Review: Resident Evil 3: PC graphics performance analysis

I'm impressed. Looks great and can be very playable on very outdated hardware.

I imagine this has to do with scheduler. Seeing as this was optimized for modern consoles, it'd likely perform better if all threads were running in parallel (like on a FX, Ryzen, or non-HT Intel CPU). If the scheduler was using the HT'd threads, that's slowing the game down since the parent thread is out-of-sync. This is why HT was known to hurt performance of games about 10 years ago. The only reason that hasn't remained especially relevant lately is because most games for the longest time were only optimized for Intel. This game could possibly be the first change in that.

I'm sure if this were tested on a 3700X or an 10980XE with HT off, there would be no performance difference between core quantity, until you reach 8 total threads.

 

LOL AMD's old RX480 beats Nvidia's 1060 GTX.

 

If it runs and looks anything like REVii then it is a good game. Man I remember playing REVii and gave up as it was just too scary. Lol!

 

I mean is true, in 1080p and 1440p the 480 is equal or better of the 1060 ( that is old as well ) what is wrong with the interpreation?

 

Worth noting that just like Resident Evil 2, the DX11 renderer in this game performs better while offering the same visual set. As such, the DX12 benchmarks aren't particularly useful, people should use DX11 unless they are CPU-limited.

 

You are always cpu limited at 1080p so dx12 offers more variability. No need to use dx11 unless you have an old nvidia card.

 

3 resolutions tested;

GTX1060 vs RX480

1080p - 74 vs 76
1440p - 49 vs 48
4k - 25 vs 23

So, you're saying 2fps difference = better, but, 1fps difference = equal? In reality they're so close it's not even worth mentioning. However, if we're going to be absolute here regardless of whether the fps is actually playable, then, the interpretation is wrong. 1 out of 3 doesn't make the RX 480 better in this test and never will. Infact, the results show that the higher the resolution, the better the GTX1060 is against RX 480.

 

Actually the performance results in this review seem to be an outlier. Other reviews indicate the 1650 Super (4GB) outperforms RX 570 (4GB) in DX 12 at all resolutions. Also DX 11 offers the best performance for both IHV's.

Edit: Looked at a few more reviews and it seems to go back and forth in terms of performance, depending vram comparisons. However those that tested DX11 and DX12 do suggest better performance using DX11.

 

Nice to see RX Vega fighting strong in this game. Looks like a game that I will find interesting.

 

For 60 fps it might not matter but for high fps DX12 mode was a big hit to performance in RE2, they screwed it up badly somehow. Leave it to Capcom to pull that off. And what do you mean variability?

And for anyone who knows: Is the performance hit under DX12 in this game as bad as it was with RE2?

 

I didn't have any issues in dx12, same now with RE3, might as well enable max 8GB just to see.

 

Go run RE2 and try it back to back. It wasn't a situational thing. DX12 mode tanked performance universally. Meaning the developers screwed something up royally.

 

hmm, sorry my bad, just checked and I played it in dx11.


About RE3 I tried with 8gb vram instead of 6gb and it still ran ok, no obvious stutters or slowdowns, only by new parts of the game a little - open world, will try dx11 again.


edit:
DX11 is better, still even by new RE3.

 

Thanks for checking. I had heard that RE3 was basically using all the same assets they made RE2 with, so it's not surprising they both suffer from the same problems.