FPS Thread

  • With 0.0.9.0 my fps went from 60+ to 40 fps using the same graphics settings. look at post #34 for reference

    Small update, after turning everything off literally everything turned off and all the sliders turned down to 0 my lowest fps was 68 fps and high was 113.

    I would call that a close 100% decrease in performance. went from all high(except vegetation density that was at 1) where my lowest fps was 55-58 fps and now with everything turned off in 0.0.9.0 it's 68 fps.

    Don't know what you did but it definitely made things worse on my end xD

    i5 4690k - 3,5 Ghz, EVGA gtx 1070 ftw hybrid - 8 gb vram, 16 gb 1600 Mhz ddr3 ram

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Jeytav ().

  • My fps is still low as written before. It goes from 28 to 18 fps.

    I also tried to lower my drivers according to some advices from german threads (for AMD's 16.11.5 driver). It looked better for the first moments, but it goes back again to 18-15 fps on the field. So I reinstalled back to current drivers 17.4.4. Even 17.6.2 had no better effect (at least for me).

    I also must try to lower all sliders and see what will happen with performance.

    Even when it's somehow playable, it seems to me that when I look ahead and there are low fps I have feeling the machine goes faster than it should. When I look down, or closer the view by mouse wheel, fps logically grow and the feeling from the drive is better. Maybe it's just my feeling.

    I must test it more.


    Jeytav wrote:

    Don't know what you did but it definitely made things worse on my end xD
    It looks when there are more than one machine at the screen, difficulty of graphics rapidly grows. That's how I explain it to myself.

    At first I was thinking to buy new GeForce GPU, to have better performance, but after Jeytav's report I start to have doubts.
    Finally I still hope that fps will grow when the game is optimalised also for AMD GPU's, actually globaly optimalised.

    Unfortunatelly this point, as I can see, will be probably solved last.


    CPU Type - Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz
    GPU Type - Graphics Chipset AMD Radeon R9 280X 3,072 GB GDDR5
    GPU Driver - Radeon Software Version 17.12.1
    RAM - 8 GB
    Win 7 64bit

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Dylan81 ().

  • Hello english AMD Guys! :thumbsup:
    I'm from the German Forum,pls read this...

    and this
    Vote for Vulkan Support in CNC!
    Desktop: Ryzen5 3600X, 16GB 3600Mhz DDR4, AMD RX Vega 56 <-- alles unter Wasser an BenQ XL2730Z(1440p@144Hz)..... Windows 10 64bit
    Laptop: i7 7700HQ,16GB 2400Mhz, Nvidia GTX 1080@120Hz 17,3" G-Sync IPS, 256GB SSD Samsung PM961 + 1TB HDD

    Der Ursprung aller Macht ist das Wort.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by DannyA4 ().

  • Finally got to play the game properly after a string of issues.

    My pc is about 6-7 years old so I'm quite impressed by everything I've seen so far.

    AMD Phenom II 1090T 3.6ghz
    Nvidia GTX660 2GB
    16gb Ram @ 66MHz
    Installed on an SSD

    I am getting roughly 30-40 FPS on the Default Medium Setting (Minus running Fullscreen @ 1920x1080 res).

  • Thanks to DannyA4 for advices.

    I'd like to add some new experience. So after downgrading to driver 16.11.5 game started to crash and tab with bugtrap info reported atioxx issue. After deleting file in my games/cnc game started ok after loading the game. As I wrote before, fps were 30 in the beggining, but after some time went down to 18-20 when two machines were working on the field.
    I was not satisfied then. I decidet to reinstall driver back. When I did it. I had to delete mentioned file again. And after starting the game I appeared at night time. At night I got about 40 fps. I lowered settings to medium and raise just graphic details to high. After that fps stayed at 35-30 even on the field with 2 machines working.
    I must try more tests even in day time. I tried it just for a moment and fps were around 25-30 depends on where you look.

    After an info from DannyA4, I'll make some tests with mentioned driver 16.7.3.
    Unfortunatelly average 30 fps reported in german thread with driver 16.7.3 is not much, but better than nothing. We still must hope that later release will be optimised for amd's.

    Another thing, when I read C4 log there is open GL 4.5 support written.
    After some study of my graphic card description, there is open GL 4.3 support written. So there is the question if the issue with low fps isn' t due to this thing. Maybe it is wrong meaning what I hope so. I'll see what number of open gl will be written in the c4 log after downgrading driver 16.7.3.

    But on the other hand, mates with newer amd GC should have higher open GL support and even so they have also low fps. That's what assures me that there isn' t issue on my old graphic card's side.


    CPU Type - Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz
    GPU Type - Graphics Chipset AMD Radeon R9 280X 3,072 GB GDDR5
    GPU Driver - Radeon Software Version 17.12.1
    RAM - 8 GB
    Win 7 64bit

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Dylan81 ().

  • Well, current final standpoint is as follows.

    My advice is to leave current drivers for AMD owners after reading some posts from german thread about this topic, because installing of older AMD driver 16.7.3 has no awaited effect for fps grow.

    The only hope is to wait for some optimalisation for AMD's and hold on a little poor performance in tech demo.

    Who is patient, he has no problem with it.


    CPU Type - Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz
    GPU Type - Graphics Chipset AMD Radeon R9 280X 3,072 GB GDDR5
    GPU Driver - Radeon Software Version 17.12.1
    RAM - 8 GB
    Win 7 64bit
  • So went through some of the menu's again today and noticed that in the fleet tab under the vehicle menu there is a live view of all the machines you own like literally a live view, you can watch your ai helper working from that menu which is a nice feature BUT @masterbrain & @Memphis could that somehow be running in the background and dragging down the fps? I didn't notice it before patch 0.0.9.0, was that feature in 0.0.8.0/1? because as I said above something made a huge dent in my performance with 0.0.9.0

    i5 4690k - 3,5 Ghz, EVGA gtx 1070 ftw hybrid - 8 gb vram, 16 gb 1600 Mhz ddr3 ram
  • Hi, I'm the engine developer of CnC.

    In the next weeks we will have a closer look why the performance is so poor with AMD cards. We did test our previous changes with an older Radeon HD card and it was fairly ok with that.

    Our entire team works with Nvidia graphic cards but the game hasn't been optimized especially for Nvidia. The OpenGL code has been designed to be rather general, no matter wether Nvidia, AMD or Intel GPUs are running our game.

    Long story short: we are aware of the problem and are working on it.
    Cattle and Crops - Engine Guru
  • I did some tests last evening and at night. I found out that new drivers 17.7.1 for AMD were released. I updated it to test FPS grow.
    Unfortunately no change in FPS volume. After loading the map without machines fps were about 25, but after confirmation cultivae and plow field No2 quest and after appearing of 2 machines fps went down to 15. Performance indicator showed CPU at full, response about 85 ms and GPU indicator showed render at half of indicator's screen, response around 40-50 ms.

    Fps grow came always when you look to the ground or to the air, but it stops at around 50 fps when looking down or up.

    To compare, it was around 100 fps during looking up or down in tech demo ver. 0.0.8.1.

    Hard to say if it is due to my quite old GPU, or not. I hope it's not :) . I say to myself that R9 280 X with 3 GB memory isn't still so bad. Yes it's no high end graphic card, but as I consulted it with my cousin (IT spec) and he said that this card should stay cappable min. next 3-4 years. Depends on opinions, of course.

    Well I just wanted to bring some next feedback.

    Edit: GPU Tweak was showing 2,5 GB memory usage and around 50% GPU usage.


    CPU Type - Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz
    GPU Type - Graphics Chipset AMD Radeon R9 280X 3,072 GB GDDR5
    GPU Driver - Radeon Software Version 17.12.1
    RAM - 8 GB
    Win 7 64bit

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Dylan81 ().

  • Dylan81 wrote:

    I did some tests last evening and at night. I found out that new drivers 17.7.1 for AMD were released. I updated it to test FPS grow.
    Unfortunately no change in FPS volume. After loading the map without machines fps were about 25, but after confirmation cultivae and plow field No2 quest and after appearing of 2 machines fps went down to 15. Performance indicator showed CPU at full, response about 85 ms and GPU indicator showed render at half of indicator's screen, response around 40-50 ms.

    Fps grow came always when you look to the ground or to the air, but it stops at around 50 fps when looking down or up.

    To compare, it was around 100 fps during looking up or down in tech demo ver. 0.0.8.1.

    Hard to say if it is due to my quite old GPU, or not. I hope it's not :) . I say to myself that R9 280 X with 3 GB memory isn't still so bad. Yes it's no high end graphic card, but as I consulted it with my cousin (IT spec) and he said that this card should stay cappable min. next 3-4 years. Depends on opinions, of course.

    Well I just wanted to bring some next feedback.
    With my XFX RX 480 8GB the fps is 25, So i don't tink its your GPU.
  • The 280x isn't that old and honestly 0.0.9.0 is destroying my system at 25 fps. So in other words your system is fine ;)



    Now I don't have 0.0.8.1 on my system anymore due to an ssd malfunctioning, but I'm still betting on the live tile showing where each of your pieces of equipment are and doing it live. I mean that gotta put some serious strain on the computer if it's "leaking" out of the menu in other words it's still tracking each piece even thought he menu is closed. I guess a simple test would be to buy a ton of machines and then drive as far away from the yard as possible while looking the opposite way of the yard so it wont be rendered and see if that affects performance

    If the devs or someone with 0.0.8.1 can confirm if this was feature or not in that version then we could pretty easily get an idea if that could be a likely culprit

    i5 4690k - 3,5 Ghz, EVGA gtx 1070 ftw hybrid - 8 gb vram, 16 gb 1600 Mhz ddr3 ram

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Jeytav ().

  • Good idea. I'll try to make this test tomorrow, cause I won't be at home today.

    Teoretically it should be possible to buy 192 Arions (assuming one costs 26000 €). It will be miracle if my GPU won't burn out :D .


    CPU Type - Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz
    GPU Type - Graphics Chipset AMD Radeon R9 280X 3,072 GB GDDR5
    GPU Driver - Radeon Software Version 17.12.1
    RAM - 8 GB
    Win 7 64bit
  • Interesting findings. I would say that fps drop isn't as markant as I anticipated. However there would certainly be different fps drop on my a bit weaker system, than at yours. I'll try it too for example.
    But the drop is there and it certainly has an effect to performance.

    Well, let's see what will bring another update.


    CPU Type - Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz
    GPU Type - Graphics Chipset AMD Radeon R9 280X 3,072 GB GDDR5
    GPU Driver - Radeon Software Version 17.12.1
    RAM - 8 GB
    Win 7 64bit
  • And how many fps do you have with the 1060?
    Vote for Vulkan Support in CNC!
    Desktop: Ryzen5 3600X, 16GB 3600Mhz DDR4, AMD RX Vega 56 <-- alles unter Wasser an BenQ XL2730Z(1440p@144Hz)..... Windows 10 64bit
    Laptop: i7 7700HQ,16GB 2400Mhz, Nvidia GTX 1080@120Hz 17,3" G-Sync IPS, 256GB SSD Samsung PM961 + 1TB HDD

    Der Ursprung aller Macht ist das Wort.
  • yup, from what I have seen, sadly amd cards are not working properly yet.

    i5 6500
    16 gb of RAM
    AMD R9 380 (4 GB of GDDR5 VRAM)

    with my native resolution 1920x1080 I get 12 fps in this. if I look at my tractor and implements from far above, its 30 fps. if I look at the edge of the map, its 40 fps, if I look from the edge into the center of the map, its 8 fps.

    changing visual settings doesn't affect the FPS by a marginal number (all high to all low difference is 10 fps tops).

    gpu usage while playing c&c is jumpy, never really reaches 100%, cpu usage is barely 20%.
  • Rob told, they will look at amd performance in next weeks. So we must wait, if they are able to improove it. I'll buy nvidia in the worst case, because this game is my heart one. And I want to play it at full especially when MP will be released.
    Let's wait and we'll surely see later.


    CPU Type - Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz
    GPU Type - Graphics Chipset AMD Radeon R9 280X 3,072 GB GDDR5
    GPU Driver - Radeon Software Version 17.12.1
    RAM - 8 GB
    Win 7 64bit

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Dylan81 ().

  • mmmBetty wrote:

    I also got a nice little 10+ fps improvement with the new update. NVidia gtx660
    Got them to 8o
    AMD Ryzen 2700X + Corsair H100x - 16Gb Ram - Curial 500Go SSD - Gigabyte RTX2080Ti Waterforce 11Go - 32'' FullHD Monitor - Logitech Saitek Heavy Equipment Bundle with 2 side controllers

    :S
    My English is not perfect, thank you for being indulgent...
    Mein Deutsch ist nicht perfekt, Danke für ihr Verständnis...
    :S
  • same things with fx 6 core and 980 gtx ....25 fps max after 2h in game (field plowed worked ect .....) it s a little more better before plowing field ( around 30fps )on hight settings

    It s not really bad but not really good
    I hope with i5 or i7 its really better ...fx its not a good cpu with n vidia gtx

    The post was edited 1 time, last by kiki21 ().

  • Lucky mates, who have Nvidia cards. I hope devs will be successful with solving the problem about low fps (AMD cards owners).

    I'm sorry, that now I can't distinguish the diference between speeds when the view in cab is maximized and minimized.
    Maybe the text below should be in other thread, but this what I want to discuss, seems to me associated with low FPS.

    Let me explain that. I mostly drive from cab view (to be more realistic for me).

    A) When I maximize the view in cab (mouse wheel forward) fps grows a little (logicaly view arc is smaller and it's therefore necessary to render less things) and
    B) vice versa when minimize the view (mosue wheel back - you can see further and wider and then fps go around 15).

    Let's imagine I go around 8-10 km/h in the field. When I'm in the view A speed feels quite ok¨(in comparison to real life), but when I switch to view B (when you see further and wider and fps goes down) it feels tractor now goes much faster.

    Even in accordance to real life. When I try to go by car IRL about 10 km/h it feels like a snail but it feels much faster in the game - especialy when in view B.
    For example when I cultivate, or plow in the game and go aprox 8 km/h, you look back to check the plow or cultivator, then look back after aprox 2 seconds and you go quite fast in bad direction (I understand that plow force you to one side). But even with light tractor, you can quite easily check the plow and correct the direction in real life due to bloody slow speed.

    I'd like to ask others with Nvidia cards who haven't big fps difference in those two views, if you can also feel speed differences in those two views. Or the "feeling speed" is the same in view A nad B.

    Perhaps I want too much in Tech Demo. But I'd like to know if it's the problem of fps or the game itself. I'm also convinced that devs have this speed model counted well.
    I think you should be able to make some checks or setups in CEBIS during the drive, without the necessity to look still forward and fear of going somewhere to hell ;) .

    Thanks in advance for answers, to have some comparison how is it with high and low fps.


    CPU Type - Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz
    GPU Type - Graphics Chipset AMD Radeon R9 280X 3,072 GB GDDR5
    GPU Driver - Radeon Software Version 17.12.1
    RAM - 8 GB
    Win 7 64bit
  • @Dylan81 It is actually neither. Higher FOV (Field of View) gives you the feeling you are going faster even if you are not. This gets exaggerated by the fact that you are changing the FOV in short intervals (scrolling in and out again).
    This is not CnC specific, go try it in FS, you can change the FOV there as well and you'll see the same effect.
    Most games use this to fake really fast speeds. Especially racing games use this effect, they combine it with motion blur to make it seem even faster.