Cities Skylines 2 reportedly runs with 7-12fps on an Intel Core i9 13900KS with AMD Radeon RX 7900XTX at 4K/High Settings
Cities Skylines 2 reportedly runs with 7-12fps on an Intel Core i9 13900KS with AMD Radeon RX 7900XTX at 4K/High Settings
Cities Skylines 2 reportedly runs with 7-12fps on an Intel Core i9 13900KS with an AMD Radeon RX 7900XTX at 4K/High Settings.
I said this on Masto, but this tells me nothing as written. You can get the first game to run like that, too.
The thing is, if it runs that way on an empty map and degrades the same way the first one did, I can't see it not crashing on a full endgame map. So... how does it run on endgame? Or is this endgame and it runs fine at first? Guessing no, since the devs themselves said this was a problem. And, well, I've seen footage from streamers and it certainly chugs on small maps, too.
42Might be good to have a watch of City Planner Play's Benchmarking video
To answer your main Q from this, apparently the biggest performance dropoff is going from no pop to 10k, scaling up to 100k isn't nearly the same dropoff.
Even with a beefy setup on high settings, CPP suggests turning off many of the post-processing effects and definitely disable VSync. Lastly 4K is out of the question for most cards, barely playable for top end enthusiast cards, Most will be limited to 1080p for a usable experience.
The good news from this video is that for anything above a 970 it is possible to get to late game, as long as you stick to 1080p low-med settings on any card with less than 8GB VRAM.
38
Perma-photo mode!
41"Just tell them they may need to upgrade their PC" -outside consultant Todd Howard
38Not that I don't believe them, but it's odd that none of the videos from YouTubers with early access have shown that kind of performance. It makes me wonder if they are trying to set lower expectations for some reason.
35I suspect 4K is the biggest killer. Most YouTubers aren't playing at that resolution.
37
Yeah ill be waiting for optimization before buying.
This is going to hurt them short term especially during launch.
27I was waiting for bikes, now I'll be waiting for this as well.
4I was incredibly excited for this game because I thought it'd be an actual city simulator this time, but it's just another American-road-based traffic simulator.
2
Same goes for me. I was really excited but this really is a big damper.
2
Double digits, let's fucking go!
2309 FPS 👌
10
Again such a idgaf-management-decision. Fucking greed ruining things yet again.
17Honestly, that's not an issue if you can scale down.
I don't understand why people assume their hardware should be able to max everything out. The game should obviously target current consumer hardware, otherwise they'll have nobody to sell it to, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with allowing the engine to run with settings current hardware can't handle - but newer hardware in the future will.
If you buy your hardware to masturbate over the thought of setting the slides to "ultra" you might be disappointed. If you buy your hardware to game, turn the settings down and go be happy.
15I have never in my 20 years of gaming not had to make some sacrifices even with new hardware. The only time I can max out all sliders is when a game is already 5 or more years old.
11Yup even if you get top of the line everything PC games usually aren't meant to be maxed out settings at launch. A high resolution really takes a toll on the hardware too. Of course not every game is like this but for the most part they don't want the games to look outdated after two years. It's always fun revisiting games after a PC upgrade because of this. Though since even the devs or publisher said that they didn't hit performance targets this is noticably worse performance, least from all the articles I've seen. I enjoyed the first city skylines except the traffic so am looking forward to buying when it gets optimized.
4Yeah, I've always had hardware that's a step or two below top of the line for its generation. I had to go through two upgrade cycles before I could max out Far Cry. I had to buy more RAM to turn up the draw distance in Mafia. Hell, I remember my computer chugging when I built too many units in C&C Tiberian Sun...
3
You should read the source article. And why shouldnt it be a problem when they ship a game with "improved" graphics when you can't run them?!
4there’s absolutely nothing wrong with allowing the engine to run with settings current hardware can’t handle
Sure, there's nothing inherently wrong with that, but if you want your product to sell and be successful, the period shortly after release date is where most of your sales will happen. If nobody can run your game at that time, you could lose 90% of the lifetime sales you're likely to make. It would make more sense to release a slightly pared-down version of the game that actually runs well now and improve it in the short-to-medium term with updates. Or, alternatively, release it when it can actually run well on commonly-used hardware.
0Permanently Deleted
1
I've watched a few people play on YouTube and it doesn't seem bad for most of them
15Because they're playing with volumetrics disabled. That's the main choke point according to the devs and play testers.
13Shhhh you gotta jump on the hate train! You can't just be happy a game is coming out here!
8Probably not playing on High Settings?
3More likely not wasting resources by running it running at native 4k and doing some reconstruction instead
0
So it might actually be worse than KSP2 then. I was so disappointed by that.
15It's not going to be worse than KSP2. KSP2 launched with game breaking bugs and all of the new features missing (and some of the old ones) as well as bad performance on ALL graphic settings no matter the specs. CS2 has features that differ it from the first game and the performance issues (allegedly) can be fixed by turning settings down (unlike KSP2). Both games launched (or will launch) without modding support which is really bad for both games.
14I meant specifically the frame rate, not necessarily the game as a whole. I should have been more specific. I do agree with the points on KSP2 though
4
Bad time for beloved indie sims getting sequels.
12KSP2 still makes me sad. I still have the hope they can pull a no man's sky. The dream of KSP2 is all I ever wanted out of a space game.
5
If you can't actually play it with the new graphics what's it's advantage over original cities skylines?
13Just have a look at the dev diaries. For me personally its the overhaul of pretty much all simulation engines (traffic, weather, water, wind, people etc.) and that they solved (apparently) the single thread problem of their traffic simulation. For me CS1 was bottlenecked when the cities became to big and the traffic could only be simulated on one core. There is a limit to that. But my cpu was otherwise idle. I have hope that this is now solved. Plus there is apparently no agent limit anymore. So a town of 500000 could in theory simulate all people individually, CS1 couldn't.
27
How many people are playing on 4k?
12I'm a 1080p guy and I just assumed that everyone else in the world was running 4k from how much I hear about it.
11Everyone with a 4k monitor
6
I hope Digital Foundry does a review. I wanna see CPU utilization so badly, Paradox needs to learn to invest into CPU optimizations for their CPU heavy games
11They do invest a lot in cpu optimization. The problem here seems to be unoptimized GPU performance.
In addition, you will always struggle with CPU performance in complex simulation games with many interlocking systems. There's only so much you can do without limiting the gameplay.
13
What would the fps be on a (similar) released game with the same specs and settings?
5Considering skylines is basically the only surviving city sim franchise, not much. But city sims have always had difficulty with performance. Sim city 4 was notorious for how badly it performed in hardware, even to this day
4
Must say a game like this is the perfect use case for dlss3 since rendering latency isn't important
4Oof
3Is it as bad on Nvidia?
2It's bad everywhere at the moment.
12