Review: Rise of the Tomb Raider: PC graphics card performance

Quick check of hardware/software used and only real differences i see are the CPU used;

• Guru3D - eight-core Intel Core i7-5960X Extreme Edition running 4.40 GHz on all cores
• TweakTown - i5-6600K - Likely running at stock if it doesn't say otherwise.
• techpowerup - Core i7-6700K @ 4.5 GHz

Not sure how much a difference all that would, and have not read what the testing metholdogy was for them.

techpowerup didn't look like a massive difference though, but i did notice that they have 970SLI at 100fps which is nice, and around 70% scaling which is more than people were leading to believe.
I can't test this myself as have no storage space left

 

Aaaand this is this is why I refuse to buy any games which use this BS just as I refused to buy anything that used that malware securom.

It's active DRM, even if it was well optimized, as opposed to the abomination that it is, it'd still introduce CPU overhead.

 

Yeah I don't care. It works at preventing people from pirating games and all the games I played that use it are fine for me performance wise.

They found a way to secure the game and not force me on the internet, completely kill my performance, or completely kill my ability to play the game (i never had an issue with any Duenvo secure titles).

So I support it.

 

Not everyone have beastly CPUs OC'd so high that they can ignore it. You're supporting a practice that ruins the game for paying customers in exchange for a few months (at best) of it being protected from piracy.

And I'm not talking about just this game, I'm talking in general. Sooner or later there's going to be a game where Denuvo ruins it for the average consumer.

 

I find the 1440p results strange. Guru3d has the Fury X around 39fps while tweaktown and techpowerup has the Fury X at 53fps. Hmmmm I want to know what caused the variation.

 

There is literally no evidence what-so-ever of the performance impact Dunevo has on games. The only shred is from a deleted twitch channel where the dev of one game stated it impacts performance up to 3-5%.

These companies are going to push DRM, in one way or another. They feel that it protects their content and increases sales. The flipside is that they just blame bad sales on piracy and stop pushing some PC titles altogether.

In my opinion the 3-5% performance impact, if it even exists, is worth it for just getting them to shut up. We've dealt with way worse DRM systems in the past, Dunevo is so far the least intrusive, most effective. It prevents them from claiming the game sold poorly due to piracy.

Idk, I don't have a problem with it.

 

The constant shifting of the goalposts in regards to Denuvo is very frustrating. First it was that it ate up your SSD, proved false. Second it was that it just made every game it ran on buggy, again, not consistent, Dragon Age was fine, Mad Max was fine. And now we're talking about phantom CPU performance issues you guys have zero proof of. This is something some random dev of a broken, buggy game that no one can even remember the name of said in a twitch VOD.

Like at what point will you just admit that it's frustrating you can't download Just Cause 3 the day it comes out? At what point will you admit that your claims of performance issues are based on absolutely nothing? Where's the benchmark? Where's the proof? The lack of integrity of the forum and PC users in general is frankly embarrassing. Prove your points. Stop spreading ****.

 

What I had read pointed it to being more than 5% but I got nothing to link you to, read it quite some time ago. And even if it is only 5% or less that's still pretty messed and will ruin the game for some people. All it needs is a case where the CPU usage is near maxed and that extra few % can cause stuttering any time the load increases.

What do you work for them or something? There's been plenty of talk online for a long time about its performance impact, just because you've been living under a rock doesn't mean anyone owes you any explanation. There's the door, leave if it's so "embarrassing". Or better yet, prove to me you don't work for the scumbags behind Denuvo. Where's your proof you don't? Show me your work ID and provide a sample of your DNA. Embarrassing. People like you are half the problem.

And no, just because one game ran "fine" with it doesn't mean other games can't have bugs due to it. Do you even know that's not the same DRM it used to be? It's constantly changed. That makes near any comparison between games useless. The only constant is that it requires CPU power, since believe it or not, things don't just magically exist in the computer world, something has to process them. Amazing how there's an apologist or a shill for absolutely anything online these days. If you figure out how to run a VM on magic let me know.

 

Surely that is his point though, it's just all talk online and we all know talk online is a mixture of stupidity and lies.
Argue about it when you both have proof either way.

The way i see it is that if there is a performance hit it is so low that people don't notice it or can monitor it then it's not an issue, and more importantly if the money people are happy with it then they won't be looking for ways of creating something new that will no doubt be worse.

 

It seems some settings are a bit different, on Tweaktown, they use SMAA it seems ( and possibly no HBAO+ ( they set AO to on not HBAO+ ) .. In PCper, i think they dont enable HBAO+ too. and on Techpower up they use HBAO+ but with SMAA too.


Now theres still the question of system used. Or a bug with one setting enabled. dont know.,

 

Anything that's constantly running, let alone running using a VM, is going to have a performance impact, we don't need a reputable expert on video speaking of it to know that. Odds are that for us, computer enthusiasts with relatively high end hardware, it doesn't matter. But for the average customer it probably does.

I have no doubt that at some point Denuvo will release a statement saying there's zero impact from their malware. I also have no doubt that the day their DRM gets cracked proof of how much of an impact it has will be posted online.

 

you do know that the file ("license" ,call it whatever you like) Denuvo generates expires after some time(about 2 weeks) and then it needs to be refreshed and you HAVE to be online for that(if you haven't been earlier). So imagine you bought some games you really like and then you go, I dunno, to a place where internet access is really problematic. But hey, you think..OK.. I'll just switch to offline mode and enjoy this vacation playing games when I have time.. And after X days you suddenly realize that you are REQUIRED to connect to steam(denuvo) to launch the game even though you are in offline mode.... Now how about that?

Any DRM is anti-consumer. Good\great games do not need DRM. The sell like hotcakes.And the history of DRm shows us that it is a consumer, a legit buyer, who suffers the most and his rights are violated.


Back in the good old days if you paid for a game you could play it on your PC forever in ANY circumstances. On the beach, on the plane, in any country, without any third party nonsense.

Now, we have region locks, we have online verifications even in offline mode(if a server is down good luck with that) , we have drm\denuvo being tied to our hardware (there were some hilarious denuvo related errors when hardware was changed), we have tons of anti-consumer limitations that serve only greedy corporations.. You don't own a copy of a game you bought anymore. Corporations own YOU.

Brave New World!

 

It obviously uses resources, but im not convinced actual performance impact is noticeable when minimum requirements are so high these days.
It's like performance tweaking software, it looks like it's speeding stuff up but in reality I haven't met anyone who saw any difference.

When it's cracked it will be interesting, though I get a feeling a lot of people will be disappointed if it doesn't have a noticeable performance impact.
Once it's cracked, I wonder what sort of impacttthe next big drm solution will have.

 

thats actually literally evidence. youre putting the cart before the horse here; youve made your mind up that antipiracy measures dont bother you, so youll justify it to yourself. why not start from a neutral point & reach conclusions objectively? i applaud you for being honest but i dont like rationalizing in lieu of reasoning

thats intellectually disingenuous. its like you didnt even read a few posts back where someone actually outlined some problems with the codebase very plainly...or read any of our previous drm discussions. i dont pirate games. i dont like drm. i could explain exactly why until you wanna strangle me to shut me up but thats very outside the scope of this thread & im already off topic here so ill refrain

thats obvious & i cant believe its being debated.


back on topic...the performance hiccups (lets euphemize & call em that) seem to stem from driver support on some level. anyone wanna take bets on whether a patch from the devs or an AMD driver update comes out first?

 

They updated this post
http://steamcommunity.com/app/391220/discussions/0/451852225134000777/

Yeah..1080p(!)..and more than 4GB VRAM for their crappy textures ROFL..I guess nvidia paid really well to promote their 980ti

It's hilarious how games with better textures than this pos and a huge open world do not require 4GB VRAM for a crappy 1080p resolution and this pos requires..lolwut? I mean..seriously?
We already had games with beautiful 4096x4096 textures, and made not for a shooter but for a huge open world games. and they worked fine.

 

so men i think this is only for the staem i will like to play it an see when i rememember my passwd

(it is very annoyin when i cant remember my passwd it is been many month (last yaer) since i saw my men on quaklive ) but i will

 

Do you actually have any proof that Nvidia did the textures for TR? I don't see TextureWorks in the GameWorks library.

 

Think we all know that no one has that proof, it's the usual deflection away from a weakness in something they own into the usual blame game.

Even if Nvidia did spend a fortune redoing the textures for an extra setting why is now a bad thing?
I'm sure the AMD users with 8GB cards will be happy they get a chance to use it.

 

welp, apaprently 980ti is the ony one that can manages 4K very well (at console framerates but who cares for that in 4K anyways).

Seeing this performance analisis is the best thing my next upgrade should be the x80ti volta or fury 3. Good thing technology advances so fast.

 

I took a break from here, nice to see the Nvidia conspiracy's still going strong. Time for another break, you can catch me on steam if you want I'll pm you my info if you want.