Ultra clouds in horizon dawn cuts down frame rate by 20 fps with nothing to show for it.
Ultra shouldn't be anything more than a scalabilty test and until we have a 3070 it's useless.
-
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.
Watch Dogs: Legion - RTX 3090 + i9-10900K (Benchmark) (4k Ultra Settings, Ray-Tracing, DLSS)
- Thread starter Kenzodielocke
- Start date
- News
Ultra shouldn't be anything more than a scalabilty test and until we have a 3070 it's useless.
As always in modern open world games, the Ultra preset will have some specific setting that is tanking the framerate by 20-30%, and lowering it will barely affect visuals while massively improving the framerate.
Nah, they're not lazy but the game looks definitely average compared to the most beautiful games of this gen, so there's no real reason fps are so low on newer GPUs.
Well, obviously, but NVIDIA tried to bullshit market it as a 8k card so it's still funny to see this
Ultra textures is a must tbh (At least on PC). Other settings can be adjusted for performance gains.
Except it doesn't look great at all because graphics are more about talent, budget and passion than brute power.
It's probably similar to odyssey where you put certain settings from high to medium without much visual effect but a huge fps gain
Then why doesnt it look like ultra? Looks avg as hell and def not ULTRAAAAAA
So you're insinuating that the devs are not talented and just threw this together with a low budget and without any passion?
Weird take.
Not knocking my socks off. Thankfully it was free with my 3080 :P It will be a nice distraction while waiting for the November 10th/12th madness.
Looks like DLSS Balanced mode + RTX might be the way to go to keep things 60+ at 4k for me. Though I am sure there are other settings that have little to no impact on quality by knocking them down a notch from Ultra yet provide good performance gains, so maybe DLSS quality mode in that case.
Looks like DLSS Balanced mode + RTX might be the way to go to keep things 60+ at 4k for me. Though I am sure there are other settings that have little to no impact on quality by knocking them down a notch from Ultra yet provide good performance gains, so maybe DLSS quality mode in that case.
It's not lazy though, that's my point.
Game could have done with RT GI or something to add depth to the scenes, because it looks pretty flat. DLSS is really great to have though, especially for those on lower end 2000 series cards.
A lot of optimizations actually get turned off when you max games out.
I'm guessing the game is really shader heavy. You take a big hit at 4k for per pixel effects.
fucking Ubisoft
this
on my 3090 I can't even get 1440p/30 locked with max settings on RDR2
however, turn a couple settings down with hardly noticeable changes to the visuals and I'm hitting 4K/60fps
I'd like to think I'd be able to do the same with Legion, 4k/60 with no raytracing, 1440p/60 with raytracing
this
on my 3090 I can't even get 1440p/30 locked with max settings on RDR2
however, turn a couple settings down with hardly noticeable changes to the visuals and I'm hitting 4K/60fps
I'd like to think I'd be able to do the same with Legion, 4k/60 with no raytracing, 1440p/60 with raytracing
You seem completely ignorant to how demanding native 4K resolution is, still.
We have not reached the point where GPU rasterization has surpassed the demands of 3840 x 2160, especially not in open world games.
Yeah, hoping for 1440p60 with RTX on and DLSS quality on my 2080TI.
4K Balanced DLSS, Ultra settings and one notch down from RTX Ultra seems doable for solid 60fps on a 3080 then. Can probably knock down one Ultra setting to guarantee that if needed.
Do we know if this benchmark is accurately representative of in game performance? Wouldn't be the first time if the in game benchmark was either too light or too heavy.
There's just something about the visual style of this game that makes it look quite ugly. It's hard to pinpoint exactly what it is.
Exactly my thought, the whole benchmark is more or less worthless without going into this.
The benchmark has Shadows and Reflections under 'Major Impact Options'.
There will be our huge performance gains.
~60% load on that i9 at 4K is actually indication that it's quite CPU heavy (or utilizes multi core very well) as this is a very, very GPU bottlenecked scenario.
Ultra settings are almost always badly optimized and run like shit even on top tier hardware for minimal visual fidelity gains if compared to high.
lmao @ Ultra settings.
If you're running Ultra settings, you deserve to live a life of disappointment.
If you're running Ultra settings, you deserve to live a life of disappointment.
That's crazy, even with a RTX 3090, that i9 and DLSS the game partially can't hit locked 60 FPS. I know there will be a game ready driver, but still, that looks terrible?! I guess console versions will run with some mixed high settings, vs. very high/ultra option on PC? Or they use dynamic resolution to hit steady 30 FPS with RT on...I would expect a 3080 to run that game on Ultra with RT Ultra and DLSS on at 60 FPS, but not even hitting that with a 3090?!
Is ultra that crazy for Ubisoft games? I mean usually games run fine on PC with DLSS on ultra settings, heck I could play Control on a laptop with RTX 2060, weaker CPU, etc. on max settings with RT max with usually 50-60 FPS.
Is ultra that crazy for Ubisoft games? I mean usually games run fine on PC with DLSS on ultra settings, heck I could play Control on a laptop with RTX 2060, weaker CPU, etc. on max settings with RT max with usually 50-60 FPS.
Yeah I tend to prefer high settings, and sometimes use a few medium settings here and there.
I think they're not bad, just not the most talented in the business. And Ubi Soft games definitely lack passion in my opinion. They lack soul and are a bit too formulaic too. Budget is good enough though. Just my opinion.
You're right, i'm wrong on this.
I just hope it utilises multiple cores well; AC Unity actually does very well on PC and i'm not knowledgeable enough to know this but wouldn't using DX12 help this? I mean Valhalla is also DX12 on PC and it's actually running at 60fps for once on the new consoles
This should be something that gamers on PC hold to the chest, it has happened over and over again - so the 'ultra settings' test is only so much of an actual showing of what performance will look like with optimized settings (this doesn't excuse the likelihood that this title could've been optimized further, it is a Ubisoft title). Though what I think should be highlighted here is the hammering DLSS is doing for performance. More titles having DLSS, means smoother gameplay for all PC gamers (on relatively contemporary hardware).
Native 4k is absolutely not something any GPU is taking lightly right now. We see now why consoles are at 30fps w/ raytracing. Without AMD delivering similar performing tech to DLSS, consoles will continue to be at a bit of a disadvantage when dealing with heavy raytraced scenes - especially open world titles like this. PC looks like a great place to play right now for this title.
Yes, 8K*.
*in DLSS Ultra performance mode which is 1/3 of the resolution, so about 1440p-ish native (please correct me if I'm wrong on the resolution factor, I lost my DLSS cheat sheet)
I know that. I think native 4K and RT are both a big waste of GPU power these days. We'd get much better graphics overall using the power elsewhere.