skyrim fps fix?

[JETSTAIN777]

Hi i was just wondering if anyone out there could help me with a small problem i have in skyrim. I have amd x4 860k(4ghz) and a evga gt 740 4gb gddr5 with 8gigs of ram..
and i know skyrim is a more cpu based game overall from what i hear but on lowest settings my rig cant get itself to a stable 60fps.. it mostly stays in the 40s on high and around 45-50 on lowest with sometimes making 60 in caves or smaller areas. i was just wondering if anyone knew of any fixes that might help cause i know that my rig can handle skyrim a lil better than that. thank you any help would be great at all

 

[atljsf]

the 740 is a weak card, perhaps a 75ti would do better

 

[VincentP]

If your minimum frame rate is over 30 fps, the graphics should be smooth.
Skyrim isn't a twitch FPS game where you ultra low response times.
It doesn't really sound like you have an issue.

Skyrim is often described as CPU intensive, but that isn't to say it cannot be graphically intensive too.
It has always been possible to add mods that improve graphics and can bring many high end graphics cards to a crawl.
Now there is an official graphics refresh version as well.

If you want better frame rates or improved graphics, you need a better graphics card.
The GT 740 has a passmark score of 1579, although I suspect this includes all versions of the card and averages the results.
A GTX 750 Ti as suggested above scores 3684, although you are unlikely to find these new anymore.
A GTX 1050 would be the modern equivalent and that scores 5198.

Edit:
One other note, the GTX 750 Ti or GTX 1050 would allow you to run high settings of the original version with some mods, or the special edition with low to medium settings. These are mid range cards in terms of performance and have 2 GB of video memory.
To install high res texture mods with original skyrim or meet the recommended settings with skyrim special edition, you would need a GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 470.

 

[JETSTAIN777]

If your minimum frame rate is over 30 fps, the graphics should be smooth.
Skyrim isn't a twitch FPS game where you ultra low response times.
It doesn't really sound like you have an issue.

Skyrim is often described as CPU intensive, but that isn't to say it cannot be graphically intensive too.
It has always been possible to add mods that improve graphics and can bring many high end graphics cards to a crawl.
Now there is an official graphics refresh version as well.

If you want better frame rates or improved graphics, you need a better graphics card.
The GT 740 has a passmark score of 1579, although I suspect this includes all versions of the card and averages the results.
A GTX 750 Ti as suggested above scores 3684, although you are unlikely to find these new anymore.
A GTX 1050 would be the modern equivalent and that scores 5198.

Edit:
One other note, the GTX 750 Ti or GTX 1050 would allow you to run high settings of the original version with some mods, or the special edition with low to medium settings. These are mid range cards in terms of performance and have 2 GB of video memory.
To install high res texture mods with original skyrim or meet the recommended settings with skyrim special edition, you would need a GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 470.

well i mean thank you for the additive information but one thing that doesnt make sense is my friend has the same card just a slightly stronger cpu with 2 more cores- amd fx-6300... and he gets above 60 on medium/ high.. also for me 30fps i know is okay for skyrim but i think it could also be frame times with the game

 

[VincentP]

If your minimum frame rate is over 30 fps, the graphics should be smooth.
Skyrim isn't a twitch FPS game where you ultra low response times.
It doesn't really sound like you have an issue.

Skyrim is often described as CPU intensive, but that isn't to say it cannot be graphically intensive too.
It has always been possible to add mods that improve graphics and can bring many high end graphics cards to a crawl.
Now there is an official graphics refresh version as well.

If you want better frame rates or improved graphics, you need a better graphics card.
The GT 740 has a passmark score of 1579, although I suspect this includes all versions of the card and averages the results.
A GTX 750 Ti as suggested above scores 3684, although you are unlikely to find these new anymore.
A GTX 1050 would be the modern equivalent and that scores 5198.

Edit:
One other note, the GTX 750 Ti or GTX 1050 would allow you to run high settings of the original version with some mods, or the special edition with low to medium settings. These are mid range cards in terms of performance and have 2 GB of video memory.
To install high res texture mods with original skyrim or meet the recommended settings with skyrim special edition, you would need a GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 470.

well i mean thank you for the additive information but one thing that doesnt make sense is my friend has the same card just a slightly stronger cpu with 2 more cores- amd fx-6300... and he gets above 60 on medium/ high.. also for me 30fps i know is okay for skyrim but i think it could also be frame times with the game

To compare with your friend you need to make sure you are running the same version with exactly the same settings including resolution, texture quality and anti-aliasing.
From benchmarks you should be able to consistently get 60 FPS with your graphics card on original skyrim at 1920x1080 res, medium detail with no anti-aliasing. Mods or special edition can significantly reduce this.
As for your CPU. I have a Core i5 760 with is slower than your CPU on the passmark benchmark. The game would hover between 50 FPS and 60 FPS, but I believe this was limited by the graphics card anyway with the mods and settings I had configured. I don't think your CPU is the issue.
The other thing you haven't mentioned is your operating system. If it is a 32-bit version you can only access 4 GB of RAM, which can be an issue. A different version of Windows or display drivers could also be a difference with your friends computer.

 

[JETSTAIN777]

If your minimum frame rate is over 30 fps, the graphics should be smooth.
Skyrim isn't a twitch FPS game where you ultra low response times.
It doesn't really sound like you have an issue.

Skyrim is often described as CPU intensive, but that isn't to say it cannot be graphically intensive too.
It has always been possible to add mods that improve graphics and can bring many high end graphics cards to a crawl.
Now there is an official graphics refresh version as well.

If you want better frame rates or improved graphics, you need a better graphics card.
The GT 740 has a passmark score of 1579, although I suspect this includes all versions of the card and averages the results.
A GTX 750 Ti as suggested above scores 3684, although you are unlikely to find these new anymore.
A GTX 1050 would be the modern equivalent and that scores 5198.

Edit:
One other note, the GTX 750 Ti or GTX 1050 would allow you to run high settings of the original version with some mods, or the special edition with low to medium settings. These are mid range cards in terms of performance and have 2 GB of video memory.
To install high res texture mods with original skyrim or meet the recommended settings with skyrim special edition, you would need a GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 470.

well i mean thank you for the additive information but one thing that doesnt make sense is my friend has the same card just a slightly stronger cpu with 2 more cores- amd fx-6300... and he gets above 60 on medium/ high.. also for me 30fps i know is okay for skyrim but i think it could also be frame times with the game

To compare with your friend you need to make sure you are running the same version with exactly the same settings including resolution, texture quality and anti-aliasing.
From benchmarks you should be able to consistently get 60 FPS with your graphics card on original skyrim at 1920x1080 res, medium detail with no anti-aliasing. Mods or special edition can significantly reduce this.
As for your CPU. I have a Core i5 760 with is slower than your CPU on the passmark benchmark. The game would hover between 50 FPS and 60 FPS, but I believe this was limited by the graphics card anyway with the mods and settings I had configured. I don't think your CPU is the issue.
The other thing you haven't mentioned is your operating system. If it is a 32-bit version you can only access 4 GB of RAM, which can be an issue. A different version of Windows or display drivers could also be a difference with your friends computer.

ah sorry i have 64-bit windows but yeah i dont even reach the 60 fps mark stably on low and at 1920x1080 i mean i understand too about my friends thing but all i was saying is he only has a better cpu and we have same operating system and same amount of ram at 8gigs... at same frequency... i even looked it up and from what i could see i had to turn shadow quality down but that really had no fix at all it boosted fps by a good 5 but at 40fps the game seemed very choppy in 1st person also my friend plays at 1600x900 could that make a major deal in a big fps difference even tho as you said he could have different display drivers or something of the sorts too.. im sorry for all the questions im just not very good with stuff like this..

 

[VincentP]

ah sorry i have 64-bit windows but yeah i dont even reach the 60 fps mark stably on low and at 1920x1080 i mean i understand too about my friends thing but all i was saying is he only has a better cpu and we have same operating system and same amount of ram at 8gigs... at same frequency... i even looked it up and from what i could see i had to turn shadow quality down but that really had no fix at all it boosted fps by a good 5 but at 40fps the game seemed very choppy in 1st person also my friend plays at 1600x900 could that make a major deal in a big fps difference even tho as you said he could have different display drivers or something of the sorts too.. im sorry for all the questions im just not very good with stuff like this..

Running at 1600x900 will have a significantly higher frame rate than 1920x1080. You can easily test this on your machine.
1920x1080 requires 44% more pixels to be rendered than 1600x900. Roughly speaking, if you get 60 FPS at 1600x900 you would only get 42 FPS at 1920x1080.
The lower resolution means less work for the graphics card and to a lesser extent the CPU too.

 

[JETSTAIN777]

ah sorry i have 64-bit windows but yeah i dont even reach the 60 fps mark stably on low and at 1920x1080 i mean i understand too about my friends thing but all i was saying is he only has a better cpu and we have same operating system and same amount of ram at 8gigs... at same frequency... i even looked it up and from what i could see i had to turn shadow quality down but that really had no fix at all it boosted fps by a good 5 but at 40fps the game seemed very choppy in 1st person also my friend plays at 1600x900 could that make a major deal in a big fps difference even tho as you said he could have different display drivers or something of the sorts too.. im sorry for all the questions im just not very good with stuff like this..

Running at 1600x900 will have a significantly higher frame rate than 1920x1080. You can easily test this on your machine.
1920x1080 requires 44% more pixels to be rendered than 1600x900. Roughly speaking, if you get 60 FPS at 1600x900 you would only get 42 FPS at 1920x1080.
The lower resolution means less work for the graphics card and to a lesser extent the CPU too.

ah well thank you very much makes a lot more sense to his side but youve at least answered all of my questions and helped in the first place so thank you for that