Thus FRAPS goes to the other side, rather than use compression, it saves nearly totally uncompressed. If CPU consumption gets too heavy, it impacts performance of games. To apply more compression, more CPU must be consumed. To use less space, more compression must be applied. When dealing with video you have two conflicting goals, low CPU usage vs low space usage. I guess bandicam's engine won't exploit the full ability of the rig? I also toggled the CPU affinity but no luck at all.įRAPS gets its speed specifically because of the large file size. The weird thing is that FRAPS that is considered to create huge fps drop generally won't make me lag at all.

Also the drives do not share same ATA channel. Note that the stress on the CPU is tops 80%.

(OS -game - output recording folder are on separate drives) even when I set all graphics to the lowest it gave me 200 fps & then on recording it dropped again in 8 fps so it must be something else. But the result was worst than FRAPS, half size recording. I used all formats, the best I got was 12 fps. This is my main concern.īut, how can it drop to 8 fps when the same format?įRAPS gives you 30fps with no lag at all. I was excited when I read about bandicam on how small its files are. I have 60 stable fps when not recording this game in any situation & with max video settings.

I expected that since it wont have to compress it ,it would give me the same fps as FPAPS. I tried the RGB24 which is supposed to be the same as FRAPS lossless standard recording. It's not the components guys, it's something else. I get 8 fps during recording (game: empire at war rts). I tried EVERY setting & preset there is to it, from the lowest to the highest. WinXP SP3 (yes it still rocks based on this rig).

Bandicam video loop