4-man Squad + fps drop

[kynusa-san]

Hey guys.

I tested Warframe in 2 maps: Draco and Void Exterminate T3 (~160 enemies).

Results:

Resolution: 1440x900. All video settings ON. 4x Anisotropic Filtering, Antialiasing MSAA (medium).

Draco 4-man Squad: Minimum FPS = 29

Void Exterminate T3 4-man Squad: Minimum FPS = 45

 

Resolution: 1440x900. All video settings ON. 4x Anisotropic Filtering, Antialiasing MSAA (medium).

Draco SOLO: Minimum FPS = 70

Void Exterminate T3 SOLO: Minimum FPS = 72

 

I tested on lower resolution (1024x768) and all settings OFF too, but I didn't have much improvement on FPS (only 5~10 FPS).

 

My system specs: (I KNOW, MY COMPUTER IS OLD/WEAK)

CPU Phenom II x4 B50 3.1 Ghz

GPU HD 7770 1 GB

RAM 4 GB DDR3 1600 Mhz

OS Windows 10 Pro x64

 

Conclusion: 

I have to play Solo if I want to have more fun...

[carnaga]

Have you tried to run in DX9 ? Is the result same? Is the performance even worse in raids (8 man party) ? Naturally when you solo the game difficulty is reduced, meaning less enemy spawns. With full squad you get large amount of enemy units that affects the performance.

Your computer system exceeds the minimum system requirements announced by devs.

I think DE should either re-work minimum system requirements or optimize the game bit more where the target FPS on minimum system with lowest settings possible (800x600, dx9 everything off) would be 30 fps even in 4-man and 8-man squads and on every mission available including long runs. 'And/or' release recommended sys requirements to fully enjoy the warframe experience.

Just my 5 cents.

Edited April 11, 2016 by carnaga

[kynusa-san]

I tried to play in DX9, it makes drop fps still more.

In exterminate missions the amount of enemy spawn is the same. Example: T3 VOID almost ever have ~160 enemies. It don't change if I'm on 4-man squad or Solo squad. But I really noticed in Draco 4-man squad spawn a lot of more enemies, and it may cause the Low fps.

And I agree with you, these System Requiriments for actual Warframe is outdated.

Edited April 13, 2016 by kynusa-san
Missing/wrong info

[Mr__Viper]

Any update on this? 

I have a relatively high performance pc and am suffering the same issues even on low settings.

Exactly as described above, fps drops below 60 in Draco in a 4 man but constant 144 when Solo. 

(Im currently locked at 144 as that's my monitor refresh rate)

Specs:

4770k

780ti 

16gb DDR3 1600mhz

Edited April 13, 2016 by Mr__Viper

[MillbrookWest]

Unfortunately, this is probably one of those performance issues that would require a 'Warframe 2' approach (i.e, re-writing a large bulk of the game code again because they are allowed). When i solo i can easily do 120+fps, but when in a group it's sorta ~80-100fps.

I suspect DE are all too aware of it themselves but can't really do anything about it until someone from up high dedicates some serious time to solving the issue.

I don't know how Warframe does its math (anything from lighting to AI, to damage), but i suspect it plays a large part in the performance issues. I mean a person can kinda gauge the complexity of it a bit - Banshee Sonar + Nova MP + Rhino Roar + Gun Damage + Proc + ...etc - Each of those steps on a single enemy needs to be calculated, and each result needs to be included in subsequent calculations.... and this is merely an overly simplified simplification :/

Also OP, Antialiasing MSAA is a bit of a repetition of words. The AA in MSAA stands for Antialiasing. Additionally, Warframe doesn't support Multisample Antialiasing, The AA solutions are all Postprocess AA - Fast Approximate AA (FXAA), Subpixel Morphological AA (SMAA), and Temporal AA (TAA) [WIP]. Representing Low, Medium, and High respectively. Just for future reference :)

Edited April 14, 2016 by MillbrookWest

[kynusa-san]

Every video setting Off/Low. 800x600 resolution. All drivers updated. Nothing open but Warframe.

http://imgur.com/a/0BQZb

Without using 100% of GPU, CPU, RAM and getting low fps... (4 man-squad on Draco)

GPU RAM: 1GB

MEMORY RAM: 4GB

[carnaga]

19 hours ago, kynusa-san said:

Every video setting Off/Low. 800x600 resolution. All drivers updated. Nothing open but Warframe.

http://imgur.com/a/0BQZb

Without using 100% of GPU, CPU, RAM and getting low fps... (4 man-squad on Draco)

GPU RAM: 1GB

MEMORY RAM: 4GB

For the curiosity I ran some tests with Integrated (on board) Graphics from my cpu. As for cpu I have i5-4690K (3.5 Ggz) and it has this:

At least with the intel HD 4600 graphics the GPU (gpu2) usage is at 100% on normal missions and sorties. Obviously GPU1 (the gtx card) which was doing the video recording with nvenc chip was using 0 - 1%.

In liset my fps jumps between 55 to 70 depending what direction I look. On starmap I get 47 fps. And gpu usage is at 99 - 100%

Settings: DX9, 1366x768, all low/off expect of some of the toggle effects: bloom, color correction, motion blur, dynamic lighting, character shadows, depth of field which are on. Screenshots in spoiler.

Spoiler

 

4-man sortie:

 

Random 4-man interception alert inside of a ring of fire:

 

 

In draco the GPU doesn't use it's full power.  (all settings off/low and resolution at it's minimum). FPS goes high as 85 to low as ~34 fps. Screenshots in spoilers.

Spoiler

 

 

 

[MillbrookWest]

On 4/24/2016 at 10:02 AM, kynusa-san said:

Every video setting Off/Low. 800x600 resolution. All drivers updated. Nothing open but Warframe.

http://imgur.com/a/0BQZb

Without using 100% of GPU, CPU, RAM and getting low fps... (4 man-squad on Draco)

GPU RAM: 1GB

MEMORY RAM: 4GB

Firstly, you are using a Mirage. If you want the latest little insight into Mirage's relationship with the dev team watch the PAX east panel.

You're looking for Steve's answer ~6:30

Secondly, as i alluded to in my post above, you are CPU limited (as you can tell by the lack of GPU usage). 

CPU threading done right leads to phenomenal gains. Problem is, it is hard to accomplish - especially in the manner DE have worked it coming from DX9. If your main worker thread is being bogged down, it doesn't matter how many cores are working on things, or queueing up jobs, the main thread will slow everything down. 

^If this graph were to represent Warframe, the purple section would be bigger than the other sections. When the number of people in a squad increases, the bigger that purple section gets - Subsequently lowering your performance. 

EDIT:
But as i say, DE are probably all to aware of it themselves. Silver lining is that since DE code for PS4/XB1 also, they likely make headway, and/or have it in the pipeline to address some of these issues since the consoles require great threading to get the most out of them.

Edited April 26, 2016 by MillbrookWest

[kynusa-san]

That makes sense! Thank you for reply :)

[kynusa-san]

On 25/04/2016 at 3:25 PM, carnaga said:

For the curiosity I ran some tests with Integrated (on board) Graphics from my cpu. As for cpu I have i5-4690K (3.5 Ggz) and it has this:

At least with the intel HD 4600 graphics the GPU (gpu2) usage is at 100% on normal missions and sorties. Obviously GPU1 (the gtx card) which was doing the video recording with nvenc chip was using 0 - 1%.

In liset my fps jumps between 55 to 70 depending what direction I look. On starmap I get 47 fps. And gpu usage is at 99 - 100%

Settings: DX9, 1366x768, all low/off expect of some of the toggle effects: bloom, color correction, motion blur, dynamic lighting, character shadows, depth of field which are on. Screenshots in spoiler.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

4-man sortie:

 

Random 4-man interception alert inside of a ring of fire:

 

 

In draco the GPU doesn't use it's full power.  (all settings off/low and resolution at it's minimum). FPS goes high as 85 to low as ~34 fps. Screenshots in spoilers.

  Hide contents

 

 

 

And if you Enable your GPU? How many fps you get in Draco 4-man squad? (and what GPU do you have?)

[carnaga]

1 hour ago, kynusa-san said:

And if you Enable your GPU? How many fps you get in Draco 4-man squad? (and what GPU do you have?)

GTX960

DX11 + all settings max (including physx) + Recording the whole thing + Draco 4 man run with saryn spore, ash blade storm, mirage and nova = worst cpu/gpu heavy combination :D

My fps dips to 38. And when that happens the GPU usage is at 35% and CPU at ~95+% . I think that I might get the same result if I put all setting to minimum: got identically same thing when running intel HD4600 where all setting were off/low and resolution of 800x600: fps dips to 38fps while the GPU usage is low and CPU at 95+% (check my previous post and draco run with HD4600).

This indicates either that Draco is poorly optimized or my cpu is becoming a bottleneck i5 4690K @ 3.5Ghz. For example: by standards of computer part manufacturers my PC is notch below mediocre gaming rig.

When running random missions in 4-man squad (including sorties and void) the performance is way better than in Draco.

Edit: here is the draco run

 

Edited April 27, 2016 by carnaga

[kynusa-san]

nice videos man.

I never see Warframe using 100% of my quad-core cpu, except on Liset, and just after I login. Then, my cpu-usage goes to 50~70 %, to a MAXIMUM of 90%...

I tested other thing today. I started a mission alone, my fps were good. Then in 2~3 minutes people have incoming for the same mission (total = 4 man-squad). My fps decreased a lot when Warframe were running with 4-man an Exterminate Alert Mission. (with me and just ONE more player was good, 70+ fps).

 

What do you think about my system? Where's my bootleneck for Warframe?

I have plans to upgrade my HD7770 to a GTX 950, and MAYBE FX6300/8320E instead of Phenom II x4.

[kynusa-san]

Sorry bad english :P

[carnaga]

17 hours ago, kynusa-san said:

Sorry bad english :P

Your English is fine :)

When I went from GTX 750Ti OC to GTX960 I asked from Tom's Hardware is it worth to do an upgrade regarding FPS. They answered something like "You wont gain massive fps boost when going from 750Ti to 960 but you will get more steady FPS". And they were pretty much right.

So I think you would be happy with GTX950 and warframe. It's almost in par with GTX960 but you cannot distinguish the performance if we measure them in Warframe. The performance difference is noticeable by 10 fps when you go with other pc games. If you are going to buy GTX950, get the OC version where performance difference is 1 - 6 fps (compared to 960). Thought you would get a performance boost if you would go with GTX 970 (Quantum Break/MGSVPP/Withcher 3/Rise of the Tomb Raider/Fallout 4). I chose 960 over 970 cause I didn't have the money back then (I needed a new psu if I would have went with 970).

GTX950 and 960 are not VR ready and they are not meant for 4K gaming. Regarding this Warframe is pretty awesome and well optimized game (excluding draco). I can get this cinematic look while playing Warframe in 4K and GTX960..

Notice here that my cpu does not go to 100% while playing in 4K - which is weird :<

(Swap the youtube video setting to 2610p 4K from the gear menu.)

For me a game is unplayable if FPS goes below 24p (cinematic fps) and stays there constantly -- that's my personal limit for unplayable single player games.

What comes for bottlenecks you are ok with that processor and warframe. Not worth the money for an upgrade at this point -- unless you play other games than Warframe (myself, I'm waiting for Friday 13 and the release of Doom).

Edited April 28, 2016 by carnaga

[MillbrookWest]

On 4/28/2016 at 2:09 PM, kynusa-san said:

I have plans to upgrade my HD7770 to a GTX 950, and MAYBE FX6300/8320E instead of Phenom II x4.

The misconception with the FX chips is the "8 cores". To cut a long story short, If you take an 8320 chip, you can basically break it down like this; 4 integer clusters, sharing 4 FPU's; 1 FPU per 2 Integer cores, issuing two, 128-bit instructions, or one, 256-bit instruction. Each cluster sharing a single fetch, and decode unit. This layout leads to really strong integer performance, but sub-par floating point performance. Games rely on the FPU since it is easy for programmers to work with.

It's hard to recommend an FX chip at this stage. They were good chips, but tech is always moving forward and they will struggle in the coming years - By this i mean you won't get your monies worth, as games will start hitting the chips performance limit a lot sooner. A modern intel chip may get you 4 years of 60fps gaming, the FX chips may only get you 1 - if that.

So at this time, i would spend my money on an Intel CPU. Any modern CPU from that camp will be a match for the 8320. But if Red team is the way to go, AMD will launch new chips at the end of the year that may be of fancy.

Unless you have an AM3+ motherboard already, and just want to upgrade? In which case i would look at the 8370, since they are binned better and you can OC them quite a bit if need be.

And for GPU, anything from Nvidia. Their DX12 performance may be suspect, but by the time DX12 is mainstream you'll be wanting a new GPU anyways.

EDIT:
For clarity, i have an 8320 OC'd to 4.2GHz.

Edited April 29, 2016 by MillbrookWest

[kynusa-san]

Thank you for help, mates!

My motherboard is ASUS M5A78L-M LX/BR. It doesn't support a FX 8 Series "non E" (doesn't support FX8320, FX 8350, FX 8370 etc). Only supports FX 4 Series, FX 6 Series and FX 8320E and FX8370E.

The reason is my motherboard has a limit of 95 W CPU. And I read on internet that my motherboard is not good for Overclocking.

So, would be better if I bought a new i3/i5/i7 + new motherboard.

I have a 400W PSU, and not wondering to change it. (Not too early).

Do you guys think a Intel i5 + GTX 950 + 8 GB RAM is good for Gaming? (Not for ULTRA GAMING, just for 60 fps in medium settings all games :P)

[carnaga]

7 hours ago, kynusa-san said:

I have a 400W PSU, and not wondering to change it. (Not too early).

Do you guys think a Intel i5 + GTX 950 + 8 GB RAM is good for Gaming? (Not for ULTRA GAMING, just for 60 fps in medium settings all games :P)

This starts to go off topic, but with Warframe you are ok with that setup.

Off topic (not warframe related stuff) in spoilers.

Spoiler

If your target fps would be 60 on medium settings with new games and HD resolution you would need a new psu and better gpu. For old games and new multiplayer fps shooters (eg black ops 3) you are pretty good to go, but not with new triple A single player games (Rise of the Tomb Raider/Quantum Break). With those you would need to go low settings to get that ~60 fps. On medium settings you would get avg fps between 30-50 which is still more than playable.

Random youtube benchmark video of gtx 950 and ROTTR.

 

I play ROTTR with medium/high settings with GTX 960 4Gb getting this:
(when you add some open maps with enemies and action the fps dips below 40 and I have seen (rarely) some dips to 29 fps on the screen during heavy action).

 

 

Edited April 30, 2016 by carnaga

[kynusa-san]

Thank you man.

Just posting my performance on other map (Operation Raathum)

http://imgur.com/a/fvunb

Medium/High Settings. Resolution 1440x900. (images 2 and 3 have two Mirages in same squad :P)

I love this game, but Draco made me disappointed XD