PC - Assassin's Creed Unity...

N

nj473

Member
Hi all,

So the internet is littered with Unity's "bad FPS" threads at the moment. Well here is another one. I know the game is just poorly optimized and there really isn't a lot I can do to achieve more than an average of 20fps (at pretty much any resolution, at both high and lowest settings), but I feel a bit cheated having just upgraded to an XFX R9 280X card. I just want a somewhat solid 30fps and I'll be happy.

So basically the point of this thread is to ask if anyone has any suggestions on how to improve the performance, based on my specs shown in my signature.

I am beginning to think my CPU might be bottle necking a bit, would this be a possibility? Would upgrading to an FX 8350 help, or would I be wasting money?

Any suggestions welcome, thanks in advance!
 
Try the latest AMD Beta video drivers.

Your Phenom II is probably holding you back a little bit but not even being able to hit 20FPS on low is not because of that, seems like the game overall is having a lot of problems on PC's.
 
Thanks for the reply.

I do have the latest Beta drivers installed, I have heard that some others have seen benefits from updating, but I can see no difference on my rig. Its not always below 20fps, it ranges usually from 20-30 during normal game play (exploring the city etc.). But in a lot of areas it goes down to 20-23, which just starts to become unplayable.

Would upgrading my CPU show a noticable difference do you think? It's the only other thing I would consider changing. Other than that, I might be screwed, I doubt there is any patch that will make such a drastic improvement in performance.
 
Console users get 20-30fps. and For my setup it will barely run 1440p-1527p ultra at 60fps. Im glad it was free or i would be taking it back.

even if you get 60fps the bugs are just stupid, your playing and on cutscenes you get like skeletons, peoples hair randomly jumping around the texture loading wtf. no one has a face after 20ft and building textures are on par with playstation 2 after about 80ft. how they looked at the games performance and went yep thats ok i will never know.

so no your rig is ok its just the game is terrible.
 
Last edited:
I haven't played the game but from what I've read that's the impression I've got. Don't bother sinking money in to your computer to play this game better, because I would imagine you wouldn't see many gains in performance.

To be fair though upgrading to an 8350 might be beneficial in the long run for a variety of games. 280X is still plenty of power for most modern stuff.
 
I will probably get a better processor at some point in the future but you're probably right in thinking there's no point in rushing to get one just for AC:U. I guess I will just have to hope for the best for now and see if anything improves (even marginally) with patches etc.

Thanks for your responses :)
 
nj473 said:
Hi all,

So the internet is littered with Unity's "bad FPS" threads at the moment. Well here is another one. I know the game is just poorly optimized and there really isn't a lot I can do to achieve more than an average of 20fps (at pretty much any resolution, at both high and lowest settings), but I feel a bit cheated having just upgraded to an XFX R9 280X card. I just want a somewhat solid 30fps and I'll be happy.

So basically the point of this thread is to ask if anyone has any suggestions on how to improve the performance, based on my specs shown in my signature.

I am beginning to think my CPU might be bottle necking a bit, would this be a possibility? Would upgrading to an FX 8350 help, or would I be wasting money?

Any suggestions welcome, thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

The game is not poorly optimized. Thats BS. 99.9% of people who claim this are not programmers or developers and wouldn't know good from bad optimization if they tripped over it. Anyone who claims otherwise has no idea. The same was said about the original Crysis. Exactly the same.

In 2007 when Crysis came out, I had 8800GTX SLI. I thought that would own it. Nope. Powerpoint mode. It wasn't until we had better GPUs that it became playable at ultra settings.

Many of the fixes are here http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/949543-PC-XB1-amp-PS4-AC-Unity-Current-Known-Issues

The game (as the developers have said) is a next gen game for next gen hardware. The min specs are a GTX680 - that is medium settings at 60FPS at 1080p. Your 280X is very much a mid-range card, although slightly slower than a 770 (essentially a 680). So albeit close, you're currently below minimum specifications.
 
But medium settings at 60fps for a card slightly slower then mine, compared to the 20fps I'm getting at lowest settings/resolution seems a bit strange to me.

Don't get me wrong, I am not a programmer at all and only have a basic knowledge of hardware. I just think somethings wrong when in some areas I get 20fps, changing the settings from highest to lowest (inc. resolution) does nothing whatsoever to improve the frame rate. Which in my mind, means that the GPU is capable, it's just something else that's wrong. Hence why I thought it might be the CPU.

Maybe it's not optimization that's the problem as you said, but just something I don't know about. According to the minimum specs my card should be OK, as apparently the 280X is the same as a 7970 from what others have told me.
 
7970 and 280X are the same thing essentially. I feel like you should be doing better than 20FPS on all low, considering that is indeed the minimum requirements. You've got some problem going on with the game as it should be doing better than that.
 
Okedokey said:
The game is not poorly optimized. Thats BS. 99.9% of people who claim this are not programmers or developers and wouldn't know good from bad optimization if they tripped over it. Anyone who claims otherwise has no idea. The same was said about the original Crysis. Exactly the same.

In 2007 when Crysis came out, I had 8800GTX SLI. I thought that would own it. Nope. Powerpoint mode. It wasn't until we had better GPUs that it became playable at ultra settings.

Many of the fixes are here http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/949543-PC-XB1-amp-PS4-AC-Unity-Current-Known-Issues

The game (as the developers have said) is a next gen game for next gen hardware. The min specs are a GTX680 - that is medium settings at 60FPS at 1080p. Your 280X is very much a mid-range card, although slightly slower than a 770 (essentially a 680). So albeit close, you're currently below minimum specifications.
Click to expand...

Yes it is a poorly optimized game...poorly developed all around in fact. I didnt play it on pc, but i bought it for ps4 and even on the ps4 the framerate is unplayable alot of the time which is completely surprising giving how ugly it is in terms of graphics with a very low draw distance. That and paired with the people appearing and disappearing randomly, everyone looking like clones, and the 20 minute wait between cutscenes from the loading times the game is garbage. Its just too bad i couldnt get a refund...

Crysis was no where near this bad when it came out...id compare this to gta4 for pc. Thats how bad it is. The game on ps4 looks worse than black flag to me yet runs slower.....if its not poor optimization then its the worst game engine ever used.
 
Last edited:
ninjabubbles3 said:
Maybe its like Watch Dogs, runs poorly on even the best of hardware
Click to expand...

Watch dogs runs perfectly fine on my machine....even better after the update. I get 40s easy with 4x msaa at 1920x1080 now.

All i can tell you, is that if acu looks anything on pc like it does on ps4, even my machine should be able to run a consistant 50fps because it looks worse than ac4 to me. A few things have been improved upon, but its not next gen quality at all.
 
Last edited:
G80FTW said:
Watch dogs runs perfectly fine on my machine....even better after the update. I get 40s easy with 4x msaa at 1920x1080 now.

All i can tell you, is that if acu looks anything on pc like it does on ps4, even my machine should be able to run a consistant 50fps because it looks worse than ac4 to me. A few things have been improved upon, but its not next gen quality at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but when it first came out, it lagged a lot, poorly optimized
 
I agree it is poorly optimised, the graphics especially after a small distance are terrible no textures and people look identicle (no face). Plus if you can only just run 1440-1527p with 2x AA on 2x gtx 980's then something is wrong. Putting 4-8x AA drops it to like 10fps with no huge visual improvements.

Considering I can play bf4 on 4k (ultra) at over 100fps and ACU pretty much crashes trying to render 4k it runs so bad.
 
ninjabubbles3 said:
Yeah, but when it first came out, it lagged a lot, poorly optimized
Click to expand...

I dont think Watch Dogs was ever poorly optimized. You have to realize in games like that, with huge maps and good draw distances that its going to require ALOT of resources to run. My 680 wasnt a top of the line card when it came out and I still didnt have any real issues with it. I couldnt really use AA when it first came out as that dropped me into the 20s but thats a small issue compared to games that are TRULY handicapped like ACU and GTA4. Those are poorly optimized games, poorly optimized for even the hardware they were designed to run on in the first place is whats worse.

That said, I just got done playing GTA5 on PS4. Not only are the graphics a million times better than ACU, the draw distance is a million times better without any distracting glitchy AI. Runs pretty smooth, unlike the 10-20fps ACU was running at on the PS4.

But if you ask me, ACU isnt even worth it. To me, the story was uninteresting and the load times between cutscenes didnt help keep my interest any to make up for all the bugs. I predict it to be a flop. But thats just me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top