Some people say that multicore user get a performance boost in Brink if you set Threaded Renderer to 2 (default is 0) in your config. I tried this but the game crashes back to desktop right after it loaded the Brink logo. Anyone else having this issue ? Or is anyone here who can confirm that this setting lets Brink run smoother ?

My system:

AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
Radeon HD 6950
4GB RAM
Windows 7 Home Edition (64bit)

i read its for >4 cores. i also get CTD when i set it and i have a quad core cpu. if you alt-tab out all cores are working anyway. maybe its just AMD? im using an intel quad core extreme

I got told that this shouldn't be used if you have a quad core. It supposed to work with 6 cores but although it doesn't work for me .

should only use 0 or 1, 2 is a developer debug setting

1 has the same effect like 2. CDT . I really hope that this upcoming patch is gonna fix this FPS problem. But actually I'm worried that the same things happen just like in Black Ops where I had the same problems and every patch just screwed up the game even more or didn't have any effect at all.

I actually saw a hit in performance so I set it back to 0 (default). It killed (if I remember correctly) around 40 or 50% of the FPS I had that set to either 1 or 2, did no good in all honesty. But, I'm not going to lie, I only have an intel core-duo, sooo, if it is only for 6x then it isn't going to do me any favors, lmao

Try this
-Go to My Computer and go in your C: drive
-Find program files
-go in the steam folder
-go in steam apps
-go in common
-go in brink
-go in base
-go in video
- and then change the "assets" folder to something else like "assets1"

dont try to verify the integrity of the game cache, or else it will redownload another assets folder and bring back the problem

I dont find a difference in using the threaded renderer, try r_shadows 0 to turn of shadows

core duo what? there are 2 and 4 core ones.

Threaded renderer have never improved things here ways dropped performance I think its was pretty much an experimental option which never really worked tbh

Intel Core Duo 2x @ 2.5 ghz, E5200 is what I have, lmao

never mind. the game runs like [censored] after last patch. the game is even worse now.

you could be running a supercomputer and it will still play like [censored]!

Unless you have a Nvidia card :tongue: . The joke is that I can put everything on maximum and still get almost the same FPS (maybe 10 less than before). I'm sick of this. With my next system I'll go back to Nvidia.

Nvidia has nothing to do with it fan-boi...
Their cards and drivers are no better than ATI, except maybe for generating a lot more heat...
I have multiple systems with both ATI and Nvidia cards, and they perform fairly equal, and if you bother to read any respectable hardware reviews you'll see the same results there.

I'm running Brink on an i5-750 Quad 3.2GHz OC, 8GB 1600 DDR3, ATI HD6970 2GB, Dell 30" 2560x1600 IPS monitor, Windows 7 Pro 64-bit, and I get an average of 60-80fps.
However, unlike most people I keep my system clean, and don't install pr0n, cr*p, av's, etc.

Read my post again and you will see that I'm not a fan boy . I'm an ATI user myself. I read alot of hardware reviews before I buy a new graphic card. They tell me the same just like you did. Although it's obvious that games seem to be optimized for Nvidia cards these days. BF:BC2 is just one example. Seriously do you think an average of 60-80fps with a system like yours is a good result ? Even with such a high resolution this is ridiculous low for an DX9 (!!!) game like Brink. Your CPU is not the newest but still very fast and your graphic card supposed to be even overpowered. At least you can play it but most of the people here don't have high-end-systems like that. You said "average". What's your lowest ? Well, even the fact that it drops under 60 with your hardware just confirms that ATI users are screwed in Brink. I'm quiet sure there are Nvidia users around here who can run the game way faster than you but with a card that is two generations older than yours. Unfortunately the chances are low that there is a Nvidia guy who gonna read this because they seldom show up in the "Hardware and Software Issues" section. And if they do it's because of another reason. Why is that ? . Honestly I won't deny that there are also Nvidia users who suffer fps problems even with the newest hardware you can get. But you have to agree that there are only a few. Most people (let's say around 90%) who complain about low FPS have an ATI card. So I don't think that this has nothing to do with it.

Yes, but you said you were going back to Nvidia, which leads one to believe that you believe it is better... :tongue:
Sure, Nvidia users may currently be having fewer issues with Brink, but I put that blame on SD and not ATI, since any other idtech game I run doesn't have these issues.
I'm a game developer and I can tell you that ATI beats Nvidia for OpenGL VA and VBO performance for similar generation cards, so there is no reason why ATI users should be having problems other than SD's modificifations to the idtech engine have messed it up.

Most game developers I know test on both cards.
They might use the Nvidia logo screen on startup because Nvidia has given them discounted/free cards to test with in exchange for the advertising.
But it doesn't mean the engine is specifically designed for Nvidia cards and won't work properly on ATI.

60-80 fps is ok on my system because the 30" monitor is 2560x1600, and most engines are fill-rate bound, so depending on the specific engine and game asset design this is in the ballpark for fps.
I also have all of the video settings in the game max'ed out (except AO, because SD's AO code really stinks and doesn't look like proper AO).

Brink is using idtech which is OpenGL not DX. And Carmack has designed idtech such that it typically tops out at 60fps.
SD has modified the engine (and done a bad job of that). Just compare Doom3 to Brink and the difference in performance and visual quality is significant (hint: Doom3 is older but runs way better and looks way better).

I didn't pay attention to lowest but highest was well over 100fps.
If I change resolution down to what most people are running, 1680x1050, I get 60 to 330 average 130.

Dropping below 60 is not uncommon with idtech even with high-end systems, it's the way the engine is designed.
And that isn't just an ATI issue.

I don't blame ATI for that problem. Of course it's SD's fault. Although it's obvious that Nvidia user seem to have way less problems with this game than ATI users and Brink is not the only game. And actually that was just my point. Nvidia is not better than ATI or vice versa. Both have their advantage and disadvantages. But if I'd have an Nvidia instead I probably could run Brink smoothly although my current ATI card should handle this easily but it doesn't. Technically the cards are almost even but what does it help if the developer builds a "Nvidia-friendly" and "Anti-ATI" game ?

Point taken and mostly agreed.

Personally, I don't think this game is worth a card change. Assuming that I had an ATI that it didn't work on I wouldn't spend the money to change to Nvidia or the time to try to get it working because this game definitely isn't worth it.
However, the game works just fine on any ATI or Nvidia system that I have tried it on (I'll bet that 75% of those people with issues would get the game working if they did a clean install of their OS, proper system drivers, and then the game -- too many people have systems choked with cr*p).
Unfortunately it's the worst game I've purchased in years as far as overall quality and IMHO a waste of money (good thing I got it on sale, too bad I listened to the positive reviews). The game play is [just] ok, but the quality of the assets, textures, lighting, and level design are really sub-par. I've seen indie games that look more professional than this. I'm really saddened that SD would put something like this out.

Just for fun I installed it onto one of my NVidia game systems.
Q6600 Quad 3GHz OC, 8GB 1066 RAM, NVidia GeForce GTX 275 896MB, 27" 1920x1080
Game settings on medium. Performance is 45 to 80 fps average ~60 fps. No big deal, game still looks like cr*p.

Hell no, I'm not planning to buy a new card just for this game..lol. My card (or system) is just a few months old. Maybe my next PC will have a Nvidia card but this will happen in a few years and nobody knows what kind of graphic cards we can get then. Maybe nobody talks about ATI or Nvidia anymore...lol.
Actually I like Brink. Yes, it's not a graphic monster. Animations are really poor. Balance in maps and weapons need to be redone and we already talked about the technical issues . Although Brink is a really good game in it's heart. But actually the biggest problem are the players themselves. No teamplay and too many CoD-Style gamer who don't play the game how it was meant to be. That's why I say Brink is a clan game and impractical for public gaming. Even when all problems would get fixed (low FPS, balance, movement...etc.) it won't change anything. IMHO Brink won't become a big title like CoD or BF because of that. The fact that it is immensely focused on teamplay is a blessing and on the other hand a curse. If you ask me Brink will remain as a good game for dedicated hardcoe gamers in a small community. Most players are casual gamers and will leave now or later because they won't enjoy the game.

P.S. I don't know if you understand what I mean. English is not my native language.