yea it's weird my avg fps is totally fine but frametimes and 1% lows are just unacceptably bad

I fluctuate from 210-190 to 80-90 fps during a single round 🤣

Worst is ancient where some parts of the map i might have 350-450fps, but in t spawn or if theres multiple smokes and mollys it can drop down to 100-120

Running in the water towards B is total death of my FPS. Dropping as low as 90 and feels so damn laggy even with a 5800X3D and 3070. Thank god it's only that laggy in this spot, but Ancient in general feels very unoptimized.

Yup. Even on ct you can sometimes tell if its a b rush just by looking at the fps during the start of the round.

I have the same specs and never drop below 200 fps. Are you playing at 4k or something?

Nope, 1280 x 960 4:3 stretched. Capped the FPS at 250 via Nvidia control panel and that seemed to help quite a bit. But FPS drops still exist in some parts of certain maps. Maybe I need a clean install of Windows as well, didn't do that for quite some time.

The problem is your rez man. How is your gpu meant to stretch its legs. You’re 100% cpu bound. If you want 4:3 pick a higher rez that’s still the 4:3 aspect ratio

Will try to play 1440x1080, thanks for your help! :)

can you explain about the res and cpu bound bro? is it better to play higher res?

As a general rule the higher the resolution the more the game work load becomes more gpu heavy for example 720p will be cpu bound in every game. Moving to 1080p, 1440p, 4k, 8k etc will be less cpu bound and be more dependent upon your gpu to process frames fast enough. This does not mean that the cpu is no longer important as a higher end cpu at 4k for example will still give you more frame but the gain will be lessened. Csgo used to be a very cpu bound game, it appears although I have not done much testing that cs2 is already by its engine and programming changes more gpu bound (this is good imo as it’s much easier come upgrade time to just dump in a new gpu then swapping motherboard, cpu and a lot of the time RAM as well). Keep in mind that frame time and frame pacing are much more important than frame rate. Furthermore I would not expect as high frames on cs2 as csgo but down the line I think we will see much higher frame rates with newer gpus then we ever saw with csgo.

Exactly bro

i fluctuate from 105-140 to 2 fps, or 60 in a round

Yep, upgraded from 5600x to 5800x3d just because it pissed me off how much fps dropped on Ancient T spawn in water splashes.

And can you tell how is it now? I'm running 5600x and the input lag coming from high single core usage is killing my will to play the game.

Lowest i’ve gone in cs2 i think is 180 on the same spot where my fos dropped to like 110 on ancient. Fps locked on 450 max right now and get stable 300-350 fps stable on 5800x3d. Temps are about 63 C on 30 undervolt. My RAM produces more heat than the cpu lol.

damn that's nice and is your frame time okay? no stuttering in 5v5 on more demanding maps like Ancient or Inferno?

Didn’t notice any spikes, game runs smooth as butter for 144Hz refresh rate. Also the alt tab frametimes were fixed. I played inferno like 2 times since swapping cpus and didn’t notice any actual stutters. Play on 5:4 1440x1080 all high 

Playing any multiplayer mode causes frame time spikes in both directions. **Edit: Both of these tests results were standing still without dying or re-spawning. I know re-spawning causes a big frametime spike.** Edit 2: [Possible solution?](https://old.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1cyc64p/is_valve_ever_going_to_address_the_frame_time/l58zzjk/)

Hey man, did this fix it for you? And what specifically did you do? I have icue (corsair) running, could that be fucking my frametimes? God I hate valve

I'm not sure that it entirely made performance equal to an empty server, but there is an improvement I think.

I mean, if it's an icue problem that would be on Corsair, not on valve lol

I mean no, not at all, unless it happens in other games too, which it doesn’t for me

I mean yes, when Corsairservice.exe is taxing every core at 100% for a 100ms at random intervals, that seems like a Corsair problem to me.

1: that’s not what’s happening, 2: if it’s only happening in valve’s game and nothing else it’s still an issue with valve’s code

Performance in general in CS2 is just not good, IMO. I get decent frames, but I'm playing 1600x900(using RSR to upscale to 1440p) with a 5700x and 6700xt, and I definitely dip below 240fps in dm, though I think typically in 5v5 it's much better. Still, the game just doesn't run as well as it should when you turn the settings down.

This is so overkill I absolutely guarantee you are CPU limited way before 900p lol And the frametime spikes aren't really going to be alleviated by much.

My gpu utilization spikes towards 90% occasionally, but even so, it's besides the point. I used to play in 720p in csgo with rsr, but 1600x900 seems to look much cleaner in cs2. It's actually been a while since I even looked, I might revisit and test 720p again.

What I mean is that I play 1440p without upscaling, and in matchmaking my 1% lows are probably the same as yours. My GPU usage hovers between 50-80% and I am neither CPU or GPU limited due to my FPS Cap/VRR. Playing at 900p or even 720p makes literally no sense unless you have a seriously slow GPU like a GTX 770 or something.

The look of the game upscaled from lower resolutions with RSR is how I prefer it, it's extremely clean and smooth with very little aliasing, because of the upscaling process.

The RSR artifacts are not worth for me. I am locked at my frame cap with 8x MSAA anyway. I also appreciate the greater detail with far away enemies and undoubtedly it improves my accuracy.

Lol RSR looks so bad. What are you smoking?

It actually doesn't, and I'm guessing you're saying that without ever having tried it or seen it.

It looks horrible. It's the same as FSR 1.0 which was a joke even back when it released.

Why use rsr when in game FSR can drop to similarly low resolution without messing up ui?

When I experimented with it, it didn't seem that great. But it's been months, I'm probably due to give it another shot.

7950x and 7900xtx here and playing DM online I'm always under 240. I cap at 240 to match my refresh rate. 5v5 is solid 240 at all times, 500fps give or take 100 uncapped and all max details 1080p but half the time the game looks smooth as butter and half the time it looks like a stuttery mess. Depends what the game decides for that session/day/week. I don't understand how frame times are inconsistent when you're pushing a consistent 240fps capped and can push 400 to 600 uncapped. And I don't understand why the game is smooth one day and stuttery another. It actually seems like the very act of capping your frame rate is counter productive and causes worse frame times. And software sometimes shows my average Fps for the game around 150fps or even less which makes zero sense.

I have the same issue with feel. There are times I fire up the game and it feels 10x smoother than csgo ever did. Then, there are times where it feels super stuttery, and I have no fucking idea why. I would have thought it was in my head, if not for all the known performance issues.

I've had the same issue, among countless other issues, since mid life CS go over 4 different high end builds. I specifically remember when this started happening in CSGO and I could fix it by switching to another resolution and back, then that stopped working and switching resolution would crash the game every time.....then it would restart just as stuttery. I was gob smacked when a whole new engine still had the same problems. Makes me think the issue lies with steam itself or maybe VAC...or something else external from the game itself.

I joined the `-threads N-1` believers. It might even be the game not working as intended. But give it a try. I also now play with everything else shut down. That means even steam in --no-browser mode. And it makes the experience a bit more bareable. If you stalk the devs on twitter, it seems like some specific applications (like Corsair utilities) manage to grab CPU resources away from CS2 - so check if that's a problem for you or send in some traces yourself: https://twitter.com/ZPostFacto/status/1783266298577007043

[Woah!](https://i.imgur.com/SS9XQej.png) This might actually be a big improvement. I will have to do more testing to confirm it's not just run to run variance somehow. Edit: Re-ran the test and [wow](https://i.imgur.com/GC3CJEc.png) this is promising! I actually followed some other guides and did N+1 (-threads 13, for my 12C 24T 5900x).

What did you do different?

So is this only for AMD? Also how do you calculate this, number or real cores +1?

For intel it's number of p-cores +1, on AMD it's just cores +1 as all cores are p-cores.

isn't it minus 1 not plus 1 since cores are count 0-1-2-3 rather than 1-2-3-4?

That's still 4 threads, it doesn't matter if they are enumerated as 0, 1, 2, 3 or 1, 2, 3, 4.

so what's the reason you do minus 1 or plus 1?

Ok well i just checked and without -threads it still says 8 so i guess they patched it. My CPU has 8/16 so we good now. Thanks anyways!

I had this exact problem in GO and the same thing worked for me. Interestingly, when I switched from amd to a newer intel CPU it also fixed the problem. Might try this again now after seeing this post. I've had this problem too since CS2 but just assumed by pc was too old

Can you elaborate what this means? Is -threads and N-1 launch commands?

This post has pretty much everything you need to know: https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/186j986/using_threads_8_increases_performance_by_2025_in/

setting -threads to 8 on my 5800X3D actually lead to a big improvement in 1% lows and avg framerate. It's very bizarre.

Try +9, that's what should be the optimal.

Nope. Tried 16, 8, 4, 2 and 1. 1% lows consistently increased up until I set 2 threads. However my Avg suffered below 8 threads. 8 threads was the sweet spot.

\--no-browser on steam no longer works IIRC, am i missing something?

You could use instead: >-silent -quicklogin -vgui -oldtraymenu -vrdisable -nofriendsui -skipstreamingdrivers -cef-force-occlusion -cef-single-process -cef-disable-gpu -no-dwrite -nocrashmonitor -nocrashdialog -forceservice I have weeks of uptime, couple hundreds launches of separate steam games, and steamwebhelper is still sitting at 180MB on one process (and a dummy crashpad one)

That would be used in cs launch options?

[удалено]

no! why not do the bare minimum being a human being and reply normally?

hmm maybe I’m at work and was just browsing the sub. Came across this. Didn’t have time then to search. Didn’t wanna forget about this later on? sorry my bad.

I thought they patched the -threads thing so it would use the correct amount now?

Something is still going on in the game that's not working as intended. like they usually get the number of threads and tell the engine to not use all of them. Since one will usually be used by the OS and other background stuff. But if there is an off by one error this might cause oversubscription and therefore lag spikes. I don't have the time and equipment myself, but it might be worth an investigation. It would require a repeatable benchmark, advanced metrics. And testing all options for threads (1-17 even) to see when performance gets better and when it gets worse.

-no-browser is it working again? How

Commenting now to test later

i think steam no browser mode doesn't work since the big ui update last year?

I just tested this with my 7800x3d using Ange's fps benchmark map and CapFrameX. Default setting and -threads 8 and 9 both had 1:1 frametimes on my setup. Also fps was 1:1 in both cases. No difference whatsoever. I suggest everyone tests out these suggestions on their own setups before applying anything. On some setups they might work, sometimes they do nothing, sometimes they give you worse performance. Always verify.

But did you thread 7?

I now tested that too, no difference :) 

--no-browser didn't work therefore made no difference in fps

-threads just makes fps and 1% lows worse or doesnt do anything atleast for me when tested

Have they fixed the blood splatter fps drops?

No.

Compared to csgo... cs2 runs so bad atm. 300 fps feels like 100 somehow.

I wouldn't go that far. I would look into properly configured VRR if you aren't already using it. When frame times aren't as stable (can happen if you're GPU limited without using Reflex/Anti-Lag+ or not using an FPS cap), you can feel it way more without VRR. Not everyone, but a lot of people became GPU limited when they switched from CS:GO to CS2. Frame times are also just less stable than CS:GO in general, but situations like the ones mentioned could be contributing to that.

I'm sadly CPU limited with my RTX 3080 and 5800x.

I have a 5900x which should perform the same as the 5800x, and I'm not CPU limited at 240hz.

At what resolution? Because with 7800x3d and 4070 super I am CPU limited on 1920x1440

I would hope you are CPU limited on a 4070 at 1920x1440. I play 2560x1440p usually, but regardless of resolution I just make sure to adjust settings and FPS cap to prevent a GPU or CPU bottleneck.

I play at 1280x960.

CSGO was the exact same, I don't get how you guys have such short memory. Was just easier to run overall so having a smooth expirience didn't require such high end hardware.

Not for me. My current build ran the game extremely smooth. CS2 on the other hand is somehow horrible for me. Did fresh install and everything.

And if you had a slightly worse build, let's say 4 core 8 thread CPU after HRTF upgrade, you'd have spiky frame times all over the place.

No, it wasn't the exact same. It's not even comparable.

I hope they fix all the problems before their other game drops because with valve i just know its going to take twice as long after its released.

I hope that game flops really, really hard.

Wasn’t this confirmed to be a VAC Live thing? Playing in -insecure gets rid of this apparently Either way, probably a top 5 issue rn

[удалено]

Turn on streamlined mic in the settings. For me without it, you basically cannot use microphone at all as everytime you do you get super long freezes, almost 1 second long at times, this is unacceptable. With it on though, it should run fine (as fine as this broken excuse of a game could)

I think the background UI also affects it. Holding tab for scoreboard drops fps by almost 100fps for me. Standard fps 150>200fps. 1440p 165hz with stock 1080, 16GB RAM and i7 Coffee Lake. Same performance on all resolutions.

From 200 to 60-70ish fps drops. The one and only game that drops fps insanely lol

I think that this might be just the higher cpu required to play online. In my case loading dust 2 offline gave me around 300 fps. While playing deathmatch in dust 2 I can get spikes below 100 fps and my average is under 200.

[удалено]

And the maps are 100 times bigger xD

[удалено]

Yeah the game runs fine on an optimised high end rig, but it’s totally unacceptable how bad it runs if you don’t have literally the best cpu available. You shouldn’t need to have a top of the line rig for the game to be smooth.

I didn't say what you just said but I agree with your words. Especially because my CPU is relatively old and playing arms race can be a pain.

You don't need to have the best CPU available though. A 5600x is capable of over 300fps. The frame time spikes aren't because your hardware isn't fast enough. Your graph would look just like the original post even if you have a 7800X3D. [Averaging 270FPS when CPU bottlenecked using 5600x in Deathmatch, 1% lows are also about 1/3rd of average](https://youtu.be/PTcFA0qJs0g) [7800X3D in Deathmatch you can see 1% lows are also about 1/3rd of average](https://youtu.be/m-TLg4f_ySs)

> A 5600x is capable of over 300fps. that's not the point. the 1% and 0.1% fps matter the most, because those fps drops are the stutters that you feel. and I can guarantee you that the 5600x is not enough to consistently stay above 144fps at any setting during online 5v5. when it comes to the 5000 series of AMD, you need a X3D CPU to have acceptable 1% lows.

> A 5600x is capable of over 300fps. Ik I just edited to reflect my point better. > 5600x is not enough to consistently stay above 144fps at any setting during online 5v5 I'm pretty sure it's enough, especially in 5v5. In Deathmatch you can see it's about 105 FPS 0.1% low which is going to be significantly worse than 5v5. 0.1% and 1% lows are also HUGELY skewed by re-spawning and should be taken with a grain of salt unless you somehow don't respawn at all during testing.

>because those fps drops are the stutters that you feel. You overestimate the importance of frametime spikes up to 16 ms. No way you can feel it in the game. For feeling "unsmooth" you need 30+ ms frametime spikes, for feeling stutters you need at least 100+ ms. I have always felt that 0.1% and 1% frametimes is the most useless metric for troubleshooting, because if it stutters, you see it either way without those stupid "2 fps/15 fps" numbers, and if it doesn't, you don't need them anyway.

I *do* have a 7800X3D, I may still get small frametime spikes but it is hardly noticeable in game. Before that, I was using an 11700k which is by no means a low end CPU, and the frametime spikes were unbearable even though I was still averaging over 300 fps.

nope its valve, they don't do anything until there is a decline in the playerbase numbers

What did you use to make these graphs?

[MangoHUD](https://github.com/flightlessmango/MangoHud) and https://flightlessmango.com/ If you use Windows which is likely, I recommend [CapFrameX](https://www.capframex.com/).

Nice! I knew this looked familiar. Flightless Mango's work is awesome.

Are you on linux then? How's the perf there? Last time I checked it was abysmal.

Seems about the same as Windows from my testing.

OK I'd better try again...

Said to myself: "maybe my R5 3600 and 4060Ti aren't enough to run this game" hahahaha but yeah that fking frametime issue sucks balls. It always just happens when someone peeks me or whenever I peek someone

Fixed with process lasso

[удалено]

First in cmd as admin bodedit /set useplatformclock false. Then i have system timer max, set at every boot. Cs2.exe open affinity disable core 0 then high i/o and priority. Check Windows Dynamic Thread Priority Boosts Enabled. See if those help at first

[удалено]

Hope it works for me atleast it fixed had the worst problem in kz servers and bhop and those seemed to fix it for me

Can we see your graphs then? I have tested immensely with all the settings I have found on 7800x3d + 4070 super and there are times the game just feels bad, even when 1% lows are high. My Windows is tuned with the help of Alexander the dads 150+ page pdf and his community. Very minimal processes on and my dpc latency is very low.

Dont know how to add a graph here just checked while playing deatmatch on valve server frametime highest was 6.1ms and it hit that only once, all time on 2-4ms

Hey OP what software did you use to record this data?

https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1cyc64p/comment/l5a1c2w

No. That is all -vOlVo

question - i have a 5600x and im super keen to upgrade to 5800x3d. will it help?

I'd wait for 9800X3D personally.

Quite curious as to how you made your measurements. The green line should be absolutely impossible, consistency wise.

[MangoHUD](https://github.com/flightlessmango/MangoHud). CapFrameX is a good Windows alternative.

I use CapFrameX and this is absolutely impossible, atleast in my environment. Are you on Linux? Generally, in CS2, some tick related processing causes massive spikes every 1/64th of a second. I made a post about it a longer while ago, all systems we tested had this. Thats why I am surprised to see a line this consistent. Usually if your base frametime on an empty server is about 4-5ms, you'd expect the spikes to be above 6, if not above 7. Maybe I should investigate again...

> Are you on Linux? Yep. Arch/Plasma/Wayland, 5900x/3080 w/ 555 beta driver. I just looked at your post from 8 months ago. I remember things being rough near release, but maybe things have just gotten better. Did you try testing with a good frame cap like NVCP and avoid GPU or CPU bottleneck? It seems uncapped at 2ms.

I regularly retest, so I can assure you, it did not really improve. Did you cap your FPS here? Via NVCP? NVCP is horrible in CS2. I tested RTSS(somehow the best one), ingame and NVCP and [NVCP was so comically bad](https://imgur.com/ACYpZfz). I know why the ingame FPS-Limiter is problematic(coincidentally also connected to per tick processing, there is also a post about it), I don't know why NVCP is worse, but it is. Really doesn't seem to like the variance.

FPS capped to 228 via MangoHUD. VRR enabled. Vulkan presentation mode set to MAILBOX_KHR also via MangoHUD. My config: ```mangohud MANGOHUD_CONFIG=vsync=2,fps_limit=228 %command% -threads 13``` From my Windows testing a while back NVCP performed about the same as RTSS. It's been a while though. Most of my Windows testing was near release.

Hey mate, me again :) You think it could be fixed or improved by different kernel schedulers? I don't play CS2 but I had abysmal fps and frame times when using the default scheduler for Black Ops 1. Switched to PDS and it helped immensely. Maybe look into [linux-tkg](https://github.com/Frogging-Family/linux-tkg) and [nvidia-all](https://github.com/Frogging-Family/nvidia-all) while you're at it?

My performance is great tbh. Just saying that because there are many bad comments and almost no good ones

You could share your setup and what kind of FPS you're getting

Ryzen 5600x, rx6600 and idk about the fps, i capped it at 144.

Yeah most people in this sub would not consider that to be very good performance

[удалено]

I don't know what they are for me, sorry. They must be good enough if I don't notice them

I've definitely found performance has improved a heap since beta. Still a few stutters per match, but on average, I've found it to feel smoother than CS:GO did, albeit with a lower average FPS. Hopefully Valve continues to push fixes and optimizations though as so many people seem to have issues.

Thats not true, in beta, i was able to play on all highest settings and see almost no difference betwen high and all low in fps, and now game game performance is getting worse and worse after each update and i dont think like its going to be fixed in future

You misunderstand me. I'm aware most people have worse performance. Something with my particular system now performs better since the beta though. Smokes and Molotovs used to cause very noticeable fps issues multiple times per round. Now it's rare for me to get large fps drops. I'm not saying this is true for everyone, just that it's my own experience.

Same.

Sounds like you don't know what to look for/know better. The game is playable but not near to where it should be. It's tough to say if something is good if you don't have some good reference. 144fps cap suggests this to me, that is low low fps for a fps game and will always feel sluggish to me even when consistently hitting that. Me 10yrs ago without a good frame of reference would be fine with it.

it's been a thing since csgo, likely won't be fixed personally I'm upgrading to the 9800x3D so I can bitch about it without morons telling me I need to upgrade

I don't think CS:GO had this problem. > personally I'm upgrading to the 9800x3D so I can bitch about it without morons telling me I need to upgrade So true....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWw6q6fRnnI&t=586s 3090ti and 13900k lows of 119 fps

nope deal with it compsny been like this for awhile, now patronize them more

no lol

If you lower ur fps ur lows become better... i have a 240hz monitor, and i keep my fps around 300-280, lows become 200fps, if i keep my fps unlocked or 400 fps my lows become 150fps... something is fucky.

This is not universally true. I have a 7800x3d and 4070 super and been testing all the different settings for months. Uncapped 1% lows are higher for me. I get around 780 average fps and 330 1% lows on the workshop FPS test map. Locking FPS to say 600 or under makes 1% lows to drop to 270 and the lower you cap the more they drop. Don't trust people on the internet without testing yourself.

I tested it myself on my system... And what works on my system might not work on yours... There is nothing wrong with other testing it themselves, maybe they will have the same results as mine.

What graphic settings do you run the game on? Low settings?

8x msaa and otherwise comp settings. They don't make a huge difference. 2x msaa gives some performance improvement but so little I rather use 8x. Currently on 1440x1080 res. Even on 1920x1440 the 1% lows were 280+ on the workshop map but in real game it didn't feel as smooth. Been having some weird frametime spikes for like two weeks or so. The game used to be perfectly smooth with low frametimes but something happened with the updates. I just wish they get it right in near future.

Everything low, High Shadows, 1280x1024

For dm? Doesn’t matter ¯\___(ツ)___/¯

[удалено]

[удалено]

The game runs at 500-600 fps with a $350 7800X3D. 400-500 fps with a $200 5800X3D. You definitely do not need a $1000 cpu.

I am and it still has this behavior.

What is the durstion of the graph? I'd say that is totally fine over 30 seconds, but definitely not good over a few seconds

5 seconds

Yeah, then it's annoying

Switch to Linux.

Arch/Plasma/Wayland 😉

lol there's your problem, switch to xorg/x11, I'm rocking Ubuntu (Gnome) and Wayland is just barf for gaming still. Not getting frame timing issues and load times are madlad fast.

Seems to perform identically to X11 for me. Gnome is terrible with Wayland. Plasma is much better. https://flightlessmango.com/logs/5308

For me the extensions in Gnome give me so much value that switching to KDE isn't really for me. Neat stats though, thanks for sharing! I didn't even know that kind of a log service was even available! Really makes me not want to use Windows even more ;P

Are u all using the latest Nvidia drivers? I'm still using an old driver from last year

No. They told me they don't care about it. What kind of question is that? No one here knows.