Dictator93
Member
We don't know for certain. But I am pretty sure rigs similar to yours have outperformed th PS4 in every multiplatform game so far. So why not this one as well.
The Witcher 3 runs at 1080p ULTRA ~60 fps on a 980
- Thread starter Kezen
- Start date
We don't know for certain. But I am pretty sure rigs similar to yours have outperformed th PS4 in every multiplatform game so far. So why not this one as well.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
No, benches aren't always the best, but they are a good indication. If a bench is telling me 40-60fps is the average framerate, the game is not going to be unplayable. Also sure, I don't think anyone is claiming a 970 SLI setup is as good as a titan X. Nor should it be, at nearly/less than half the price.
Will be interested to see how the memory limit effects performance moving forward.
I expect that since a 980 is minimum requirement for Ultra settings in Arkham Knight, it will be one game where running Ultra settings in 4K is absolutely out of the question.
But that's good. More games need to release where Ultra settings are not even obtainable on currently released hardware.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Yes, native 4K on a 65inch Samsung Curved.
It is game changing in my opinion. Games finally start to have that CG movie quality IQ that we just haven't had in games up until now. Detail everywhere the eye can see, less jaggies, less shimmering. Objects, NPC's etc are visible from MUCH farther away. You can resolve who an NPC is from staggering distance if the games in engine LoD supports it.
Games with rich texture work like The Witcher 2 really start to shine, even when they lack graphically fancy effects, little things stand out, scratches in armor, not of Geralt, but of the NPC that is lingering in the background become readily apparent. Pilots running on rooftops across the map in Titanfall are instantly visible, and details resolvable, even at a distance. Blades of grass in Far Cry 3 look insane. Starfields in Homeworld look like art. It is all really impressive.
Things like brick buildings, grass, trees, etc all look infinity better and more crisp.
4K really has taken even older games to an entirely different level for me.
Dictator93
Member
I just ran the Nvidia's GPU analyzer for The Witcher 3 and it shows this image:
Notice the different resolutions and settings listed for the GPUs. Looks like a 980 will be very well off in this game (I imagine each card getting ca. 45 fps if Geforce Experience is to go by)
Notice the different resolutions and settings listed for the GPUs. Looks like a 980 will be very well off in this game (I imagine each card getting ca. 45 fps if Geforce Experience is to go by)
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
I just ran the Nvidia's GPU analyzer for The Witcher 3 and it shows this image:
Notice the different resolutions and settings listed for the GPUs.
Oh hot damn. That is awesome. Really hoping I can do Ultra at 4K 30fps with twin 970 FTW.
I know they are no Titan X though. Not by a long shot.
ArkkAngel007
Member
Hmm...mine will be an intel 4770, and may just make the plunge with the 980. I'll be salvaging RAM from another PC being sent to me, so I'll have to see what is there. I'll have at least 8 GB there though.
Maybe they meant 2560x1440?
2560x1920?I just ran the Nvidia's GPU analyzer for The Witcher 3 and it shows this image:
Notice the different resolutions and settings listed for the GPUs. Looks like a 980 will be very well off in this game (I imagine each card getting ca. 45 fps if Geforce Experience is to go by)
Dictator93
Member
I would count on it at this point. The only uncertainty is how much VRAM the game will use. But it being forward plus makes me think its framebuffer will be noticably smaller for a variety of reasons.
Your monitor doesnt have a fat mode? Shame!
I think it is supposed to read 2560x1440.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Yeah I am hoping this is the case.
Looking at any other game that gets 60@1080p on a single 980, 970's in SLI get at least 30+ in 4K. That rule has yet to be broken. And the FTW's have a significant OC as well.
The only thing I am kind of concerned about is Hair Works. Although gamestar said it was working at 60FPS with it enabled, Gopher said it ran at 25-30 with it enabled.
There are people saying this is because Shadowplay was active and when it is, performance of physX and Hair Works tanks.
I hope so, because I really want Hair Works.
Dries
Member
A 30 fps hit just for enabling HairWorks? I hope this is way over the top.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Indeed. I suspect it does have something to do with being enabled at the same time as Shadowplay which is what the youtubers used to record.
Which would explain why other websites said they played at 60fps with hairworks on, but did not record, and everyone that recorded, did not have hairworks on.
Bloodsent
Member
Man, can't decide if I should just be proactive here and upgrade, or wait it out. My i7-920@4.0Ghz, 6GB RAM, 7950@1150/1400 has served me well up to this point. With both new CPUs and GPUs just over the horizon here, it makes the decision hard. Am I better off just getting the PS4/XBO version, or will my rig play this at 1080p better than the PS4?
ShooterMcTavish
Banned
Not sure if anyone asked this already, but when is the 980ti supposed to drop. And what price you think it will be. 699? thinking about waiting a little longer and getting that instead of 980gtx
I was using the CPU 920@3.6 until my upgrade, the CPU and its platform is getting pretty ancient in terms of computing and the Haswell-E is a great upgrade option.
I am using a 670 with 920 and didnt realize how CPU bound i was until I upgraded. Most games ran 60+ fps but with the upgrade some are peaking 100+.
Keep your GPU and upgrade your CPU, 1st Gen i7 is really long in the tooth.
CPU-wise you are still outperforming PS4 by a huge margin. The GPU is also more powerful. The only part I'd be somewhat concerned about with an open world game such as this is the total system memory.
The Wraith
Member
Make sure you get more ram, considering this is an open world game I would make sure to have 8 gigs of ram.
RandomSeed
Member
I keep going back and forth on which version I want. An overclocked HD 7850 2GB has me leaning towards the PS4 version, but obviously an i5-3570k @4.2ghz is better than what's in the console. I mean technically, my GPU doesn't even met minimums.
CPU isn't holding him back much unless he has a 120Hz+ monitor. Getting a GPU like the 290X would be quite a upgrade for him, while swapping the CPU wouldn't do much if he sticks with the 7970...
I'd say either just upgrade the GPU or do a complete rebuild.
Unfortunately I don't have a picture in English.
Price/value ratio. Green arrow is better and red is worse.
Fenris95
Neo Member
I used to think an i7 would be overkill, until games started coming out that were 64bit. Generally speaking 8GBs of DDR3 1600Mhz and an unlocked i5 will be fine, even an i3 runs GTA5 at 60fps/1080p on High.
i'm a little late to the party, but i just saw that the minimum cpu requirement was an i5 2500k ...was kinda shocked to see that.
anyway, i'm still running an old i5 760 @ 3.8ghz + 8gig ram + gtx680 4gig ...and it's served me pretty well for several years (ie, getting pretty well constant 60fps @ 1080p with very high settings in GTA V) ...so i'm wondering ...
do you think my old ass cpu would be enough to pull off very high settings @ 1080p, and at least a constant 30fps in Witcher 3?
anyway, i'm still running an old i5 760 @ 3.8ghz + 8gig ram + gtx680 4gig ...and it's served me pretty well for several years (ie, getting pretty well constant 60fps @ 1080p with very high settings in GTA V) ...so i'm wondering ...
do you think my old ass cpu would be enough to pull off very high settings @ 1080p, and at least a constant 30fps in Witcher 3?
loganclaws
Plane Escape Torment
The 2500k is a magical chip that can be a minimum requirement and more than a recommended requirement at the same time.
Sold. Thank you sir!
veggiesaurus
Member
At the very least, you could run the game at PS4-equivalent settings @ 60fps, unless CDPR have suddenly forgotten how to code for PC.
Sanctuary
Member
I just ran the Nvidia's GPU analyzer for The Witcher 3 and it shows this image:
Notice the different resolutions and settings listed for the GPUs. Looks like a 980 will be very well off in this game (I imagine each card getting ca. 45 fps if Geforce Experience is to go by)
Is this something that can really be considered legitimate though, and not just a way to influence the purchases of new cards?
Personally, the game is coming out at an odd time. There hasn't been any real reason to get a new card over my GTX 780 so far, and this game is the closest, yet still not worth an extremely marginal upgrade. Maybe if the 980 Ti was out now I'd be considering it.
Dictator93
Member
It has been quite accurate in the past.
It shouldn't be. ShadowPlay performance hit is 2-3 fps at worst.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Not shadowplay itself, but ShadowPlay enabled simultaneously to Hairworks I guess causes framerate issues. Though Angry Joes video seemed smooth...
Going to cross post this here as the other thread is ancient and it is kind of relevant to this thread.
dgrdsv
Member
TW2 using D3D9 only has something to do with this I think.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Ah thanks! Good read.
Unfortunate, but I have decided to keep it on, since the framerate drops only in certain cutscenes, and during normal gameplay I get mostly 60fps. And it looks extremely nice.
Hopefully Wild Hunt is using something of similar quality Bokeh, but obviously without the drastic FPS hit.
TheSpoiler
Member
FX4300 3.3GHZ
8 gigs of ram
2GB R9 270x
PS4 version or just do it on this busted ass PC ?
8 gigs of ram
2GB R9 270x
PS4 version or just do it on this busted ass PC ?
DeathGlobe
Member
I have the ps4 version preordered but my pc has 8gb of ram i5 3570k and 970. Pc is the no brainer ?
Yes, you can probably max it without hairworks and get 60 fps. So def a better exp than a ps4 since your PC is a lot lot better.
Dictator93
Member
Your GPU is better, such a shame that you have that CPU though...
I am not sure how the game wills cale with CPU cores and IPC strength, but... I highly doubt the FX4300 was their target for higher end settings.
Everything about your PC is better. You could easily target 1080p high. Though it is hard to say how much VRAM this game may need. It has dedicated texture streaming though... so probably not too much VRAM.
Sqrt_minus_one
Member
PCPC will be better IMO
PC is probably better but will be close and can go either way
PS4 almost definitely
Sodding_Gamer
Member
I'll be grabbing a 970 in a couple of months but I'm hoping my 770 will suffice with mostly ultra settings at 30fps.
Saiyan-Rox
Member
What's the chances I'll get ultra on an over clocked to 4.2 i5 and a 980?
None what-so-ever. You should just give up.
pretty high, they said a single 980 is enough to max it.