extreme settings.

[Faiakas]

Playing on Extreme and game goes smothly with no lag.Specs are i7 3.2GHz QC, 6GB ram 1600MHz triple channel, GTX580 1.5GB Ram and a SATA 2 HD. Windows 7 Pro 64Bit. But I have no tested in huge Battles rather than early battles with relative few units (from 6-10 unit cards)

[kamikazee786]

well i was quite shocked at how well my old pc ran the game,

Im playing with unit sizes on large and shadows on very high, apart from that everything is set to extreme with unlimited memory checked

my frame rate is from 60-30fps and it runs pretty decently.

My specs:

I5-2300 @2.8 (3.10 on turbo)
8GB ram
500GB 7200rpm HDD
ATI Radeon 5850

i know that my gpu and cpu are quite old but the game runs beautifully

[A Barbarian]

A medium graphics card (e.g. 7870, GTX660) is actually enough to run extreme graphics.

BUT

No existing CPU can run extreme settings with a consistently higher framerate than 20-25fps in battles! Not even a 5Ghz i7-4960X $1000 CPU.


To reduce the CPU bottleneck you either have to:
- lower shadows and unit detail (the lower the more 2D models are displayed instead of costly fully animated 3D models)
or
- lower unit size (because there will be fewer 3D units and shadows to render)

3D animation, hit-testing and shadow calculation all seem to run on a single CPU core and thus bottlenecking everything when zooming in on battles.


Ah, now I realize. I always noticed that Shogun 2 (same in Rome 2) is the game which scales the most with main memory speed increase. Almost all games benefit only very little or not at all from faster main memory, there as Shogun 2 displayed a surprisingly high scaling (still not a lot in absolute terms but relatively much higher than almost any other game).

It also benefits greatly from a large CPU cache. I guess that there is a certain point where there are too many data to fit into the CPU cache at which performance quickly deteriorates because the engine has to access more and more data from main memory instead of the CPU cache. And main memory is easily 10 times slower than the CPU cache.

So there is no linear scaling with higher unit numbers because in the beginning everything runs on the CPU cache but with a certain amount of units(data) more and more data have to be stored in main memory and from there on performance will get worse quickly.

[SinerAthin]

3.5ghz i7 (though I think my computer automatically runs it on 3.9GHZ)
780 Nvidia card
16gb memory

It can get a little laggy at times, but I've never run into a single digit FPS(at least not since I began using 8gb RAM instead of 16GB)

[Yamabushi]

So all that talk about Intel and this amazing `Haswell` chip hasn`t even been optimised to run RTW2. So you could waste your money getting a super PC if you got it just for RTW2.

Astonishing.

The whole CA and Haswell chips, is mainly about the Direct Resource Access in the graphics options. However that option is only usable when playing on the Integrated graphics

[Lionheart11]

Game has memory leaks it deteriorates and after 10-20 turns its sucking your computer up thru a straw, more so in late game. I usually restart rome more than i would like to cure this turn lag as i would call it.

Game is still laggy yes,

[Parzival]

i7 4770K
16GB 2400Mhz
780SC

Everything on extreme/maxed with distortion effects, vignette and DOF disabled I'm getting 47.9 in the forest benchmark with beta3. I started experiencing battle map lag with beta3 patch.

Still using forceware 314.22

[niko from Australia]

I built a my pc specifically for rome 2. Its a 4670k @stock clock. A gtx 770 4gb vram. 16gb corsair dominater ram. Msi g47 gaming mobo. Hyper evo 212 cooler. 256gb ssd samsung. And windows 8 64 bit. Cost all up just under $3000

And I am not impressed at all. Shogun 2 runs and looks so much better. I just play on high settings now because it crashes if I run on extreme. The unlimited memory option doesnt seem to help at all, even though I have 4gb! The campaign map lags. And battles look terrible, maybe just better than medieval 2. But that was 3 titles ago.

Overall I have not been impressed whatsoever and CA wil need to alot of ass kissing if they want $1 from me for dlc or want me to even buy the next title let alone pre order it!

[Sir_Red]

All on extreme plus 1440p resolution and 16x AA.

My specs: i7950 @ 4ghz, MSI OC 780, 12gb RAM, SSD.

[A Barbarian]

The only interesting part about the forest benchmark is the 'minimum framerate'. If you cut it in half, then that's about the framerate which you will get when zooming in on a big battle.

Example: Forest benchmark minimum 28FPS = 14FPS when zooming in on big battle with many units in sight.


@Sir_Red

16xAA

you probably mean 16xAnisotropic, not AA(as Anti-Aliasing) because
1) MSAA doesn't work and u also can't force it with Nvidia Inspector
2) If 16xAA would work it would completely thrash your VRAM/performance