View Full Version : horrible f.e.a.r preformance

12-09-05, 10:05 AM
I've got a 7800GTX w/ a dell widescreen of 1680x1050

f.e.a.r. wont play at this resolution (10-12 fps), while the bench marks have this game @ 42 fps @ 1600x1200 (more pixels).

Drivers are up to date, all other games work perfectly.


12-09-05, 10:33 AM
softshadows off?

12-09-05, 12:21 PM
Running at that high a resolution I'd say drop the textures down one notch,and DEFINATELY DROP SOFT-SHADOWS.Most of the game my 6800 will handle the textures at max but there is some stuttering.If I drop the texture resolution to medium(everything else maximum,other than no soft shadows)....smooth as butter.(xmassign)

12-09-05, 01:27 PM
droped everything down to medium....still chuggin' well below the 30fps mark.

something has to be wrong...

12-09-05, 01:31 PM
What kinda 3DMark05 score do you get?

12-09-05, 01:55 PM
vsync off? If you're using vsync, try using dxtweaker to force triple buffering.

What do you get on the FEAR benchmark?

12-09-05, 02:14 PM
you need more RAM

12-09-05, 05:22 PM
Soft Shadows will kill the game performance more then anything and shadows a lill. Its a damn shame when you have a 7800GTX and have to dummy down the grafx to play smooth, is it the hardwares fault NO. This is called hurry the game we need money NOW.

12-09-05, 06:13 PM
I've got a 7800GTX w/ a dell widescreen of 1680x1050,f.e.a.r. wont play at this resolution

I'm not surprized....

There is no question that to get the best mix of IQ and performance, we had to drop to 1280x960 on both video cards. It is hard to believe that on the most expensive video cards out there, we had to drop the resolution to 1280x960 to achieve an enjoyable gaming experience.

To give an idea of how intense our manual run through is in comparison to the built in "stress" test, the average and minimum frame rates for the NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX at 1280x960 2xAA 8xAF were 41 fps and 11 fps respectively. In contrast, the stress test reported a 55 fps average and 35 fps minimum frame rate with only 17% of the frames below 40 frames per second. We think it is fair to say that the stress test isn't really much of a "stress" test after all

add another GTX and you should be ok

12-10-05, 03:31 AM
That's what I experienced when comparing my GTX to my X800XT-PE. While both had similar minimum frame rates, the X800XT-PE crawled in game, the GTX was fine.

12-10-05, 08:44 PM
add another GTX and you should be ok

ARRRRRG I ****ing KNEW this would happen when SLI showed up.

people actually expect you to drop 1k in gfx cards alone to play a game the way it's meant to?

and you wonder why people say PC gaming is dying?

12-10-05, 10:49 PM
you need more RAM

F.E.A.R., however, isn't the kindest game when it comes to hardware demands. In the past year, we've gotten accustomed to running games at 1920x1200 or 1600x1200, but we needed to lower things down to 1024x768 on many of our test machines to keep things smooth, using both NVIDIA and ATI video cards. On an XPS 500 with an NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX and 2GB RAM, we were able to keep things running nicely at 1680x1050 (there's no built-in widescreen support, but there's a simple tweak for it courtesy of the folks at the Widescreen Gaming Forum.)

12-10-05, 11:08 PM


Strange that, both the Bit-tech and Hardocp test setups were using 2gig

Hardocp = CPU AMD Athlon 64 FX-55
Motherboard ASUS A8N-SLI Deluxe
System Memory 4 x 512MB Corsair XMS PC3200LLPro

Bit-tech = AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (operating at 2400MHz, 12x200MHz); DFI LANParty nF4 SLI-DR (NVIDIA NForce4 SLI); 2 x 1GB Corsair XMS4000 Pro

12-10-05, 11:15 PM
It is a bit strange but Gamespy stating that "we were able to keep things running nicely" is about as subjective a statement as one can make. :) They didn't provide any benchmarks in that article either. The reviewer's setup was:
P4 3.4GHz CPU; 2GB RAM; GeForce 7800GTX video card; Audigy 2 ZS sound card; Creative Gigaworks 7.1 speakers; Saitek Eclipse keyboard; Razer Diamondback mouse; Dell 2405 widescreen LCD monitor. So the main difference was that Gamespy was using a P4 and not an A64. Either way, though, you're right...it's strange.

12-10-05, 11:29 PM
I'm also under the impression that 2gig would help more with loading times and hitching rather than increase playable/average framerates (cheers)
I know with my setup i cant play at Maximum Texture Resolution without a lot of hitching

12-10-05, 11:33 PM
I'm also under the impression that 2gig would help more with loading times and hitching rather than increase playable/average framerates (cheers)

You're right it does.