Lol a 960 is not a low range card. It’s classified as a mid range budget card.
Yea its low end when it comes to gaming cards. Hes having frame drops in SFV for a reason.
I have a 760 and experience no frame drops, low end gaming is 950 and below, his settings are jack man
950 isnt a gaming card, thats a multimedia card. Just look at the gaming cards above the 960, you have the 970, 980, 980Ti, Titan, Titan X, Titan Z and ect… Its on the low end spectrum of gaming cards. 760 and 960 are basicly the same card with small adjustments. He has an old CPU and he doesnt know what the speed of his ram is. Theres more to running games then just the videocard you have.
960 charts 27th lol
Well like I said his frame drop isn’t due to his card like you are suggesting. That card is fine for this game… And most games out there if you are playing at 1080p
Also rocking the game with a GTX 760. running at 1680x1050 with maxed out settings. Runs flawless with constant 60fps. I only set postprocessing to the lowest setting because I can’t stand the motion blur, but performance was also perfect with it at high.
Oh yea its more than enough to run the game. I was talking more about his configuration. He has a older rig, i bet his ram is running at 600Mhz single channel.
actually you are correct my ram is at 666mhz.
He probably has a bottleneck with his CPU, the 960 is a great card for gaming at 1080p. Switch to an Intel i5/i7 and you’ll be loving life.
went to the bios and change it to 800 anyways it was 666 x 2 so pretty sure is not the ram. Tried giefs ultra again same slowdown.
How much of a difference does vram make? Let’s say 2gb vs 4gb.
I’m running a 2gb and have no issue
2GB vs 4GB variants of the same card provide negligible improvements. Go for the cheaper option.
hmmm…
I just got the fx6300 when I install it then ill get my answer hopefully is just that.
Video ram for most games isn’t a big issue above 2GB, at least at present. Maybe at super high resolutions like 4k, but you’re probably not going to be playing at 4k.
What's everyone's outcome with using "reccomended" graphics settings? Looked about the same as high settings, for me.Windows 10
Processor: i5-4690K 3.50GHz
Ram: 8GB
Graphics: GTX 970
Resolution: 1080P
The game runs flawlessly at max. Beta 2 I had no problems, but there was an issue during the beta 3 test. The game would close like clockwork every fifteen minutes, with no error message. I wasn’t alone, as there were a few Steam threads about this problem, all though how long people could play before it turned off on them was variable. I eventually got fed up and just played on PS4. Really hoping this is worked out before release, the game looks so good on PC, so much that it made angry to switch to PS4.
I only had crashes on the first night.
I’ve never had a single crash.
My R9 270 came in. Tried it out on the “special” version of SF5 and I got 60 fps with everything on high except shadow/effects which were on medium. I assume the actual game will be better optimized when it comes out though.
Needless to say, at $109, well worth it.
Upgraded cpu, motherboard and ram and I still have the same slowdown with zangief critical art with all maxed.
Its the stupid gtx 960, I tried and old xfx 7970 no slowdown… Fuck you Capcom!