The Witcher 3 - GTX 780Ti Could Push 35-45 FPS At Max?

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Apr 14, 2014.

  1. main_shoby

    main_shoby Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,044
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    980Ti Qnix 2710 96Hz
    well, thing is, playing in highest end graphics, is a luxury. And for luxury my friend, you have to pay :)
    If one 780ti is not enough for max graphics, I am sure, two will be enough. If not, i will still be happy that something is out there which justifies my investment in two 780ti.
     
  2. Lowki

    Lowki Master Guru

    Messages:
    622
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    RTX 2070 xc ultra
    I hate aa anyways. always feels like I'm trading fps for a worse image quality. I'll keep my crisp jaggies over blurry vision any day.
     
  3. Slikar

    Slikar Master Guru

    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX970 WF3
    But this is year before game is out, when its finished and when drivers for the game are made. It must run at least 10-15 fps more...
     
  4. sw1000xg

    sw1000xg Banned

    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 970 G1
    They having a laugh? Console un-optimized tosh... I know what you lot will say, but if it works on console then it's not a PC game.

    This **** is getting old, getting so bored with games today running at such low fps on top end cards!

    We all saw that Unreal demo on a 680 and that looks much better than this. Why can't they just develop games properly today?
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2014

  5. sw1000xg

    sw1000xg Banned

    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 970 G1
    What's bugging me with AA is people complain about it, but yet they still haven't in my opinion allowed for two cards to deal with this?

    I have a 660ti old a bit slow but games today are a joke in terms of graphical progression, and there is no need for me to upgrade to upscaled console games. But yet why can't I use my old 560 Ti to do the work of AA and let my 660Ti do everything else? Or is this to easy? You can do it with a physX card and what ever you are using why not do the same with AA?
     
  6. ---TK---

    ---TK--- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,112
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    2x 980Ti Gaming 1430/7296
    My 780ti were cheaper than the 290x when I bought them. A big LOL boycotting an nvidia game.
     
  7. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,521
    Likes Received:
    1,395
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    While I like the idea and personally think this should happen to, it is comparing apples to oranges. Physics is a completely separate set of calculations that has nothing to do with visuals; representing physics through visuals is an entirely separate process. AA is a visual process, and PROPER AA needs to know the geometry of the objects being displayed, otherwise there isn't much difference between AA and just simply blurring the image. I figure dedicating a GPU to AA is like putting a motor in a trailer attached to your car - sure the extra power might be handy but getting to operate at the same speed as the car (and knowing when to stop) isn't that easy.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2014
  8. sw1000xg

    sw1000xg Banned

    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 970 G1
    But this is what amazes me is... They haven't even tried? Surely it's a matter of software? I remember when I had my Geforce 3 and tried AA for the first time BANG crippled, and since then have never used. And don't see the point adding it when most cannot use it. It's pointless hogging hardware or software on a graphics card.
     
  9. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,521
    Likes Received:
    1,395
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    I agree - something should have been done about it a long time ago. They could have at the very least included some instruction set dedicated to AA. The stupid thing is by the time there is a hardware solution to AA, UHD screens will obsolete the need of AA. With enough pixel density, you don't really need to smooth the edges anymore. I get the impression that raising the screen resolution has a much lesser effect on performance than AA. In other words, enabling AA at 720p could have roughly the same visual smoothness as 1080p with no AA, but it wouldn't surprise me if AA at 720p would perform slower. At the very least, an easy fix to a higher resolution is more VRAM and better bandwidth, but I do realize it isn't quite that simple. AA, to my knowledge, doesn't really have a straight-forward hardware solution.
     
  10. Ch0plol

    Ch0plol Member Guru

    Messages:
    167
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    ASUS GTX 770 4GB
    As many others have said, I also hardly ever go above 2x MSAA unless the game can easily handle higher (like CS:GO where I can go to 16xQCSAA no problem). There just doesn't seem to be much of a difference between 2x and higher settings to make the performance hit worth it.

    It's pretty easy to claim a game will cripple GPUs when you turn on 8x MSAA or some form of SSAA.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2014

  11. main_shoby

    main_shoby Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,044
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    980Ti Qnix 2710 96Hz
    I paid 500$/780ti open box from craigslist. beat that :banana:
    and oh yeah! +1 to boycott nvidia games lolol
     
  12. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    16,421
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX980Ti OC
    So ~40fps @ 1080p @ 8xmsaa, i bet it will run at 60fps+ with 2xmsaa or postAA, rest maxed. :)
     
  13. Deathchild

    Deathchild Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,970
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    -
    lol yep.
     
  14. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,240
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti @ 2GHz
    MSAA is the most basic AA there is, but not the oldest. You're probably thinking of FXAA or MLAA, those can be blurry, especially MLAA.

    If you want sharp images SSAA (super sampling) is the only way to go, it's probably the oldest method and the most taxing of them all. Most systems don't have enough power to run modern games which a high level of SSAA.
     
  15. eclap

    eclap Banned

    Messages:
    31,497
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    Palit GR 1080 2000/11000
    yep, in fact, TW2 maxed out runs worse than this article suggests. Bring it on, I'm ready (not a fan of TW2 if I'm honest, the original was much better imo).
     

  16. tsunami231

    tsunami231 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,717
    Likes Received:
    372
    GPU:
    EVGA 1070Ti Black
    8x AA would do that to alot games.
     
  17. ---TK---

    ---TK--- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,112
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    2x 980Ti Gaming 1430/7296
    tbh I probably wouln`t of taken a chance from craigslist. good you got a good 1 for 500
     
  18. (.)(.)

    (.)(.) Banned

    Messages:
    9,094
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 970
    I get what you mean but youve worded it in a weird way. Hence the responses from those above.

    The problems is not with the devs. Its the Hardware manufactures.
     
  19. (.)(.)

    (.)(.) Banned

    Messages:
    9,094
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 970
    I remember applying Sparsegrid super sampling for the first time on far cry 2, via a post from someone on this here forum.

    Id only just managed to get fc to playable fps with the so called highend gtx280. SGSS destroyed my fps but by the great talos did it look amazing. So stopped playing and didnt resume until i got my new (at the time) system.
     
  20. jerzeeloon

    jerzeeloon Member

    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gtx 1080 ti hybrid sc2
    I like how the article says 1 $550 USD gtx 780ti can't run it. You tell me where you've seen a ti for $550 usd cause I haven't seen any under $700.
     

Share This Page