I've read so many bad things about the performance of the PC version, just wondering if there were any ppl who are pleased with the performance of the game on their PC, besides me?

I've got an older rig, duel core, 2.66Ghz, with 8gb RAM and Win7. I'm also running an old Radeon 3870 graphic card.

I don't run in Ultra or anything like that, but I do run in the middle of the settings with 1900x1200 resolution. I have some things turned up and a few (shadows) turned down. When I'm outside where I can see forever, I get right around 35fps. If in in a dungeon I usually get around 40-45fps and no stutter or anything like that. I also don't have any drop in fps when i enter a town, been seeing a lot of talk about that too.

I've been reading a lot of discussion about these fps numbers with people complaining that they are only getting 65-70fps. What the heck do they want? I thought that once you get past 30-40fps, it doesn't matter anyway, am I missing something? Why would somone need those huge fps numbers?

One thing that I did do though, was to run msconfig from the start menu and turn off all the garbage that runs in the background, that helps immensely speed up your system. I mean, does the google or yahoo toolbar really neeed to run?

My performance is pretty good. I tend to get a solid 40-50fps outside, with dips down to 35 sometimes and around 30-40 in towns. A tiny bit annoying sometimes but hardly that noticeable.

For this game you need a very powerfull PC, specially a powerful CPU with much Ghz power. All this because they did a bad pc port from the consoles, and the game uses almost all the time only CPU power, and it's bad optimized too.

Wait for a official patch, or buy next year march/april 2012 a new PC.

If got a pretty high end system and it runs very well. This is sort of similar to the situation when Morrowind was released. The "good" machines of the day would run it at 12 or 15 fps. It was playable, but just barely. A top end machine would get 25 or 30 and that made a huge difference.

My rig is a piece of crap that barely meets minimum specs. 2.3 gig dual core processor, 2 gigs of ram, geforce 9600 etc etc...


I run on high settings with the view distances cranked up to bout 3/4 and the shadows on medium at 1920X1080 and get consistent 40-50FPS. Although the UI is utter crap, the game runs way better than I could have ever hoped.

I'm not sure how people with killer rigs are having issues, to be honest.

Ultra settings, more than 70 fps everywhere.

If you experience anything else on a PC you built in 2011, you built it wrong.

Sorry, I doubt that are getting 70 fps everywhere including cities like markarth. Actually, I know you aren't.

You got me! I lied because _____________ and ___________________!

fill in the gaps!

If they, developers team, don't patch the game to run proper, i will wait for the ivy bridge next year, i put some water cooling in it, and i will crank the CPU up to 5+Ghz, and then i will test this console port. ))

e8500 @ 3.5GHZ
2gb RAM
GTX 260 core 216

1680x1050, 16xAF, 8xAA, All settings Ultra, max render distance, ini tweaks for graphics

60 FPS in interiors 75% of the time.

Outside in the world 30-40 FPS

Cities 30-35 FPS with drops into the mid 20s in problem spots.

Very happy with how it runs on my system.

Not all of us have money to Burn on a killer rig, I may not be a boffin on the whole building of systems (only dabble for my own systems and that of my family) but that statement is just plain arrogant and simply unneeded imho.

I sit on about 70 FPS everywhere on Ultra

i7 2600k O/C 4.8GHZ
580 GTX
8GB RAM

Still not happy with the quality though, the textures are pissing me off. I sat my wife down to experience the opening sequence with me after bragging about how awesome its going to be. She stood up and said the graphics are terrible and walked out, and she isnt even a gamer.

LOL man i have a better PC than yours and i have the same frame rate. This game is bad, really...

I have a Phenon II X4 3.4 ghz and crossfired 5770s (only using one card at the moment). I play at 1080p.

I play on high settings and have had superb performance. On rare occasions I get a hickup in a city, but it is rare.

I would also point out that the games performance relative to FPS is VERY NICE. I've played games where I am showing consistent FPS above 30, but still feel very janky. Oblivion could even be like this at time, feeling janky or stuttering even when I had high FPS. In this game, I seem to be getting an incredibly smooth experience consistently.

It runs a hell lot faster than Oblivion. Oblivion gets slow when there are a lot of ppl like in Rockmilk Cave.

I haven't checked the fps with FRAPS, but the game is running very well for me at 1080p, all settings maxed (Ultra) except AA reduced to 4x, FXAA disabled, Object Detail Fade enabled. I'm getting better performance than when running DA2 on max settings and significantly better than running Witcher 2 on low settings.

The only areas where it seems to slow down a bit are the city of Riften, some parts of Markarth and the forest area near Falkreath. Also I'm playing mostly in third person and I recently noticed sometimes switching to first person reduces the frame rate a bit.

My laptop specs are lower than the official "recommended" specs for running the game on high:
i7-820qm 1.73GHz (3.06GHz turbo)
1GB AMD 5830 Mobility (running at stock clocks)
16GB RAM
Dual Intel SSD in Raid0

60-120 FPS, 90+% GPU usage, Ultra at 1080p.
2600k@4.8Ghz, GTX460(768mb) SLI, 8ghz RAM, vista 64bit, OS on SSD while the game on SSD@raid0.

Problems:
Occassional CTD.
Occassional Gray flicker, more often then CTD.
Occassional crazy physics.

I believe the crazy physics and the flicker as something to do with the SLI and 120hz. By crazy physics, it don't mean horses fly around, but the game makes an impact sound at high frequency like 120 times a second or something like that, very annoying.

But hey, it is a PC game that is less than one week old. It is very playable and enjoyable. Sound and video card drivers also play a role on the stability of the game. With Nvidia's beta driver, 3D works very well, which was unexpected.

I have great performance, except when the game crash!

Mine runs great almost no load times, had a few problems were game will slow way way the hell down but i just restart and it works great again.

If you 'dont have money to burn on a killer rig', dont complain about new games running like crap.

@seero: You have good performance because you have overclocked the CPU at that high speed, that's all.

I absolutely love this new UI. One of the best looking, fastest, sleekest and easiest to use, ever.

I agree! It and it runs much better than I thought it would, and with less problems. I'm about 30 or so hours in and so far no
stuttering, no crashes (not a single one), no problems at all. Pure gaming bliss all the way. KNOCK KNOCK ON WOOD!

After much, much tweaking (I have tweaked games for many years) I am happy now. As happy as I can get with what I have.

Running everything Ultra @ 1920x1200 rez, 16xAF, ((no AA, FXAA enabled Only due to the stupid ATI popping decal/texture problem, otherwise AA would be enabled))

I get over 140 fps indoors and between 35-70 fps outdoors, with occasional drops when first entering cities of around 15-20.

Only changes to the ini so far are disabling vsync, mouse acceleration, and gamepad.

And I added that ati dll file into my Skyrim folder as a temporary cheat for xfire users till we get a driver and CAP...


Other than that Xfire is still enabled...and yes, I am pretty happy with my performance...Skyrim is gorgeous...I may post some links of good screenies later when I get back on my laptop.

The UI is good looking and sleek, but it is not fast by any stretch of the imagination. I mean honestly, I don't even understand how someone could have that opinion seriously. It takes numerous actions to get to things that should be one button press away.

Game runs silky and beautifully (ultra high graphics) on my GTX 260.