Brerlappin
Member
Not sure if people know this already, but i just realized that having shadowplay on while playing this means i love about 15fps. Went from 45fps in one section right down to 30 as soon as i turned shadowplay on
Dead Rising 3 PC Performance Thread
- Thread starter fluffydelusions
- Start date
SuperEpicGuy
Banned
Thank you. If I'd wanted that I'd have gotten an xbone.People saying it's ok to play at 30fps and 720p on PC.
What are your specs? I'm guessing a 780/780ti and a high end I5/I7.
How on earth can I respond with relevant data to what can be a matter of perception or subjective opinion. How one person perceives irregular frametime variance and frame pacing issues can differ greatly. What you did also ask, and I quote, was...
which from the data I supplied from some tested benchmarks shows is not the case.
You then proceeded to bring up console ports and about their CPU which has no bearing at all on how the vast majority of game are threaded on PC, port or not. This was uttered to the moon and back at the start of last generation and is getting brought up again and again this generation. Look at the data I provided a dual core i3 is outperforming 8 core AMD chips.
Pretty much. As I said in the quoted post, I found there to be about 100% give or take scalability in the settings provided without dropping my resolution. Granted textures on Low and lowering the Shadow Quality look really, really bad but most of the hard hitting settings like Mirror Quality and Ambient Occlusion might be less obvious to those not knowing or looking for what those effects bring to the table.
Dictator93
Member
What is your CPU and GPU?
flaxknuckles
Member
It's probably because neither of them are newer games
So just got to trying it out and stopped at when you got to the garage.
Running it maxed with SMAA AA @ 1080p and rock solid 30 fps all around. What I can't get rid of is the goddamn tearing. I've limited to 30 fps with Riva Tuner and have used the half adaptive refresh rate with Nvidia Control Panel and I'm still tearing for some reason.
Other than that, no crashes at all in game, though I cannot go back to the main menu once I'm in game since then the game crashes.
Anyway I can play this at 1440p? My monitor is native 1080p, but I set-up a custom resolution of 1440p, but not sure if the "full" setting is taking advantage of this or not.
My specs are a GTX 780 Ti Classified + i7 2600k @ stock.
Running it maxed with SMAA AA @ 1080p and rock solid 30 fps all around. What I can't get rid of is the goddamn tearing. I've limited to 30 fps with Riva Tuner and have used the half adaptive refresh rate with Nvidia Control Panel and I'm still tearing for some reason.
Other than that, no crashes at all in game, though I cannot go back to the main menu once I'm in game since then the game crashes.
Anyway I can play this at 1440p? My monitor is native 1080p, but I set-up a custom resolution of 1440p, but not sure if the "full" setting is taking advantage of this or not.
My specs are a GTX 780 Ti Classified + i7 2600k @ stock.
MDSLKTR
Member
So much for running current gen games at 4k easily amiritePeople saying it's ok to play at 30fps and 720p on PC.
Windom Earle
Member
After messing around with the various options to improve the frametime, Nvidia half refresh rate + 1 frame buffer is by far the smoothest for this game in my experience. No Riva Tuner this time.
Remember to uncap the framerate before and set in-game V-Sync to off.
Played about 7h and still no crashes.
Remember to uncap the framerate before and set in-game V-Sync to off.
Played about 7h and still no crashes.
This game is pretty unoptimized. The game's not really a looker whatsoever. There is no way this game should be that taxing even if it is open world.
flaxknuckles
Member
Isn't it hardware intensive because of the mass amount of zombies that all have unique textures, all the physics objects that can be interacted with, and the seamless interiors?
Yeah, I was getting this. Crashed with the dedicated, I was able to play with the integrated but it had an atrocious framerate.
xBladeM6x
Member
I really really hate this fucking argument. No, even if it's only at Xbox quality, I still wanted to play it on my PC, because I like my PC more, and I prefer to own the majority of my game as possible on one platform. I get that this game was not made with PC in mind, but if it's at least as good as it's console original then it's a parity port, even if not an acceptable one that uses PC properly.
Also, don't take my hostile tone of this post as being directed at you, it's just the argument itself that gets to me since it's insinuating that if PC ports aren't 2342% better than their console counterpart, there's literally no reason why anyone should buy it on PC over console. As if preference doesn't exist.
Birgitte2004
Member
Yes, this is a known issue with integrated/dedicated setups.
Read this again and again SURGEdude (and the rest of you negative people)
1080p just isn't realistic for a lot of reasons. Most of all is probably a lack of experience on the devs part.
I recorded a video, but ShadowPlay doesn't actually record the onscreen FPS. Regardless, it's 60 most of the time for me. The quick drops occur most when new textures / areas are being swapped in. There are ACTUAL drops to ~50 when massive amounts of zombies are onscreen.
Dead Rising 3 09 06 2014 09 58 29 01: http://youtu.be/CJPpYWmTMcA
YouTube is still processing HD so wait a bit.
I consider this fully acceptable with the sheer volume of "stuff" <--technical term
is on-screen.
Regardless of technical weaknesses, with my settings a couple pages back, the game is perfectly playable and worth the money (TO ME).
Windom Earle
Member
That's what I was thinking too. Had some minor crashing issues with games some time ago and couldn't figure out what it was because my OC in prime95 was stable. Then I found out that I actually had parity errors in the windows event viewer from time to time. Since I upped my voltage a tiny bit, everything is great. Not saying it is the main issue here, but some people run crazy OCs without knowing they are not stable.
Chairmanchuck
Member
I dont really get this game performancewise.
Started it and see like thousands of Zombies, have about 25-30fps. Drive with the card and see like... maybe 20 Zombies and it runs with 5 fps...
Then a cutscene starts and they also run like with 5 fps to 15fps...
Started it and see like thousands of Zombies, have about 25-30fps. Drive with the card and see like... maybe 20 Zombies and it runs with 5 fps...
Then a cutscene starts and they also run like with 5 fps to 15fps...
Youtube finished the HD processing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJPpYWmTMcA
Edit: If there's someplace I can upload the MP4 file, so you can see 60fps, I can do that. The file is 715MB.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJPpYWmTMcA
Edit: If there's someplace I can upload the MP4 file, so you can see 60fps, I can do that. The file is 715MB.
I think what I mean by unoptimized is just the kind of hardware required to run this thing decently.
I really don't want to sound PC elitist, but being PC gamers, we shouldn't even have to stand for a 720p resolution.
There's a reason why I was asking a while ago how to force other resolutions since I want to play this at 1440p.
There is no other game in my library trying to put as much on screen as this game.
And this wasn't made by Capcom Japan, unfortunately.
I get where you're coming from, but I doubt it's going to get better. The game is fun, and looks great to boot. Your choice is to hate it and not play, or enjoy it. I'm going with the latter. It's a blast.
Stevey
Member
Well that looks fine to me, which gives me hope as I have a 3770k and a 3GB 780, I'll probably get it on sale at christmas.
Mega.co.nz or I believe Gamersyde are the best place for stuff like that currently.
I'm not certain on Gamersyde, but I believe they recently implemented user uploads.
I never said I wasn't enjoying the game. It's a blast, and it looks pretty decent with all the bells and whistles turned on. I'm just surprised you can play it at a 720p native resolution when even on 1080p native for me, the IQ still leaves a lot to be desired.
Anyway, that's all I'll be doing on the benchmarking front. Gonna be enjoying the game now.
You'd be doing yourself a disservice otherwise. Really fun.
Mega is going to take 3 hours, they apparently don't have the bandwidth Youtube does (less than 10 minute upload).
Also:
If GamerSyde is better, let me know where I can do that.
Dude, there are like a million character models on the screen at any given moment. I'm not saying it's the best optimized game in the world but some people's expectations totally lack context or reasonableness.
I have a 780 and I run it on high settings and haven't noticed any hiccups.
1. It runs better than the XBO version
2. I's cheaper than even a current used copy of the XB1 version at Gamestop and includes all the DLC.
3. You don't have to buy a $400 console to play it.
Those alone are good reasons to buy this version. Sometimes I think some people only buy PC games for e-peen reasons because they think they are going to massage their ego about how awesome their rig is.
Windom Earle
Member
Yup, I do find some aspects of the game impressive. Textures and models are on the weak side, but the scale and zombie amount are pretty awesome. Lighting also has its moments.
I can't give final judgement on the new timer system yet... The old DR games were more stressful to play, but I feel it is nice to have a bit more time in this open world.
edit: One question... Is it normal to have so many weapons available in the hideout locker? Or is that part of the DLC?
I don't really want to get into this whole Xbox One version over the PC version debate as they both cater to different crowds and have merits either way but let's put it this way, in 5 years time when you go to play Dear Rising 3 in either an Xbox One or if the newer Xbox has backwards compatibility it's probably going to play exactly the same as it does today. On your PC, even if you're using the same hardware you might get better performance through newer drivers. If you have made some further upgrades to your hardware, especially on the GPU side you will definitely get better performance. Dead Rising 2 ran at about an average of 40fps for me when it came out on my Q6600 and 480 combo, which at the time was about the best GPU you could get (short of SLI) and today I get into the high 100's easily on a single card.
1. *eyeroll* @ 720p comment. You do realize there are some pc gamers with hardware that can't play it at more than 720p30, right? Not everyone has 780s.
2. You can play it at whatever your monitors native res is by setting game quality to "full" in the advanced options menu.
symphonask
Member
Okay my specs are as follows :
i7 3770 @ 3.4GHz
R9 290x
16GB RAM
I'm running at full 1440p, motion blur off, SMAA, and LOD slightly lowered - everything else on high.
Outside of cutscenes, it is playable and it rarely drops below 30fps otherwise it is variable 35-60fps - with the lower end of that on the Rollerhawg running over a lot zombies and higher end when on foot and smaller areas.
i7 3770 @ 3.4GHz
R9 290x
16GB RAM
I'm running at full 1440p, motion blur off, SMAA, and LOD slightly lowered - everything else on high.
Outside of cutscenes, it is playable and it rarely drops below 30fps otherwise it is variable 35-60fps - with the lower end of that on the Rollerhawg running over a lot zombies and higher end when on foot and smaller areas.
Just played the game for about an hour, my findings:
pc specs:
i7 870 @ 2,93 ghz
GTX 460
4 GB RAM
Because my pc specs are quite a bit below minimum, i put all the options on low and resolution on 720p. With this, i get 30 fps most of the time, with the exception being if there are a lot of zombies on screen at the same time. The game is very playable like this, even if it isn't super nice to look at. I didn't have any crashes (yet). Pretty happy with the performance until now.
pc specs:
i7 870 @ 2,93 ghz
GTX 460
4 GB RAM
Because my pc specs are quite a bit below minimum, i put all the options on low and resolution on 720p. With this, i get 30 fps most of the time, with the exception being if there are a lot of zombies on screen at the same time. The game is very playable like this, even if it isn't super nice to look at. I didn't have any crashes (yet). Pretty happy with the performance until now.
For simplicity I'll all videos in this post:
Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJPpYWmTMcA
DropBox:
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7026896/Dead Rising 3 09.06.2014 - 09.58.29.01.mp4
Mega upload:
https://mega.co.nz/#!jxFyTRwS!xX6IESIq9aLtnNhTIE7ieUamYU9i6UdhngHXTk9dQ-o
The 60fps MP4 file is 719MB
And once again here is my hardware and my settings
Edit: If someone wants to rehost the video on Dropbox or Mega that'd be great, Dropbox doesn't allow for much traffic and Mega is slow.
Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJPpYWmTMcA
DropBox:
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7026896/Dead Rising 3 09.06.2014 - 09.58.29.01.mp4
Mega upload:
https://mega.co.nz/#!jxFyTRwS!xX6IESIq9aLtnNhTIE7ieUamYU9i6UdhngHXTk9dQ-o
The 60fps MP4 file is 719MB
And once again here is my hardware and my settings
Edit: If someone wants to rehost the video on Dropbox or Mega that'd be great, Dropbox doesn't allow for much traffic and Mega is slow.
IMACOMPUTA
Member
I was crashing literally every 15 minutes. (A total of 11 times).
I rolled back to 335 and played 2 hours. No crashing.
2002whitegt
Member
Might try the rolling back my GPU driver, because as is, the game is a mess, crashes so much.
Otherwise, it runs ok, not great at 30fps and 1080p on my rig, looks ok on my tv, except the cutscenes look bad with textures loading late or not at all.
My rig:
core i7 3770
GTX 670
8gb ram
Otherwise, it runs ok, not great at 30fps and 1080p on my rig, looks ok on my tv, except the cutscenes look bad with textures loading late or not at all.
My rig:
core i7 3770
GTX 670
8gb ram
dmix90
Member
Yup.... you guys should install 335.23, i tried to rollback to 337 at first and game still crashed, played for 5 hours with 335 without a single crash. Rock solid 30 frames if you don't count some cutscenes.
AMD FX 8120 overclocked to 4.6 ghz, so basically same perfromance. Works great at 30 frames. With unlocked framerate drops to 30, so there is no point if you don't want to lower graphics quality.
dmix90
Member
Unlocked framerate? I am playing without .ini tweaks. Forced vsync(normal) and triple buffering in nvidia control panel, also locked deadrising3.exe in riva tuner statistics server to 30 frames just in case
, oh and turned off ingame vsync option.Nostremitus
Member
I think you misunderstood my original question then.
The data you provided shows how IPC affects the average frame-rate when the game is ran in an unlocked, untested and unoptimized configuration. What it doesn't show is frame-time variance of the game as released. My understanding is that the game has frame time instability across the board for all chips when ran with the framerate unlocked. That's why I said it wasn't relevant, because it doesn't answer my question at all. Average framerate doesn't show anything regarding frame stutters, it just shows that higher IPC leads to a higher average.I don't think anyone would disagree with that. An average means nothing when discussing frame stutter unless you are comparing two identical chips and see an increase between graphical configurations or an overclock, even then you're just postulating that the increase means less stutter until you actually see a frame time breakdown.
My question was about how the game was optimized. As in, the way it runs unaltered. Did the devs optimize the game for more threads vs higher IPC.
I wasn't claiming they did this. I wasn't waving an AMD flag as this would also affect i7s. I was asking a question based on the posts of people in this thread, I was hoping people here would post their frame times and we could see evidence one way or the other. Posting averages of the game running with settings the devs didn't bug test doesn't really say anything.
Regarding the threading of PC game ports, remember that the current consoles are code compatible to regular desktop chips this time. The CPU instructions don't have to be rewritten from IBM code anymore. It's possible that the CPU code could transition to the PC port mostly unaltered.
I am experiencing this, too. The whole time it didn't crash with the old driver, but now it starts crashing with it, too
MiniBossBattle
Member
First time in awhile I have had issues with a game on my PC. Frustrating.
i5 4690k @ 3.5GHz
560 Ti
16GB RAM
SSD
No crashes so far, but the game doesn't really run well at all at 1080p with no AA/motion blur/DoF. Cutscenes are almost a slideshow, and regular gameplay framerate isn't very good, either. I'm using the latest GPU drivers, I'll try rolling back to see if I fare any better but I suspect my GPU is the culprit. I was planning on waiting to upgrade since nothing has really pushed it so far.
560 Ti
16GB RAM
SSD
No crashes so far, but the game doesn't really run well at all at 1080p with no AA/motion blur/DoF. Cutscenes are almost a slideshow, and regular gameplay framerate isn't very good, either. I'm using the latest GPU drivers, I'll try rolling back to see if I fare any better but I suspect my GPU is the culprit. I was planning on waiting to upgrade since nothing has really pushed it so far.
LOL:
I'll upload to Mega. They're really slow though and it failed twice during upload.
Edit: Actually it's hitting 450KB/s now that I made a free account. I'll link the video when it's done. Looks like about 25 min for the upload.
Edit 2: Down to 230KB/s. Ugh. I have 3MB/s upload capability. Oh well.
I'll upload to Mega. They're really slow though and it failed twice during upload.
Edit: Actually it's hitting 450KB/s now that I made a free account. I'll link the video when it's done. Looks like about 25 min for the upload.
Edit 2: Down to 230KB/s. Ugh. I have 3MB/s upload capability. Oh well.