Far Cry 5 PC performance thread

7700k @ stock speed with a 1080 - My benchmark hit an average of 50fps on high at 1440p. What is going on here? My GPU is only using 3gb, so it has to be a CPU heavy game right? Even with arguably the best CPU going around its not hitting 60fps at 1440p? I have to be missing something. This never happens in any game, something has to be funky. Any ideas please

Edit: Even switching down to 1080p didnt change anything
Edit 2: Wtf - the epic games launcher was running in the background and was taking up 80% of my cpu. Frames are up to 80+ now. Okaaaaaay

i5 4690k 1080 Ti here. Hopefully this will run decent. Apart of the cities ACO ran decent enough so I'm hopeful.

Will check in after initial impressions. Thanks for the thread!

icecold1983 said:

theres no way a 970 is pulling 144 fps even at lowest settings

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

He reiterated later that it was 80s iirc

6700K @ 4.6ghz
16 GB DDR4
1080 GTX 2000/5556mhz
1440p

Benchmark at Ultra:

Min - 73
Avg - 84
Max - 97

Runs pretty much consistently with the actual game, which is nice for a benchmark to actually do for once. Really impressed by the optimisation, and it looks superb.

Where are people seeing the Uplay version unlocks at 7PM EST?

I have it on Uplay and it's still just a greyed out button that says Preloaded

Just messed with my settings for an hour. Still getting stutter on my desktop and it actually gets worse if I lower the resolution, use resolution scaling, or do anything like that. It's almost unavoidable, even though I have a gsync monitor and am hovering around 60fps.

Edit: rebooted and it's running better, for now.

Spartancarver said:

Where are people seeing the Uplay version unlocks at 7PM EST?

I have it on Uplay and it's still just a greyed out button that says Preloaded

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Same here, I got excited reading people saying it unlocked at 7 earlier. Got this for free with my new PC, curious if it'll run well. Seems I meet the minimum specs and all I care about is 60fps really.

MattyG said:

Just messed with my settings for an hour. Still getting stutter on my desktop and it actually gets worse if I lower the resolution, use resolution scaling, or do anything like that. It's almost unavoidable, even though I have a gsync monitor and am hovering around 60fps.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Tried borderless instead of fullscreen, or alt-tabbing out then back in? Sometimes fixes stutters in games for me

is this already unlocked?

thought this was supposed to unlock at 7 ET? it's 7:30 now and still nothing

edit: as for performance, it's worth noting we don't have Nvidia's Game Ready driver for FC5 yet. these can sometimes make a big difference

Is anybody running this with SLI?

I got the benchmark to clear above 60 fps by setting everything to max except for shadows, which I turned down from "ultra" to "high," and dropped my 4K resolution to "80%" (roughly 1726p) with the built-in scaler. Lowest spike was 65fps.

i7-4770k, OC'ed to 4.2Ghz
1080Ti
16GB RAM DDR3-1866

Here's a few shots I took to check the difference between visual settings. Personally, I don't feel that Ultra is that impressive. AA is off. You get SMAA or TAA as choices.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Seems to be running fine during the first 30 minutes of gameplay. Hdr works out of the box, which is nice. Also dual shock 4 support!

i5 4690k, 16 gb ddr3, 1080 Ti, w7. Playing on 4k 80% res scale, everything high, max 60 fps, vsync on, taa, motion blur off.
The game looks really great imho. Flora looks good and nice lightning together with hdr. I love looking at nature. Ubi does it again?!

GavinUK86 said:

Here's a few shots I took to check the difference between visual settings. Personally, I don't feel that Ultra is that impressive. AA is off. You get SMAA or TAA as choices.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Small differences but theres also <10% performance difference between high and ultra according to the benches a member supplied above. At least ultra isnt tanking performance for such tiny differences

GavinUK86 said:

Here's a few shots I took to check the difference between visual settings. Personally, I don't feel that Ultra is that impressive. AA is off. You get SMAA or TAA as choices.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I can't even see a difference between High and Ultra settings... Ubisoft going to Ubisoft when it comes to their console to PC ports.

Hearing this runs well is great to hear, except I now kinda regret going with console over my PC lol. Oh well, at least I got a good deal with GCU, and the PS4 Pro version is supposedly fine.

Anyone rolling with a 1070/7600k/16 RAM combo on 1440p?

GavinUK86 said:

Here's a few shots I took to check the difference between visual settings. Personally, I don't feel that Ultra is that impressive. AA is off. You get SMAA or TAA as choices.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I like the art style, but technically it is kind of rough, especially when it comes to draw distance. Also, SMAA is not that great, but TAA pushes my performance over the edge so I've gotta settle for it. I tried forcing AA with Nvidia control panel and it doesn't really make a difference.

samred said:

I got the benchmark to clear above 60 fps by setting everything to max except for shadows, which I turned down from "ultra" to "high," and dropped my 4K resolution to "80%" (roughly 1726p) with the built-in scaler. Lowest spike was 65fps.

i7-4770k, OC'ed to 4.2Ghz
1080Ti
16GB RAM DDR3-1866

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I have similar specs, but I'm running at 1440p. I'm getting minimums in the low 70's and highs of 97 with everything maxed. It certainly doesn't hurt that I'm playing on a G-Sync monitor.

Arrahant said:

i5 4690k 1080 Ti here. Hopefully this will run decent. Apart of the cities ACO ran decent enough so I'm hopeful.

Will check in after initial impressions. Thanks for the thread!

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Your CPU seems like a pretty big bottleneck for your 1080 Ti. At least in CPU-intensive games.

Spartancarver said:

Where are people seeing the Uplay version unlocks at 7PM EST?

I have it on Uplay and it's still just a greyed out button that says Preloaded

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Pretty sure it unlocks at 9 PM PST.

Game is running pretty great and is much better than some of the other previous Far Cry games have been at launch. I remember 4 had a really annoying stutter issue that ultimately had me shelving the game (and I never came back to it).

It's out on Steam, decrypting now.

Does this game not have DoF? It's also interesting how when you stand still everything is more sharp and when you walk forward it adds a sort of blur/softness to it, and my motion blur is off. I have all the settings on max.

Shield TV -- controller and HDR are not currently working.

bargeparty said:

Does this game not have DoF? It's also interesting how when you stand still everything is more sharp and when you walk forward it adds a sort of blur/softness to it, and my motion blur is off. I have all the settings on max.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

thats their taa. it must be a less ideal implementation that deactivates when you dont move

Well, this is refreshingly smooth after having played Assassin's Creed Origins.

J_Viper said:

Hearing this runs well is great to hear, except I now kinda regret going with console over my PC lol. Oh well, at least I got a good deal with GCU, and the PS4 Pro version is supposedly fine.

Anyone rolling with a 1070/7600k/16 RAM combo on 1440p?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Did you really choose the console version when you have those pc specs? anyway, waiting on impressions with those specs because that's what I'll be running as well.

I7-6700 Stock
EVGA 970 GTX SSC ACX2.0+ 4(3.5)gb Vram
16gb DDR4 ram @3000
Windows 7
Game Installed on non OS SSD
Playing @ 1080P on TV
Game defaulted graphic settings to High, Benchmark had FPS as low as 51, AVG 58

I was getting freezes occasionally in the benchmark, possibly engine loading, unsure. Every time the camera swung 180 degrees, it would freeze for a moment and then catch up.

Still in beginning section, failing car chase on hard over and over. GPU is getting hit hard, mostly 90%+, seem it at full 100% quite a few times. CPU isn't getting hit hard like AC Origins was thankfully.

Looks like I'll be turning some stuff down if the FPS is already dropping and I'm not even in a plane or Heli, will I suspect is gonna be worse with the draw distances. Dunno what impacts fps had besides shadows obviously.

Nintendo said:

So is it better to use SMAA or increase resolution scale?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It depends on how much rendering headroom you have. SMAA doesn't eliminate aliasing as well as downsampling, but as it's a post-process method, its impact on performance is negligible.

Edit: My benchmark results:

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

32GB DDR4-3200, i7 6800K @ 4.2GHz, GTX 1080 Ti, 390.77, Win10 x64.

Game ready drivers not out?

http:///2YIc.jpeg

flipswitch said:

Game ready drivers not out?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Nope. This may very well be the first time AMD has beaten Nvidia to the punch, haha.

nvidia driver drops tomorrow according to PCGH

Smokey said:

Is anybody running this with SLI?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I am. So far it runs pretty good. I hate the fact that TAA isn't compatible with SLI tho. SMAA does next to nothing as always.

I do like how fancy looking the bench report page is. Did two runs at 720p and 5760x2400.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

My settings, GTX 1080 I7 6700 !6GB RAM game is on my SSD.

Runs at a solid 70fps just about on 1440p

Not sure what's going on. When I try to use my DS4, it still shows Xbox prompts and the dpad doesn't work.

I'm hanging out for more impressions on older CPUs. My 4670K is getting on in years but I'm loathe to replace it until 2019. AC Origins is the only game that's basically defeated it. Stuttering no matter the settings.

As far as this game goes, I'd love to play at 50-60fps @ 1440p on my freesync monitor.

icecold1983 said:

thats their taa. it must be a less ideal implementation that deactivates when you dont move

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Well it's a combination of that TAA's "blending" of frames lessens when you stand still and the game appears to have some level of post process sharpening going on which is more apparent when you stand still. A lot of games with TAA do this an it's very noticeable in this game because there's lots of moving foliage.

Guffers said:

I'm hanging out for more impressions on older CPUs. My 4670K is getting on in years but I'm loathe to replace it until 2019. AC Origins is the only game that's basically defeated it. Stuttering no matter the settings.

As far as this game goes, I'd love to play at 50-60fps @ 1440p on my freesync monitor.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

My 4670K and GTX980 runs at a fairly consistent 80fps @ 1080p on high settings.

2600k @ 4.4 ghz
8gb ram
1070 w/newest drivers (the sea of thieves game ready driver)

On ultra I was getting some choppy bits here and there, running the benchmark it was dropping to 50-51 fps at the part in the scene where the camera pans around the house near the end.

I went through testing each option and dropping them down, the geometry and vegetation option has a HUGE performance difference. Dropping it from ultra to high and my fps in the benchmark stayed 58-60fps all the way through with no more dropping to 50.

Shadows, which is generally a huge performance area seems have just a few small fps differences, no where near as much as the geometry and vegetation option.

7700k @ 4.8GHz
1080 @ 2GHz
1440p resolution

Just put in about 40 minutes.
i5 8600k running at 4.3Ghz
GTX 1080
32Gb DDR4 2666

Running at 1440p with everything on Ultra I was getting the benchmark with a minimum FPS of 69 and an average of 80. I've got vsync on now and it's been at a smooth 60.

I'm really impressed with how well it runs, considering how great it looks.

Mutagenic said:

My 4670K and GTX980 runs at a fairly consistent 80fps @ 1080p on high settings.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Awesome news! Thank you. I should hopefully be ok for 60fps or thereabouts at 1440 with my RX580.

Isee said:

Another Ubi game that hits CPUs hard it seems. At least that's the impression I'm getting from the 1080p PCGH.de benchmarks.
Rapid Packed Math (half precision FP16 rendering) seems to be doing some work here for AMD cards. They seem to outclass their Nvidia counterparts by ~10%. At higher resolutions at least.



edit:
Ubisoft video showing of the ingame settings.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It does. All cores on my 8700K hit 100%. I would place it similar to Battlefield 1 if my temps are any indication.

cant wait to let my 1080 spin this bad boy

A little disappointed with how it's running. The benchmark said one thing(and my god those opening scenes and gameplay at night I was dropping to low 50's)and of course the actual gameplay says another. I'm getting 58-81. It's mostly at around 70 on high settings. Nothing is at ultra. For a very CPU intensive game, my 1700x is only showing about 15-24% in Afterburner overlay. Have a 980 Ti. I realize this card is about three years old now, but putting all settings to normal didn't seem to help much either.

ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero
Ryzen 1700x
MSI GTX 980 TI
Corsair Vengeance DDR4 16GB@3000mhz
EVGA SuperNOVA 850W 80+ PLATINUM
1x 1TB Crucial MX300 SSD
2x 850 Samsung EVO 500GB SDD

Horseticuffs said:

Just put in about 40 minutes.
i5 8600k running at 4.3Ghz
GTX 1080
32Gb DDR4 2666

Running at 1440p with everything on Ultra I was getting the benchmark with a minimum FPS of 92 and an average of 97. I've got vsync on now and it's been at a smooth 60.

I'm really impressed with how well it runs, considering how great it looks.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Why is your fps so much higher then on my gtx 1080? I'm "only" getting 70 min, 82 average.

flipswitch said:

Performance similar to Far Cry : Primal?​

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

First impression: performance is way better then primal.

Isee said:

Why is your fps so much higher then on my gtx 1080? I'm "only" getting 70 min, 82 average.



First impression: performance is way better then primal.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

From what it looks like on here the results are very CPU dependent. What CPU are you running?