Post your computer specs, game settings and performance!

[ogggrez]

Hi, y'all!
It would be nice to know some of your guys computer specs, what graphics settings you play on (incl. unit size) and the cirka fps you get while playing, since I am thinking of upgrading my computer soon, and my gf is gonna build her own one as well. So it would be nice to have some different specs to look at and compare I believe that this would also benefit other people in my situation and it would in general just be pretty interesting to know what other DeI players "play with".

[Dave0718]

AMD FX-6120
10.0GB Dual-Channel DDR3
Gigabyte 2AC8
2048MB ATI AMD Radeon HD 7570

... and it runs rome 2 at about 25 fps lol. my rig sucks until the parts that i ordered for my new rig come in. They will be:
intel 17-4790k
8gb corsair vengence ddr3 @1600 mhz
evga gtx 770 2gb superclocked with acx
and various other cool things to go along with it. I'm predicting a bit of a performance boost lol

[suras333]

Good thread! I'm also interested.

[rjacko10]

I got a "budget" gaming machine:

GTX760
AMD FX6300
8gb ram

Performs well on ultra settings, largest unit size. The FPS is around 40-50 usually, lowering to about 20 minimum if zoomed into huge battles.

Huge walled sieges is the exception, where the lag will hit any computer (due to crappy pathfinding orders).

[Menulo]

yea, it really doesnt matter what PC you have. even with a top end PC a siege battle wil run at 1-2 fps i am afraid:/

[Phil2]

Strangely, i don't own top end GC (only my brave old Zotac 580) neither top end proc (only I5 3470 @3.2 GHz) but can say my city battles are at least 80% fluent.
Yes, only 20% battles where sometimes i can get occasional slide show, but changing the zoom while stuttering often solve it.
Again strangely, i have to zoom somewhere instead of full de-zooming action!
Aready got 40VS40 units without slide show (i recall a fantastic battle at Bibract city, completely crazy and indecisive to the end - 50 minutes!)

On side note, i run Rome II at 2560X1440 reso, i'm playing large units size (not ultra), and only my game units settings are on ultra. Others settings are on High, except particules set on low (see spoiler).
I have SSAO on, but no antialiasing (but FXAA on via Nvidia CP as well as anisotropic X4 and triple buffering)
I have the unlimited memory box checked too.
My SweetFX also enhance the whole game nicely with cristal clear picture.
Very satisfied so far with TWR2 graphicals (tried lately NapoleonTW, but was very desapointed)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[zonks40]

Intel i7 3770k overclocked to 4.2Ghz, boost 5.9Ghz
8GB Rippjaw RAM
120GB Samsung 840 SSD
GTX 780Ti video card 3GB.

Everything maxed that can be maxed including veg alpha gives me about 55fps on the benchmark, only bought the Video card last Monday.
I'm going to re-add GEM and see what kind of performance I get then.

yea, it really doesnt matter what PC you have. even with a top end PC a siege battle wil run at 1-2 fps i am afraid:/

I've never experienced this, even with my old GTX 560Ti, and I have my game set at 40 unit armies.

[Sir_Pee_Alot]

Myn PC runs this game on all Extreme and never got any problems dont know the fps because i quite playing some time ago.

Only need some faster memory.

[BunnyPoopCereal]

In-game screenshots of the graphical settings would be welcome

[FieryMastermind]

GTX 780 OC edition
i5 4670k
8 GB Ram

I play with 480 men/unit so my average FPS is around 40 when zoomed in

[juanplay]

GTX 780 OC edition
i5 4670k
8 GB Ram

I play with 480 men/unit so my average FPS is around 40 when zoomed in

Can you have a 16000 battle without stuttering ? With a 770 4gb and an I7 4770k 4.4 ghz, my sweet spot (with extreme settings, except alpha vegetation) is 12000 thousand men, anything bigger than that and battles become a slideshow for a while (though fps remain stable between 40-50). I ask you because im thinking about buying a 780 ti

[zonks40]

Can you have a 16000 battle without stuttering ? With a 770 4gb and an I7 4770k 4.4 ghz, my sweet spot (with extreme settings, except alpha vegetation) is 12000 thousand men, anything bigger than that and battles become a slideshow for a while (though fps remain stable between 40-50). I ask you because im thinking about buying a 780 ti

I wouldn't waste your money on a GTX 780Ti, I picked one up last Monday, it's made the game look better and run better, but on my old GTX 560 Ti I was having battles head to head involving sometimes over 20,000 men, the CPU is the most important aspect of the battles, not the graphics card.
I feel that I have wasted $800 AU on a card in the hopes that it increased my pleasure playing this game, and I't hasn't, your better of waiting till they come down in price, the GTX 880 is not that far away, you should see a price drop then.

[FieryMastermind]

Can you have a 16000 battle without stuttering ? With a 770 4gb and an I7 4770k 4.4 ghz, my sweet spot (with extreme settings, except alpha vegetation) is 12000 thousand men, anything bigger than that and battles become a slideshow for a while (though fps remain stable between 40-50). I ask you because im thinking about buying a 780 ti

Yup, the battle itself start to lag but the game itself stays at around 40 fps... My guess is that the engine was not created for such large battles. Although sieges are a nightmare, even with just half those numbers.

[juanplay]

If the CPU is the most important aspect, then is quite worrying an i7 4770 k with such oc is unable to move those battles, then again maybe the Engine was not made for such numbers when they fight head on, although using Darthmod in Napoleon Total war i have had battles with over 30000 men without stuttering, maybe the problem is the number of animations the engine can handle (Rome 2`s Death Moves), as in Napoleon there were few melee battles.

[zonks40]

If the CPU is the most important aspect, then is quite worrying an i7 4770 k with such oc is unable to move those battles, then again maybe the Engine was not made for such numbers when they fight head on, although using Darthmod in Napoleon Total war i have had battles with over 30000 men without stuttering, maybe the problem is the number of animations the engine can handle (Rome 2`s Death Moves), as in Napoleon there were few melee battles.

I'm not to sure, my boys CPU is the i7 4770K, and we have over clocked that also, so the CPU with his GTX 560Ti, which is a few years old now, can handle battles with 80 units on the field at 1.5 unit size, smoothly, the most units we have had on the field in a head to head campaign battle is 120, both of us have i7's, both of us had gtx 560Ti, and that ran well.
My other boy has an i7 CPU also, though it is one of the older 1156 types and runs at 2.8Ghz, he also has an GTX 560Ti, and he cannot run the game as we do without a slideshow, this is why I believe the CPU is the most important factor.

[juanplay]

I'm not to sure, my boys CPU is the i7 4770K, and we have over clocked that also, so the CPU with his GTX 560Ti, which is a few years old now, can handle battles with 80 units on the field at 1.5 unit size, smoothly, the most units we have had on the field in a head to head campaign battle is 120, both of us have i7's, both of us had gtx 560Ti, and that ran well.
My other boy has an i7 CPU also, though it is one of the older 1156 types and runs at 2.8Ghz, he also has an GTX 560Ti, and he cannot run the game as we do without a slideshow, this is why I believe the CPU is the most important factor.

well, 80 units at 1.5 Dei Size is about 12000 men (my limit when it comes to game smoothness), did you play with extreme settings?, if yes, then rome 2 does not take advantage of high end gpu`s

[zonks40]

well, 80 units at 1.5 Dei Size is about 12000 men (my limit when it comes to game smoothness), did you play with extreme settings?, if yes, then rome 2 does not take advantage of high end gpu`s

We use a mix of Extreme and ultra, and water turned down to medium, no veg alpha or distortion.

The only reason I say the CPU is "beast" is because I have 6 systems in this house (+2 laptops), my two boys and myself all have Rome 2, we all had GTX 560Ti video cards, the only real difference between the systems was the CPU, which are all i7's.
Mine being a 3770K, oldest boy has a 4770K, youngest boy has a 870, and between the 3 machines all with identical video cards, the better the CPU, the better the performance.

The reason I believe that many people are complaining about the difference in performance between Shogun 2 and Rome 2 is the new hit point system they have introduced, that would increase the workload of the CPU by a very large amount, every single unit on the battlefield needs to be constantly tracked for current hit-points, including dealing and receiving, otherwise there is very little that sets the two games apart.

[Sir_Pee_Alot]

this is why I believe the CPU is the most important factor.

Yes TW games are heavy CPU based. "And always will" You dont need a card like a 780 ti to play this on all Extreme, I got one only because i work with heavy rendering tools...

[scdandme]

Im not so sure about the cpu being the "beast" that you want in these games like TW....you have to keep in mind the best system specs that were available at the time a game was developed...yes some games can be "optimized" for newer hardware, but I think most of the moderators/programmers here would tell you that older games like TW used just one core of your cpu...so if you could actually find a good motherboard that would accept 4gb of memory and handle a gpu that has about 512mb of memory and run the best single core processor made back then that could use a 64 bit OS, I think you would be surprised at the performance of older games like total war because all those processes for so many units on a battlefield are very intensive.....for the most part fewer cores means faster speed of the chip....at least for older cpu's !!! ...also for example having night battles with thousands of men holding torches seems to me like a HUGE hit because of all the endless shadows the game tries to produce...shadows are a big one.....in my rookie opinion the best thing you can do for a pc these days is get a SSD !!...even a small cheap one is better than the best HDD...and I really love being able to have a huge paging file for my setup because of the speed of the SSD's it's almost like having extra memory if windows needs it..and don't go cheap on the psu !!!.....just my opinion

dp45sg Extreme mobo
QX9650 Black OC @ 3.3 Ghz
8 GB 1333 DDR3
EVGA GTX 560 ti
Seasonic Platinum 1000 Hybrid PSU
Coolermaster Hyper 212
Coolermaster HAF X (high air flow) case
400 GB WD HDD
3 X 256 GB Samsung SSD's in RAID 0
who really cares about the DVD drive....LOL

I just use my pc for games so I am not worried about loosing data in case of RAID failure...and I keep a back-up on the HDD

[Karchedon]

well...
Intel i7 720qm
geforce 330 gt
4gb ram

all on medium except unit size(ultra), everything is working good