Starcraft 2 Low FPS....way over recommended specs

[Guinibee]

Hello all,

I have a pretty beasty rig:

i7-2600K OC'd 4.2ghz
16gb Ram
GTX 970 MSI SLI OC'd to ~1500mhz core on both...

and when I play Starcraft 2 it recommends medium settings and during 4v4 matches it plummets my fps....granted I know 4v4 is rough, but I was hoping with SLI GTX 970s I could crank up all the settings.

I'm getting anywhere from 20 fps during big fights to 100+ fps in my base...

I also have an ASUS ROG SWIFT using G Sync.

I'm wondering does this game have an issue with SLI? I know back when I had one GTX 670 I never had issues and the game would recommend ultra settings. I haven't tested it yet with one card...but I did turn off SLI and it still recommended medium settings. Does G-Sync mess with FPS?

I have the newest drivers 344.16 as well and I'm not overheating as I'm monitoring using Afterburner during game....does anyone have any thoughts?

as a side note BF4 runs around 100-140 FPS at all times, 3DMark FireStrike gets me 16000 score, Hitman Absolution is maxed at 140 FPS, Bioshock Infinite gets 120-140 FPS...strange that SC2 is an issue....

 

[Cons29]

try using 1 card. see what happens

 

[cats_Paw]

Sc2 in 4v4 fights must go as slow as the slowest PC of the 8 players playing it.
Other way the game would not be able to know what it is supposed to be displaying in the PC of everybody else.
To confirm that this is the problem is related to servers/other players you could try to make a huge UMS map where there would be enough units fighting each other to simulate a 4v4 battle (8x180 units should do it).

 

[Guinibee]

Oh that's really interesting... But why does it recommend medium settings for me?

 

[cats_Paw]

The recommendation is based on tests performed by the game engine. In case you didn't realize, the game came out before your GPU, so it will not have a profile for it.
If it dosent have a profile, it will run the most basic tests to try to give you an approximation. It is the same recommendation a historian can give you on quantum mechanics...

You can test this yourself. If your PC is able to run at over 40 FPS at maxed graphics, you should be able to play the game perfectly well.
RTS do not require as high frames as first person shooters or racing games in order to feel fluid, but they do need a steady frame rate like every game out there to feel fluid.

 

[Stefan Valkov]

Guinibee,I play Starcraft 2 since the beta,I got for years old 9800 GT and the game said recommend settings -"Ultra", few weeks ago I got new PC with EVGA GTX 750 Ti and the game said recommend settings- "Medium" .It is weird,but Blizzard failed to optimize the game other than low settings.So if you want pure gameplay and less distraction in game,just go for all low and that's it.

 

[hieutrinh]

So im not the only one have problem with gtx 970 sli and SC2.

My desktop: i5 3570k @ 4.2Ghz, Palit GTX 970 SLI, 16GB ram.

I play SC2 from the very beginning, its run perfectly with 9800GT, 5770, GTX660, GTX680, 6870 and when i upgrade to 2xGTX970 SLI it lag every 10s in 1vs1. The game also recommend me Medium setting.

Hope Bizzard will have a driver to fix it soon.

 

[OptimusPavlos1]

I really don't think they will they have almost abandoned sc2 as gamers don't really do rt's any more sadly. Hopefully with the next expansion they will get their sh*t together.

 

[cats_Paw]

Unlikely.
Heart of the swarm saw a heavy decline in sales compared to WoL (I think it was around 8.6 million WoL vs 4.6 HOTS?).
The game is not interesting enough to keep players and viewers hooked to the game (at least in big numbers, and you can see that in teamliquid monthly viewers counts on twitch.tv), and it triggers a domino effect where as viewers/gamers leave, so do sponsors, leaving less quality content to watch.

Blizzard spend a huge deal of money in promoting HOTS, and it did not sell too well, so the third part might have even lower sale figures.