Triple buffering in the CP only refers to OpenGL games. It does not have any effect on Vulkan or DirectX titles.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Red Dead Redemption II PC performance thread
- Thread starter GrrImAFridge
- Start date
I noticed something was off when I was looking around with the mouse, sometimes it would be jittery, sometimes not. I found that while I was holding shift, it would jitter, let go, back to normal. Tried holding alt like you asked, had mouse jitter again but in slow mo.
R* pls.
Anything other than ULTRA seems to be borked; even on High the textures on Morgans jacket for example and the rocks near the rivers look. . .not great.
LOWEST settings at 4K (except textures because they rely on vram and don't affect performance much)
Low in this game is probably equivalent to medium-high in other games. Especially for the draw distance, shadows, and volumetric clouds and lighting. Most games completely disable volumetric clouds and lighting at lower settings.
This game's has its own graphics scale. Don't think of "Ultra" as it is for other games. Ultra is designed for future hardware.
Same person who fixed Outer Worlds. Gotta love the PC gaming community.
I tried it for Outer Worlds and COD and it looked really bad and overblown at .5. What do you have yours at?
I don't think sharpening even does anything in this game. I can't tell a difference at least.
Haha. I'm not the person to ask then. I've found it fairly subtle compared to what I do with reshade, at least in BFV and RE2.
Are you setting the film grain to 0? I set it to 15 in BFV because it looked oversharp and had a weird scanline otherwise.
LOWEST settings at 4K (except textures because they rely on vram and don't affect performance much)
Low in this game is probably equivalent to medium-high in other games. Especially for the draw distance, shadows, and volumetric clouds and lighting. Most games completely disable volumetric clouds and lighting at lower settings.
This game's has its own graphics scale. Don't think of "Ultra" as it is for other games. Ultra is designed for future hardware.
What do you have textures set to? That looks pretty darn good to me.
I had already checked other users comments, but yeah,
1080p high is 30fps on the 1060
My game wont even launch. Guess I drew the short stick. I'm trying redownloading but deep down I know that's not going to do shit. Already flashed my Bios and already had the current Nvidia driver. Neither did shit.
I think I'll wait to see the DF video on it. I don't know if it's bad optimization or the game is really that demanding with the higher options being REALLY higher options
I already have it on PS4, so if I can't get either significant IQ and/or performance improvements, there's little reason to buy it
I already have it on PS4, so if I can't get either significant IQ and/or performance improvements, there's little reason to buy it
Something is up with Nvidia's drivers or the how the game scales, older architectures perhaps I can see, but a 590 beating a 2060!?
I question how much value 'future proofing' really has though when providing 'Ultra' settings where people have to strain to notice the difference in still shots (if any), yet they cause such a huge performance hit. When Ultra is something like ray-tracing or providing massively increased texture quality/lighting, sure. But slightly more accurate fog? That's not going to make this game look next-gen 5 years from now when midrange cards can run it at 4k 60fps (if even). All it does is just puts the onus on the user when if they have a modern system, they're justified in immediately slamming all the sliders to the right out of habit. Maybe I'm being overly cynical, but it seems like often the 'Ultra' settting is given so publishers/developers can say "See PC gamers we hear you!" when very little optimization has gone into actually making them worthwhile, it's just a notch on the slider so us PC gamers can feel like we're being catered to.
Even taking that into account and ignoring ultra settings, I think the performance overall right now seems a little subpar. Remember how well GTA5 was optimized for the PC, just blew away the console versions in performance/graphics. Whereas in most multiplatform titles, a 590/580 can usually come close or match (and exceed in some cases) the Xbox One X version running at the same quality settings and resolution - as of now, it doesn't look like you're getting a locked 30fps even on medium (?) with those cards at a native 4K like the X is doing. Not even with a 1660Ti which from my experience easily outpaces the X in virtually every multiplatform title I've seen, hell it would be lucky to break 20fps at 4k/medium from the benchmarks I'm seeing.
I question how much value 'future proofing' really has though when providing 'Ultra' settings where people have to strain to notice the difference in still shots (if any), yet they cause such a huge performance hit. When Ultra is something like ray-tracing or providing massively increased texture quality/lighting, sure. But slightly more accurate fog? That's not going to make this game look next-gen 5 years from now when midrange cards can run it at 4k 60fps (if even). All it does is just puts the onus on the user when if they have a modern system, they're justified in immediately slamming all the sliders to the right out of habit. Maybe I'm being overly cynical, but it seems like often the 'Ultra' settting is given so publishers/developers can say "See PC gamers we hear you!" when very little optimization has gone into actually making them worthwhile, it's just a notch on the slider so us PC gamers can feel like we're being catered to.
Even taking that into account and ignoring ultra settings, I think the performance overall right now seems a little subpar. Remember how well GTA5 was optimized for the PC, just blew away the console versions in performance/graphics. Whereas in most multiplatform titles, a 590/580 can usually come close or match (and exceed in some cases) the Xbox One X version running at the same quality settings and resolution - as of now, it doesn't look like you're getting a locked 30fps even on medium (?) with those cards at a native 4K like the X is doing. Not even with a 1660Ti which from my experience easily outpaces the X in virtually every multiplatform title I've seen, hell it would be lucky to break 20fps at 4k/medium from the benchmarks I'm seeing.
That looks good
LOWEST settings at 4K (except textures because they rely on vram and don't affect performance much)
Low in this game is probably equivalent to medium-high in other games. Especially for the draw distance, shadows, and volumetric clouds and lighting. Most games completely disable volumetric clouds and lighting at lower settings.
This game's has its own graphics scale. Don't think of "Ultra" as it is for other games. Ultra is designed for future hardware.
Finally tried this out. Game runs surprisingly well, considering my HW : i5-3570k, Radeon RX470 and 16 GB RAM. Settings defaulted to mix of High and Medium with Low reflections. 50-65fps in first snowy chapter.
However, those huge multi-second hitches when using Vulkan make the game almost unplayable. Hopefully they'll fix it soon, Vulkan runs great on AMD cards.
Edit: Forgot about benchmark: 55fps average.
However, those huge multi-second hitches when using Vulkan make the game almost unplayable. Hopefully they'll fix it soon, Vulkan runs great on AMD cards.
Edit: Forgot about benchmark: 55fps average.
They probably don't plan on remastering for next gen and instead will brute force this time.
Oh shit that little patch from earlier seems to have removed a lot of the stutter on Vulkan.
Game now runs at 75fps average on my 1080ti 1440p medium-ish settings with ultra textures, which is ok performance with amazing visuals (Medium labels are meaningless here). Hopefully some patched, tweaks or fixes gets this above 100 fps in the future.
Game now runs at 75fps average on my 1080ti 1440p medium-ish settings with ultra textures, which is ok performance with amazing visuals (Medium labels are meaningless here). Hopefully some patched, tweaks or fixes gets this above 100 fps in the future.
Really? The settings in the PC version almost convinces me that they are already planning to bring it over to new consoles.
I believe that's what he means - they'll just release it with the PC ultra settings. It won't be a 'remaster' in the sense they'll really update any assets, but there probably will be a PS5/Xboxonex2 patch.
Not sure, updated from 7B86vM1 to 7B86vM4 according to MSI. I THINK it was from AMD AGESA 1.0.0.2 to 1.0.0.4. Not sure, though.
GTAV felt so good, especially after GTAIV. There were some issues, I remember one friend having the "game can't launch, keeps crashing" issue, but the frame rate / pacing was fine I think.
The advanced settings at that time would tank your frame rate though.
Max Payne 3 was a great port too, shame about the loadings.
Looks genuinely great, consoles must be using mostly lower settings then.
LOWEST settings at 4K (except textures because they rely on vram and don't affect performance much)
Low in this game is probably equivalent to medium-high in other games. Especially for the draw distance, shadows, and volumetric clouds and lighting. Most games completely disable volumetric clouds and lighting at lower settings.
This game's has its own graphics scale. Don't think of "Ultra" as it is for other games. Ultra is designed for future hardware.
Think I'll whack everything on medium and see how it goes.
Ya, GtaV PC was more impressive because it was simultaneously a remaster(next gen) and a PC port.
e: I think GtaV had a few settings that destroyed fps too. Foliage, MSAA, and Soft Shadows maybe.
These been posted yet?
Reasonably happy as a 5700xt owner.
Source: https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pag..._graphics_performance_benchmark_review,1.html
What the hell is with the 5700XT spanking the 1080Ti? That seems like an error.
Well to be fair in the case of DH2 it ran like garbage on every platform at launch. I don't have the full game on PS4 so perhaps the demo never got updated with patches, but tried it recently as I was comparing it to the PC version on my 1660, and yikes. Massive frame rate drops in open areas (feels like low 20's), texture that take 10+ secs to pop in, huge controller lag. It was a mess, I think the amazing PC version of DH1 which ran like a dream compounded the issue, people were expecting a similar level of optimization in the sequel and got a 180.
Death of the Outsider was far better optimized though so they at least did learn something after DH2's release.
The AMD cards easily outpace all their Nvidia counterparts in that bench, don't think it's a one-off. It's either a driver or game architecture issue.
Scary thing about those charts is those are balanced settings - I've seen a few posts where people say "Ignore them, they're at Ultra" - no, only the texture setting is. The rest are a mix.
About 45 fps on the default balanced preset, so i tuned resolution scaling to about 0.80 or 0.75 which gave me pretty good 60fps. Haven't been to saint denis yet however, but the benchmark showed me an avg of 70fps. Been playing for 3 hours now and not noticed any crazy dips.
Is there a fix for the game not being able to launch from the rockstar launcher yet? Aside from the compatibility mode steps the support site suggests. Mine simply will not launch. 10 minutes from requesting a refund...
It gets worse yes. There's just a shitload of trees and grass and shadows that will tax your hardware.
Yeah definitely gets worse. And for me the benchmark test is less taxing than a lot of parts of the game.
I played the division 2 at 80% resolution scale at 1440p and couldn't tell a difference. This sounds alright to me, thanks!
LOWEST settings at 4K (except textures because they rely on vram and don't affect performance much)
Low in this game is probably equivalent to medium-high in other games. Especially for the draw distance, shadows, and volumetric clouds and lighting. Most games completely disable volumetric clouds and lighting at lower settings.
This game's has its own graphics scale. Don't think of "Ultra" as it is for other games. Ultra is designed for future hardware.
you're not wrong in what you've written but there are some really noticeable hits to the overall look of the game here (the water, texture tiling, the general texture resolution off to the left side of the frame)
I am debating trying this or simply refunding. Don't want to redownload again :(