Prior to patching up to 1.9 I ran a low res DX9 test to see how much cpu the game could use:



(Using up to 3 cores here)

After upgrading to 1.9, DX11, and High Res I now get worse gpu usage (but only in SLI), and the fps is now capped at 100 (even after using a tool to raise fps which works in the menu screen limiting fps to 500 instead of 3000+):



(Now only using one core)

Whereas before I was seeing great gpu usage, and over 50% total cpu usage, I now see on average about 50% cpu usage, and lower gpu utilization.

Does anyone know what happened, it's like Crysis 1 now... Is it a known issue and will it be addressed ever?

Can't tell why you'd ever want more than 120 fps, let alone more than 60. However its very interesting if the processor/gpu utilisation is borked especially if its somehow only using one core o.O. Do we need to manually specify the number of cores to get it working again?

Can't tell why you'd ever want more than 120 fps, let alone more than 60. However its very interesting if the processor/gpu utilisation is borked especially if its somehow only using one core o.O. Do we need to manually specify the number of cores to get it working again?

I tried to set affinity manually it didn't help, but during actual game play the usage is around 50% (i5-2500k), however the gpu usage isn't nearly as good as it was in DX9 pre patch, DX9 is the same way as DX11 is now, same for high res on and off.

I had thought it was a vram limitation, however even with high res off and DX9 used (vram usage is around 1mb) the problem is still present.

I am talking about that all time after dx11 patch come out - crytek ruined the game by de-optimizing it.

Can't tell why you'd ever want more than 120 fps, let alone more than 60.
Trust me, the more fps the better. What the human eye can supposedly register doesn't matter. The refresh rate the screen supports doesn't either. These things all have overlaps and so become secondary to having the highest speed of frames you can.
I would never enable Vsync for MP, and personally not even SP. It might remove some tearing that some people find irritating (I hardly notice), but it's cost to actual responsiveness is not usually worth it imo.

On custom maps for 1 v 1 like the simple aim_maps in Wars (on low settings for MP of course), I sometimes had 200fps and up if I remember right (most of the best players the same or better), and you can feel it when the game is free from any slow down, freeing your input and responsiveness to be as good as it can be.

It's hard to feel that in C2 with the seemingly inherent game delay But it further svcks to think that Crytek have finished with us after making performance choke even for lowest DX9, are you out there Crytek?

I too see a slow down, but my FPS is too high to notice, running Dx11 in SLI gets me 45 FPS, running Dx11 with one card gets me 30fps. I think they just need to work on Driver optimization, the game itself is solid as stone with a single card. (with the right CPU)

Maaan, it worked perfectly on my E8400 CPU, which is clocked at 4Ghz by 500FSB x 8 Multiplier - having very fast memory response.

After 1.9 patch - lags, slowdowns etc.