Game Runs at "9FPS" Yet Other FPS Report Programs Show "60+FPS"???

Not sure what to make of this, but the in-game FPS counter is reporting often around 9fps, sometimes even down to 7 on every computer I've tried (2). I can run scenarios on one computer, the other one all timers run faster than the game. However, when I use other programs to check the game FPS, they all report about the same FPS, which is beyond 60 FPS on both computers.

What is going on?? Neither computer fits the recommendations of the software. The one unable to run scenarios runs very smoothly and well (fits the 60FPS description) and all simulations are fast, and it has a dual core, 3.5GHz processor, 6GB of DDR2 RAM (I've never even neared running out with this), and an AMD Radeon R9 380 4GB graphics card. Second computer has a 6 core, 2.8GHz processor, 6GB of DDR3 RAM and an AMD HD 6400 512mb graphics card.

Both computers run many games very well at around 60 FPS or more. From what I read here about certain scenarios being impossible below 20 FPS, I don't see how that is even possible as I have a decent processor in one computer and it only gets 9 FPS... And a decent graphics card in another and same problem... For example, in the runway drag race, about halfway to the marker, time ran out and I lost even though I was very clearly ahead of the AI at that moment. I've completed the intersection scenario too, but I still am "too slow" before I even hit the other car.

Sorry about all this, but I just don't get why this is the way it is... Thanks and have a great day!

 

what are these processors. Actual model numbers. Most games barely touch CPU usage, BeamNG can max out individual cores on older processors very easily leading to insane lag.

Take my tablet, runs 30fps in spintires, just 4 in BeamNG. Why, yeah tablet has pretty sucky graphics chip, but a quad core intel atom at just under 2ghz still has enough grunt for spintires, doesnt have enough for BeamNG, BeamNG just crawls, pegs a core at 100% usage the entire time.

T3d graphics engine is also poorly optimised so framerates will be generally lower.

 

I am using an AMD Athlon II X2 250 with a stock clock speed of 3.0GHz, overclocked to 3.51GHz and an AMD Phenom II X6 (forgot the exact model) with a stock clock speed of 2.8GHz.

This still doesn't explain the huge difference between game reported FPS and actual FPS. Is the game FPS the internal simulation rate while the actual FPS is the external rendering rate? The game runs the same on both computers (although the one with the Athlon can achieve much better graphical settings with the same "smooth" or "fluid" gameplay as it has a much faster graphics card) which is especially confusing me. From testing, I have noticed that the more vehicles are simulated, the higher the CPU usage, however I would not expect it to be so great compared to other games and engines.

 

oh sorry missed that you were experiencing higher than it claims to run. No idea then

 

I do notice the CPU running at 100% utilization with 2 vehicles, however I am able to stream, record and play with fluid gameplay. I can see the CPU being a problem with the timers being messed up as times are off due to full utilization, but the different reports and even the entire feel of the game being smooth and nowhere near 9 FPS just doesn't make sense.

 

Ah, I see. Thank you! It seems that while the game runs well on everything, it's simply the scenarios that are too much for a dual core. Probably the AI navigation is what overloads it?

 

If that's what slows you down then most likely this is the cause. With having 2 vehicles running at the same time, you're probably maxing your CPU out or it's throttling back due to thermal loads being too high.

 

My CPU can't thermal throttle. It's overclocked and runs very cool with a stock cooler... ~35 degrees C. But if it gets too hot, the computer simply cuts power and it shuts down... But I can run 2 vehicles very well without the situation of the scenario. I believe around 3 is my maximum before I start reaching the limits of the CPU, so with the AI, would that end up sort of counting as another vehicle? (In general, I've noticed each vehicle needs a dedicated core.) With this, I would need 3 cores or more to run the scenario I'd think. But it's probably that.