Thankfully, my system consistently runs the basic terrain at around 120fps. Not bad considering I built it about 2 years ago now
Surprisingly enough mine runs it better than the last Section, at around 40FPS (with a bunch of hills) on 5 year old mobile GPU. Although I’ve left the 3D viewport at that small default size and my landscape is only 500m x 500m aswell.
Landscapes seem to be an efficient and optimised method of rendering.
Getting 60fps but that’s cause my monitor is limited to 60hz so yeah, pretty good for a portable(laptop) programming rig
I’m geting about 80 - 90 FPS in editor at 1522x931 preview area size. GeForce GTX 980 Ti.
I am getting 120. Seems capped. I am using a GTX 970. Working well so far.
3 Likes
I can only reach 60FPS using my laptop with NVIDIA 740M, though it’s not pretty bad for laptop 
I’m getting between 40-50 on a 2012 imac w NVIDIA 660M
I’m getting about 20fps. I have a very old, very low-end laptop. I’m saving for a desktop. Hopefully, in a few months, I’ll have one that is much better.
Also took like 4 minutes to build lighting. Sigh.
Got myself a new laptop a couple of weeks ago to learn programming and these unreal sessions. It has a 1060 GPU and does a solid 60fps. It seems to be capped at though, doesn’t go higher or lower.
Running at 370fps after uncapping it with a GTX 1070.
Hitting a smooth 120FPS on an i7 6700K with a GTX960
about 80fps, couple years old mbp
no issues, running 120fps on an i7 6700 GTX960
120fps seems like its working
8.33ms:heart_eyes:
Nailed at 120FPS
im getting 60 fps and 13 ms. I have a laptop running i7 6700hq w 12 gb of ram and a gtx950m with 4 gbs of video ram. Should it be running faster or is this good for laptop performance?
I am getting 110 fps at 8.5 ms
getting 40 - 60 fps at 21ms using a gt 630
my system consistently runs at 120fps. Using I7 4790K -> 2x970 -> 32Gb DDR4 Ram