well thour test it and these are the results: Avg. FPS: June 2023: 440 FPS August 2024: 368 FPS (16.36% decrease) 1% FPS: June 2023: 233 FPS August 2024: 233 FPS
@@spinzo I feel like somewhere around 2020-2022 CSGO had the best performance overall, maybe the same as 2023. it does seem like this last version runs worse than it should.
CS2 has no reason to run the way it does, it looks the same as titalfall 2 yet it runs 30 times worst, Titanfall 2 with a million effect, gian mechs and more players. it's stupid
The problem with fps as a metric is it's rate of growth. FPS basically grow exponantially fast, 10 fps more seems like nothing if your base fps is 500, but world changing if your base fps are 15 (500 -> 510 is not as big as a jump as 15 -> 25). In game dev, frame time is usually used, which more accuratly describes performance differences and would in this case show a much more clearer picture for the differences in stability. I think from these benchmarks the downgrade in stability from csgo to cs2 would be linear to the decreased fps.
ye the cs2's "stability" is pretty misleading considering that you just aren't able to run the game at more fps, with lower highs ofc you will get a more stable looking graph.. the point is that for the average player, and especially someone who just played cs and nothing else, being able to run the game on 200+fps on a 500 dollar pc from 2015 to having to buy a 1000+ dollar pc now in 2024 for a worse experience just isn't worth it. one thing riot understdood really well is that performance is key. both valorant and league could look much better but then they alienate millions of players. league is notoriously played by people with horrible pcs. i know people who have been playing league their entire life because its the only multiplayers game they could run on their pc. the same goes for valorant when compared to other fps that require obnoxiously expensive setups for the fun they provide. that is why riot stays on top and it wouldn't be a surprise to see valorant eventually surpass cs and become the new king of fps as the time goes on.
The issue I have is that I can't even run it smoothly on a 4060ti, r7 5800x & 32gb ram. Fair the game will drop in performance but not even being able to have 300+ 99% of the time is crazy for a game like cs2 in my opinion, the optimization is just terrible.
@@milkkolaj I was getting a smooth 144FPS at 1440p with my 6800XT, but using AMDVLK *or* enabling vsync is a must. RADV stutters a lot for some reason, all of that stutter is gone with AMDVLK. Arch should have AMDVLK somewhere in the AUR I think, and it's officially packaged by AMD for Debian/Ubuntu.
comparing a 3% fps difference over 10 years of csgo updates vs the ~30%+ reduction in performance from 12 months of cs2 updates is absurd, I hope you know this
Recently I've been having these really weird jitter stutters. No problem with my stuff, I don't rubberband or anything, but all enemies/allies jitter around for a minute. Everybody I've talked to is having the same issue currently. Also, they NEED to rework smokes and mollies. They frame drop SO hard for no reason.
I really don't buy that. You aren't even expected to have a graphics card from the past 8 years to run the game. If you can't run the game, maybe don't expect the thing you bought 12 years ago to do a great job.
@@varsik289 I don't think I really get what you are saying? If the game was designed to get high FPS easily isn't that a good thing? Also of course upgrading your PC will get expensive if you are trying to buy top of the line stuff, which is why you can buy things from say six years ago and still run the game fine?
Also when the visual upgrade is not much of a leap, they are still using assets from left4dead1. They is no ray tracing no fog effects no sunrays/tindal effect textures are same as go and they are still using cubemaps for reflection and no volumetric clouds. The only thing they did improve are lighting in general and shaders. You can achieve the same look of CS2 by installing some filter mods in csgo and get very close results.
Battlefield 1 looks miles better compared to cs2 and it has larger maps and still somehow I get more fps from bf1 on higher settings than cs2 on lowest???
cs2 not having multicore thread rendering and dlss 3 support is a big L cuz most modern games have support for both options and cs2 doesn't yet or might not ever
You missed the most important thing, how performance degraded massively since the first cs2 beta to now, the huge performance drop isn't justified by ANYTHING, there wasn't anything game changing or graphics update, it's the same shlt, only minor updates
Both of these are Volvo basically saying "we are too lazy, so you get the OPPORTUNITY to explore and test this out for us": -Slightly delayed tagging effects to reduce instances of players experiencing teleportation when taking damage. Delaying tagging results in a smoother experience, however players will have slightly more time to move at full speed when receiving damage. The delay can be adjusted on servers using convar sv_predictable_damage_tag_ticks (default 2) -Added a server setting "sv_vote_to_changelevel_rndmin" to control rounds/time during which voting for a level change is allowed.
I personally was playing CSGO at 150-250 fps with minimal fps drops, but now with CS2 I get 10-80fps with huge fps drops and freezes. The fact that I can't play CS now makes me hate it. Nothing more. I miss playing CS.
Performance is not a main reason I stopped playing at all. It's the subtick quality, the mini stutters, peeker's advantage, economy on 13 rounds format and more. I understand that valve plans on evolving the game but for now the game does not feel good to play. It's really sad.
I love how my average fps is around 250 lower than in CSGO with the same pc and settings. I play at between 220-140 depending on the map and spot, but if I open the score board that drops another 50-60 fps ...
You didn't say much here. Your testing had nothing to do with actual real world gameplay and you took your sweet time basically saying "games get more graphically demanding overtime."
- No volumetric clouds - No raytraced lights - No real time global illumination - No raytraced reflection - almost all maps are just ports from CSGO - Assets dating back to half life 2 - Textures dating back to left 4 dead 2 - 30% content of what CSGO had at its end - still uses prebaked lighting. Saying this game has better graphics is criminal.
When every other CS came out, you could still play the easy to run version, this is no longer the case. The game is popular in lots of less fortunate countries, where a top of the line CPU is expensive. These communities and players would have previously stayed on the last version of the game. Valve took this. This is part of why there are so many voices online complaining about performance, the game was taken from them. They will get to play it in 5 years time, but not now.
Yeah the game is unplayable right now. It just stutters. Ping is unpredictable. Taking damage causes a 400 ms frametime lag spike as well as pulling up the score board.
For those that started playing csgo in the early 2010s!: Was csgo relatively demanding for the average PC back then or did it already start out being really easy to run for everyone?
Going from source with nice performance at the time to GO in 2013 was 100% worse for me performance wise. My pc that could get atleast 300+ fps in source could only handle 90 fps in go. So I would say it was pretty much worse for me at the time being
@@q1ntz267 Okay that would indicate that valve will try to keep the rate of increase in demandingness of cs2 lower than the rate at which hardware improves over the next 10-20 years of this game.
Performance was worse but not as worse as it is now, also that now with cs2 you cant rly go back to csgo... And before anybody tells me "yOu CaN pLay cSgo, iTs on ThE bEta tAb" ,most ppl are not going to do that so csgo is pretty much dead, all those stupid servers like classic counter force you to join their discord and have stupid requirements to actually play the game when Valve could have just simply put a different app ID for csgo and thats it lmao
I swear to god cs2 has no rights getting fps this low. And the max ms spike are insane if you don't have a monster rig. I lost around 100 fps just by staying near a smoke or a molly.
My problem with CS2 is that, I don't have a descent Pc, but I can run Cyberpunk 2077, Starfield, Call of Duty and many other games that are much more intensive than CS2 and still CS2 goes from 180 to 40fps when Molotovs are thrown and in many other moments, at least for me the game performance is a mess and completely unstable. I know it's not just me, on 3Kliks video back when the game released he ask for people to comment about their rig and performance on CS2, and had a considerable amount of people with good PCs having the same issues as I have with a super old machine, and I saw that in my friends group too, I have a friend with a RTX3060 12GB and R5 3600X and 32gb of ram and he's game shutters and have weird drops below 80fps in the lowest setting.
I know games have to evolve and all that, but there was no reason to rush cs2 the way they did... They could have perfectly released it in 2025 or 2026 and lot of problems would be solved Also that games evolving doesnt mean they have to run way worse than they should, hell the game feels exactly the same as csgo but with better lighting and smokes...
I used to have 280fps in cs2 fpsheaven benchmark map like couple months ago. Yesterday I got as low as 174fps. After updating drivers and Windows and switching to Vulkan I was able to boost fps to about 230fps.
I figured the same: They are betting on technological advancements and with the release of RTX 3000 series and Ryzens X3Ds kicking ass, it only seems logical to have a game more demanding. In the future, most consumers will have upgraded at some point, and each new generation of hardware will be more readily available at reasonable pricing. This is just the growing pains with RTX 4000 as our top dog atm
But how can things change so dramatically. My laptop was getting 170 fps with 100 low last week. Now it's struggling to get 100 fps with 50 low with paste change and dust cleaning.
But what about full 64 player community surf server or zombie escape escape server even with R7 5800x + 4070s 32gb ram 1440p it dropped down from 300 fps to straight just 30 fps.. what if i had low end pc.........................
optimalization is the problem how can i have with 2,5k pc have drops from 250 to 140 that's absolutely insane when you play 240hz screen. how can i have more stable fps in COD MW 3 when the mechanics and overall game is much more complex. i only hope when full version comes out there will be more stable framerate
Also if you check, the game never uses more than 50% of your cpu. This seems to me the game is not optimized. Used the sys_info command in cs2. Realized it wasn't using all cores and threads. So I changed "the amount +1" in the startup "-threads #+1" doesn't give me more fps. But feels more stable and lower frametimes.
@@balto7798 Wth are your components???? If you can't get a decent PC for 2.5k that sounds more like a you issue 😂 I have a PC for 1.4k and I am getting 680 FPS in the benchmark and like 500+ in my regular games so either there's something seriously wrong with your PC or you run everything at max graphics which again is a you issue .. Nobody is playing eSports with max graphics and expect great frame times 😂
It happens a lot since I don't like presenting wrong information to a large audience. I would rather reupload and fix the mistake then to let the mistake be apparent and perhaps risk someone missing my pinned comment that I messed up somehow
@@MrMaxim Just make a note in a pinned comment if it's nothing major :D You're probably hurting your own videos in the algorithm by reuploading as I doubt most people will watch the same video again
2:59 I can't agree with that - updates themselves *shouldn't* cause FPS drops - in fact, we should see an improvement as maps and engine itself get optimized. The only thing that might do that is actual maps update, but that didn't happen here! But anyway, I wouldn't be upset about this, because visuals are waaay better with Cs2 and I hope no one is saying otherwise, but there is only one thing that bothers me... Valve *promised* that if there will be any different it will be slight and maybe on some maps there will be even improvement (!) because the new engine is using hardware in more effective way - that happened to be a lie. Anyway, all we, as players, asked for was completive smokes and 128 tick and the second one is still lacking.
yes csgo was way more demanding than cs2 but valve didnt decide to kill source when go was released. imagine paying for a game that you can no longer play (due to performance)
People who blame CS2 for performance are lucky ones without hardware. Once you boot it up, scout wallbang headshot from other side of map will show what it is really worth.
In terms of FPS with cs2 i have found loads of things that can improve, when i saw Hardware unboxed review for the 9700x which you have put in the video the numbers are low in general. Before i started messing around with settings in windows etc. Massive list of trial and error but i have gone from 350-400 FPS to 600FPS with major system latency reduced on top. Also fixed other issues in games like FC24 for pc which is very badly optimised. My Specs for PC is 5800x3D 4070ti Super 32GB of Ram etc etc. I most likely will make some sort of video about it in the future. But if people are wanting more FPS then the simple way of doing it is clean windows install. Chipset drivers downloaded after fresh install will give a 20% jump without the hassle of doing much else.
Feels like not many people are aware of this... but there is considerably more "screen-shake" when shooting in cs2 compared to csgo. And no, the 'viewmodel_recoil' command from csgo does not affect the aforementioned screen-shake. It just happens to shake more in cs2. It's quite subtle to be fair.
playing deathmatch with 10 player damn the fps drops is insane with my ryzen 7 6800h rtx 3060 on 1080p high settings. Usually from 190fps to 70fps. Stutter issues still there.
It seems to me that the problem lies not in the number of FPS but in stability. I'll use my example and say that FPS hasn't improved much since CS2 came out, but I remember that sometime between March and April the game really worked well. I don't know how they do it that with every new accutation they break something, but if it continues like this it will be a repeat of entertainment and the same as in CSGO it will take years for this game to become as good as CSGO.
Something you didn't touch on was that the reason we don't have 128 tick servers, per valve, was that it alienated people with lower end rigs. Now? You have awful performance in the *only version of the game available* unless you have a high end rig. Whaddya know, alienating people with lower end rigs. And we still have fucking 64 subtick bullshit! I'm one of those people who's starting to leave. Cashed my most expensive skins and I maybe play once every two to three weeks. Feels terrible to play.
Im curious if the source 2 engine can take advantage of the new hardware to an extent that in the future high end pc's could run cs2 at higher framerates and better frametimes than csgo. But that's just me probably being overly optimistic.
The problem with this comparison is that you use the newest tech to obtain data on the current fps in csgo / cs2 (which was stated at the end of the video ofc! :) ) if you would use the according tech to the year csgo ended support - or to be more specific use the tech that was the best/most common in the years these versions of csgo came out - its is highly likely that these numbers even out a lot more that they do right now cs2 runs very well on the latest most common pc specifications (that are being used according to the steam survey) and will put out high numbers of fps even on a 5800x and a 3070 which csgo also did on the exact same tech (even though csgo was a bit better ofc since you can litterally run the game on a 4790k and a 1080 with good fps) this comparison would be great in 2-3 years when the most common tech advaces a bit more
my issue with cs2 isnt the fact that it stutters a lot in fights, you can fix that by adding an fps cap. my issue is that the tick system is delayed. a shot registered client-side takes 2 extra ticks to register server-side on the same system. Everything is delayed just enough I can see it, but not enough to show you in real time. its horrible. I do think we need a deep dive into this from you in case people aren't aware of it. host_timescale may or may not resolve the issue, but it is consistently 2 ticks at full game speed.
THE THING IS... 240 fps cs2 feels like 120 fps csgo no cap, many people say frames dont matter as lonf as they are above your monitor refresh rate, well i am getting 99 % of the time more than 240 and it feels terrible whilst csgo buttery smooth.. tested capping both to 240, massive diff
CS2 ran solid after the first post-release update yet somehow they fucked it up, I had (and still have) GTX 980. the game felt smooth back after release but after that, update after update, they managed to fuck up the tele-communication in the servers, even with low ping this game sucks…idk what to say, ridiculous shit…
I personally think that the main issue is the optimization. It's crazy how i can mix this, and that in the settings, and nothing will change. Like i went from very low to full high and i got the same fps. Same goes for resolution. On my old pc when i used to play csgo 4:3 was a really good help for framerate. Now it basically gives you 0 fps. The game is just garbage. The main playerbase are the "wannabe" pro players, and the actualy pro players, who are too lazy to get used to another game.
Right now, the main thing that disappoints me regarding CS2 perf is that, like 32-bit CSGO, the game sometimes struggles to run with many players (more than 12 or so) on one server, and human players have the biggest impact. I figured a true 64-bit backend like Source2 should have made this issue insignificant, but I guess Valve still has work to do here.
The fact that Valve's reasoning for not upgrading to 128 tick is because most players' pc's wouldn't be able to handle it, and yet push CS2 for everyone with this kind of performance just pisses me off
i have already quit bro bcuz i am a school guy and dont have insane pc still in csgo i can get like 110 -120 in 1024*768 but in cs2 i get like 55-60 in 800*600 why the hell i will continue to play cs2 bro
I had over 300 fps with my old pc and nearly 0 fps drops and now i have a new pc with a 4060 and 32gb ram and i only get 200 fps with so many fps drop to 100 fps. When a smoke pop i lose fps and when a moly gets thrown i lose fps
3:40 THIS is the problem. CS:GO FEELS great today. CS2 still feels unsmooth and delayed (stopped playing summer 2023). The issue is not the hardware, it's still the game itself in my opinion.
They don't care, that's why they revolusionised esport scene, so that it can stay alive for a long time (open circuit). And I'm pretty sure if they put so much effort into changing esports systems they will do everything so that game is playable for casuals and pros in the near future.
Is it just me or cs2 looks completely washed out? Like there is no contrast and just way too bright for no reason. Lowering the gamma makes is better but csgo still looks way better in terms of contrast for me
Definitely. Despite having an eye condition I never had any issues in CSGO, but even after adjusting gamma visibility for me in CS2 feels like trash :(
Are you able to source benchmarks of CS2 over the past year and a half to see if performance degrades as they update the game? Maybe you can ask permission from Hardware Unboxed to use their data every time they review a new CPU (like the 9950X review they did they include their latest CS2 benchmark data from 14900k to 5800X3D, paired with RTX4090) edit: wow you almost did exactly that at 4:00
CS2 is the future of the franchise the same way Source was the future of the franchise. They should just let Goose make the version of the game he envisioned back in 2004 at this point.
i have a shitty gaming laptop but i am not affected by fps drops, what i am affected by are packet losses or whatever that arrow that points down next to ping is. I have a stable wifi connection and it was never an issue in csgo or in other games but noone talks about that... so i guess its just me.
![PC Master Race Explained in 9 minutes [Animated]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RRY1jrIDhvU/mqdefault.jpg)
I think you missed an opportunity to compare older versions of CS2 to current CS2, so we could see how much fps we've lost since
What older versions? I'm pretty sure there is no way to access those versions, but I might be wrong.
Yup this.. I’ve lost more fps with every update… I didn’t even know that was possible until cs2 lmfao 🤡🤦🏽♂️
well thour test it and these are the results:
Avg. FPS:
June 2023: 440 FPS
August 2024: 368 FPS (16.36% decrease)
1% FPS:
June 2023: 233 FPS
August 2024: 233 FPS
Yeah, I actually came in this video expecting the CS 2 original versus CS 2 current comparison but yeah, I understand you can’t actually test that…..
@@spinzo I feel like somewhere around 2020-2022 CSGO had the best performance overall, maybe the same as 2023. it does seem like this last version runs worse than it should.
It's incredible, you can go play battlefield 2042 and have higher FPS with more stuff going on than in a 5v5 CS2 match.
CS2 has no reason to run the way it does, it looks the same as titalfall 2 yet it runs 30 times worst, Titanfall 2 with a million effect, gian mechs and more players. it's stupid
wow sell said! So true man
But bf2042 has much higher system requirements so it cancels out
@@varsik289 I’m going to cancel you out
Wow i am not alone with same thought. I play bf1-4 best setting 1080p. But 1024x768 low settings cs 170fps avg 4060
This entire video was nothing burger
The problem with fps as a metric is it's rate of growth. FPS basically grow exponantially fast, 10 fps more seems like nothing if your base fps is 500, but world changing if your base fps are 15 (500 -> 510 is not as big as a jump as 15 -> 25). In game dev, frame time is usually used, which more accuratly describes performance differences and would in this case show a much more clearer picture for the differences in stability. I think from these benchmarks the downgrade in stability from csgo to cs2 would be linear to the decreased fps.
ye the cs2's "stability" is pretty misleading considering that you just aren't able to run the game at more fps, with lower highs ofc you will get a more stable looking graph.. the point is that for the average player, and especially someone who just played cs and nothing else, being able to run the game on 200+fps on a 500 dollar pc from 2015 to having to buy a 1000+ dollar pc now in 2024 for a worse experience just isn't worth it. one thing riot understdood really well is that performance is key. both valorant and league could look much better but then they alienate millions of players. league is notoriously played by people with horrible pcs. i know people who have been playing league their entire life because its the only multiplayers game they could run on their pc. the same goes for valorant when compared to other fps that require obnoxiously expensive setups for the fun they provide. that is why riot stays on top and it wouldn't be a surprise to see valorant eventually surpass cs and become the new king of fps as the time goes on.
when cs2 came out, i ran the game at 200 fps, now it runs at 120-150...
my pc is like -100 or worse too!
frames per second are not as important as frametime consistency
it is but as long as you get frames 60+ i agree that frametime consistency is much more important
High frame time means your 1% is pretty high meaning your fps is stable
i mean cs has a horrendous input delay when your fps is low..
@@fregatta9243 thats what i am experiencing right now at 60fps, although i think i have gotten used to it
@@fregatta9243 its better to avoid such a situations, because it is nothing fun playing like that.
The issue I have is that I can't even run it smoothly on a 4060ti, r7 5800x & 32gb ram. Fair the game will drop in performance but not even being able to have 300+ 99% of the time is crazy for a game like cs2 in my opinion, the optimization is just terrible.
@@milkkolaj I was getting a smooth 144FPS at 1440p with my 6800XT, but using AMDVLK *or* enabling vsync is a must. RADV stutters a lot for some reason, all of that stutter is gone with AMDVLK. Arch should have AMDVLK somewhere in the AUR I think, and it's officially packaged by AMD for Debian/Ubuntu.
@@milkkolaj Any updates on the VLK?
CS2 feels like its still beta.......
it is
comparing a 3% fps difference over 10 years of csgo updates vs the ~30%+ reduction in performance from 12 months of cs2 updates is absurd, I hope you know this
Bro you have to benchmark while playing on a server,cs2 instability comes in handling duels and utilities….
3:15 has no business being this slick
I don't think you realize how much this means to me when people notice these smaller details in my videos!
💖
@@MrMaxim it must've been a nightmare
First try actually I'm like a robot with these paths @@LeventK
@@MrMaxim Now thats what I call a godly transition
Recently I've been having these really weird jitter stutters. No problem with my stuff, I don't rubberband or anything, but all enemies/allies jitter around for a minute. Everybody I've talked to is having the same issue currently.
Also, they NEED to rework smokes and mollies. They frame drop SO hard for no reason.
Yep.
1 smoke = - 100fps xD
Do you have G sync, vsync and reflex on?
@@thomaskutty1440 no, but I'm not experiencing any screen tearing
@@BaxxyNut I couldnt recognise screen tearing when it happened to me but turning all these on helped a lot.
@@thomaskutty1440 I'll attempt it. It could just be a corrupted file that doesn't pop up with verifying files. It happens sometimes
If cs2 has better visuals, but the majority of the playerbase cant use them, because of performance issues, there is no reason to have them
I really don't buy that. You aren't even expected to have a graphics card from the past 8 years to run the game. If you can't run the game, maybe don't expect the thing you bought 12 years ago to do a great job.
@@thing4826
You forget that the game was designed to get high FPS easily also that upgrading pc is much more expensive...
@@varsik289 I don't think I really get what you are saying? If the game was designed to get high FPS easily isn't that a good thing? Also of course upgrading your PC will get expensive if you are trying to buy top of the line stuff, which is why you can buy things from say six years ago and still run the game fine?
@@thing4826yea maybe if the netcode was better, too. In csgo i didnt "need" a fxcking fiber connection
Also when the visual upgrade is not much of a leap, they are still using assets from left4dead1.
They is no ray tracing no fog effects no sunrays/tindal effect textures are same as go and they are still using cubemaps for reflection and no volumetric clouds. The only thing they did improve are lighting in general and shaders. You can achieve the same look of CS2 by installing some filter mods in csgo and get very close results.
I have 5800x and rtx 3070, csgo max settings mirage avg 500-600 fps, while cs2 barely runs 240 with low settings. This impacted me a lot...
how do i get almost the same fps in cs2 with a worse gpu? and mid to high graphics
@@TheSodingen627Mid to high > max settings
same btw, with 5600x and 3070
@@kipchickensouti have 5700x and rx6650xt perfect for 1080p
Same, here, Aincent in T-spawn water... run around and look at water, it is 90 fps :O I have a 5900x and 3070
Battlefield 1 looks miles better compared to cs2 and it has larger maps and still somehow I get more fps from bf1 on higher settings than cs2 on lowest???
cs2 not having multicore thread rendering and dlss 3 support is a big L cuz most modern games have support for both options and cs2 doesn't yet or might not ever
this, yet this jobless youtuber says it's your gpu brokie! Def not the crap optimization the devs force down our throats.
BF2042 with 128 players runs better too lmao
@@datmanz5890 what can you expect about someone who promotes gambling and potentially to children
I have same thoguht. Nice im not alone
You missed the most important thing, how performance degraded massively since the first cs2 beta to now, the huge performance drop isn't justified by ANYTHING, there wasn't anything game changing or graphics update, it's the same shlt, only minor updates
1:31
Is this a reference to how 3kliksphilip portraited a then hypothetical Source 2 version of Counter Strike back in 2015?
Not being able to play your favorite game because of the lack of a GPU hurts
The game sux. Don't be sad you can't play it
Not my favorite game anymore
Both of these are Volvo basically saying "we are too lazy, so you get the OPPORTUNITY to explore and test this out for us":
-Slightly delayed tagging effects to reduce instances of players experiencing teleportation when taking damage. Delaying tagging results in a smoother experience, however players will have slightly more time to move at full speed when receiving damage. The delay can be adjusted on servers using convar sv_predictable_damage_tag_ticks (default 2)
-Added a server setting "sv_vote_to_changelevel_rndmin" to control rounds/time during which voting for a level change is allowed.
I personally was playing CSGO at 150-250 fps with minimal fps drops, but now with CS2 I get 10-80fps with huge fps drops and freezes. The fact that I can't play CS now makes me hate it. Nothing more. I miss playing CS.
Same here started a month or 2 ago I had 110 fps then it just dropped and I can't get over 60 its unplayable
Performance is not a main reason I stopped playing at all. It's the subtick quality, the mini stutters, peeker's advantage, economy on 13 rounds format and more. I understand that valve plans on evolving the game but for now the game does not feel good to play. It's really sad.
frametime is shit though, i get stutters often when someone is shooting
shame you didnt mention frametime
I love how my average fps is around 250 lower than in CSGO with the same pc and settings.
I play at between 220-140 depending on the map and spot, but if I open the score board that drops another 50-60 fps ...
You didn't say much here. Your testing had nothing to do with actual real world gameplay and you took your sweet time basically saying "games get more graphically demanding overtime."
- No volumetric clouds
- No raytraced lights
- No real time global illumination
- No raytraced reflection
- almost all maps are just ports from CSGO
- Assets dating back to half life 2
- Textures dating back to left 4 dead 2
- 30% content of what CSGO had at its end
- still uses prebaked lighting.
Saying this game has better graphics is criminal.
When every other CS came out, you could still play the easy to run version, this is no longer the case. The game is popular in lots of less fortunate countries, where a top of the line CPU is expensive. These communities and players would have previously stayed on the last version of the game. Valve took this. This is part of why there are so many voices online complaining about performance, the game was taken from them. They will get to play it in 5 years time, but not now.
Yeah the game is unplayable right now. It just stutters. Ping is unpredictable. Taking damage causes a 400 ms frametime lag spike as well as pulling up the score board.
that frametime is too accurate, mine spikes to like 40ms sometimes which feels like my ping spiked to 600
For those that started playing csgo in the early 2010s!: Was csgo relatively demanding for the average PC back then or did it already start out being really easy to run for everyone?
Going from source with nice performance at the time to GO in 2013 was 100% worse for me performance wise. My pc that could get atleast 300+ fps in source could only handle 90 fps in go. So I would say it was pretty much worse for me at the time being
Yes but it has been a year and the performance seems to get worse over time with every update.
@@q1ntz267 Okay that would indicate that valve will try to keep the rate of increase in demandingness of cs2 lower than the rate at which hardware improves over the next 10-20 years of this game.
You at least had css as a fallback, now you have nothing... except valorant, since it runs much better
Performance was worse but not as worse as it is now, also that now with cs2 you cant rly go back to csgo...
And before anybody tells me "yOu CaN pLay cSgo, iTs on ThE bEta tAb" ,most ppl are not going to do that so csgo is pretty much dead, all those stupid servers like classic counter force you to join their discord and have stupid requirements to actually play the game when Valve could have just simply put a different app ID for csgo and thats it lmao
I swear to god cs2 has no rights getting fps this low. And the max ms spike are insane if you don't have a monster rig. I lost around 100 fps just by staying near a smoke or a molly.
2:01 Did bro prestrafe on vanilla?
Yes. 🤦
and everyone was like "cs2 will give you better FPS because it's a new engine 🤓☝"
no one said that, and if they did, they are stupid
csgo fps avg 350 cs2 avg 130 its crazy
Valve nuking csgo is the main issue
My problem with CS2 is that, I don't have a descent Pc, but I can run Cyberpunk 2077, Starfield, Call of Duty and many other games that are much more intensive than CS2 and still CS2 goes from 180 to 40fps when Molotovs are thrown and in many other moments, at least for me the game performance is a mess and completely unstable.
I know it's not just me, on 3Kliks video back when the game released he ask for people to comment about their rig and performance on CS2, and had a considerable amount of people with good PCs having the same issues as I have with a super old machine, and I saw that in my friends group too, I have a friend with a RTX3060 12GB and R5 3600X and 32gb of ram and he's game shutters and have weird drops below 80fps in the lowest setting.
Left the game a year ago, only have a monetary attachment to the game, and I hope to cash out in 10 years
As a bottom-tier gamer, the cruel hand of fate dealt me a raw deal, one I couldn’t escape...
I know games have to evolve and all that, but there was no reason to rush cs2 the way they did... They could have perfectly released it in 2025 or 2026 and lot of problems would be solved
Also that games evolving doesnt mean they have to run way worse than they should, hell the game feels exactly the same as csgo but with better lighting and smokes...
I used to have 280fps in cs2 fpsheaven benchmark map like couple months ago. Yesterday I got as low as 174fps. After updating drivers and Windows and switching to Vulkan I was able to boost fps to about 230fps.
I figured the same: They are betting on technological advancements and with the release of RTX 3000 series and Ryzens X3Ds kicking ass, it only seems logical to have a game more demanding. In the future, most consumers will have upgraded at some point, and each new generation of hardware will be more readily available at reasonable pricing. This is just the growing pains with RTX 4000 as our top dog atm
But how can things change so dramatically. My laptop was getting 170 fps with 100 low last week. Now it's struggling to get 100 fps with 50 low with paste change and dust cleaning.
But what about full 64 player community surf server or zombie escape escape server even with R7 5800x + 4070s 32gb ram 1440p it dropped down from 300 fps to straight just 30 fps.. what if i had low end pc.........................
optimalization is the problem how can i have with 2,5k pc have drops from 250 to 140 that's absolutely insane when you play 240hz screen. how can i have more stable fps in COD MW 3 when the mechanics and overall game is much more complex. i only hope when full version comes out there will be more stable framerate
Also if you check, the game never uses more than 50% of your cpu. This seems to me the game is not optimized. Used the sys_info command in cs2. Realized it wasn't using all cores and threads. So I changed "the amount +1" in the startup "-threads #+1" doesn't give me more fps. But feels more stable and lower frametimes.
@@KNDCHVits because they dont need to.
They already achieve their performance target. Why invest more?
@@balto7798 Wth are your components????
If you can't get a decent PC for 2.5k that sounds more like a you issue 😂
I have a PC for 1.4k and I am getting 680 FPS in the benchmark and like 500+ in my regular games so either there's something seriously wrong with your PC or you run everything at max graphics which again is a you issue .. Nobody is playing eSports with max graphics and expect great frame times 😂
why the reupload?
Some leftist from valve was offended by this
@@notmeq7879breh
@@notmeq7879 what the fuck does that even mean bro its a cs2 video
@@montyslush Ahh a typical leftist, just tell me that you're from Great Britain
@@notmeq7879 what the fuck are you talking about man? this is a cs2 video about performance over the years.
My computer meets the reccomended requirements for CS2, yet I cannot even get 60fps consistently on minimal graphics and 1200x720 resolution.
You should’ve also compared older versions of cs2 I could’ve sworn I was hitting 500 average in the early beta stages
Why do you always re-upload your videos ?
It happens a lot since I don't like presenting wrong information to a large audience. I would rather reupload and fix the mistake then to let the mistake be apparent and perhaps risk someone missing my pinned comment that I messed up somehow
@@MrMaxim Just make a note in a pinned comment if it's nothing major :D
You're probably hurting your own videos in the algorithm by reuploading as I doubt most people will watch the same video again
@@kujalanville I guess... but I care more about the video being "correct" than the video doing poorly especially if the mistake is bugging me lol
@@MrMaxim Fair enough :D love your stuff!
2:59 I can't agree with that - updates themselves *shouldn't* cause FPS drops - in fact, we should see an improvement as maps and engine itself get optimized. The only thing that might do that is actual maps update, but that didn't happen here! But anyway, I wouldn't be upset about this, because visuals are waaay better with Cs2 and I hope no one is saying otherwise, but there is only one thing that bothers me... Valve *promised* that if there will be any different it will be slight and maybe on some maps there will be even improvement (!) because the new engine is using hardware in more effective way - that happened to be a lie. Anyway, all we, as players, asked for was completive smokes and 128 tick and the second one is still lacking.
yes csgo was way more demanding than cs2 but valve didnt decide to kill source when go was released. imagine paying for a game that you can no longer play (due to performance)
People who blame CS2 for performance are lucky ones without hardware. Once you boot it up, scout wallbang headshot from other side of map will show what it is really worth.
The biggest problem that I have with this game are the 1% lows. Avg. is fine for me but the FPS jumps are sometimes crazy.
In terms of FPS with cs2 i have found loads of things that can improve, when i saw Hardware unboxed review for the 9700x which you have put in the video the numbers are low in general. Before i started messing around with settings in windows etc. Massive list of trial and error but i have gone from 350-400 FPS to 600FPS with major system latency reduced on top. Also fixed other issues in games like FC24 for pc which is very badly optimised. My Specs for PC is 5800x3D 4070ti Super 32GB of Ram etc etc. I most likely will make some sort of video about it in the future. But if people are wanting more FPS then the simple way of doing it is clean windows install. Chipset drivers downloaded after fresh install will give a 20% jump without the hassle of doing much else.
csgo dust 2 hides a lot of props on low settings while cs2 renders them on all settings
bro really said features in the same sentence as cs2 lmao
Feels like not many people are aware of this... but there is considerably more "screen-shake" when shooting in cs2 compared to csgo.
And no, the 'viewmodel_recoil' command from csgo does not affect the aforementioned screen-shake. It just happens to shake more in cs2. It's quite subtle to be fair.
playing deathmatch with 10 player damn the fps drops is insane with my ryzen 7 6800h rtx 3060 on 1080p high settings. Usually from 190fps to 70fps. Stutter issues still there.
It seems to me that the problem lies not in the number of FPS but in stability. I'll use my example and say that FPS hasn't improved much since CS2 came out, but I remember that sometime between March and April the game really worked well. I don't know how they do it that with every new accutation they break something, but if it continues like this it will be a repeat of entertainment and the same as in CSGO it will take years for this game to become as good as CSGO.
I only wanted 128 tick
Something you didn't touch on was that the reason we don't have 128 tick servers, per valve, was that it alienated people with lower end rigs. Now? You have awful performance in the *only version of the game available* unless you have a high end rig. Whaddya know, alienating people with lower end rigs. And we still have fucking 64 subtick bullshit!
I'm one of those people who's starting to leave. Cashed my most expensive skins and I maybe play once every two to three weeks. Feels terrible to play.
No, they just think CS works the best in 64-tick, weird, but that's genuinely what they stand with.
Hellyeah, fuck cs2 and fuck valve. People should stop playing this game so valve can see what we think about it.
@@christophermalthe1818 That isn't going to work, as long as people are opening cases, nothing will happen.
to sum the video up, we're fucked
I'm missing the decrease in performance between the early and current build of CS2. Apparently we've lost like 10%+ already
yeah sure but for me the difference fps -> 1% lows is massive. (14ms max frametimes? on a ryzen 7800x3d + rtx 3070?)
Im curious if the source 2 engine can take advantage of the new hardware to an extent that in the future high end pc's could run cs2 at higher framerates and better frametimes than csgo. But that's just me probably being overly optimistic.
subtick is probem, plus that strange mosue movement feeling feels like its fking floating ....
I used to get 600-700fps on csgo when i had 5600x, then cs2 the fps went 700 to 200, Ugraded to 7800x3d last month getting 600fps again feels good
Gaslighting doesn't work when you see the frame times
i used to play csgo with 120fps on my fx6300 and r7 250 1gb, cs2 started pretty well on the hardware and fps ratio
The problem with this comparison is that you use the newest tech to obtain data on the current fps in csgo / cs2 (which was stated at the end of the video ofc! :) )
if you would use the according tech to the year csgo ended support - or to be more specific use the tech that was the best/most common in the years these versions of csgo came out - its is highly likely that these numbers even out a lot more that they do right now
cs2 runs very well on the latest most common pc specifications (that are being used according to the steam survey) and will put out high numbers of fps even on a 5800x and a 3070 which csgo also did on the exact same tech (even though csgo was a bit better ofc since you can litterally run the game on a 4790k and a 1080 with good fps)
this comparison would be great in 2-3 years when the most common tech advaces a bit more
my issue with cs2 isnt the fact that it stutters a lot in fights, you can fix that by adding an fps cap. my issue is that the tick system is delayed. a shot registered client-side takes 2 extra ticks to register server-side on the same system. Everything is delayed just enough I can see it, but not enough to show you in real time. its horrible. I do think we need a deep dive into this from you in case people aren't aware of it. host_timescale may or may not resolve the issue, but it is consistently 2 ticks at full game speed.
THE THING IS... 240 fps cs2 feels like 120 fps csgo no cap, many people say frames dont matter as lonf as they are above your monitor refresh rate, well i am getting 99 % of the time more than 240 and it feels terrible whilst csgo buttery smooth.. tested capping both to 240, massive diff
i used to get on almost every map over 250 300 fps and now im getting 170 up to 250, and i have 240hz monitor
Ryzen 7 5800x
Rtx 3080
64gb 4400mhz
i have the same specs and I get 200 - 400+ fps in comp/premier. I can drop lower in ancient spawn of course but that's not rly relevant.
They took the game away from the people
CS2 ran solid after the first post-release update yet somehow they fucked it up, I had (and still have) GTX 980. the game felt smooth back after release but after that, update after update, they managed to fuck up the tele-communication in the servers, even with low ping this game sucks…idk what to say, ridiculous shit…
Reupload??
I personally think that the main issue is the optimization. It's crazy how i can mix this, and that in the settings, and nothing will change. Like i went from very low to full high and i got the same fps. Same goes for resolution. On my old pc when i used to play csgo 4:3 was a really good help for framerate. Now it basically gives you 0 fps. The game is just garbage. The main playerbase are the "wannabe" pro players, and the actualy pro players, who are too lazy to get used to another game.
Right now, the main thing that disappoints me regarding CS2 perf is that, like 32-bit CSGO, the game sometimes struggles to run with many players (more than 12 or so) on one server, and human players have the biggest impact. I figured a true 64-bit backend like Source2 should have made this issue insignificant, but I guess Valve still has work to do here.
The fact that Valve's reasoning for not upgrading to 128 tick is because most players' pc's wouldn't be able to handle it, and yet push CS2 for everyone with this kind of performance just pisses me off
i have already quit bro bcuz i am a school guy and dont have insane pc still in csgo i can get like 110 -120 in 1024*768 but in cs2 i get like 55-60 in 800*600
why the hell i will continue to play cs2 bro
i think the diffrence in older gpu is much higher than new gpu in csgo vs cs2 stats
It's not slow just in the FPS
I've been having a lot of problem with the connection as well
I get lag from the pings going up alot
I had over 300 fps with my old pc and nearly 0 fps drops and now i have a new pc with a 4060 and 32gb ram and i only get 200 fps with so many fps drop to 100 fps. When a smoke pop i lose fps and when a moly gets thrown i lose fps
3:40 THIS is the problem. CS:GO FEELS great today. CS2 still feels unsmooth and delayed (stopped playing summer 2023). The issue is not the hardware, it's still the game itself in my opinion.
CS2 will be known as the end of CS. Valve doesnt care and have the most bottom of the barrel devs working on it
They don't care, that's why they revolusionised esport scene, so that it can stay alive for a long time (open circuit). And I'm pretty sure if they put so much effort into changing esports systems they will do everything so that game is playable for casuals and pros in the near future.
I mean, for me it's still playable, I don't experience most of issues others do (even though I have low-mid spec.
This has been said with css and csgo. No, this won't be the end of cs. Yes, the developers behind cs2 do care. Chill.
heck even the main menu is laggy as fuck, also the player models.. the more people on the server the laggier it becomes by alot
Is it just me or cs2 looks completely washed out? Like there is no contrast and just way too bright for no reason. Lowering the gamma makes is better but csgo still looks way better in terms of contrast for me
Definitely. Despite having an eye condition I never had any issues in CSGO, but even after adjusting gamma visibility for me in CS2 feels like trash :(
@@pred1993 especially at night when I usually play. It's eye piercing bright, I always gotta lower the brightness when I boot up the game
Test on a pc that isn't 2000$ and test cs2 comparing itself to the launch versions. Then you'll see why people aren't happy
Couldn’t really play cs2 because of my pc, literally going to upgrade my pc today
performance is important, but all i really care about is a new operation
you were able to hit easily over 144fps+ with a gtx 750 ti before panorama update
ive been having stuttering issues for months, basically unplayable without an ethernet connection
I don't think people would care if they just let us play cs:go and cs2. but they had to remove cs:go
bro i watched the video like a hour ago and its says now its new and its posted like 1 min ago
valve could learn something with overwatch2 performance that shit runs amazing even en low ends
Overall the Game runs not smooth ,even with 200 fps
Are you able to source benchmarks of CS2 over the past year and a half to see if performance degrades as they update the game? Maybe you can ask permission from Hardware Unboxed to use their data every time they review a new CPU (like the 9950X review they did they include their latest CS2 benchmark data from 14900k to 5800X3D, paired with RTX4090)
edit: wow you almost did exactly that at 4:00
why reupload lmao
Thanks for correcting 🙂
lowkey i have been playing only 1.6 after they removed csgo
CS2 is the future of the franchise the same way Source was the future of the franchise.
They should just let Goose make the version of the game he envisioned back in 2004 at this point.
and I was here blaming my pc for this shit performance lol
i have a shitty gaming laptop but i am not affected by fps drops, what i am affected by are packet losses or whatever that arrow that points down next to ping is. I have a stable wifi connection and it was never an issue in csgo or in other games but noone talks about that... so i guess its just me.
Wow so ur saying games have to keep up with modern hardware and leave older hardware behind ? Thats crazy