SFD new version, performance issues?..

[Odex64]

Hello again fighters, this question is only for Beta Tester. I have a very old pc and in the current SFD version (free one) I have low fps, about 80 - 90 frames while playing with everything off, and I was wondering if in the new Steam version there will be a drop of fps/performance that makes the game impossible to play... I know this seems a stupid question, but this isn't for me.

Here's the system requirements on the Steam page


as it says, you need at least 2GB RAM, 512 MB graphics card, an 4 cores CPU if you want host and 1GB available space..
I want to know the real fps drop between the current version and the Steam one (especially while hosting)
example: I have 100 fps in main menu, and 80 in the main menu of new version..
and why the game requires 1GB if the current version is about 100MB??

I'm asking all these questions because of my shi*y pc but I will buy a powerful new one after 2 years from Christmas.. but for now I'm using this.

Thanks if you're going to answer me, and sorry if I annoyed you to checking the fps..

[Gurt]

There's a lot of differences between the Beta 1.0.2c version (the last "free" beta version from 1 year ago) and the current Steam version that's about to release.
A few new things in the Steam version: Bots fighting in the main menu.
A multi-core system is really recommended, 4 cores I would say.
I would suggest using any versus map or the zombie survival map for comparison between the versions.

[Odex64]

There's a lot of differences between the Beta 1.0.2c version (the last "free" beta version from 1 year ago) and the current Steam version that's about to release.
A few new things in the Steam version: Bots fighting in the main menu.
A multi-core system is really recommended, 4 cores I would say.
I would suggest using any versus map or the zombie survival map for comparison between the versions.

About the "multi-core system" an Intel 2 Duo is ok? Or I need at least an i3 or i5? And 256 MB graphics card is enough?

[RickAvory]

There's a lot of differences between the Beta 1.0.2c version (the last "free" beta version from 1 year ago) and the current Steam version that's about to release.
A few new things in the Steam version: Bots fighting in the main menu.
A multi-core system is really recommended, 4 cores I would say.
I would suggest using any versus map or the zombie survival map for comparison between the versions.

About the "multi-core system" an Intel 2 Duo is ok? Or I need at least an i3 or i5? And 256 MB graphics card is enough?

I don’t have worst PC in the world, but mine is pretty meh. Runs the game just fine with Vsync on. Haven’t had any issues. Normally get around 280 FPS without Vsync on. I got a Intel 5500 with Core I9 (If I remember correctly).

[Splinter]

About the "multi-core system" an Intel 2 Duo is ok? Or I need at least an i3 or i5? And 256 MB graphics card is enough?

My computer has a core 2 duo, 4gb ram and a very basic graphics card. I run the steam version at around 70 fps with farbg on, effects high and resolution 1280x720. You should be fine!

[Odex64]

About the "multi-core system" an Intel 2 Duo is ok? Or I need at least an i3 or i5? And 256 MB graphics card is enough?

My computer has a core 2 duo, 4gb ram and a very basic graphics card. I run the steam version at around 70 fps with farbg on, effects high and resolution 1280x720. You should be fine!

Oh, that's fine! I guess that I can run the Steam version too with a good performance if it's so.
Thanks @Splinter for the answer
I'm excited to buy the game and play it in local with my friends!

[RickAvory]

About the "multi-core system" an Intel 2 Duo is ok? Or I need at least an i3 or i5? And 256 MB graphics card is enough?

My computer has a core 2 duo, 4gb ram and a very basic graphics card. I run the steam version at around 70 fps with farbg on, effects high and resolution 1280x720. You should be fine!

Oh, that's fine! I guess that I can run the Steam version too with a good performance if it's so.
Thanks @Splinter for the answer
I'm excited to buy the game and play it in local with my friends!

What’s great about SFD is that it is not at all resource intensive. I have 2 laptops and I am able to run the game on my cheap 200$ laptop at around 100 FPS Easliy. I’m sure if you have issues with performance you can lower game settings, run the game in high priority, close other applications, and turn on Vertical Syncranation, and you should be 100% fine.

[Splinter]

@RickAvory @Xstream

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, you should only use VSync in some cases, like when your fps is really high or oscillating too much and your screen is tearing (google screen tearing and you'll see what it is). If you're having performance issues and low fps, turning VSync on will only make things worse, I think, since it requires more processing from your CPU.

[Odex64]

@RickAvory @Xstream

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, you should only use VSync in some cases, like when your fps is really high or oscillating too much and your screen is tearing (google screen tearing and you'll see what it is). If you're having performance issues and low fps, turning VSync on will only make things worse, I think, since it requires more processing from your CPU.

Yeah, If I remember well, you need to activate VSync only if your fps are very high, so your CPU uses less power and resources, setting the max fps as your screen refresh rate.

[RickAvory]

@RickAvory @Xstream

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, you should only use VSync in some cases, like when your fps is really high or oscillating too much and your screen is tearing (google screen tearing and you'll see what it is). If you're having performance issues and low fps, turning VSync on will only make things worse, I think, since it requires more processing from your CPU.

Yeah. Sorry I forgot to clarify. Only use Vsync if you can easily get above 60 FPS. I used to not use Vsync and get around 280 FPS, but as a result my FPS would jump around and it would be annoying to play like that. I had switched to Vsync which had allowed for a smoother experience at a steady 60 FPS. Although slower, it’s actually not noticeable from the naked eye (or so I have heard.)

[GreenyShark]

Me going in front of my pc fans after getting the update..

[Tom Th3 Assasin]

@RickAvory oh boy I had a similar issue in the past.I would normally get around 300-450 fps without vsync on and had a same result like yours.turning on vsync locked the game at a constant 85 fps,for me 85 felt very heavy for my gameplay .So I had to tweak the config file a little.if you know where to find the config file?open it with the notepad and scroll down to the bottom where you will see "FPS CAP 0" change that "0" to "150" then you may only get about 140 fps at a constant rate,the game wouldn't just be smoother but a lot faster.

[RickAvory]

@RickAvory oh boy I had a similar issue in the past.I would normally get around 300-450 fps without vsync on and had a same result like yours.turning on vsync locked the game at a constant 85 fps,for me 85 felt very heavy for my gameplay .So I had to tweak the config file a little.if you know where to find the config file?open it with the notepad and scroll down to the bottom where you will see "FPS CAP 0" change that "0" to "150" then you may only get about 140 fps at a constant rate,the game wouldn't just be smoother but a lot faster.

What The heck? You have an 85 Refresh rate Monitor? Damn son. I also tried doing that with the code. It didn’t cap it well.

[Odex64]

Ugh, I'm trying to enable again VSync in SFD but the fps doesn't synchronize with monitor refresh rate, my fps keep going over than 60, I don't know why. But some months ago VSync worked fine, any help?

UPDATE
I'm going to uninstall and reinstall the game deleting user files too (but saving the maps); I hope this fix the issue.