Dead Rising 3 PC Performance Thread

Does having more than 4GB RAM (which is what I have) help at all? I'm playing at 1280x720 and framerate is really shitty most of the times.
 
Does having more than 4GB RAM (which is what I have) help at all? I'm playing at 1280x720 and framerate is really shitty most of the times.

What are your other specs? I think the game puts more strain on VRAM (some users have reported it going up to 3.6gbs)
 
I'll quote myself from the pre-load thread as that seems to have moved on.

Big fat 0 from me, this game performs atrociously for what is suppose to be a port of an Xbox One game. I haven't even played the game yet, it just sits on the loading screen for 30+ minutes before it decides to crash the computer.

Specs if anyone really cares:

Operating System
Windows 8.1 Enterprise 64-bit
CPU
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 3.50GHz
Ivy Bridge 22nm Technology
RAM
8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 666MHz (9-9-9-20)
Motherboard
ASRock Z77 Extreme6 (CPUSocket)
Graphics
4095MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 (EVGA)
I have no clue why Speccy is reporting my RAM @ 666MHz, but its actually 1333.
 
I want to play this :(

I just find 30-50FPS unplayable. I've been spoiled by 60+. :( Hopefully patching and drivers updates will fix the problems.
 
Anyone getting massive stutter? I have an i7 2600k @ 4.5ghz and a GTX 780 and yet my game dips from 30 to like 10 constantly.
 
I understand D3DOverrider may still be the preferred method to force-enable "triple-buffering" in DirectX games, but I've personally retired it a couple of years ago in favor of setting "maximum pre-rendered frames" to "1" when enabling vsync through Nvidia Inspector. It produces the (same) desirable results, and it's one less "dll injection" to worry about. :-)

I'm with you there. I've got maximum pre-rendered frames set to 1 in the global settings of the Nvidia Control panel, and haven't used D3Doverrider since moving to Windows 8. :)
 
What does that maximum pre-rendered frames setting do?
Actually, are there any good global settings for nvidia I should use not just for this game but in general? Either the control panel or the inspector thing? I have a 760.

I have no idea what half of these settings do :(
 
What does that maximum pre-rendered frames setting do?
Actually, are there any good global settings for nvidia I should use not just for this game but in general? Either the control panel or the inspector thing? I have a 760.

I have no idea what half of these settings do :(

Maximum pre-rendered frames controls the number of frames buffered by the gpu. Setting it higher can provide a smoother experience as the GPU has more time to create frames, but it can create input lag. I set it to 1 to reduce the input lag as much as I can, but it's also the first setting I tweak if a game is acting weird.
 
Maximum pre-rendered frames controls the number of frames buffered by the gpu. Setting it higher can provide a smoother experience as the GPU has more time to create frames, but it can create input lag. I set it to 1 to reduce the input lag as much as I can, but it's also the first setting I tweak if a game is acting weird.

Not the GPU, the CPU. It's the number of frames the CPU is allowed to prepare ahead of the GPU. The CPU always has to prepare the frame before it is handed off to the GPU.

Reducing it to one does decrease input lag, but it can also cause your frame times to be more erratic. This however depends on the game, whether you're GPU or CPU limited, and other factors.

Keep in mind this is separate from double-buffered Vsync or triple-buffered Vsync, which are GPU related. This does not replace D3DOverrider's function.
 
Not the GPU, the CPU. It's the number of frames the CPU is allowed to prepare ahead of the GPU. The CPU always has to prepare the frame before it is handed off to the GPU.

Reducing it to one does decrease input lag, but it can also cause your frame times to be more erratic. This however depends on the game, whether you're GPU or CPU limited, and other factors.

Keep in mind this is separate from double-buffered Vsync or triple-buffered Vsync, which are GPU related. This does not replace D3DOverrider's function.

And that's why I usually keep my trap shut when people asks. Thanks for clarifying Arulan. :) I'm aware that it doesn't replace triple buffering though, but I haven't really needed it, as almost no games drop from 60 to 30 anymore, at least not according to Afterburner.
 
Thanks to the both of you!
Are there any settings in the nvidia investigator or control panel that should be changed from default that work better for the majority of the time?
 
Not the GPU, the CPU. It's the number of frames the CPU is allowed to prepare ahead of the GPU. The CPU always has to prepare the frame before it is handed off to the GPU.

Reducing it to one does decrease input lag, but it can also cause your frame times to be more erratic. This however depends on the game, whether you're GPU or CPU limited, and other factors.

Keep in mind this is separate from double-buffered Vsync or triple-buffered Vsync, which are GPU related. This does not replace D3DOverrider's function.

I do not wish to get into an argument here, but tweaking "maximum pre-rendered frames" in conjunction with enabling vsync through Nvidia Inspector does produce results equivalent to "triple-buffering" in both my gaming rigs. You see, someone recommended it to me a couple of years ago over at the GeForce forums, and while I don't pretend to know why/how it works, it just does, and I haven't had to use D3DOverrider ever since. Anyway, I just wanted to spread the word in case it ends up helping someone else as it sure helped me.:-)
 
Used MSI Afterburner to check statistics during gameplay.
Very strange. GPU doesn't get used over 50%, all my CPU cores don't get used over 60% (only one gets stressed to 60%, rest all are in 20s or 30s), RAM usage is 5 GB out of 8 GB, VRAM is used around 800 MB out of 1 GB. What gives? Is the game not even utilizing the hardware?
Witcher 2 uses the GPU to almost 90%.
 
Thanks to the both of you!
Are there any settings in the nvidia investigator or control panel that should be changed from default that work better for the majority of the time?

I like to set the following in my Global Settings in the NV control panel:

Anisotropic filtering: 16x
Maximum pre-rendered frames: 1
Power management mode: Prefer maximum performance
Texture filtering - Negative LOD bias: Clamp
Texture filtering - Quality: High quality
Vertical sync: On

I find that these work well for most games, but I always look at these settings first if I'm having trouble.
 
Used MSI Afterburner to check statistics during gameplay.
Very strange. GPU doesn't get used over 50%, all my CPU cores don't get used over 60% (only one gets stressed to 60%, rest all are in 20s or 30s), RAM usage is 5 GB out of 8 GB, VRAM is used around 800 MB out of 1 GB. What gives? Is the game not even utilizing the hardware?
Witcher 2 uses the GPU to almost 90%.

They really need to fix this fast can't believe they let it release in this fashion I even heard that the xbox one version got a 13 gb patch.

Looks like game testing is a concept the devs are unfamiliar with.
 
8 hours in.

GTX 680, i7 3770K, 8GB RAM. 30 FPS throughout, drops when launching the game, and then stays stable. Cutscenes lead to the heaviest drops surprisingly still, and it runs hot as hell on my machine. 1080p, everything High except Depth of Field/Motion Blur turned off.

The game is so much fun, but it sure ain't a looker. Weird texture filtering issues, and pop-in are problematic, but god damn if I'm not running in a Shark head and skirt!
 
Thanks for all the help, I will try those settings.

Also, in regards to DR3, I am having pretty great performance. Solid 30 (Haven't unlocked anything). Even cutscenes look fine I guess? No crashes either. I left all the settings alone in game except I turned off motion blur so whatever is default is is what I am using.

i7 2600k
gtx760
8 or 16 gigs ram I don't remember

I did preemptively roll back my driver like suggested because I didn't wanna deal with crashes. But Things are working great and I am pleased, game is awesome.
 
http://steamcommunity.com/app/265550/discussions/0/613935404078103027/
UPDATE #3 (weekend edition)
Hello Dead Rising fans,

First of all, on behalf of the team, I'd like to thank you for your patience on the matter while the dev team continues to work on a possible solution.

There appears to be some confusion with regards to the nature of the crash, so I'd like to take this opportunity to provide some clarity on all currently reported issues and potential workarounds.

There are generally three types of crash incidents reported, but they're all caused for different reasons and all are mutually exclusive to each other.

1. Desktop Nvidia users with discrete graphics cards
The dev team is aware of reports of random crashes that occur in middle of active gameplay. It can happen 5 minutes in or 2~3 hours later. It's seemingly random but fairly consistent for those users affected by it.

For those experiencing random crashes, many users have reported that rolling back to GeForce 335.23 WHQL driver[www.geforce.com] resolved the problem, or at least reduced frequency of the crash. While the dev team continues to look into fixing this issue, this may be a viable workaround for the time being. For those who cannot roll back to 335.23, some users have had success by turning off the “Shader Cache” option in the Nvidia Control Panel​
.

2. Laptop users with NVIDIA Optimus switchable graphics
While laptop graphics fall outside of the minimum spec requirements and aren’t officially supported, we understand many users still choose to play DR3 on laptop systems.

There are currently two unique issues that prevents NVIDIA Optimus systems from running DR3.

The game crashes or freezes right after the Capcom and CV logo. The game either enters the “Dead Rising 3 is Not Responding…” state and stays stuck indefinitely, or crashes to desktop immediately. Windows error log seems to indicate deadrising3.exe crash is related to Nvidia’s Dynamic Link Library known as nvwgf2umx.dll – a DLL that controls a number of display functionalities such as gamma, power profile, multi-monitor modes, and so on.

At this time, there’s no permanent user-side fix and it’s something the dev team needs to look into.

Workaround: While not practical, a known a workaround is to connect your laptop to a second monitor or a television set via external video output. This essentially bypasses the Intel integrated graphics chip and allows the system to talk directly to the Nvidia chip at a hardware level instead of passing through the on-chip solution. It essentially operates as if Optimus doesn’t exist at all, allowing the display to hook directly to the NVIDIA GPU. Note: you will also want to assign “High-performance NVIDIA processor” to Dead Rising 3 in the Nvidia Control Panel --> Manage 3D Settings menu. This workaround should circumvent the crash/hang at the initial start-up while using the Nvidia chip.

Note for Nvidia Optimus users with Windows 8.1 64 bit…there’s also a known issue with the new SecureBoot feature that was introduced via Windows 8.1 update. This bug is currently preventing Nvidia graphics from reliably establishing connection to device enumeration APIs. Due to this issue, some games (including DR3) defaults to “Integrated graphics” even if you manually assign “High-performance NVIDIA processor” in the Nvidia control panel. A temporary workaround is to disable SecureBoot in the PC’s system BIOS menu. This should at least allow the game to operate using the Nvidia chip. Note, however, that this solution doesn’t mitigate the 2a crash issue. A true, temporary workaround is to bypass integrated chip by connecting to a second external monitor.​

3. “Crash-on-Boot” issue

The symptom: game crashes almost instantly upon launching the application. We apologize for the inconvenience this has caused as it was clearly a human error on our part due to working with a number of different build versions.

For clarity’s sake, this issue affected a small subset of users who redeemed a Steam key that was purchased outside of Valve’s Steam store, from a boxed retail copy, or obtained via other means. Unfortunately, some of these keys were associated to an older build branch which unfortunately had missing files that the game depended on.

Number of users who had experienced the ‘crash-on-boot’ issue (we simply looked at the number of redeemed keys that were tied to this incomplete build branch) at the time was roughly 2.38% of the entire user base before we updated the build tree with the missing files. The missing files became available the same day via automatic update that downloaded approximately 1.4GB worth of files.

To clarify, not all users will be prompted to download this 1.4GB ‘missing file update’ since most already have them on their PC.​


Finally, thank you for your patience on the matter, and we’ll be sure to update you as soon as we have more information or a solution in place.

-wbacon
lets see how long it takes them to fix Optimus isssue
 
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-vs-dead-rising-3-pc

Conclusion:

PC Dead Rising 3: the Digital Foundry verdict

There isn't a whole lot known about Dead Rising 3's Forge Engine but it certainly doesn't seem to be utilising PC hardware as efficiently as it should be. With rendering resolution taking the biggest toll on performance, even when using a high-end GPU it's a wonder Capcom Vancouver was able to pull this game off on Xbox One at all when PC hardware that's so much more powerful can't sustain 1080p60. We can't help but wonder whether this explains the poor performance experienced in many of the game's early Xbox One demonstrations.

It's disappointing that this new port was unable to solve many of the original version's problems. PC ports that fail to perform well are often labeled as unoptimised when, in reality, this often simply means that the developer has chosen to include high-end features that aren't always beneficial to average users but require very powerful hardware. Where Dead Rising 3 falters is in failing to offer additional high-end PC features while suffering from relatively poor performance. The fact that the highest possible settings only match the original console release despite this performance is very disappointing.

Is Dead Rising 3 unoptimised then? When you combine poor performance with limited PC features and issues such as awful mouse acceleration, it starts to feel that way, and our issues with the game repeatedly crashing on multiple machines certainly suggest that the title would have benefitted from more stringent QA. While it has the potential to offer an experience superior to the Xbox One version, the caveats in reaching that goal are numerous. If you have the hardware muscle or don't mind limiting yourself to 30fps, you can still enjoy a good experience on a mid-range enthusiast gaming PC, but those expecting to power through this at a constant 60fps might want to check their expectations at the door.
 
Alright, I think I have a theory on the performance shit.

My rig (before it oddly died just after running this game once at lunch) was running a 290X. This game ran gorgeously smooth (stock, did not unlock FPS) but was pumping my card to 80C. AMD cards run hotter than nVidia, so that temp is not unheard of. Played 30 minutes, went back to work.

Came home - card was dead. Nope, game hadn't been running all day or anything. Just no display. Swapped out to a 770 a friend let me borrow. Guess what? SHIT PERFORMANCE ALL OVER THE PLACE.

I used DDU before installing the nVidia card.

Here's the kicker - the laptop I have with an 760m can run it at "full" (1080p) res, with the only tweak being AA and blur off. It runs at 30 no drops. I think the game prefers AMD systems and more integrated systems - I bet if anyone has an AMD APU system, it'll run fine.
 
Alright, I think I have a theory on the performance shit.

My rig (before it oddly died just after running this game once at lunch) was running a 290X. This game ran gorgeously smooth (stock, did not unlock FPS) but was pumping my card to 80C. AMD cards run hotter than nVidia, so that temp is not unheard of. Played 30 minutes, went back to work.

Came home - card was dead. Nope, game hadn't been running all day or anything. Just no display. Swapped out to a 770 a friend let me borrow. Guess what? SHIT PERFORMANCE ALL OVER THE PLACE.

I used DDU before installing the nVidia card.

Here's the kicker - the laptop I have with an 760m can run it at "full" (1080p) res, with the only tweak being AA and blur off. It runs at 30 no drops. I think the game prefers AMD systems and more integrated systems - I bet if anyone has an AMD APU system, it'll run fine.

I have an AMD based system, its old, but exceeds their minimum requirements and cant play game at 1280x720, all low settings at 30 fps. FPS constantly drops to teens and only when I am staring at a wall, it runs at 30 fps.

System specs:

AMD Phenom II 1055T OCed to 3.4 GHZ, MSI Cyclone 6850 PE/OC 1 GB DDR5, Corsair 8 GB 1600 Mhz.

I exceed the minimum specs except GPU part, but people with 7770 have run the game way better, and devs clearly said that if you have minimum specs, you can run at all low settings at 30 fps. Also, my GPU usage never exceeds 50% during gameplay, so obviously my GPU is not restricting the performance. No idea how the game passed QA.
I think I will game on my PS4 in the future and forget there are any PC games. No point wasting my time tweaking settings and measuring performance etc. Not worth the time and hassle.
 
I'm really disappointed in this release - I haven't played anything this unstable in a long time and my Steam list is full of betas and early access stuff.

The performance is fine on my Alienware i7-4900MQ / 16 GB / Nvidia GTX 780M but the random crashes are insufferable, especially in a game with checkpoints and no manual save.

If I stay on foot, it appears to crash somewhere within the first half hour, if I get into a vehicle, it crashes within minutes. I turned off the shader cache and that doesn't seem to make a difference - rolling back my gfx driver is unacceptable so I'll be waiting for a patch.

There's nothing exotic about my rig and it runs things like Watch Dogs and Arma 3 on ultra without a hitch.
 
While laptop graphics fall outside of the minimum spec requirements and aren’t officially supported, we understand many users still choose to play DR3 on laptop systems.


Wow, they are so out of touch. There are laptop GPUs that are on par if not better than many mid-high end desktop solutions currently on the market. I've gamed solely on my laptop for the past couple of months and I have never encountered a problem like this. It just goes to show how much they cared for a PC port with all these BS problems.

sUTPSAM.png
 
How is rolling back your drivers 'unacceptable?' It is the one fix that is verified to work (crashed twice in an hour, rolled back drivers- played 7 hours crash free) and you refuse to do it. But hey keep complaining I guess.
 
I have an AMD based system, its old, but exceeds their minimum requirements and cant play game at 1280x720, all low settings at 30 fps. FPS constantly drops to teens and only when I am staring at a wall, it runs at 30 fps.

System specs:

AMD Phenom II 1055T OCed to 3.4 GHZ, MSI Cyclone 6850 PE/OC 1 GB DDR5, Corsair 8 GB 1600 Mhz.

I exceed the minimum specs except GPU part, but people with 7770 have run the game way better, and devs clearly said that if you have minimum specs, you can run at all low settings at 30 fps. Also, my GPU usage never exceeds 50% during gameplay, so obviously my GPU is not restricting the performance. No idea how the game passed QA.
I think I will game on my PS4 in the future and forget there are any PC games. No point wasting my time tweaking settings and measuring performance etc. Not worth the time and hassle.


Hey man, I'm not defending the game - I know it's likely coincidence that my 290X died after the first time I ran it, but the fact that it chugs on my (much newer) desktop system with a 770GTX but runs fine on a year old gaming laptop with a 760m blows my mind.

Sorry you can't get it to run. I hope modders sort this shit out - it's a pretty alright game but fucking Capcom, what the hell happened?
 
I still can't even load the damn game. Luckily I already played it on Xbone and this was a review copy, but if I had paid I wouldn't be all too happy right now.
 
How is rolling back your drivers 'unacceptable?' It is the one fix that is verified to work (crashed twice in an hour, rolled back drivers- played 7 hours crash free) and you refuse to do it. But hey keep complaining I guess.

Because I do more on my laptop then just the one game and I need the drivers to function optimally? Sorry if you take umbrage that I expect AAA games to run on their recommended specs after purchase.
 
I don't know what I changed but I now have gameplay running at 60fps and cutscenes that are watchable and don't crash.

Think I turned off surface dispersion or whatever it's called and AA down to FXAA. Still crashing after 30 mins though, will try driver downgrade next. What's the recommended version?
 
Well great, after 9h of fun (whilst with horrible performance) now the game also crashes for my every ten minutes on my AMD card. Capcom pls, I really enjoy it but it's not playble like this...
 
System specs:

AMD Phenom II 1055T OCed to 3.4 GHZ, MSI Cyclone 6850 PE/OC 1 GB DDR5, Corsair 8 GB 1600 Mhz.

I exceed the minimum specs except GPU part, but people with 7770 have run the game way better, and devs clearly said that if you have minimum specs, you can run at all low settings at 30 fps. Also, my GPU usage never exceeds 50% during gameplay, so obviously my GPU is not restricting the performance.

My 2gb 660Ti reports ~1100mb of VRAM use with everything on low (including 720p rendering). I noticed that going from 720p to 1080p can consume over 200mb of VRAM and the difference between min and max LoD distance will use a further 200mb. That number is quick to add up as you increase texture resolution. If you run out of VRAM then your GPU will stall and could be your reason for only seeing 50% usage.

For what it's worth, shadows seem to be the big performance tanker on my system. During a particular cutscene, the difference between high and low is ~35fps vs. ~80fps when rendering at 720p with everything else maxed out. At 1080p, it's the difference between 20fps and 50fps.

Edit: I've also noticed that the game will commit up to 2.4gb of VRAM when having textures on high. That's more than my card has onboard and causes thrashing. MSI Afterburner only reports 1.7 of those gigabytes so don't assume it's an entirely accurate number.
 
LOL people act like this is the only console port that ever had issues. Seriously, the indignation over a console port in here is just hilarious. It's a port of an open world console game that ran like shit on the console, of course it's going to run like ass on PC. I love how each new console port that has issues is dubbed 'WORST PORT EVER' until the next one comes out and so on and so forth. Seriously people, this is a first gen xbox one port of an open world game that had performance issues to begin with from a series that is known to have performance issues and poor PC ports from the beginning. Maybe you should think about WHY they capped it at 30 fps instead of circumventing it and then banging your head against the wall in frustration for days when it doesn't do what you want it to do. This is not the first or last console port that is capped at 30 fps and if you want to try and get around that then good luck, but maybe not act like a baby when it doesn't work out for you?

I paid full money for this game

Are you telling my specs are not good enough?

i5 4.5Ghz
7950 OC (7970 specs)
16GB ram
SSD

????

Fucking smack yourself over your head, who the fuck are you telling customers not to act angry when they've wasted hard earned cash.

Please karma punish this clown, please
 
It's a shame really, this had the potential to be a great port and could really show what a powerful pc is capable of against current gen consoles. Been playing on and off since Friday and it's crashed at least 5 times, i hope a patch is in the works...
 
[/B][/I]

Wow, they are so out of touch. There are laptop GPUs that are on par if not better than many mid-high end desktop solutions currently on the market. I've gamed solely on my laptop for the past couple of months and I have never encountered a problem like this. It just goes to show how much they cared for a PC port with all these BS problems.

sUTPSAM.png

Yeah, I can't believe they went there. At a minimum there are a lot of laptop GPUs which destroy the "minimum" spec, but I guess they aren't supported because reasons.
 
I don't get it. By all right game should run like shit on my machine, but it runs just fine. I'm on a 7750 4GB, 8 gigs of RAM and an old i5. It should run badly, but I get a solid 30 at 1080p, and can even get close to 60 if I tone it down to 720.

I don't get how you guys with better PC's then mine are having issues. Truly a mess of a port.
 
Wow, they are so out of touch. There are laptop GPUs that are on par if not better than many mid-high end desktop solutions currently on the market. I've gamed solely on my laptop for the past couple of months and I have never encountered a problem like this. It just goes to show how much they cared for a PC port with all these BS problems.

Yeah that was a really weird thing to say.

there is a small solution for laptop users
you have to hook up the laptop to an external screen or TV
maybe it work

I always play games with my laptop hooked up to an external monitor and it's been crashing and hanging the whole time.
 
I do not wish to get into an argument here, but tweaking "maximum pre-rendered frames" in conjunction with enabling vsync through Nvidia Inspector does produce results equivalent to "triple-buffering" in both my gaming rigs. You see, someone recommended it to me a couple of years ago over at the GeForce forums, and while I don't pretend to know why/how it works, it just does, and I haven't had to use D3DOverrider ever since. Anyway, I just wanted to spread the word in case it ends up helping someone else as it sure helped me.:-)

It's unrelated to GPU triple-buffering. Keep in mind that when using double-buffered Vsync, your fps count (FRAPS for example) doesn't necessarily show when you step down (60 to 30 to 20, etc.). Double-buffered Vsync does indeed do this, but you have to look at it from the frame times perspective, not frames per second. If an individual frame takes more than 16.66ms to render, it'll skip to 33.3ms but your total frames per that one second (which is an average) may not show a change unless you've stayed above 16.66ms to render for a period of time (long enough to alter the average, or if you stay >16.66ms and <33.3ms for the entire "second" it'll display 30fps). This means that your FPS (with double-buffered Vsync) can show numbers that aren't 60, 30, 20, etc. because it's an average.
 
Bear in mind that the game runs at 720p/30 on Xbox One. To get 1080p/30 you need a 2.25x faster GPU at the same settings. The 7970 is 'only' 3x faster.

That's not taking into account console optimization. The 2-3x figure is only true if they make good use of Mantle
 
Just tried unlocking the frame rate to 60. Same settings as before (all max but with FXAA) and this is what fraps says I got

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
78152, 1408003, 38, 61, 55.506

Played the first DLC episode from just after the first cutscene (started benchmark when it ended) up to a little after taking over the Taxi station and driving to Almuda. Bit of zombie horde driving, explosions and fire effects along with one cutscene which I think is where the min frame rate came from as the actual game itself was very smooth.

GTX780, i5-4670K@3.4GHz, 16GB ram.
 
Gtx 770 + fx 8350 + 8 gb ram, it runs without drops at 1080p/30fps with everything maxed out, when i tried to unlock the framerate it fluctuated in the 35/55 range
 
Top Bottom