Laptop: 3 gigs ram, core2duo 2.00 ghz, some old nvidia mobile card.

FPS: as high as in the 40s with nothing around, typically in the teens.

Desktop: 2 gigs ram, core2duo 2.4 ghz, 8800gts

FPS: consistently in the 20s

Desktop: 3 gigs ram, core2duo 2.88ghz, gtx260, lowest resolution played at of all 3.

FPS:  From teens to 20s. 

All tests were done at low settings with medium textures and default sampling on windows xp sp3.  No WvW, noticeable decrease in performance to low teens whenever several other players (under 10 but more than 2 or 3) were on the screen at the same time.

I've got some new hardware on the way for computer 3, but it's really quite screwed up that the laptop runs it comprably to the third desktop. 

It occurs to me that something about the game is asking things of my graphics card that my processor cannot accomodate, and perhaps if the game were fooled into thinking I had an 8800 it would run best of the 3.  I had to do something similar with Diablo 3 to maximize my fps, by finding a d3prefs config file.  I wonder if something similar exists for GW2, anyone know?

My basic specs:

AMD Phenom II x6 @ 3.83 Ghz.

8GB DDR 1500

Galaxy GTX 570 1.28 Gb video card

Windows 7 x64

I had some frame rate issues, for the first time, during the Saturday stress test. When patching for today, I got the message that my video driver may cause issues, so I decided to try the new NVidia drivers that are still in development, as they were rumored to include tweaks for GW2.

Settings were all maxed, except for Shadows, which were High. Post Processing OFF, because I think it looks better. Sampling set to default.

Contrary to my usual gaming experience, turning VSync on actually boosted performance by 3 FPS, so I left it on.

Frame rates were often close to or at 60FPS. Average FPS running around was usually 49 FPS+ Even with a DE zerge, FPS never dropped below 35 FPS. Game has never looked better and I was very happy with the frame rate.

I do think that the developers drivers do include at least some of the GW2 driver tweaks/fixes. Normally, using the -umbra gpu command line switch would knock my FPS down to arrounf 20. Today, no hit at all and using this got rid of the disappearing terrain/objects issue caused by the software occlusion "fix".

They had said that the hardware occlusion was bottlenecked by a bug that would have to be fixed at the driver level. It seems these NVidia drivers do so. v.305.67 are the drivers I used today. A google search should lead to the NVidea developer's site DL, but rumors are that there will be an official beta release in time for GW2 headstrt, for those who dn't want to mess with Alpha drivers.

BTW, a friend playing on a laptop saw a 50%+ increase in FPS today vs. previous tests, no special driver, so there are optimizations that are helping a lot of people already included in this latest stress test build.

Edit: Here are the links to the NVidia driver referenced above. No reported issues, but they are alpha, so most people may want to wait for the beta release:

Download for Windows XP (32-bit)
Download for Windows XP (64-bit)
Download for Windows 7 and Vista (32-bit)
Download for Windows 7 and Vista (64-bit)

I dont have a super good system but I can run all the game that have come out lately at mid to max settings.

AMD AM2 Duo core running 3.0 ghr

3 Gigs corsair ram

Asus 570 mobo

Nvidia 440 GTS

700 watt diablo tect power

Windows 7 Home Premium

I get 60 FPS in almost all areas except if there like 80 players there then drops to 35 to 40 in big boss fights it drops to like 20 maybe.

I do not OC any of my stuff even tho I can OC my CPU to 3.8 but my cooling cant handle it would need better cooling. But I run SWTOR at max setting even in Flash points I get 45 fps and in PvP I get 35 to 40. The only game I have played lately the bogged my pc down was BF3 and I can still run it in medium settings fine.

Oh in GW2 I run all at medium but can run it at max at 45 FPS in all zones minus 10 fps with lots of other players.

I'm curious. When people talk about fps, where is it you are checking it location wise? The reason I'm asking is because no matter where you are, it is always so variable that I believe that it's not really worth mentioning numbers to other people. For example, I could be standing on a tree stump, not stepping off of it or anything, and get 60 fps. But mereley rotating 180 could drop it down to 45 fps. 

Anyway, to the OP I have no suggestions for little tweaks to the processor or the card other that overclocking. If your machine is running pretty poopy anyway, OC won't do that much anyway.  

I love the game and stand by it in every way, but the "fps" is all over the place in most cases so don't despair, I'm sure they will have it worked out before launch.

AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 980 Processor 3.7 Ghz

8GB Ram

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670

1920x1080

VelociRaptor 1000rpm Hard Drive

Edit: sp

Originally posted by Aerowyn
you dont need much to run this game but if you look at your cpu and gpu and they were released over 5 years ago AND at the time of release they weren't top of the line stuff I wouldn't expect much.. this is a next gen type game but even so really doesnt' need a whole lot to run.. i could put together a $500 system that could max this game out.

Listen, I don't mind a little hyperbole, but no you couldn't.  I spent 300 at newegg on the most cost efficient i5, mobo, and 8 gigs of ram, and likely will still not be able to max the game out.  That's with me providing the HDD, keeping my current card, case, and PSU. 

Further, many games with much more intense physics and higher end graphics run twice as well on my system as GW2.  People have a double standard when it comes to MMOs.  I do not.  I expect performance to be appropriate to the graphics quality.

Originally posted by Amjoco

I'm curious. When people talk about fps, where is it you are checking it location wise? The reason I'm asking is because no matter where you are, it is always so variable that I believe that it's not really worth mentioning numbers to other people. For example, I could be standing on a tree stump, not stepping off of it or anything, and get 60 fps. But mereley rotating 180 could drop it down to 45 fps. 

Anyway, to the OP I have no suggestions for little tweaks to the processor or the card other that overclocking. If your machine is running pretty poopy anyway, OC won't do that much anyway.  

I love the game and stand by it in every way, but the "fps" is all over the place in most cases so don't despair, I'm sure they will have it worked out before launch.

AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 980 Processor 3.7 Ghz

8GB Ram

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670

1920x1080

VelociRaptor 1000rpm Hard Drive

Edit: sp

My fps is pretty consistent, with the exception of the laptop.  And I think it's actually quite clear that they won't have 'issues' worked out by release.  I think their solution, as is the case with many people who have responded, is to upgrade.  Even though many with similar specs have reported good fps.

Originally posted by Amjoco

I'm curious. When people talk about fps, where is it you are checking it location wise? The reason I'm asking is because no matter where you are, it is always so variable that I believe that it's not really worth mentioning numbers to other people. For example, I could be standing on a tree stump, not stepping off of it or anything, and get 60 fps. But mereley rotating 180 could drop it down to 45 fps. 

Anyway, to the OP I have no suggestions for little tweaks to the processor or the card other that overclocking. If your machine is running pretty poopy anyway, OC won't do that much anyway.  

I love the game and stand by it in every way, but the "fps" is all over the place in most cases so don't despair, I'm sure they will have it worked out before launch.

AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 980 Processor 3.7 Ghz

8GB Ram

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670

1920x1080

VelociRaptor 1000rpm Hard Drive

Edit: sp

Yeah I guess you are right by saying with movement in that case I get about the same as you when moving about 45 to 50 fps. But its just a way to explain not every one has the same problems it is really based on the pc it self with transfer rates from video to cpu and ram to cpu that really make a differance then. But I will not explain that I dont want to be writing all night.

I have...

Intel Core i7 CPU, 2.8GHz 8 cores

6GB RAM

ATI Radeon HD 5800 series with abou 3.8GB VRAM

Runs fine on my system.

Originally posted by adam_nox

Originally posted by Aerowyn
you dont need much to run this game but if you look at your cpu and gpu and they were released over 5 years ago AND at the time of release they weren't top of the line stuff I wouldn't expect much.. this is a next gen type game but even so really doesnt' need a whole lot to run.. i could put together a $500 system that could max this game out.

Listen, I don't mind a little hyperbole, but no you couldn't.  I spent 300 at newegg on the most cost efficient i5, mobo, and 8 gigs of ram, and likely will still not be able to max the game out.  That's with me providing the HDD, keeping my current card, case, and PSU. 

Further, many games with much more intense physics and higher end graphics run twice as well on my system as GW2.  People have a double standard when it comes to MMOs.  I do not.  I expect performance to be appropriate to the graphics quality.

Funny as i have a new computer with specs similar to your i5 and  I was able to run my tests at max all four of the recent stress tests. The only time i've ever had lag was when avast was running and the only time i've had drops in framerate was today before their first patch (client autorestarts and fastpatching is awesome btw) when rain hit the areas i was exploring.

hyperbole is when there's an absense of fact, since it's working on my machine then apparently it's not hyperbole. in this case the only hyperbole would your assessment of the games current electronic load requirements. smh

They promised they would make this game for low end rigs, and once again they delivered.

Originally posted by adam_nox

Originally posted by Aerowyn
you dont need much to run this game but if you look at your cpu and gpu and they were released over 5 years ago AND at the time of release they weren't top of the line stuff I wouldn't expect much.. this is a next gen type game but even so really doesnt' need a whole lot to run.. i could put together a $500 system that could max this game out.

Listen, I don't mind a little hyperbole, but no you couldn't.  I spent 300 at newegg on the most cost efficient i5, mobo, and 8 gigs of ram, and likely will still not be able to max the game out.  That's with me providing the HDD, keeping my current card, case, and PSU. 

Further, many games with much more intense physics and higher end graphics run twice as well on my system as GW2.  People have a double standard when it comes to MMOs.  I do not.  I expect performance to be appropriate to the graphics quality.

Not trying to bash here but I did just build 3 comps that where just towers and fully lodded minus sound card and where around that price and all where tested with Crysis 2, GW2, and BF3 all 3 ran really well and I did one for $459 next one was $490 and the last was $498 but mostly it depends do you want a good system or a god system I can do a god system for around $1300 that is going to run circles around most pc's listed here on this site. Cause oyu can spend all the money you want but if you dont look at alot of stuff and only buy it because its name or price dont not make it good but might have some major flaws like take bus speed on the mobo or transfer rate even ram speed can make a game run like crap on top end systems. Thats why I laugh when people dont really pay attiontion to detail and only buy this or that based on name or value.

Originally posted by Creslin321

I have...

Intel Core i7 CPU, 2.8GHz 8 cores

6GB RAM

ATI Radeon HD 5800 series with abou 3.8GB VRAM

 

Runs fine on my system.

Thank you, it runs fine on mine too. Are you just as tired as i am of these folks coming in here saying it's because the game is messed up that their computers aren't running it properly?

When i did the first stress test last week, I found that i had many an incompatible item running that caused problems. I forgot i had not used my app called gamebooster, and i had avast on which is clearly warned against in the launcher. That's all i needed to disable to get this game running like clockwork. It's the most stable build of any beta I've ever played, and i've played quite a few.

Originally posted by Creslin321

I have...

Intel Core i7 CPU, 2.8GHz 8 cores

6GB RAM

ATI Radeon HD 5800 series with abou 3.8GB VRAM

 

Runs fine on my system.

What HD 5800 do you have that has that much VRAM O_O

I have a HD 5850 and it only has 1GB VRAM.

Aside from that I have a Intel Core i7 930 2.8 GHz, 6GB DD3 RAM :) So pretty much the same system.

Desktop:

CPU: AMD 8150 8 core 3.8

GPU: GTX 580 Superoverclocked 4 gigs of V ram

12 Gigs of ram duel channel

Sabertooth M Board

Fiber optic cables

adverage of 120 FPS on max

Laptop:

MSI GT70-ONC

Intel Core i7 turbo to 3.2

16 gigs of duel channel ram

Raid 0 SSD 128

GTX 670m Nvidia video

Average Frames : 50-80

Max settings.

Game looks fantastic and runs even better no complaints here.

Originally posted by nolic1

Originally posted by adam_nox

Originally posted by Aerowyn
you dont need much to run this game but if you look at your cpu and gpu and they were released over 5 years ago AND at the time of release they weren't top of the line stuff I wouldn't expect much.. this is a next gen type game but even so really doesnt' need a whole lot to run.. i could put together a $500 system that could max this game out.

Listen, I don't mind a little hyperbole, but no you couldn't.  I spent 300 at newegg on the most cost efficient i5, mobo, and 8 gigs of ram, and likely will still not be able to max the game out.  That's with me providing the HDD, keeping my current card, case, and PSU. 

Further, many games with much more intense physics and higher end graphics run twice as well on my system as GW2.  People have a double standard when it comes to MMOs.  I do not.  I expect performance to be appropriate to the graphics quality.

Not trying to bash here but I did just build 3 comps that where just towers and fully lodded minus sound card and where around that price and all where tested with Crysis 2, GW2, and BF3 all 3 ran really well and I did one for $459 next one was $490 and the last was $498 but mostly it depends do you want a good system or a god system I can do a god system for around $1300 that is going to run circles around most pc's listed here on this site. Cause oyu can spend all the money you want but if you dont look at alot of stuff and only buy it because its name or price dont not make it good but might have some major flaws like take bus speed on the mobo or transfer rate even ram speed can make a game run like crap on top end systems. Thats why I laugh when people dont really pay attiontion to detail and only buy this or that based on name or value.

I agree, I don't laugh at folks because before this year i was less then a novice, but a friend pointed these things out to me and showed me sites that did third party non-profit testing on these machines and components and had an updatable database with the results, so not only did they have personal reviews side by side they had their own reviews for each component which helped me pick out my computer. I bought it just for this game but it's by no means the best.

Originally posted by Creslin321

I have...

Intel Core i7 CPU, 2.8GHz 8 cores

6GB RAM

ATI Radeon HD 5800 series with abou 3.8GB VRAM

 

Runs fine on my system.

Well, are you going to answer the question.

What 5800 series has 3.8 GB of ram,i had a 5870 x fire set up when they first came out and i never saw one or read any 5800 series having that much ram.

Me thinks you are telling porkys.

Originally posted by adam_nox

Originally posted by Amjoco

I'm curious. When people talk about fps, where is it you are checking it location wise? The reason I'm asking is because no matter where you are, it is always so variable that I believe that it's not really worth mentioning numbers to other people. For example, I could be standing on a tree stump, not stepping off of it or anything, and get 60 fps. But mereley rotating 180 could drop it down to 45 fps. 

Anyway, to the OP I have no suggestions for little tweaks to the processor or the card other that overclocking. If your machine is running pretty poopy anyway, OC won't do that much anyway.  

I love the game and stand by it in every way, but the "fps" is all over the place in most cases so don't despair, I'm sure they will have it worked out before launch.

AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 980 Processor 3.7 Ghz

8GB Ram

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670

1920x1080

VelociRaptor 1000rpm Hard Drive

Edit: sp

My fps is pretty consistent, with the exception of the laptop.  And I think it's actually quite clear that they won't have 'issues' worked out by release.  I think their solution, as is the case with many people who have responded, is to upgrade.  Even though many with similar specs have reported good fps.

lol really?

Their engine is just crap.  The game is more than playable at this stage, but it's pretty clear that the game has some optimization problems when setting my camera at a particular angle to view a wide landscape in a certain area nets me 18 FPS yet Heart of Mists with all the player activity is smooth as a baby's bottom.

Originally posted by Sylvarii

Originally posted by Creslin321

I have...

Intel Core i7 CPU, 2.8GHz 8 cores

6GB RAM

ATI Radeon HD 5800 series with abou 3.8GB VRAM

 

Runs fine on my system.

Well, are you going to answer the question.

 

What 5800 series has 3.8 GB of ram,i had a 5870 x fire set up when they first came out and i never saw one or read any 5800 series having that much ram.

Me thinks you are telling porkys.

http://hothardware.com/printarticle.aspx?articleid=1532 , it's not technically a single gpu solution. If he is talking about a 5870 with 4gb of video memory, it's the Asus ARES.

Originally posted by itgrowls

Originally posted by nolic1

Originally posted by adam_nox

Originally posted by Aerowyn
you dont need much to run this game but if you look at your cpu and gpu and they were released over 5 years ago AND at the time of release they weren't top of the line stuff I wouldn't expect much.. this is a next gen type game but even so really doesnt' need a whole lot to run.. i could put together a $500 system that could max this game out.

Listen, I don't mind a little hyperbole, but no you couldn't.  I spent 300 at newegg on the most cost efficient i5, mobo, and 8 gigs of ram, and likely will still not be able to max the game out.  That's with me providing the HDD, keeping my current card, case, and PSU. 

Further, many games with much more intense physics and higher end graphics run twice as well on my system as GW2.  People have a double standard when it comes to MMOs.  I do not.  I expect performance to be appropriate to the graphics quality.

Not trying to bash here but I did just build 3 comps that where just towers and fully lodded minus sound card and where around that price and all where tested with Crysis 2, GW2, and BF3 all 3 ran really well and I did one for $459 next one was $490 and the last was $498 but mostly it depends do you want a good system or a god system I can do a god system for around $1300 that is going to run circles around most pc's listed here on this site. Cause oyu can spend all the money you want but if you dont look at alot of stuff and only buy it because its name or price dont not make it good but might have some major flaws like take bus speed on the mobo or transfer rate even ram speed can make a game run like crap on top end systems. Thats why I laugh when people dont really pay attiontion to detail and only buy this or that based on name or value.

I agree, I don't laugh at folks because before this year i was less then a novice, but a friend pointed these things out to me and showed me sites that did third party non-profit testing on these machines and components and had an updatable database with the results, so not only did they have personal reviews side by side they had their own reviews for each component which helped me pick out my computer. I bought it just for this game but it's by no means the best.

thats the thing a lot of people don't understand hardware and how fast in some years things advance compared to others.. one year a cpu could come out that almost doubles or triples performance compare to the last gen one then it could go a few gens with only minor increases.. my suggestion to people who don't know much about this stuff spend some time at tomshardware.com lots of info on the subject and even has almost monthly best cpu and gpu for the money articles.

Originally posted by Searias

Originally posted by Sylvarii

Originally posted by Creslin321

I have...

Intel Core i7 CPU, 2.8GHz 8 cores

6GB RAM

ATI Radeon HD 5800 series with abou 3.8GB VRAM

 

Runs fine on my system.

Well, are you going to answer the question.

 

What 5800 series has 3.8 GB of ram,i had a 5870 x fire set up when they first came out and i never saw one or read any 5800 series having that much ram.

Me thinks you are telling porkys.

http://hothardware.com/printarticle.aspx?articleid=1532 , it's not technically a single gpu solution. If he is talking about a 5870 with 4gb of video memory, it's the Asus ARES.

That's not a single gpu,it's a x fire set up on a single unit.Again,their has never been any 5800 with that type of ram unless it's in crossfire which he never mentioned.