BF1 unoptimized

[FunkyFeatures]

I recently picked up BF1 and have enjoyed it so far, but it seems really stuttery and unsmooth at times, as if it was in Beta still.

Just wondering, how have people enjoyed the new Battlefield so far? Because it seems they really took some stupid decisions. You want to customize loadout? Let me take two minutes loading it. You want to leave the server? Let me punish you with a 5 minute wait time. This is on an SSD, and is completely unacceptable.

And just in general in game, CPU usage for an I7 is ~70%. I would be fine, but whenever I peak 100%, the game completely freezes. Unacceptable, never seen this in any other game.
How about the Origin overlay - pretty much required for playing with friends. Well, that is completely broken, but still takes 5% CPU usage while in games.

 

It seems they somehow rushed Battlefield 1, with really bad balance, optimization and all, however this might just be me.

[HungryHamster]

Yeah, currently there are still issues with exiting and between matches. I'm hoping this next patch coming out this month will finally resolve it. I wouldn't necessarily call the game poorly optimized because the Dice/EA servers are having issues communicating with Origin. Even on my older rig with a GTX 760 I was able to get around 60 fps on ultra settings which isn't too bad. When I think of "poorly optimized" I think of most Ubisoft games like The Division or WatchDogs 1/2 where performance is capped by poor rendering techniques that are usually designed for consoles and then ported over.

[skullbringer]

It's an EA Dice game, what did you expect?! lol

Still, you are right. You touch anything in game and wonder wtf is this shit, who thought of this, why is this behaving like this, this makes no sense, why has this dog 5 feet etc.

I would also like to see proper 60Hz servers without the low update rate grenades and air vehicle lags. I would love to see Origin overlay open and close every time I press Shift+F1 and not 35% of the time. And a progression system that is not worse compared to previous bf games would be great, but ey what can you really expect out of a developer that is under the whip of a AAA publisher like EA. 

 

I mean, it still could be worse. Ubisoft.

 

[privoid]

Just finished my own post in the forum... 

 

 

It's especially annoying to play when your hardware is not the best and you're just walking around with 30 - 40 fps...

[FunkyFeatures]

1 hour ago, ThatGamingFox said:

Just finished my own post in the forum... 

 

 

It's especially annoying to play when your hardware is not the best and you're just walking around with 30 - 40 fps...

Glad I'm not the only one... So far I have not seen any games that I cannot run, would be a shame if Battlefield would kill my system.

I see you ran low settings. Lower settings did nothing to my framerate, almost as if it was a CPU bottleneck.

I really enjoy having videos running in the background of my games, something I am not able to do in BF1 unfortunately.

Sinai Desert is really intensive, yet not that graphically impressive.

[Soundsystem90]

Game sucks vote with your wallet.

[Praesi]

BF1 runs smooth and fast like no other BF bevor. Performance is perfect. You dont have enough RAM btw.

[Roddy1891]

I've had a few issues where freezing/stuttering occurs for around 10-40 seconds, very rare (maybe 3 or 4 times now and I've got around 60 hours in game)

Lots of small issues with the UI for both origin and BF. Not intuitive at all. Why have the option to see friends and invite them on screen but 80% of the time can't join on them whilst theyre already in game, because the option doesn't show. (I know shift, F1, but why have the option available in the first place?), and if there's a que, can't they say where in the que you are? When it says 'a friend is playing would you like to join them?'... and they had actually joined You! It takes you out the game to reload same map/server you were already in. So there are a lot of problems, they're not fully listed here but meh. I like the game. Most of my gripes aren't with the game itself.

 

Think the game is great though. 

 

[FunkyFeatures]

7 hours ago, Praesi said:

BF1 runs smooth and fast like no other BF bevor. Performance is perfect. You dont have enough RAM btw.

I have never during this systems two year lifespan had issues with too little RAM, I have monitored it during BF1 as well...

[FunkyFeatures]

5 hours ago, Roddy1891 said:

I've had a few issues where freezing/stuttering occurs for around 10-40 seconds, very rare (maybe 3 or 4 times now and I've got around 60 hours in game)

Lots of small issues with the UI for both origin and BF. Not intuitive at all. Why have the option to see friends and invite them on screen but 80% of the time can't join on them whilst theyre already in game, because the option doesn't show. (I know shift, F1, but why have the option available in the first place?), and if there's a que, can't they say where in the que you are? When it says 'a friend is playing would you like to join them?'... and they had actually joined You! It takes you out the game to reload same map/server you were already in. So there are a lot of problems, they're not fully listed here but meh. I like the game. Most of my gripes aren't with the game itself.

 

Think the game is great though. 

 

When the game works, it is a lot of fun. I thought I was done with FPS games, but my friends were set on getting this. I have enjoyed the game a bit even without playing with friends.

 

Some things just seem inconsistent, perhaps I just don't read enough about "features".

E.G. sniping, bullets consistently drop a bit down and to the left... Down I understand, but left?

[Praesi]

1 hour ago, FunkyFeatures said:

I have never during this systems two year lifespan had issues with too little RAM, I have monitored it during BF1 as well...

Ya. And i tell you that more Ram will improve performance. Its up to you.

[PlayStation 2]

Battlefield 1's performance seems to be all over the place in who's running it. Some like @Praesi actually have the game running fine, while others, like you, seem to have the shit end of the stick. Honestly, I'd try lowering settings until CPU usage is more proportional, then go from there.

[FunkyFeatures]

31 minutes ago, Praesi said:

Ya. And i tell you that more Ram will improve performance. Its up to you.

LTT seems to think otherwise

[Praesi]

2 hours ago, FunkyFeatures said:

LTT seems to think otherwise

Many People in the BF1 Forum said their Performance went up alot in MP after they added another 8GB Ram. Your Choice.

[Delicieuxz]

Battlefield 1 minimum spec is 8 GB RAM, but 16 GB of RAM is recommended: https://www.battlefield.com/games/battlefield-1/tech

 

Some people's benchmarks show the difference in performance between 8 and 16 GB of RAM as being not much at all, but other benchmarks show it being a pretty big difference, like in this one:

 

 

 

It looks like the lowest graphics setting that you play with, the bigger the difference more RAM makes:

 

 

[Roddy1891]

9 hours ago, FunkyFeatures said:

When the game works, it is a lot of fun. I thought I was done with FPS games, but my friends were set on getting this. I have enjoyed the game a bit even without playing with friends.

 

Some things just seem inconsistent, perhaps I just don't read enough about "features".

E.G. sniping, bullets consistently drop a bit down and to the left... Down I understand, but left?

Can't say I've noticed the drop to the left, but I tend to avoid long range sniping... mainly because I'm rubbish at it lol. Didn't BF4 do that with tank rounds long range too? 

Maybe something to do with the rifling of the weapon being used? Coriolis effect? Who knows, if it happens it's probably on purpose though. 

 

I'm happy to see past the flaws this game has at the moment and keep playing, as I know they'll sort them out like they have before with bf3 and 4. 

 

5 hours ago, Praesi said:

Many People in the BF1 Forum said their Performance went up alot in MP after they added another 8GB Ram. Your Choice.

I'd love to disagree with you here, purely because the system requirements say 8GB, but..  bf4 apparently only needed 4GB and that played like crap with said set up. So even though I've not encountered the issue, I'd be inclined to believe you. And at least ram is fairly cheap at the moment.

[typographie]

On 12/4/2016 at 8:13 AM, FunkyFeatures said:

It seems they somehow rushed Battlefield 1, with really bad balance, optimization and all, however this might just be me.

I've got about 100 hours in the game at this point, and while I haven't run into all the same issues I'd have to agree. The CPU demands of the game seem pretty unreasonable to me… and it's not like it's even consistent. My CPU usually runs in the 90%+ range on all cores, but performance is noticeably impacted only rarely. And it usually goes away if I restart the application or switch servers. That suggests optimization issues to me.

 

Plus, I think it's a little unreasonable that a game could require more than an overclocked $250 CPU for consistent 60 FPS performance. Taking a quick look at Steam's hardware survey data suggests to me that the vast, vast majority of PC gamers would be having a far worse time with this game than I am.

[Roddy1891]

2 minutes ago, typographie said:

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I think it's a little unreasonable that a game could require more than an overclocked $250 CPU for consistent 60 FPS performance. Taking a quick look at Steam's hardware survey data suggests to me that the vast, vast majority of PC gamers would be having a far worse time with this game than I am.

I'll be monitoring CPU and GPU utilisation and see if I run into similar results. 

It does seem off. 

I am wondering why people are recommending an i7 as a solution, vast majority of games will see the two as very very similar right? 

If it plays relatively well on a console it should be able to play on a PC ok.

[FunkyFeatures]

3 hours ago, typographie said:

I've got about 100 hours in the game at this point, and while I haven't run into all the same issues I'd have to agree. The CPU demands of the game seem pretty unreasonable to me… and it's not like it's even consistent. My CPU usually runs in the 90%+ range on all cores, but performance is noticeably impacted only rarely. And it usually goes away if I restart the application or switch servers. That suggests optimization issues to me.

 

Plus, I think it's a little unreasonable that a game could require more than an overclocked $250 CPU for consistent 60 FPS performance. Taking a quick look at Steam's hardware survey data suggests to me that the vast, vast majority of PC gamers would be having a far worse time with this game than I am.

I guess you can say I am adding salt to the optimization wound, above 50% CPU usage in the menu, and half a minute load time to enter customization.

 

Could be true that Multiplayer needs slightly more RAM, I just haven't seen it myself. RAM sits safely at 70-80% utilization on Sinai Desert.
It would make sense though, assuming LTT uses Singleplayer to benchmark their games (for more consistency)

[2FA]

50 minutes ago, FunkyFeatures said:

I guess you can say I am adding salt to the optimization wound, above 50% CPU usage in the menu, and half a minute load time to enter customization.

 

Could be true that Multiplayer needs slightly more RAM, I just haven't seen it myself. RAM sits safely at 70-80% utilization on Sinai Desert.
It would make sense though, assuming LTT uses Singleplayer to benchmark their games (for more consistency)

I typically use 7.9GB or more in multiplayer out of my 16GB.

[typographie]

23 hours ago, Roddy1891 said:

I am wondering why people are recommending an i7 as a solution, vast majority of games will see the two as very very similar right?

Well, the theory goes that throwing more logical cores at it will allow the load to fall a bit and alleviate the BF1 'bottleneck,' but I don't have an i7 handy and can't say for sure how it behaves in reality. From what I've seen in games where an i7 does make a difference, it's almost never a big difference… it may help but still feel very subpar in this case. I also have a severe allergy to recommending $350+ CPUs as a way to work around what looks to me like a glitch or optimization problem with one game.

[Mr.Dingle]

The  part with DICE and EA that confuses me is that , BF1 Beta , ran smoother and looked better in the same time , compared to the current state . 

 

How the hell do you go from awesome in the beta to really crappy in the full release ? 

 

From 80-90FPS avg. 1080p ultra settings and 125% res. scale , to 60-75 at same settings + and additional OC on the CPU. 

[Praesi]

2 hours ago, ColonelThunder said:

The  part with DICE and EA that confuses me is that , BF1 Beta , ran smoother and looked better in the same time , compared to the current state . 

 

How the hell do you go from awesome in the beta to really crappy in the full release ? 

 

From 80-90FPS avg. 1080p ultra settings and 125% res. scale , to 60-75 at same settings + and additional OC on the CPU. 

I have 10-15 FPS more in 1440p than in Beta. Average is 100 now. You cant trust the Resolution Scale in this Game btw. Just play in native or turn it down till you have the FPS you want.

[OCNcheffy]

I've found what fixes my issue was setting CPU priority to High for BF1.exe when the game is running. Completely smoothed it out for me with an I5 3570k and GTX 970.