For now pretty much. We'll see how it runs after the inevitable driver updates. They should really be ready before a game releases but we all know they always lag behind.
Watch_Dogs PC performance thread [Read post #1215 before posting]
- Thread starter fluffydelusions
- Start date
- Status
I'd be impressed if there was a nice payoff for the high requirements.
But there's not. Its not a great looking game, its just a resource hog. Don't know whats impressive about that.
Moral Panic
Member
What card can run this @1440p 30fps?
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
I honestly can't tell the difference between high and ultra though.
High on PC should be much better than the Ps4 at least.
Yeah, Nvidia's history of being cheap with VRAM and its recent habit of holding back its actual flagship cards (beginning with the 6xx series) is immensely frustrating. If the 870 isn't at least 4GB by default I'll likely ditch my two 670s for two R390s instead.
Really? I think Ultra looks quite a bit better than High, particularly shadows and reflections.
DarkLiberator
Banned
There's like no noticeable difference between high and ultra in textures for me.
Brofist
Member
What's the difference in performance?
I was originally going to go with an R9 290 this time around, but I really, really like downsampling, unfortunately for me. AMD, please start supporting it... please, for sanity's sake, please with $100 on top. :l
Only impressed at the thread-utlization (if true), not the performance and more from the programming side. Whatever's causing that terrible stuttering, for example, is inexcusable for a game that's been supposedly developed in collaboration with a major GPU manufacturer and must have been able to run perfectly fine on weaker hardware than what's available now when they were showing it off a couple years ago. Actually, it's inexcusable, period.
They knew what they were developing for and if there isn't enough VRAM, for example, they should have developed and tested a more thorough streaming solution. The game does look good, I really think it does, but there's no way even top-end hardware should be struggling like it is, that I agree with (though I cannot speak on the CPU performance issues as it's a bit more difficult to determine the cause and whether it's justified or not). I'm still impressed by any game that actually utilizes multiple threads however, more from an appreciation of programming than gaming performance.
Thats pretty good video. It shows that game is using all threads and GPU to its fullest. So he is only GPU limited in this video.
I assume this is only for benchmarking purposes. Playing at 60-90 fps makes no sense when you could just lock it down to 60.
finalflame
Banned
My feeling exactly. I have a 780 Ti with 3gb VRAM, and even though the game states that is enough for Ultra texture, it causes terrible stuttering.
What makes it worse, is as you said, these textures look like total shit.
It makes sense if 60 fps introduces input lag.
Although new limiters in Nvidia Inspector seems to work fine.
No, it does not.
It just shows that windows is putting something on those logical cores (possibly what is encoding the video).
The only way to tell how many threads the game is using and how much CPU time they each are using is to use something like process explorer.
Boss Mog
Member
WTF at those CPU temps! I mean is the TIM on the 4770K that shitty that he's hitting 80C CPU temps without even being at 100% use and only at 4.0GHz. I mean either that or he didn't install his HSF/thermal compound properly (gonna assume he's on air with those temps).
For reference my 2600K @ 4.6GHz on air never goes above 67C at 100%, during gaming I've never seen it go above 61C. And my ambient temperature is pretty high most of the year (around 26C).
DarkLiberator
Banned
Not sure, maybe a few frames. Didn't notice a thing.
You're kidding right?
Chance Hale
Member
Argh
Was explained on the first page.
finalflame
Banned
What video card/how much VRAM do you have? Ultra textures is the number one thing that instigates stutters for me on a 780 Ti w. 3GB VRAM.
Woops I thought this was the performance talk thread from last week didnt even look at the first page.
Fried Food
Banned
forget 60 fps, I'm going to be choosing the highest settings I can, while staying locked at 30. I need this game to look as good as possible. AA will have a pretty high priority
Nydius
Member
I know those feels.
If I could go back 6 months and slap myself for not spending the extra on the 4GB GTX 770, I would. But no, my dumbass had one of those "2GB should be good enough" moments. Having to tweak a bunch of settings to compensate for the lower VRAM has become an all too common refrain this year.
Fried Food
Banned
Someone should tell the guy that runs the "I need a New PC!" thread to stop recommending 2GB video cards altogether.
Not quite the same thing, but I bought my 780 a couple months ago and literally about two days later, 6GB 780s finally came around. I hate my luck.
DarkLiberator
Banned
I have a HD7970 Lightning 3GB. Runs the game around 50-60 FPS at 1080p Ultra-highish. My copy arrived early at the shop, so I picked it up, though you need to force Uplay to offline in order for your retail copy to work.
I was considering buying a 670 2GB last year because it was cheaper then the Lightning, but i figured the extra VRAM might come in handy one day. Lucky I did.
A card with less than 4GB wasn't even on my radar when I recently upgraded. I knew VRAM requirements would go through the roof with the new consoles coming out and to be honest I would've liked to get more than 4GB if it was available for a reasonable price.
flipswitch
Member
My 2GB 1yo GTX 670 is pretty much useless now I take it. 
.
.Oh I definitely agree with you on the overreactions on how the final product ended up looking. A lot of changes can be made during development during 2 years, the explosions, effects, models, all were rendered using insanely high GPU processing power. I think you're right in a way that they used that 10 min long demo to sort of provide a layout for how the game would look, some gameplay aspects, and I'm confident that due to being a game worked on by over 1000 people from across the globe using different teams to focus on different aspects of the game fucked them over with a mess of a game (on the conceptual level, I'm sure the team that built that initial demo had much more focus on how to really show off what kind new experience that could draw you in with the new visual effects they could pull off using DX11, and with their own ways of handling a modern open world game. The fact that they're building around the previous console hardware too severely limits what they can pull off with their design since they have to basically make sure every animation, piece of dialogue, character model, and object models can be implemented into a piece of hardware with 512mb of RAM.
I mean sure, they could support higher resolutions, hbao, and whatever visual effect all the current gen games use now. But you're limiting yourself so much when all those visual features you implemented are still built in this framework of an engine designed to be efficient for 8 year old hardware with a market that would be able to run those features on their machine are a much smaller piece of the pie. Not that those are the only reasons, the other is how Ubisoft uses their development team less and less as creative forces to innovate in ways that are only possible with this new hardware. Which I think is why they just throw different chunks of their AAA games around that end up with a bunch of different project teams and leads literally designing different parts of the game independently from one another.
That ends up as a clusterfuck when they finally finishe their aspect of the game they were assigned to, and all they tried to dp was just mash all these different mechanics, and designs into the game when the legwork was done. That causes a lack of vision, direction, all these different teams working on a portion of a game without a real identity to the end product? That's just basic teamwork right there, having an understanding of what the game is so they can create using their limitations to their advantage. Those were how the most clever design mechanics in history were developed. These AAA yearly franchise entertainment giants They treat design and creating like a manufacturing process and it ends up falling short of the kind of game they initially conceived but still left with all the pieces they wanted there.
2 years ago that same trailer made it seem like this would be a hybrid MMO kinda like Destiny with the camera focusing on this other player in that players game, and then proceeds to zoom out showing all these other similar shapes that identified other players running around in the same Chicago. It's a combination of Ubisoft trying to create their own brand and style to all their games, while also treating the design and conception stage of an artistic entertainment product into a game factory.
DarkLiberator
Banned
My 2GB 1yo GTX 670 is pretty much useless now I take it.
Just drop some settings to high instead, still looks good enough and you should have enough vram.
This completely depends on the user's requirements and budget.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
maneil99
Member
Why? Unless you are playing maxed 2gb doesn't matter. Cards with 2gb aren't being released as high end cards anymore
Cannon Goose
Member
Could someone post screens of the graphics options?
Bonfires Down
Member
Yep, useless. Might as well just give it to me.My 2GB 1yo GTX 670 is pretty much useless now I take it.
DarkLiberator
Banned
maneil99
Member
You are thinking of an FPS cap, use EVGA Precision X if you have Nvidia or Afterburner if you have AMD. Monitors don't have 50hz refresh rates, most are 60hz so 30 and 60hz are factors and work well. As does 72 for 144hz
Yeah the 50/60hz switch is there.
You can create custom resolutions with custom refreshrate if are into the refreshrate gap that your monitor support. I played a few games using 50 hz resolutions (for example, NFS Rivals before nvidia 337.50 drivers) to avoid framerate fluctuations. Deadpool can only be played with smooth framerate using a 59hz resolution.
If a game has a framerate between 60 and 50, the best solution is to use a 50 hz resolution so framerate = refreshrate and is completely smooth. 50 fps at 50 hz is very near to 60 fps at 60 hz. But 50 fps in 60 hz is a judder festival.
Using plasma so 50hz is an option for me. Thankfully
Sometimes use 50fps in 3d for the reduced ghosting that comes with the refresh rate.
Any stuttering at all?
Nope.i just did intro mission and then drive around a bit in open world to look for stutter, nothing ever below 30fps so far. It's usually always on high 40s and 50s
- Status