1. #1

    Low fps in Diablo 3

    Greetings,

    I've got a slight problem playing Diablo 3. I'm running with Amd 6-core FX 3,5 ghz buldozer proc, 2gb radeon 7700 and 4 gb ram. My gf is running with amd quad fx 3,6 ghz, 6 gb ram and geforce 550 TI 1 gb. However the difference between our fps is really drastic. She has lik 60-90 (depending on fight intensity) while I'm getting 18-35. Are these 2 ram difference enough to get me so much lower fps? We are both running windows 7. I'd be really thankful for some suggestion to help my problem.

  2. #2
    I am Murloc! Fuzzykins's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    5,222
    My first instinct was to blame the difference in graphics cards, but the 7700 competes surprisingly well with the 550ti. Specificially what processors are you running? A difference in architecture may be to blame, but I doubt a bulldozer would really be a bottleneck for D3; it doesn't really take that much to run.

    It could be a RAM issue, but that's pretty easy to deduce. Run Diablo 3, pop open your task manager, and look at your memory usage. If something is wrong, you want it to be your RAM, simply because it's the easiest possible fix. Either eliminate background programs or install more RAM. (Probably a good idea anyway, tbh.)

    The monitor resolution is also relevant... If her monitor is a lower resolution than yours, hers takes less to drive.

    Lastly, as a formality, just check to make sure all of your drivers are up to date.

  3. #3
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    17,222
    Yeah, I feel like this is more an actual problem than a lack of hardware. D3 just isn't demanding most of the time.
    Might be worthwhile to check temperatures as well.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  4. #4
    We are running similiar model of processors, just the difference is that her was made quad and mine is 6-cores (FX-type). Her resolution is lower then mine (I run with 1920-x1080, she runs with 1600x900), however when I tried chaning to lower everything loses sharpness and becomes low-res. I have also checked temperatures and according to speccy nothing is off-charts.

    As for the ram it uses 1,3 gb which is quite a lot if you sum up win7 as well.

  5. #5
    Immortal Stormspark's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Columbus OH
    Posts
    7,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Vasilisa View Post
    We are running similiar model of processors, just the difference is that her was made quad and mine is 6-cores (FX-type). Her resolution is lower then mine (I run with 1920-x1080, she runs with 1600x900), however when I tried chaning to lower everything loses sharpness and becomes low-res. I have also checked temperatures and according to speccy nothing is off-charts.

    As for the ram it uses 1,3 gb which is quite a lot if you sum up win7 as well.
    Diablo 3 can't use 4 cores. It can only use a maximum of 2. So the 4/6 core difference is completely meaningless.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Vasilisa View Post
    We are running similiar model of processors, just the difference is that her was made quad and mine is 6-cores (FX-type). Her resolution is lower then mine (I run with 1920-x1080, she runs with 1600x900), however when I tried changing to lower everything loses sharpness and becomes low-res. I have also checked temperatures and according to speccy nothing is off-charts.

    As for the ram it uses 1,3 gb which is quite a lot if you sum up win7 as well.
    If you're getting close to 4GB in usage, there's a good chance swapping happens. Basically the OS trying to use the HDD as extra RAM, which is terribly slow compared to real RAM.

    1920*1080 has 44% more pixels than 1600*900, so that's also a factor, but definitely not the whole reason.

    The blurriness would be because you're trying to stretch drawn pixels across multiple screen pixels, making some show half of multiple different pixels.

  7. #7
    I am Murloc! Fuzzykins's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    5,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Asmekiel View Post
    If you're getting close to 4GB in usage, there's a good chance swapping happens. Basically the OS trying to use the HDD as extra RAM, which is terribly slow compared to real RAM.

    1920*1080 has 44% more pixels than 1600*900, so that's also a factor, but definitely not the whole reason.

    The blurriness would be because you're trying to stretch drawn pixels across multiple screen pixels, making some show half of multiple different pixels.
    Actually, the resolution difference really is the whole reason. I bet if you took your rig and set it up on her screen, you'd get good framerate. Go on now. Try it.

  8. #8
    I posted this article b4 in another thread but seems to be worth digging up again

  9. #9
    I am Murloc! Fuzzykins's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    South Korea
    Posts
    5,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Denpepe View Post
    I posted this article b4 in another thread but seems to be worth digging up again
    That was a surprisingly relevant graph... Well done.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •