Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Nov 5, 2019.
Seems virtually every flavour of cpu core combos, but no 4C/4T for some reason?
Recommended is 12GB of RAM but can someone tell me what it actually uses whilst playing? I have 16GB of RAM but Malwarebytes and Windows 10 services etc etc seems to add add up, so for Far Cry New Dawn I was up to 80% used.
Thanks for any info.
I have sli activated, and it works in neither dx12, nor vulkan - see my screenshots :
Mate you are spot on.Thumbs up for trying to teach these so called tech enthusiast.
The area tested seems to heavily affect the results of the benchmarks. HU/GN/Techpowerup/Guru3D all show pretty different results (cards relative to others) depending on the area tested and settings used.
So trying to draw conclusions about how a 1080Ti performs relative to another card is kind of pointless.
A little advice for people - set all your lighting and volumetric options to medium. The only one I have on high is global illumination. Every other setting is on high or ultra and I'm getting a solid 60fps @1080p on a 1070Ti, email@example.com, 16gb 3200Mhz
Xbox1 x can't do native 4k. It's upscaled. No console yet does 4k native.
Funny when it runs perfectly for me on a 1070Ti. No doubt that people are having issues, but with the above settings as I said, no issues, smooth as butter and looks amazing.
I suppose I've been lucky that I haven't had a single crash, glitch or any other issue to speak of.
Badly optimised it is not. Demanding it is. Sure some people have issues, but the game is running great for me and many others. It's a minority that are having issues. But poor optimisation is not one of them.
Simply, do not expect because you have a 1080Ti you can crank all the settings to ultra. Set all the lighting and volumetric to medium and everything else on high or ultra (for me shadows ultra, both tesselation options ultra, soft shadows high, AF16x, everything else on high) and the game runs amazingly smooth and looks beautiful. Don't expect it to run ok fully maxed out, won't happen.
As much as I'm agreeing with those saying the game runs fine, you're definitely not running the game on "ultra" with a 1070. Period. Even a 2080Ti won't.
Some settings on ultra, sure. I have multiple on ultra, just as said, all lighting and volumetric on medium (and I've tested at all levels and the visual difference is not that great between med and high)
Sweclockers during their tests found the game had issues on 4C/4T CPUs and caused occasional stutters, sometimes hanging completely for while using their i5 2500k.
According to Digital Foundry Red Dead Redemption II renders in native 2160P on the Xbox One X;
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
So another horrible console port, thanks but no thanks.
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.
Here is a nice guide:
Like most games you if you tweak settings you can get huge fps gains for very little loss of image quality.
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...
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
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.