F5F Stay Refreshed Software PC Gaming Yes, that's typical.

Yes, that's typical.

Yes, that's typical.

S
SworDam
Junior Member
17
06-22-2017, 04:49 AM
#1
Your setup is solid for gaming, but the performance you're seeing might be limited by your GPU's capabilities. The GTX 1080 Ti can handle Ultra Wide 1440p at 60-80fps with Ultra settings, but if you're consistently hitting lower frames, it could be due to driver issues, game settings, or other system factors. Check for updates and ensure drivers are current.
S
SworDam
06-22-2017, 04:49 AM #1

Your setup is solid for gaming, but the performance you're seeing might be limited by your GPU's capabilities. The GTX 1080 Ti can handle Ultra Wide 1440p at 60-80fps with Ultra settings, but if you're consistently hitting lower frames, it could be due to driver issues, game settings, or other system factors. Check for updates and ensure drivers are current.

Z
Zrothan
Junior Member
13
06-22-2017, 11:30 AM
#2
It seems typical. I'm also testing on a 1440p screen with a 1070 resolution, and even at ultra settings, I'm only reaching around 60 frames per second. In my opinion, PUBG isn't really optimized well. The ports people mention usually sound even worse.
Z
Zrothan
06-22-2017, 11:30 AM #2

It seems typical. I'm also testing on a 1440p screen with a 1070 resolution, and even at ultra settings, I'm only reaching around 60 frames per second. In my opinion, PUBG isn't really optimized well. The ports people mention usually sound even worse.

F
funniegame1
Member
192
06-22-2017, 05:57 PM
#3
It's typical for PUBG. For better performance, lower shadows and render distance since they impact FPS most. The benchmarks show 1080p results, but adjust for your resolution—many users with 1080i or 1440p report similar stats.
F
funniegame1
06-22-2017, 05:57 PM #3

It's typical for PUBG. For better performance, lower shadows and render distance since they impact FPS most. The benchmarks show 1080p results, but adjust for your resolution—many users with 1080i or 1440p report similar stats.

I
InfinityAnt
Member
53
06-22-2017, 06:18 PM
#4
The game isn't running efficiently. Consider boosting the CPU speed slightly to improve performance. Several players have shared comparable outcomes. Don't stress too much!
I
InfinityAnt
06-22-2017, 06:18 PM #4

The game isn't running efficiently. Consider boosting the CPU speed slightly to improve performance. Several players have shared comparable outcomes. Don't stress too much!

P
Pxnther
Junior Member
43
07-08-2017, 09:46 AM
#5
The performance looks solid at 1440p with around 60 frames per second. It seems like the game is running reasonably well despite common complaints about optimization.
P
Pxnther
07-08-2017, 09:46 AM #5

The performance looks solid at 1440p with around 60 frames per second. It seems like the game is running reasonably well despite common complaints about optimization.

O
owldragonaxe
Member
223
07-08-2017, 06:43 PM
#6
We can't really confirm these numbers since a new game shouldn't have those figures. If it did, Call of Duty would be newer, yet I manage 112 frames at full settings. However, it relies on an older engine. Similar to PUBG using Unreal 4, which is a stable and widely used platform for development. Benchmarks for Unreal 4 perform significantly better than the game itself. The main differences lie in the type of games and assets, along with optimization techniques. Many people claim the game isn't well optimized due to factors like rendering resolution, object size, hitbox accuracy, shadow quality, etc. These issues can be improved through adjustments or better implementation. Given the large team working on PUBG versus Fortnite's smaller group, it's hard to assign blame. I'm not trying to be naive, but sharing my thoughts on why this matters.
O
owldragonaxe
07-08-2017, 06:43 PM #6

We can't really confirm these numbers since a new game shouldn't have those figures. If it did, Call of Duty would be newer, yet I manage 112 frames at full settings. However, it relies on an older engine. Similar to PUBG using Unreal 4, which is a stable and widely used platform for development. Benchmarks for Unreal 4 perform significantly better than the game itself. The main differences lie in the type of games and assets, along with optimization techniques. Many people claim the game isn't well optimized due to factors like rendering resolution, object size, hitbox accuracy, shadow quality, etc. These issues can be improved through adjustments or better implementation. Given the large team working on PUBG versus Fortnite's smaller group, it's hard to assign blame. I'm not trying to be naive, but sharing my thoughts on why this matters.

M
116
07-08-2017, 07:59 PM
#7
These points highlight several valid considerations. If they’re truly achieving this, there’s room for enhancement. For context, I view a new game as one that’s recently released and likely more challenging due to increasing demands over time. Hardware requirements have consistently risen—today’s AAA needs more power than a similar title five years ago. A 1070 model aimed at 1440p gaming makes sense, especially since most titles are built for high performance, with Ultra serving as an optional upgrade for those with powerful systems. Of course, other games might prioritize different frame rates depending on the platform. This is my perspective.
M
mrwalrusman100
07-08-2017, 07:59 PM #7

These points highlight several valid considerations. If they’re truly achieving this, there’s room for enhancement. For context, I view a new game as one that’s recently released and likely more challenging due to increasing demands over time. Hardware requirements have consistently risen—today’s AAA needs more power than a similar title five years ago. A 1070 model aimed at 1440p gaming makes sense, especially since most titles are built for high performance, with Ultra serving as an optional upgrade for those with powerful systems. Of course, other games might prioritize different frame rates depending on the platform. This is my perspective.

K
216
07-08-2017, 10:23 PM
#8
In my opinion, there are two types of poorly optimized games: the "traditional" ones, where little effort was put in and the performance is poor, and the "stupid" ones, where a game looks like a simple childhood title but demands more than something like Witcher 3—like using a 16k resolution white wall. PUBG seems poorly optimized because it doesn’t look great and performs worse than similar titles. I’m not sure why, but I think they have room for improvement, and things will get better over time.
K
Kawaiichan1776
07-08-2017, 10:23 PM #8

In my opinion, there are two types of poorly optimized games: the "traditional" ones, where little effort was put in and the performance is poor, and the "stupid" ones, where a game looks like a simple childhood title but demands more than something like Witcher 3—like using a 16k resolution white wall. PUBG seems poorly optimized because it doesn’t look great and performs worse than similar titles. I’m not sure why, but I think they have room for improvement, and things will get better over time.

M
master_scope
Posting Freak
794
07-09-2017, 01:30 AM
#9
Sure, I understand. Since I haven't played it, I can't judge its visual style compared to others. I know that if two games appear alike yet require very different systems, it usually points to a problem.
M
master_scope
07-09-2017, 01:30 AM #9

Sure, I understand. Since I haven't played it, I can't judge its visual style compared to others. I know that if two games appear alike yet require very different systems, it usually points to a problem.