Hobo Misanthropus replied to Will this game ever be optimized? February 27, 2023 @ 1:47:47 pm PST
Like I'm just gonna say it, people who think a game should run "Well" Just because it doesn't look photorealistic are a huge problem in the gaming sphere.
There are almost no circumstances of a game running poorly because of its graphics, because graphics can be scaled by the user. Most games have poor (Relative to how they look) performance because the Processor is handling a lot of complex things in the background like Simulating, and Valheim in particular is doing A LOT of simulation.
This is why a game like Dwarf Fortress, which has ASCII graphics, can even make an RTX4090 based system drop to single digits. Dwarf Fortress is in reality, a highly styled Monte Carlo simulation, and the CPU (And memory) is doing such titanic amounts of work as the Game progresses, that even something like a 7900X will eventually be overwhelmed.
And again, this is a game that has ASCII graphics.
So while I have no doubt the Optimization on Valheim could be tightened up a bit, the fact is, Valheim runs so comparatively poorly with how it looks, because it has to. It's utilizing a lot of processor time in order keep the simulation running and properly track everything that needs to be tracked. This is also why scaling the graphics up and down has very little impact (Shadows and Lighting are usually the only settings that affect performance when we see a CPU bottleneck, at least by any appreciable amount)
In summation, if you want your performance in this game to be as good as possible, you need to get either a 7950X3D or a 13900K Processor. You need something that has brute force clock frequency and IPC throughput in order to push out more of the game's instructions in a shorter amount of time.
Going from a Ryzen 5000 to 7000 will net around 20% more FPS, going from a 10th or 11th Gen Intel CPU to a 13th Gen will net around 30% more FPS. It scales almost perfectly with clock speed which is like the number 1 indicator of a CPU bottleneck. So if you go from a Processor that is usually running around 4.0 GHZ multi core load, to one that can do 5.0GHZ multi core load, you'll see around a 25% performance uplift. Could be more, could be less by around 5%
There's edge cases of cousre, for example, going from a Ryzen 2700X to a Ryzen 5800X is more like a 40%-60% performance increase, because you gain not just clock speed, but reap the benefits of IPC (Instructions per clock) on AMD's much better Zen 3 architecture. A CPU's throughput is usually measured in IOPS and/or FLOPS, and the OPS are, in some very basic back-of-the-napkin-math (CLOCK)*(IPC) = FLOPS
In OP's case, going from a 7700k to a 13700k would likely see performance double, if not triple. The architectural and clock speed advantage of that large a gap is absolutely gargantuan. I think there are 13th generation PENTIUM processors, that outmatch the 7700k now. (A fine processor when it came out no doubt, and perfectly adequate to still play most games today.)
There are almost no circumstances of a game running poorly because of its graphics, because graphics can be scaled by the user. Most games have poor (Relative to how they look) performance because the Processor is handling a lot of complex things in the background like Simulating, and Valheim in particular is doing A LOT of simulation.
This is why a game like Dwarf Fortress, which has ASCII graphics, can even make an RTX4090 based system drop to single digits. Dwarf Fortress is in reality, a highly styled Monte Carlo simulation, and the CPU (And memory) is doing such titanic amounts of work as the Game progresses, that even something like a 7900X will eventually be overwhelmed.
And again, this is a game that has ASCII graphics.
So while I have no doubt the Optimization on Valheim could be tightened up a bit, the fact is, Valheim runs so comparatively poorly with how it looks, because it has to. It's utilizing a lot of processor time in order keep the simulation running and properly track everything that needs to be tracked. This is also why scaling the graphics up and down has very little impact (Shadows and Lighting are usually the only settings that affect performance when we see a CPU bottleneck, at least by any appreciable amount)
In summation, if you want your performance in this game to be as good as possible, you need to get either a 7950X3D or a 13900K Processor. You need something that has brute force clock frequency and IPC throughput in order to push out more of the game's instructions in a shorter amount of time.
Going from a Ryzen 5000 to 7000 will net around 20% more FPS, going from a 10th or 11th Gen Intel CPU to a 13th Gen will net around 30% more FPS. It scales almost perfectly with clock speed which is like the number 1 indicator of a CPU bottleneck. So if you go from a Processor that is usually running around 4.0 GHZ multi core load, to one that can do 5.0GHZ multi core load, you'll see around a 25% performance uplift. Could be more, could be less by around 5%
There's edge cases of cousre, for example, going from a Ryzen 2700X to a Ryzen 5800X is more like a 40%-60% performance increase, because you gain not just clock speed, but reap the benefits of IPC (Instructions per clock) on AMD's much better Zen 3 architecture. A CPU's throughput is usually measured in IOPS and/or FLOPS, and the OPS are, in some very basic back-of-the-napkin-math (CLOCK)*(IPC) = FLOPS
In OP's case, going from a 7700k to a 13700k would likely see performance double, if not triple. The architectural and clock speed advantage of that large a gap is absolutely gargantuan. I think there are 13th generation PENTIUM processors, that outmatch the 7700k now. (A fine processor when it came out no doubt, and perfectly adequate to still play most games today.)
12:13 am, February 28, 2023