Sadly, "constant" it's not a word on planetside , too many factors influence fps so there's no perfect build this time around.
In a full 96+ fight? Good luck with a 1M+ PC there... Even on lowest setting, there is just too much being processed on that it's impossible to get 144fps. Keep in mind this game was made before multicore was a thing. The devs patched the engine, yes, but the whole thing is not really optimized for this generation processors. To be honest, i'm happy if my fps don't drop below 30.
144fps on planetside? nope! (well sure in the warpgates!) i have a 1080ti and a i7-7700k, can handle any game on max, planetside 2 still drops to 50fps in the bigger fights. (at 2k resolution) ultra vs low doesn't seem to make too much difference.
well i don't reall get to 140 often, even en warpagets it usually peaks at 120, and that is with a 1080ti, planetside 2 just isn't very optimized sorry i will say that you should stillget whateve the best pc is that you can afford, since the damage your rate of fire is directly tied to your FPS, so you want the highest FPS that you can possibly get.
this guy is actualy geting 180fps in smaller-medium battles wtf, while i am at 20-50 with a 144hz montiro rip need to get a job and work 24/7, but starting university in couple days so I will probably have other things to worry about guy with 144+fps -> https://www.twitch.tv/nefinub CPU: Intel 8700K overclocked to 5 ghz
I'm running an Intel 8086K. I can do 144hz in the warpgate but not in full battles. I run Ultra+ graphics, but even at low this wouldn't happen.
W(r)eeeeeeeel depends on what you put lower. On 480 p I can get outrageous fps The trick is to devide the load. This game is mostly CPU bound, so you want large cores. The graphics generally isn't doing too much, except when ramping up graphics settings to maximum. But here's the kicker: Setting everything low will reduce your FPS. Some of the settings can be either done by the GPU or CPU, depending on the setting. Lets take shadows as an (imaginary) example. On low it's rendered by the CPU, which eats your FPS. All settings are leaning heavily on CPU already, so more usage means less fps. At a certain setting the process switches from CPU to GPU. That means the CPU is doing less work and can put that power to more FPS! Keep in mind that any process is still activated, monitored and processed by the CPU, so generally you want the GPU to give as little information back as possible to not eat power from the CPU. So the switchover point to GPU is generally best as the smallest amount of information is processed and given back to the GPU (imagine the GPU handing you a processed file of ultra shadows or medium shadows. One will be much easier to read). I can't remember which settings switched from CPU to GPU nor at what level, but other people can certainly help. In the end, get a 8700k or better. High power per core and a few to make use of the tiny optimisations of multicore threading. 3D card matters much less for this game, especially on lower settings, so a 1050 can be plenty. Still, if you're playing other games, a 1060 and sometimes a 1070 can give you huge bang for buck. The AMD cards are also incredibly competitive now, and with the new GPUs coming theres even some attractive 1080 and other high end cards you can consider, but only if you truly need the power. But thinking about it, 144Hz might be problematic on a 1050, but that's just speculation on my part. Haven't looked into datasteams from graphic cards to 144Hz monitors at all.
This streamer (https://www.twitch.tv/nefinub) comes closest to what you describe. He pretty much doesn't drop below 120 FPS, though in the very biggest available battles he does go down to 100 sometimes. His setup is: CPU: Intel 8700K @ 5 ghz RAM: Gskill 3866mhz Motherboard: Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7 Video Card: ZOTAC 1060 6 GB PSU: Corsair 650M Storage: WD 320 gb x 2, WD Raptor 600 gb , 80 GB Intel SSD, Samsung 960 EVO Case: Lian Li PC-A75 Cooling: Thermochill PA120.3 radiator, Iwaki MD20 pump, Swiftech Apogee XL waterblock, Tygon R3603 tubing.
