Review: Red Dead Redemption 2: PC graphics benchmark analysis

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Nov 5, 2019.

  1. MonstroMart

    MonstroMart Master Guru

    Messages:
    680
    Likes Received:
    230
    GPU:
    GB 5700 XT GOC 8G
    It's not only this game though. BF V has stutters problem with 4c/4t cpus too. As we are moving toward 8c/16t cpus as being the norm people can expect this to happen more and more in the future.
     
  2. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,329
    Likes Received:
    177
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070 GamingX
    For me the real comparison to PS4 (standard) is with GTX970. It should be able to run very similarly to it in both image-quality and performance (minus exceptions like Assassins Creed: Odyssey).

    From the limited research I did on this, it seems comparable. It's also clear that PC image-quality is much better than PS4 Pro and still clearly better than Xbox One X.

    However, the extra detail in the PC version also means there is more "pixelation", for example when looking through the trees, but, this is a side-effect of being more detailed.

    Check this video from 2 minutes onwards to see what I mean.
     
    Singleton99 likes this.
  3. 0blivious

    0blivious Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,842
    Likes Received:
    386
    GPU:
    5700XT/ 1070/ RX580
    Nope. I've been playing completely maxed out on Ultra. I think it might dip into the 30s once in awhile (in a city) and I may back off a couple settings, perhaps some of those you mentioned. It's really been running quite well. I don't recall people complaining this much when the Witcher 3 released. It was easily as demanding if not more so than this. All I recall the complaints were about a graphical downgrade.
     
    pharma and airbud7 like this.
  4. Irenicus

    Irenicus Master Guru

    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    97
    GPU:
    1070Ti OC
    Quite well running 30fps? Dude, you're not getting more than 45 MAX on ultra with a 1070. I could max it out on my 1070Ti, factually more powerful than your 1070 by quite a margin, and I wouldn't be hitting 60fps. I don't mind 60fps, even if some complain they want more (with higher hz monitors) but I wouldn't settle for LESS than 60. Why? Because I notice it way too much. Hell, I notice when it drops to 58, 55 and so on and it doesn't feel smooth.
    And yes, people complained A LOT about Witcher 3, which will still cripple certain hardware, in fact even with a 1070, you won't be maxing it out today and get 60fps at all times.

    With my current settings however, it's a buttery smooth 60fps at all times.


    Well of course PC is going to look better than an Xbox1 X, but what's this pixelation you speak of? I see none of that and trust me I've been looking very closely at the game, since I play VERY slow and spend a lot of time just trotting around on my horse admiring the scenery.
     

  5. NCC1701D

    NCC1701D Member Guru

    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    116
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 Ti
    I feel like the graphics are a bit overrated for this game. It looks good, but not earth shattering like some reviewers make it out to be. I would expect better performance for the level of visuals.
     
    Solfaur and fantaskarsef like this.
  6. 0blivious

    0blivious Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,842
    Likes Received:
    386
    GPU:
    5700XT/ 1070/ RX580
    Who are you trying to convince here? The only times it ever come close to 30-40 FPS is when you are in a major city. Most of the game is not in anything that complex. According to the benchmark, I get 79 FPS max. 39 average. I bumped a few settings and it's 49 average in that benchmark. And again, that's in the WORST case areas that I have rarely been in at this point.

    No, this isn't running at 120-144FPS, but it is NOT running choppy in any way, shape or form. You would think I might notice with my 144hz monitor but you apparently know better than I do what it is I'm seeing here. I give up. If people want to b!tch and complain, let them.
     
  7. Alienwarez567

    Alienwarez567 Active Member

    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1
    So another horrible console port, thanks but no thanks.
     
  8. Irenicus

    Irenicus Master Guru

    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    97
    GPU:
    1070Ti OC
    39 average? Meanwhile here I am sitting on 60average, 60 min, 60 max. 60 at all times even in Saint Denis while raining.

    Not trying to convince anyone, I'm too old for that crap. I'm simply stating facts. Lower your lighting and volumetric fog settings to medium with minimal visual difference and you'll see a boost in fps, I have everything else on high and ultra, except for particle stuff on medium. NOTHING on low.

    "when you are in a major city" -no, when YOU are in a major city. Please don't speak for me. As I said my fps never dips, I've tweaked my settings to make sure of that. And still got a lot of settings on high/ultra. You simply have to know which ones to put on medium (process of elimination and knowledge of game settings over many years of playing and tweaking them)

    But yeah, you're not playing the game with everything on ultra on a 1070 without crappy performance. Oh wait, you already confirmed you have crappy performance and you don't even have EVERYTHING on ultra. Dude, just stop. Even a 2080Ti will have trouble with everything maxed out.

    Nope. Not sure what you're doing PC gaming if you expect never to see issues with a release. The game runs buttery smooth here and for MANY others. Only a minority are having issues. To be expected on this platform. It's a great port and we all know Rockstar care and will patch the game until issues are sorted. They already pushed out a couple of patches within the first 2 days.

    You would be wrong. I haven't seen as good a looking game since Witcher 3. This looks even better. Your feelings are incorrect.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2019
  9. Dribble

    Dribble Member Guru

    Messages:
    136
    Likes Received:
    56
    GPU:
    Geforce 1070
    Amaze likes this.
  10. GREGIX

    GREGIX Master Guru

    Messages:
    584
    Likes Received:
    58
    GPU:
    MSI 1080 /AMD v7
    Wow, discussion about crappy fps. Y, 60fps is crappy to me, 30 or 39 average....well, I would rather dig my eyes out, than play that way...
     

  11. HybOj

    HybOj Member Guru

    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    54
    GPU:
    ASUS GTX 970 DCmini
    Interresting, this shows to ppl who still claim Anisotropic filtering comes with no performance hit that they are not right. It was like this WAY BACK, but since nowadays textures are basically a materials with god knows how many layers, its not truth. I 1st observed it in the Rise of the Tombraider.

    Here u can see almost 4% performance hit.

    For comparison, lets see the setting which are LESS HW DEMANDING than Anisotropy here (switching from low to highest setting)

    Lighting quality -2,5%
    Global ilumination - 1,5%
    Far shadow quality - 3,9%
    Particle quality - 1.5%
    Tesselation Q - 3,4%
    FXAA - 3,3%
    Volumetric Light Q - 4,2%

    I think its worth noting...

    PS: I never go over anisotropy 8x, u cant see a difference and u increase the requirements 2x
     
    Solfaur likes this.
  12. ELIAS-E

    ELIAS-E New Member

    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    GTX 1080TI
    NVIDIA strategy is always to destroy old cards to force us to upgrade.
    This is completely unacceptable.
    My 1080ti performance is worse than RTX 2060 !!!
    IF NVIDIA will not fix Pascal GPU's performance in RED DEAD REDEMTPION 2, this will be my LAST NVIDIA GPU and I will switch to AMD without thinking twice.
    I Hope each one will try to makes NVIDIA understanding this.
     
  13. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,584
    Likes Received:
    2,049
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    nonsense and foolishness.

    there is nothing to fix.

    We have been spoilt by a minimally-shifting feature set for too long and the tech community has gotten ignorant to what actually happens when new graphical features are introduced with a new game.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2019
    jbscotchman likes this.
  14. ELIAS-E

    ELIAS-E New Member

    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    GTX 1080TI
    No it is not insane, NVIDIA is doing it, to force us to upgrade from Pascal to Turing and makes tons of money!!
    I remember when Kepler GPU's were running very bad in Witcher 3 comparing to Maxwell. (780ti was same performance as 960!) and there was a post on NVIDIA forum talking about this issue. NVIDIA listened to us and released a new driver for Kepler GPU's for witcher 3 that fixed Kepler cards performance in witcher 3 and gained 10-15fps, I had GTX 780 and tested it.
     
  15. ELIAS-E

    ELIAS-E New Member

    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    GTX 1080TI
    It happened in witcher 3 when NVIDIA released a driver for Kepler cards that fixed the performance.
    Anyway, I will switch to AMD and I don't trust NVIDIA anymore.
     

  16. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,584
    Likes Received:
    2,049
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    Irrelevant, come up with a new argument but get yourself clued in on the vulkan capabilities improved upon with Turing and Vega/RDNA capabilities first.

    Pascal has architectural limitations that mean Vulkan doesn't work as well as it can on Turing.

    DX9 and 11 are not Vulkan and D3D12, there is not alot in the way of Driver optimizations you can introduce which aren't actually optional features of the API in the first place.

    Turing VK features such as
    FP16 math
    Turing Mesh acceleration (VK / DX12) 3x faster than Pascal
    Concurrent Execute
    Variable Rate Shading
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2019
    Stormyandcold likes this.
  17. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,655
    Likes Received:
    1,033
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Kepler was two gens old at the time and had abysmal sp32 compute compared to Maxwell and latter. Kepler was not a priority for optimization therefore it was put off so that the newer GPU architectures got optimizations first. At least Nvidia addressed optimizing Kepler, AMD on the otherhand dropped Terascale optimizations immediately following GCN1 release and bug fixes stopped 6 months later.
     
    Stormyandcold and airbud7 like this.
  18. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,779
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    These posts are honestly cancer.

    Not only do Hilbert's tests not show what your saying but in other benchmarks, for example GN, they have the 1080Ti 10-14% faster than 2060 Super - techpowerup has the 1080Ti ~18% faster than a RTX2060. So how in the world are you saying your 1080Ti is slower than a 2060 non-super?

    Either your computer is completely screwed up and you should consider setting it on fire or you're intentionally lying to propagate fanboy nonsense.

    The frustrating part about all this is I know like 2 years from now I'm going to see posts using this game as an example of Nvidia downgrading old cards. @Glottiz These posts are perfect examples as to why you wait for overwhelming evidence before you jump on the bandwagon. It's just another example in many where people are jumping to conclusions and now when more information comes out the initial results aren't even indicative of the overall games performance.
     
    yasamoka, fantaskarsef and Irenicus like this.
  19. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,584
    Likes Received:
    2,049
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    They're upset because the 2060 with its improved feature set in this quite heavy title isn't as far behind the 1080ti as say.... COD:MW was.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2019
  20. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,779
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    Yeah I mean the architecture differences (of which I think Turing is the largest departure in architecture since Kepler) are going to factor a lot into these performance differences.. but in this case no other site even shows what people here are claiming. Hilbert's testing area, for whatever reason, has the 1080Ti/Super cards closest. There are multiple other sites that reviewed performance now and all them have the 1080Ti outperforming the 2060 and even the 2060 Super by a significant margin. I don't know why the settings/area Hilbert tested showed these results but they clearly aren't indicative of the relative performance of the cards throughout the game. I think he tested the snow area? Perhaps some shader there just runs better on Turing? Not sure but Techpowerup/Hardware Unboxed/Gamers Nexus all show radically different results in respect to the 1080Ti compared to the 2060 Super. I didn't look into any of the other cards relative comparisons.

    In this guys case he's saying his 1080Ti is worse than 2060.. which even Hilberts test don't show despite them already being an outlier in favor for Turing.

    Maybe I'm reading these posts wrong but it sounds like you guys are both arguing that the game looks good and runs well but you're both being hostile to each other? Lol
     

Share This Page