Is it just me, or does AC Syndicate run just as bad as or worse than Unity?

[afyeung]

A lot of the reviewers of the test copies were saying how this time Ubisoft got their act together for this game. I just got it and I'm averaging around 40 fps with a 5820k @4.5ghz and R9 290 overclocked to 1162mhz on the core. This is with Ultra high environment, high textures, high shadows, SSAO, and FXAA. Does this seem right? Unity actually had amazing lighting while Syndicate's just plain sucks. Furthermore, the anti aliasing options are horrendous, at least on the AMD side. Might do a review after I get my 2nd gpu back from MSI. 

Update: I didn't mention earlier but I'm playing at 1440p. FPS isn't that bad too be honest actually. It gets well over 60 in some areas but dips to the 40s in more intense scenes. I just expected it to perform a lot better given they toned it down a lot compared to Unity. 

[Aytex]

i can only get 30 fps on lowest settings so i cant really say anything

[Morgan MLGman]

Turn down shadows and see if it helps, they usually take a lot of performance. I ran it for a moment on an overclocked 290X and had no FPS issues

[xAcid9]

Might do a review after I get my 2nd gpu back from MSI. 

I don't think this game got Crossfire profile yet.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

A lot of the reviewers of the test copies were saying how this time Ubisoft got their act together for this game. I just got it and I'm averaging around 40 fps with a 5820k @4.5ghz and R9 290 overclocked to 1162mhz on the core. This is with Ultra high environment, high textures, high shadows, SSAO, and FXAA. Does this seem right? Unity actually had amazing lighting while Syndicate's just plain sucks. Furthermore, the anti aliasing options are horrendous, at least on the AMD side. Might do a review after I get my 2nd gpu back from MSI. 

You don't have Nvidia Gimpworks turn on do you?

[ShadowCaptain]

Hmm on a 290, im sure you can find a better balance of settings that still look good but run better

 

Sometimes things like shadows can be reduced with very little graphical impact, make sure any Nvidia settings are turned off, 

 

FXAA can make games look "soft" so maybe turn that off?

 

SSAO is a subtle thing and can definitely be turned off

[watts300]

It's a brand new game on hardware that's not top of the line. I wouldn't expect it to run much better than that. 

 

People like to say that it's "not optimized"... but c'mon... want better graphics? Get a better graphics card. 

[Fulgrim]

You expect Ubisoft to do a decent job of optimization? r u avin a giggle der m8?

[afyeung]

You seem to be getting worse performance than you should be.

Syndicate does perform much better than Unity.

Your issue may be your RAM.

Look to see if you RAM in your case is, in slots, 1,3 or 2,4.

Make sure they aren't sitting next to each other.

I think I have the ram covered. 16gb ddr4 in quad channel is more than enough

[afyeung]

It's a brand new game on hardware that's not top of the line. I wouldn't expect it to run much better than that. 

 

People like to say that it's "not optimized"... but c'mon... want better graphics? Get a better graphics card. 

The only card on the Nvidia side which does better than my card in the games I play is the 980ti/Titan X(Both GM200). I'm not spending $400 just to play one game. And I checked on youtube and the 980ti doesn't seem to do very well either with settings cranked up. 

[watts300]

The only card on the Nvidia side which does better than my card in the games I play is the 980ti/Titan X(Both GM200). I'm not spending $400 just to play one game. And I checked on youtube and the 980ti doesn't seem to do very well either with settings cranked up. 

It works fine with mine. 

 

Either way, I'm not suggesting you spend any money "just to play one game." I'm just saying that you should re-set your expectations on what an R9 290 can do with brand new AAA titles. 

[afyeung]

It works fine with mine. 

 

Either way, I'm not suggesting you spend any money "just to play one game." I'm just saying that you should re-set your expectations on what an R9 290 can do with brand new AAA titles. 

Battlefront is considered to be a new AAA title and well optimized as well, and the 290 wrecks every Nvidia card except the 980ti/Titan X at 1440p in that game. And "fine" to me is mostly in the 60s. Doesn't look that way in these videos and according to Nvidia's AC syndicate performance overview which I just read.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/assassins-creed-syndicate-graphics-and-performance-guide

[watts300]

Battlefront is considered to be a new AAA title and well optimized as well, and the 290 wrecks every Nvidia card except the 980ti/Titan X at 1440p in that game. And "fine" to me is mostly in the 60s. Doesn't look that way in these videos and according to Nvidia's AC syndicate performance overview which I just read.

https://www.youtub v=NmZbYF3hr9Y

https://www h?v=I1ijP58ImKs

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/assassins-creed-syndicate-graphics-and-performance-guide

The Frostbite engine for Battlefront has been around for a while.  Battlefront and Syndicate isn't a valid comparison. 

 

Besides, not all games are the same. And just because two games are different doesn't mean that one is "good" and one is "bad."  Technology doesn't work that way, my friend.  

 

I followed the annotation on that video to his 1080p demo (because that's what I use and I am familiar with) and he seems to be doing alright.  I'm not anal and obsessive that I always have an FPS counter running so I don't have it memorized what I get on a regular basis... but I did run it for a little while when I started the game. I get slightly better than his.    Even he is happy with the performance.  He says so repeatedly in the video, and also in his description: 

 

"In this video I play around in AC: Syndicate and test the performance with the GTX 980 Ti card. This is done in 1080p, with ultra settings. I'd say the performance is pretty fair for the content this game has, and we constantly maintained a decent FPS."

 

For the content this game has.... c'mon, bro. You're not being reasonable with an R9 290. 

[afyeung]

 

The fps isn't really what bugs me. I run witcher 3 maxed out with hairworks at 30-40fps and compared to AC syndicate it feels like 60fps. Assasin's creed has a problem where it feels like you're dragging the mouse especially at lower fps. That's why a lot of people play assasin's creed with the controller. 

[Blair]

It's a brand new game on hardware that's not top of the line. I wouldn't expect it to run much better than that. 

 

People like to say that it's "not optimized"... but c'mon... want better graphics? Get a better graphics card. 

You got to be kidding! <Sniff Glue much?

[Blair]

The Frostbite engine for Battlefront has been around for a while.  Battlefront and Syndicate isn't a valid comparison. 

 

Besides, not all games are the same. And just because two games are different doesn't mean that one is "good" and one is "bad."  Technology doesn't work that way, my friend.  

 

I followed the annotation on that video to his 1080p demo (because that's what I use and I am familiar with) and he seems to be doing alright.  I'm not anal and obsessive that I always have an FPS counter running so I don't have it memorized what I get on a regular basis... but I did run it for a little while when I started the game. I get slightly better than his.    Even he is happy with the performance.  He says so repeatedly in the video, and also in his description: 

 

"In this video I play around in AC: Syndicate and test the performance with the GTX 980 Ti card. This is done in 1080p, with ultra settings. I'd say the performance is pretty fair for the content this game has, and we constantly maintained a decent FPS."

 

For the content this game has.... c'mon, bro. You're not being reasonable with an R9 290. 

And Syndicate uses the old Black Flag/Watch Dogs engine, Whats your point? Just admit you wanted to brag instead of making a point!

[watts300]

You got to be kidding! <Sniff Glue much?

 

And Syndicate uses the old Black Flag/Watch Dogs engine, Whats your point? Just admit you wanted to brag instead of making a point!

 

Can you even read? Do you even read?  http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/assassins-creed-syndicate-graphics-and-performance-guide

Read that. It explains everything.  It's not my point to make, Nvidia and Ubisoft make their point quite clear in the performance guide. 

 

If you think I'm bragging, then it would seem that you have a confidence problem. My experience is offered as a direct point of comparison to what the performance guide has spelled out based on the hardware they explicitly recommend for using the maximum settings.  If you weren't behaving so childish, you'd see that.  

 

By the way, nice going reviving a dead thread. 

[Praesi]

I wonder that you reach 40fps with this Card in the first Place.

[Humbug]

It's probably because you have environment at Ultra high. Drop it just one setting lower and it should run good. That's what I've heard from a lot of people anyway that ultra is not worth it... especially since you are playing at 1440p which is a higher resolution than most people

Also make sure you are running window 10 and Crimson 15.12 which came out a week ago.

http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/desktop?os=Windows+10+-+64

 

I wonder that you reach 40fps with this Card in the first Place.

It's a good GPU though. He's running a R9 290 @ 1162mhz. i.e. faster than a GTX 970 in most games.

[Humbug]

The Frostbite engine for Battlefront has been around for a while.  Battlefront and Syndicate isn't a valid comparison. 

 

Besides, not all games are the same. And just because two games are different doesn't mean that one is "good" and one is "bad."  Technology doesn't work that way, my friend. 

People will always compare the technical work of AAA game devs vs other devs in the industry. You can't stop it. Everybody knows that there you get a combination of some high quality work and some shoddy work out there... PC performance is not just about brute force hardware, it's about whether the game is written in a way that maximizes use of available hardware. You can't stop the comparisons. Some games are good at utilizing hardware resources efficiently, some just aren't. People who play lots of games have a general idea of what their hardware is capable of on average and gamers will hold devs accountable if they think the graphics and simulated detail is not sufficient to justify the framerate. There are games like Arma3 and Ark Surival which don't run well on anything. If everybody just says oh we should just wait for next gen and buy better hardware then you are not encouraging industry best practices. Moving the industry forward means the devs doing their jobs better while the GPU makers work to innovate. The fact that you can brute force something doesn't mean that you should do; it means you are wasting hardware resources which could have been used for something else. For example if Battlefront was not so well optimized then the world environment would have been less detailed as the devs compromised to get it running smoothly. Similarly you get people saying that DX12 and Vulkan are not worth it because they have 4Ghz six-core CPUs to avoid CPU bottlenecks. Again what they don't realize is that good software means getting the job done in the most effecient manner possible. If the rendering takes less CPU time that means more people have better performance and the devs can actually use that freed up CPU time for something else such as AI and physics. The fact that you 'can' brute force it doesn't mean it should be acceptable. The fact that so many PC game devs do get it right shows what can be done...

 

Having said that I agree that AC Syndicate is better than AC Unity. The difference in the steam user reviews says it all... And ubisoft deserves credit for the improvement. On average their customer's are a lot happier with this release.