S.T.A.L.K.E.R. (Release Version) Performance Issues

Hard to believe that. I tried 1680 x 1050 and it looked like a slideshow. Runs fine with high settings @ 1280 x 1024 for me with a 7800 GS

same here

runs fine on high settings @ 1280 x 1024 with most effects turned up. some turned down, but i know ive got AF at the max and AA up some degree to the middle..

played fine, for what i did play, and im hoping to get alot of time in on it this weekend

rig in sig ;) lovin it
 
Im going to copy what I put in another STALKER thread here. I somehow doubt that many in this thread will believe me, but Im telling you - This game runs really well on my system(30+ FPS) with every setting maxed. I don't try to keep up with the rest of the [H], and don't give a damn about my e-peni either. Here's what I wrote:

After reading this thread yesterday I was pretty worried about the performance I would get in this game.

I played for only about 15 minutes last night, but was very happy w/ the performance the rig in my sig had w/ the game.

I ran at 1280x1024, EVERY SETTING MAXED OUT! I did not use FRAPS or anything to measure the framerate, but it had to be 30+ which was very acceptable to me. The game looks amazing at those settings. I even maxed out the view distance, grass shadows, used full dynamic lighting, etc.

Not sure why I would see such nice performance w/ 'a low end X2' and musty old hardware.

Seriously though, I was quite surprised at how well the game ran.

I am running on XP w/ the newest XP driver from nvidia.
__________________
AMD 64 X2 3800+ // Gigabyte K8N-Pro SLI
2x1 GB Patriot DDR 400 PC3200 RAM
2 x EVGA 7800GT CO (Yay! SLI) w/ AC1 coolers
2x160 GB Western Digital HDD RAID 0
BenQ 19" LCD FP91G+
ULTRA X-Connect 500W Modular PSU
Saitek Eclipse keyboard // G5 Logitech mouse // Ratpad
 
8800GTS/Conroe = the best looking shooter I've ever seen. It's the new benchmark until Crysis or whatever.

Game is a pig. You need a fat rig to run it.
 
Well, I have to say this is the first game I have just installed, tossed everything at max I could, after one dv4-display.drv failing error + reboot, my system just sliced through the game like a hot knife through velveta.. So far I used my video driver properties to force 16x AF and enable transparent AA super sampling.. I'm going to try enabling more AA levels via the drivers maybe tonight.. we'll see.. I think this game really likes the shader heavy architecture of the 8800 series cards.. running at 1920x1200 now and it's buttery smooth.. and pretty damn fun also.
 
it runs a bit sluggish on my rig as well...i thought my system would be able to handle it, but its a bit choppy

athlon 4400+ X2
asus a8n-sli
evga 7800gt
4gb g.skill memory
wd raptor 10k rpm hard drive
win xp x64

i'm thinking of upgrading to a 8800gtx....but i'm rather surprised that it doesn't run better on my system
 
Just picked up a copy and installed it, and it seems to run fine using the maximum setting in the game @ 1680x1050 on the sig rig. I'm even using the current 93.71 WHQL drivers and no problems.

The game does hitch at little, turned the settings down to high for a little, and it seemed to hitch less, but the hitching is not that bad, at least will just running around, might be a problem in a fire fight.

I too was a little scared that the sig rig would be gasping but that just isn't the case at all.

Took a look at the SLI indicators and QUAD SLI was showing up, there's an nVidia profile. When I forced the profile to Single-GPU mode however, I didn't notice a performance difference however.

Also, I've got a Logitech G15 running the CPU/memory ultilization utility, the CPU never went over 57% and memory was at 75%.

I don't think that this game is quite the pig some have said, but then again, even though the sig rig isn't top of the line, I guess its still pretty powerful.

I'm going to try STALKER out on an Athlon 64 3400+ Socket 754 with an X1950 PRO AGP card and try to compare.
 
Running 1680 x 1050 at max to medium high settings (in game settings) I find the game not too fun. It starts becoming slightly like a southpark animation, particulary areas where several characters are at once. Other areas without lots of foliage or characters it plays really nice and looks really good. I ALSO NOTICED, that during the areas of slowdowns it's the CPU that is causing the problem as one core hits the ceiling while the other is at about 33% usuage (walking close to foliage or many characters in once spot).

I'm running SLi 2 x 7900GT's 720/900 with Opty 170 set to 2800mhz.
 
I'm only at the beginning of the game, but where you come out from the basement or whatever onto the surface, there's quite a lot of foliage and characters, and the game is running great on my sig rig, which is somewhat equivalent to yours. Yours might be a bit faster even.

There's the occasional hitch, but its not really bad, that's the only thing negative performance wise I've seen.

I did notice the same thing regarding the CPU as you, one core is pegged, but in my case, the second isn't even hitting 20% most of the time. But still the performance is fine.

I did try the game on a Vista Ultimate Athlon 64 3400+ Socket 754 with an X1950 Pro AGP GPU, and it BSODed. It was extremely choppy before it crashed as well. I wasn't planning on playing this game on this system, just trying it out.

So what is going on here? There seem to be a lot of instances of similar rigs performing quite differently with this game.
 
I think I may have fix the uneven cpu load problem. Although I've only been playing it for 20 minutes corrected so far. I'm really not sure if this corrected it or not. I was switching the affinity on the game for both cores. The last time I had it running on core 1, still using 100% of core 1 and minimal core 2. I'm in a firefight part of trying to kill the guys at the post. Right before I got there I had switched it from core 1 to both cores and now they are balancing the load equally. Currently running it at 1680 x 1050 2960mhz 740/815 sli 7900gt. I had made so many changes including getting rid of aa, then finnaly moving af approx to the middle. Seems to be running much better than before (although increased from 2800mhz). Both cores seem to balance the load well.

This game is burning up a constant 400 to 460 watts according to my Power angel meter!!
 
I just installed the game and it runs as smooth as butter on my sli 8800GTX rig. :D
 
I think I may have fix the uneven cpu load problem. Although I've only been playing it for 20 minutes corrected so far. I'm really not sure if this corrected it or not. I was switching the affinity on the game for both cores.

How do you do that, is that in game?
 
I have a computer that has a 4800 x2 @ 2.5 Ghz with an 7950gx2 and I run the game at medium settings @1920 X 1080. It looks like ass to me but does run (slowly).
 
Game runs just fine on my system. Every setting maxed out @ 1920x1080. The game is alright I suppose. The graphics have a neat style to them, but it is certainly not a "next gen" PC game by any means. It has a very Oblivion feel to it which will likely mean I won't be able to get into it. We will see I guess.
 
Rig in sig.

1920x1200 maxed detail. Very playable. A few caching hitches as was mentioned, but other than that, it's fantastic!

Get back to playing!
 
it runs a bit sluggish on my rig as well...i thought my system would be able to handle it, but its a bit choppy

athlon 4400+ X2
asus a8n-sli
evga 7800gt
4gb g.skill memory
wd raptor 10k rpm hard drive
win xp x64

i'm thinking of upgrading to a 8800gtx....but i'm rather surprised that it doesn't run better on my system

Im sure with a GTX it will run better. The 7800GT was a midrange card 3 generations ago. Can't really expect too much from it.
 
I have a computer that has a 4800 x2 @ 2.5 Ghz with an 7950gx2 and I run the game at medium settings @1920 X 1080. It looks like ass to me but does run (slowly).

I have a similar system, except Ive got another GX2. However, @1680X1050 the game is running great for me, using the maximum in game quality setting. Try that resolution and see how it goes.

I tried running with a single GPU and it still ran fine as far I tried it, which was only a few minutes into the beginning.
 
Yeah I heard that unified pixel shaders are clearly the way to go by means of performance. I might go pick me up some 8800's later this week and see how much better it performs. I have tried now both pagefile on and off to see performance difference, but no dice on that one. It does amaze me however that it would run so poorly considering the X-Ray engine was developed in the days of the 6800 series cards. It may be time to retire my 7800 and bite the bullet, but I fear that the moment I buy my 8800GTX that Nvidia will push out the dual core version or something far superior as I have heard some news on the horizon of a new nv series card. Anyone know of the performance of the 8800GTX in Linux?

I have the same rig as you except I've got 7900GTs in SLI, and it runs like ass too. It's the game not the PC. It's the DX9 effects they tacked on. The DX8 effects are if you use Static or whatever lighting. If you use Full Dynamic Lighting youre getting DX9 effects which just werent optimized well at all.
 
How do you do that, is that in game?

control + Alt + Delete > click Process tab > right click XR_3DA.exe > Set affinity.

I don't know about anyone else. My game just eats up one core. It's not until I go in, change the affinity from both cores to core 1, go back into game, then add core 0 back in to make it utilize both cores equally.

I think the problems with us having the 7900GT and lower is that this game is probably eating up video card ram, especially when we run 1680 and higher. I think that's where the poor perforance is at. Unless someone out there has 2 x 512mb cards in sli. I would bet the 8800gtx is running it fine because of that massive 700+ mb on that card.
 
I can tell you that this game is EXTREMELY CPU heavy so your card is not necessarily to blame.
 
What the hell is with the people posting it runs smooth as butter on their 8800s? No shit it runs smooth, it's the best card out there and the graphics of this game are worse than HL2 which can run smooth as butter on a 6600. Jeez, everywhere I go on this forum I see "my 8800 can run this and that so much better than this and that"
 
Well here is my experience. With my 7800gt I can run this game at maximum preset with aa off and af low, 1280 1024, and I will get around 30 fps while fighting. Obviously there are parts where I get above 50 but I rarely drop so low that it detracts from the game. I like 60 fps as much as anyone but hell all the fps on consoles run at around 30 so its not too bad if u think of it like that. Btw, on tweakguides.com the author has posted vids of the game playing on his 7800 at 1280 max just fine. Also I am using the magical 94.20 driver. How are people supprised with shitty performance gaming on x64 or vista? Duh
 
the graphics of this game are worse than HL2 which can run smooth as butter on a 6600.

Bollocks. Set up nice and high this game is stunning. Lighting model is incredible, use of specular (bump, parallax) is brilliant.

I love how peeps compare fairly limited freedom games (ala HL2) with open ended ones (Stalker), and bitch about the performance differences. Might have something to do with the required "background" assets don't you think? Not all performance issues are directly related to what is onscreen "right now".
 
The 8800GTX runs this game well.
I think the graphics are more challenging than Source and are probably not well optimized yet. At 1920x1200 this game is brilliant. Graphically it rivals any game out, whether you consider this an "old" game or not. But it takes muscle to run it correctly, no doubt.

I also have a computer with an e6600 and 7900GTX in SLI and the game runs very well there too.

My impression is that the scale of the game is also to blame. This is almost entirely outside and the scale is massive. Rendering all that real estate is really a challenge for the GPU. I think HL2 EP2 is going to be just as demanding.
 
What the hell is with the people posting it runs smooth as butter on their 8800s? No shit it runs smooth, it's the best card out there and the graphics of this game are worse than HL2 which can run smooth as butter on a 6600. Jeez, everywhere I go on this forum I see "my 8800 can run this and that so much better than this and that"


Calm down Tyler :p
 
What the hell is with the people posting it runs smooth as butter on their 8800s? No shit it runs smooth, it's the best card out there and the graphics of this game are worse than HL2 which can run smooth as butter on a 6600. Jeez, everywhere I go on this forum I see "my 8800 can run this and that so much better than this and that"

Lack/presence of visual fidelity does not imply a certain game will run well/horribly. It's all in how well optimized the game is visually...
 
Lack/presence of visual fidelity does not imply a certain game will run well/horribly. It's all in how well optimized the game is visually...

I didn't say anything about this games performance, just giving off a rant about all these 8800 comments. And for the record, my 7600 SLI runs this game smooth with static shadows, people who are having problems are mostly a 8800 bad driver and users with vista or a combo of the two,
 
how many of you are running in vista w/ good performance?
I was looking at picking it up and im running vista and was just wondering about that
 
Calm down Tyler :p

Gun's not in your hand, the gun is in my hand.

Game runs a lot crappier than it should. Maxed out and outside, perfectly playable, but it's gotta be hovering in the 30s and dipping into the teens and 20s when I'm underground.
 
Game runs a lot crappier than it should. Maxed out and outside, perfectly playable, but it's gotta be hovering in the 30s and dipping into the teens and 20s when I'm underground.

Performance is all over the board with the game. What's going on here? I think it ruin great on my sig rig with the Maximum setting in the game @ 1680x1050. Others with similar or better hardware are reporting way less performance.

Anyone know what's going on here?
 
Performance is all over the board with the game. What's going on here? I think it ruin great on my sig rig with the Maximum setting in the game @ 1680x1050. Others with similar or better hardware are reporting way less performance.

Anyone know what's going on here?

I switched Dynamic Lighting to Static, and now the game runs very well at 1920x1200 with V-Sync.
 
It runs FINE! Running on max details everywhere(nV, in-game) with 16xAA, etc... I surprised to say the least considering it has no loading time(between levels unlike HL2), I expected gfx to be better but it is still quite an amazing game its not just FPS but RPG as well, some details look stunning, but sound could be better.
What do think of STALKER?
 
how many of you are running in vista w/ good performance?
I was looking at picking it up and im running vista and was just wondering about that

Stalker has known issues with Vista, patch is supposed to address that

BTW, didn't someone say that Stalker likes lots of videoram? I mean like 512 or more for 1920x1200?
 
it ran fine for me (30-40fps) @ 1680x1050 with mostly max in-game settings on my 8800.

once i went underground tho, the framerate tanked.. i'm sure it has to do with all the lighting/shadows, etc. haven't played with it yet to see if i can get acceptable framerate.
 
It plays bad on my rig, and I have a 8800gtx and Core 2 Duo. It looks like Call of Duty (the first one), but runs like FEAR with 16xAA :p
 
it ran fine for me (30-40fps) @ 1680x1050 with mostly max in-game settings on my 8800.

once i went underground tho, the framerate tanked.. i'm sure it has to do with all the lighting/shadows, etc. haven't played with it yet to see if i can get acceptable framerate.

30-40fps is horrible to me :p
 
30-40fps is horrible to me :p

For most games in a single player mode 30-40 FPS is fine. Tha'ts the performance level I'm seeing and the game is completely playable and smooth, except the ocassional hitching, which really isn't bad and I haven't had it happen in a fire fights yet.
 
Back
Top