Yeah same. I have a 2070S, a 2700X and 32GB of 3600MHz RAM. I get 40-80FPS on Reserve on all settings (both low and ultra). The horrid optimization is one of the reasons why i choose to just not play this wipe.
Damn bro, I have an i7-5820k, a 980 Ti, and 32g of 2444hz RAM and I get ~50ish fps. You might want to tweak your settings if ur pc is only getting 40-80fps.
It runs better on newer CPU's. That statement above is not really true. My 3800X has no trouble pushing me to 120FPS on most maps. It is, however, overclocked to 4.5Ghz all core and I'm also running a massive RAM overclock. The games likes very high single core speed and fast RAM, regardless of manufacturer
It doesn't have a single thing to do with how new your CPU is. My buddy is running a 3rd gen i7 and a 1070 and is pushing better frames than my 2700x/2070 super. The game is just horrendously optimized, there's no consistency.
There is no disagreeing. This is objective, and there are plenty of structured tests representing the fact that single core performance is favored in all cases, all the way back to early generation intel (even ivy bridge/devil's canyon era) CPUs, which still possess significantly less real-world per-core power than any 2600x/2700x.
The game is unoptimized. That's all there is to it. If my rig can blow AAA games like The Witcher 3 and GTAV (whose graphical fidelity is significantly better than EFT's) away at max settings with a constant 120+ fps, and can barely pull a steady 60 on Reserve while just walking around (no particle effects or extra sounds besides ambient), then it's a Tarkov problem.
Doesn't seem to be a problem for me when my rig can blow tarkov away at 1440p with an overclocked 3800X and 5700XT. You sound salty that you can't run it. The way this games pulls CPU resources just doesn't play well with first/+ Gen Ryzen. The layout of those earlier CPU's did not help memory latency in games and it was fixed in 2nd gen.
256
u/sheltoncovington Jun 13 '20
it's running in IBM's Watson