Watch_Dogs PC performance thread [Read post #1215 before posting]

Status
Not open for further replies.
My GPU isn't next gen enough for Watch_Dogs :(

Everything else hits the recommended settings, besides my CPU which hits the minimum requirements. >_<
 
People should go check if memory usage increases over time.

Because if this game has memory leaks no amount of RAM or videocard memory is going to help.
 
ctw0e said:
A 144/120Hz monitor

It doesn't eliminate tearing entirely, but enough to keep vsync off

Haven't used v-sync since I got the VG248QE
Click to expand...

If I can get a decent deal on this game, I'll give it a spin with a 3770, a GTX 770 4gb and a G-Sync VG248QE.
 
HRose said:
People should go check if memory usage increases over time.

Because if this game has memory leaks no amount of RAM or videocard memory is going to help.
Click to expand...
I haven't been paying too much attention to how much of my PC's resources are being used at what time, but I will say that when I first started playing my RAM usage was around 4GB, and when I checked after a few hours it was at 6GB.

General performance wise, things are pretty good with everything maxed and temporal SMAA. I'm running at 30Hz because I know I won't be able to hit 60 fps, but that aside I'm not noticing any dips at all. I get a little stuttering/hitching when I drive around quickly, but it's only about as bad as GTA 5 and it only takes a fraction of a second to load more of the game. It's not optimal, but it's far from unbearable or even annoying.

My specs

i7 920 @ 4.2 GHz
7970
6GB RAM

I'm actually surprised how well my system is handling the game. After the dev tweets I was sure my CPU would be my downfall, but it's holding up well. And the game itself is fun as knobs. I was worried after watching the IGN stream yesterday, but I've already played 13 hours and it's really good. Also pretty. Very pretty.
 
IcyBlueStrawberry said:
I haven't been paying too much attention to how much of my PC's resources are being used at what time, but I will say that when I first started playing my RAM usage was around 4GB, and when I checked after a few hours it was at 6GB.

General performance wise, things are pretty good with everything maxed and temporal SMAA. I'm running at 30Hz because I know I won't be able to hit 60 fps, but that aside I'm not noticing any dips at all. I get a little stuttering/hitching when I drive around quickly, but it's only about as bad as GTA 5 and the game only takes a fraction of a second to load more of the game. It's not optimal, but it's far from unbearable or even annoying.

My specs

i7 920 @ 4.2 GHz
7970
6GB RAM

I'm actually surprised how well my system is handling the game. After the dev tweets I was sure my CPU would be my downfall, but it's holding up well. And the game itself is fun as knobs. I was worried after watching the IGN stream yesterday, but I've already played 13 hours and it's really good. Also pretty. Very pretty.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm... that is very similar to my system except my CPU is clocked a little lower and I have 8 GB of RAM. Are you able to get close to 60 fps by turning down some settings by chance?
 
Felix Lighter said:
Hmmmm... that is very similar to my system except my CPU is clocked a little lower and I have 8 GB of RAM. Are you able to get close to 60 fps by turning down some settings by chance?
Click to expand...
I haven't even tried, to be honest.

I just set my refresh rate to 30, cranked the settings and just started playing. Like a lot of Ubi games, it plays really smoothly when it's running at 30Hz.

And, assuming you're running at ~3.8GHz with a 920 or similar, your CPU will be fine.
 
IcyBlueStrawberry said:
I haven't even tried, to be honest.

I just set my refresh rate to 30, cranked the settings and just started playing. Like a lot of Ubi games, it plays really smoothly when it's running at 30Hz.

And, assuming you're running at ~3.8GHz with a 920 or similar, your CPU will be fine.
Click to expand...

3.9 GHz with a i7 930 and a 7970 as well. Very similar PC.
 
Felix Lighter said:
3.9 GHz with a i7 930 and a 7970 as well. Very similar PC.
Click to expand...
You should be fine then.

I did a quick benchmark with vsync off, and with everything at "high" I got an average fps of 49 with min of 40 and max of 61. That was in the city, at daytime, in the rain. And the hitching went away. I don't know whether it was due to lowered settings or lack of vsync, though.
 
Could this be one of those games were the VRAM usage basically scales up to whatever you have for cacheing purposes but doesn't actually need it all?
 
anyone know how the game is running on radeon r9270x? what kind of resloution will i be able to run with this. i have a core i5 2500, 8gb ram
 
HRose said:
Looking at this again, when it drops to 20 FPS the GPU usage goes down to 12%, while CPU remains the same, and the RAM usage goes down by almost 500Mb.

Meaning that it's neither GPU, nor CPU. This is memory management and maybe loading from disk.
Click to expand...

Is it possible to get that same FPS / GPU / CPU temps and stuff with EVGA Precision? (Specifically In-game)
 
hm 780 ti sli here was hoping for ultra with txaa at 1440p. Doesnt seem like that will be possible at least until patches or better drivers come in.
 
my 780ti is running it fine at 1080.. only using 80-90% gpu.. but i dont get constant 60fps, i think im limited by the i5 750 (4ghz mind you)
 
I am pretty new to PC gaming, but here is my build:

Inter Core i5-3350p CPU @ 3.10GHz
Nividia GeForce GTX 760
8.2 GB RAM
Windows 7 64 bit

From what I understood, I should be able to run on High with no problems. Unfortunately, I am getting insane screen tearing and frame rate drops. With my little knowledge of settings and stuff, what should I be looking to turn down in the settings to fix this, it is becoming unbearable. I have tried messing with some settings on my own, but I really dont know what a lot of them mean or do
 
ricochetguro said:
What's the best way to cap a framerate for a 64 bit game?
Click to expand...
If you want to cap at 30, create a custom resolution @ 30hz and just set the in-game option accordingly.

It runs as smoothly as the console versions.

If you don't want to run at 30hz, though, then you can use Riva Tuner Statistics Server to limit FPS. You can also use double v-sync via the game options, Nvidia CP or RadeonPro.
 
Goddamn. This game does NOT look good enough to be demanding this much performance. I am really having a hard time attributing the performance from this game to anything BUT poor optimization and/or a lack of Day 1 patch or updated nVidia drivers.

I fully expect to see some nVidia drivers soon that provide a 20-40% increase in performance in this game. Otherwise, this is ridiculous. If this looked like the 2012 video then maybe it would be justified, but it absolutely does not. I can run Crysis 3 better than this game, and that looks FAR nicer.

i5-4670K @ 4.2ghz
780 Ti @ 1500/7800 (core/mem)
16gb DDR3-1600

And I can barely manage to run the game a Ultra/1440p. And from the looks of it, SLi folks aren't having much luck, either. And forget AA at 1440p. I can maybe do FXAA and still get 40-60, else I am screwed.

What are other people's experiences with similar setups?
 
Adry9 said:
i5 3570k @3.40Ghz
8Gb RAM
Sapphire HD 7950 Boost 3Gb
Windows 7 64 bit.

It's a nightmare. Let me explain:

Turning V-Sync on does the same thing as in AC IV where it basically locked the game at 30 fps unless you were looking at the wall. Without it it's like a roller coaster going from 30 to 60 and back down, if you are walking slowly is not that bad but driving is almost impossible. I mostly play on High becuase setting the game on Medium barely helped, you gain a few fps but the drops are still there.

I hope they fix it with a day one patch or some drivers by AMD. Ubilol at it's finest.
Click to expand...

Get D3DOverrider and enable Triple Buffering.
 
victor.m said:
Goddamn. This game does NOT look good enough to be demanding this much performance. I am really having a hard time attributing the performance from this game to anything BUT poor optimization and/or a lack of Day 1 patch or updated nVidia drivers.

I fully expect to see some nVidia drivers soon that provide a 20-40% increase in performance in this game. Otherwise, this is ridiculous. If this looked like the 2012 video then maybe it would be justified, but it absolutely does not. I can run Crysis 3 better than this game, and that looks FAR nicer.

i5-4670K @ 4.2ghz
780 Ti @ 1500/7800 (core/mem)
16gb DDR3-1600

And I can barely manage to run the game a Ultra/1440p. And from the looks of it, SLi folks aren't having much luck, either. And forget AA at 1440p. I can maybe do FXAA and still get 40-60, else I am screwed.

What are other people's experiences with similar setups?
Click to expand...

You do realize you're comparing a linear FPS to a sandbox game...
 
Bruno said:
You do realize you're comparing a linear FPS to a sandbox game...
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying, but the IQ in this game is far below that of Crysis 3. And Crysis 3 has some fully rendered, huge areas. I expect this game to require more computation power, but even then, not the ridiculous "i7 or higher".

Not only that, but the 3gb VRAM requirement for textures would be fine..if they didn't look like ass/not that special at all.

Overall, for what the game looks like, I think it performs like an unoptimized game. I really hope nVidia has better drivers coming out soon for it.
 
It's a nightmare. Let me explain:

Turning V-Sync on does the same thing as in AC IV where it basically locked the game at 30 fps unless you were looking at the wall. Without it it's like a roller coaster going from 30 to 60 and back down, if you are walking slowly is not that bad but driving is almost impossible. I mostly play on High becuase setting the game on Medium barely helped, you gain a few fps but the drops are still there.
Click to expand...
A nightmare? That's simply the effect of utilizing double buffer v-sync. Triple buffering would solve that.

If that's what you're seeing, however, that means your system is unable to hold 60 fps.
 
Raonak said:
Water looks nice. But pretty much everything looks underwelming tbh. in screenshots atleast
Click to expand...
See, I don't think those are the highest settings. Effects I've seen in the Nvidia promo are straight up missing, and the one I noticed the most was the volumetric lighting. Other posters noticed other missing effects.
 
IcyBlueStrawberry said:
I haven't been paying too much attention to how much of my PC's resources are being used at what time, but I will say that when I first started playing my RAM usage was around 4GB, and when I checked after a few hours it was at 6GB.

General performance wise, things are pretty good with everything maxed and temporal SMAA. I'm running at 30Hz because I know I won't be able to hit 60 fps, but that aside I'm not noticing any dips at all. I get a little stuttering/hitching when I drive around quickly, but it's only about as bad as GTA 5 and it only takes a fraction of a second to load more of the game. It's not optimal, but it's far from unbearable or even annoying.

My specs

i7 920 @ 4.2 GHz
7970
6GB RAM

I'm actually surprised how well my system is handling the game. After the dev tweets I was sure my CPU would be my downfall, but it's holding up well. And the game itself is fun as knobs. I was worried after watching the IGN stream yesterday, but I've already played 13 hours and it's really good. Also pretty. Very pretty.
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting my exact experience and my exact specs aside from the GPU:) That was weird to read.

I think our PC is still going to hold us back a bit in this game but the fact my little OC'ed i7 920 can rock a game like this is so nice.

The review for this game is going to be a blast. LOTS of interesting differences from the trailer. Some good some...not so.

The sweet spot for me is now 1080p with some sweet sweet MSAA loving and everything at ultra.
 
Adry9 said:
i5 3570k @3.40Ghz
8Gb RAM
Sapphire HD 7950 Boost 3Gb
Windows 7 64 bit.

It's a nightmare. Let me explain:

Turning V-Sync on does the same thing as in AC IV where it basically locked the game at 30 fps unless you were looking at the wall. Without it it's like a roller coaster going from 30 to 60 and back down, if you are walking slowly is not that bad but driving is almost impossible. I mostly play on High becuase setting the game on Medium barely helped, you gain a few fps but the drops are still there.

I hope they fix it with a day one patch or some drivers by AMD. Ubilol at it's finest.
Click to expand...

That's just standard double buffer vsync behaviour. Force triple buffering through RadeonPro.
 
People with framerate drops due to VSync:

Isn't the menu option GPU Max Buffered Frames essentially selection between double and triple buffering?
So if you enable Vsync and set this to 3 (or 2?) should it not eliminate drops from 60 to 30 the instant your framerate drops to 59 for example?

In AC4 I had to get triple buffering via D3D Overrider - game was unplayable without it - but AC4 had no such option in menu.
Can anyone try this?
 
I have
Intel Core i7 3770
670 GTX
16GB RAM

Would it possible to have it running 1440p at ultra or high setting with 60FPS? If not then I would have to go out and buy 780 ti GTX. >_<
 
AMD x4 760k
Msi r7 260x 2GB

1080p 30fps on high settings. I'm satisfied with that. Game really isn't a looker anyways, especially during daytime.
 
Goldenhen said:
I have
Intel Core i7 3770
670 GTX
16GB RAM

Would it possible to have it running 1440p at ultra or high setting with 60FPS? If not then I would have to go out and buy 780 ti GTX. >_<
Click to expand...

1440p? Definitely not. 1080p? Maybe, if you were to mix it with high / ultra settings. Then again, this topic seems to be superfluous until we get confirmation if a driver is coming out for this on Tuesday, because if one is, then we could see drastically different things.
 
Denton said:
People with framerate drops due to VSync:

Isn't the menu option GPU Max Buffered Frames essentially selection between double and triple buffering?
So if you enable Vsync and set this to 3 (or 2?) should it not eliminate drops from 60 to 30 the instant your framerate drops to 59 for example?

In AC4 I had to get triple buffering via D3D Overrider - game was unplayable without it - but AC4 had no such option in menu.
Can anyone try this?
Click to expand...

Often settings like that refer to the render ahead queue but it's definitely worth a try.

Most people should be swallowing their pride and capping the game to 30fps.

Dark, since you're posting in this thread I've started using MSI Afterburner to cap to 30fps correctly without micro stutters and it gives the same effect as a console fps cap which is great. I've been using it in combination with the driver "double" (I.e. 1/2 refresh rate) Vsync option. Is using both necessary or am I fine to use MSI Afterburner with standard Vsync (double or triple buffered), I trust your eye over anyone else's.
 
Game looks good but just feels unoptimized and the menus are pretty poor to navigate IMO.

The actual gameplay is alright but It just didn't catch me the way I hoped it would.

Mouse acceleration on by default would explain a lot of things it feels very very sloppy.

Gonna take a few patches to be really playable I think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Final Fantasy XVI PC Performance Thread
2 3
138
14K
Rush2112 replied
Who got a 5090-5080? post in this thread
7 8 9 10 11
511
25K
Buggy Loop replied
Capcom responds to Monster Hunter wilds PC performance issues
2 3 4
158
11K
polybius80 replied
Dragon's Dogma 2 PC Performance Thread
2 3 4
183
21K
JRW replied
Post the most Cringe Videogame Clips or Vids
2
81
2K
mileslongthe3rd replied
Top Bottom