• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Digital Foundry: What Can Be Done About Unreal Engine 5 Games With Image Quality/Performance Issues?

id tech isnt pushing any fancy graphics though despite pushing ray tracing. it looks like a last gen game.

s8vAYtvRh7eRSvcN.jpeg

LMhd074UVeEjtQxr.jpeg

5s4nIJtFef8JKnLI.jpeg


what optimizations could they have made here?
This looks every bit as good as any UE5 game I have seen. It also runs many times better. I would bet you that ANY gamer would prefer the smoothness visuals of this over the garbage of UE5.
 
Last edited:
I think many of these developers should be talking to Embark and what they've done with Unreal Engine 5/ARC Raiders.
The game looks incredible and runs extremely well with all the craziness happening during games.

It will also be interesting to see what CD Projekt Red ends up doing with their highly modified Unreal 5 Engine(using it for The Witcher 4).
 
Why do you guys still do not understand that game engines are not magic. they cannot make a hardware push more than it physically can. It's 100% on the devs to work with the chosen tools and make the correct choices. Even if there are bad parts about UE3 .. the devs still decided to include those.
Some of the earlier UE5 games suffered from CPU bottlenecks due to UE5 being extremely single threaded. This was resolved by UE5.4. Every game since then that has issues is because these consoles are not equipped to run games at 60 fps while pushing next gen tech.

Gamers can go to the 30 fps modes which run at an average of 1440p but they refused to do so, and that is basically the core of the problem. people bought these cheap $500 consoles in 2020 and think they are going to run games at 4k 60 fps while pushing ray tracing and AI upscaling these consoles dont support.

This. All engines rely on the same rasterisation or raytracing techniques at the core in the end. GPU APIs pretty much dictate that.

Rendering at 4K is expensive. Raytracing is expensive. You can render at lower resolutions and then upscale, but that's that really for any "magic" to get things running better.

If you want performance with good looks, then you use pre-baking. Pretty much all engines can do this. But then you lose either dynamic lights and/or dynamic objects.

I wish there was an engine that would have "free" raytracing and physics, but that's just not going to happen.
Some of the more recent UE5 games actually run at 1080p 60 fps. Expedition 33 and Mafia both target 1080p 60 fps. mafia has some drops while riding cars through the open world but during normal gameplay its mostly 60 fps. UE5.6 is supposed to make hardware lumen performant enough so that it runs at the same performance profile as software lumen. They already showed Witcher 4 running at 800-1080p 60 fps using hardware lumen.
 
I think many of these developers should be talking to Embark and what they've done with Unreal Engine 5/ARC Raiders.
The game looks incredible and runs extremely well with all the craziness happening during games.

It will also be interesting to see what CD Projekt Red ends up doing with their highly modified Unreal 5 Engine(using it for The Witcher 4).
Arc Raiders is a good example of a UE5 game that runs fairly well at decent resolutions. You dont HAVE to use next gen features like lumen and nanite to get a decent looking game built on UE5. Split Fiction does the same.

It's clear that the issue isnt UE5, but developers choosing the wrong features for their games. A game like High On Life 2 doesnt need lumen. Nanite maybe. But lumen, eh? At least drop it in the 60 fps mode and claw back some performance that way. Forcing everyone to play a 60 fps mode at 720p on 4k monitors is retarded. The game looks like garbage on consoles. Either stick with 30 fps or drop these fancy next gen features for the 60 fps mode.

This is where console manufacturers shouldve had some standards forcing devs not to drop below 1080p on base consoles. If you cant ship a 60 fps version at 1080p then dont.
 
UE5 is pushing other tech like nanite and VSMs. Graphics cost graphics processing power. this is not rocket science.

it literally doesn't matter what UE5 "pushes"

because what the end result is is games looking worse than last gen titles, while running at ÂĽ the resolution and struggling to hit 60fps.

UE5 games on current gen consoles look like how games like Doom looked on Switch 1.
that is to say they look like games not designed for the systems they ship on, but instead are forced onto hardware that's clearly not capable of handling it.

and at the same time other engines are just as advanced while having to make far less compromises to image quality and performance.

other engines have good looking shadows, they have RT GI, they have nanite-equivalent LOD handling... but somehow easily reach double the performance of your typical UE5 game.

Star Wars Outlaws runs on the fucking Switch 2, with RT GI, RT reflections and RT shadows.
Fortnite can't even run Nanite on Switch 2 yet, let alone Lumen. and that's the game MADE BY THE FUCKING DEVELOPERS OF THE ENGINE ITSELF!

Indiana Jones will be the next Switch 2 game with full RT GI, and will probably run at a higher resolution than most UE5 games do on Series S, on something with only half the GPU and CPU power.
 
Last edited:
it literally doesn't matter what UE5 "pushes"

because what the end result is is games looking worse than last gen titles, while running at ÂĽ the resolution and struggling to hit 60fps.

UE5 games on current gen consoles look like how games like Doom looked on Switch 1.
that is to say they look like games not designed for the systems they ship on, but instead are forced onto hardware that's clearly not capable of handling it.

and at the same time other engines are just as advanced while having to make far less compromises to image quality and performance.

other engines have good looking shadows, they have RT GI, they have nanite-equivalent LOD handling... but somehow easily reach double the performance of your typical UE5 game.

Star Wars Outlaws runs on the fucking Switch 2, with RT GI, RT reflections and RT shadows.
Fortnite can't even run Nanite on Switch 2 yet, let alone Lumen. and that's the game MADE BY THE FUCKING DEVELOPERS OF THE ENGINE ITSELF!

Indiana Jones will be the next Switch 2 game with full RT GI, and will probably run at a higher resolution than most UE5 games do on Series S, on something with only half the GPU and CPU power.
So much exaggeration in this post its ridiculous. Pretty sure you are just trolling at this point. No point getting into a serious discussion with you anymore. You have turned into a parody of yourself.
 
Like I already said in another (similar) thread, the current gen consoles can't run UE5 games with all their iconic features enabled (VRS, Lumen and Nanite) and achieve reasonable image quality at 60 fps. Nanite and Lumen can make a difference, but not at 4K with a 25% resolution scale and poor image reconstruction (or simple bilinear upscaling). The benefits of these features are obscured by a blurry image and intense noise.

"High on life" is a good example. The first game runs on UE4 at 1800p on PS5, while the sequel runs on UE5 at 720p and use lumen / nanite / vsm. Technically, High on Life 2 has more advanced graphics, but the blur makes the game look worse. That's not the engine's fault, but the developers' fault because they opted for technology that can't run well on PS5 hardware at 60fps.

The PS5 has the power to run UE5 with all it's features, but only at 30fps. Black Myth Wukong in quality mode on PS5 runs at 1440p reconstructed to 4K (with either FSR3 or TSR) and the image quality looks very good (4K like to my eyes) on this screenshot below.


60fps performance mode however looks like crap:


What can be done on current-gen consoles? If the game has a static TOD and must run at 60 fps, the lighting should be pre-baked, and the most demanding UE5 features, such as Nanite, VSM, and Lumen, should be deactivated. This allows for 4K like image quality (FSRQ) at 60fps. If the game has a big, open world with a dynamic TOD, it can use UE5 with all its features, but at 30 fps. It may also be possible to balance the image quality at 40 fps and that would make even first person shooter games enjoyable.

UE5 will shine on the next generation of consoles, if they can offer 9070XT/4080-like performance (xbox magnus should even beat the 9070XT according to recent MILD leak). This will enable 4K at 120 fps with FSR 4 quality and FG x2. Those with similar PC hardware can already play UE5 games with amazing quality and frame rate.
 
Last edited:
No developers telling developers how to do their jobs?
basically, yeh, I just wish one or more of of these studios called them out on it, I'd love to see DF attempt to make a game in UE5, they should make a video series out of it, show us how easy it is to make an amazing game with no performance issues, do it DF
I Dare You Do It GIF
 
id tech isnt pushing any fancy graphics though despite pushing ray tracing. it looks like a last gen game.

s8vAYtvRh7eRSvcN.jpeg

LMhd074UVeEjtQxr.jpeg

5s4nIJtFef8JKnLI.jpeg


what optimizations could they have made here?

I liked Doom TDA a lot, but the graphics in this game looked nice and ugly at the same time. I was impressed with the scale of the levels, overall art direction and look but the lighting looked a little bit flat despite using RT (even with PT many objects were missing direct and indirect shadows) and the ground textures often looked PS3 like. UE5 games (at least the best looking ones) definitely push wayyyyy higher graphics fidelity.


DLSSQ-FGx2.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think the Unreal Engine 5 graphics engine isn't very successful in terms of optimization, especially on consoles, and in fact, the Sony Decima graphics engine is much better.
Decima is great but does it have the same level of lighting that UE5 does? I don't think it does.

UE5 isn't any more optimised on PC either but a minority have beefy PCs that it doesn't become a problem hitting 60fps in comparisons. >70% of PC players have hardware that is lower performance than a PS5 though.
 
What can be done on current-gen consoles?

Current consoles are running on hardware from 2019/2020 basically. Imagine the raytracing and upscaling capabilities and performance of the AMD hardware back then. Miniscule, basically.

Only recently AMD has caught up somewhat with RT and FSR performance. We just need a new hardware generation, just like you wrote.
 
KCD2 was truly a pleasant surprise in this regard. Expansive open world, great image quality and very well optimized.

Vast majority of UE5 games (especially open world ones) are a shit show on PC.
 
KCD2 was truly a pleasant surprise in this regard. Expansive open world, great image quality and very well optimized.

Vast majority of UE5 games (especially open world ones) are a shit show on PC.

CryEngine was built for expansive worlds from the jump.
The editor loads you into an 8x8km world by default........default.
UE5 large map preset is 2x2km.....max without tinkering is 8x8km.....world partition is a solution but still aint perfect as evidenced by so many games.
 
Probably a better take.


Denis Dyack on Unreal Engine, Optimization, and the State of the Industry

Large Unreal teams + extreme specialization

• Denis Dyack argues that most Unreal Engine projects are built by very large teams.
• Those teams often function like an assembly line, where individuals specialize in very narrow areas.
• Example:
• An artist whose entire focus is just blades of grass
• They optimize their grass assets, but may have no visibility into how other systems interact
• With 200–1,000+ developers, everyone pushes their piece forward, making full technical oversight extremely difficult.

Experience gaps + why optimization is hard
• Many teams include talented developers, but a large portion may only have 2–5 years of experience.
• Denis contrasts this with his own background:
• 35 years in the industry
• Experience building custom engines
• Key point: optimization is extremely hard, even for experienced teams.

Unreal as an "all-round" engine
• UE5 is described as a general-purpose engine designed to handle everything.
• But optimization needs vary drastically depending on the game:
• Racing game
• Open-world RPG
• 2D title
• Each genre requires deep, game-specific optimization knowledge.
• There is no universal solution that automatically makes everything run well.

It's not the engine — it's the industry
• Denis Dyack's central claim: poor performance in many UE5 games is not the engine's fault.
• Instead, it reflects the current state of the video game industry.

Shipping without optimization
• According to Denis, many studios are in such a difficult position that:
• If the game "works," they ship it
• There isn't enough time or budget to properly optimize
• Result: games launch in technically rough condition.

Optimization vs. content dilemma
• Optimization takes time and resources.
• That time could instead be used to:
• Add new content
• Add features
• Market "what's new"
• In many cases, decision-makers prioritize content over performance polish.
• Optimization is often seen internally as "not worth it" compared to visible additions.

Industry turmoil: "black swans" + "extinction-level event"
• Denis references multiple black swan events in recent years.
• He also describes an "extinction-level event" in the industry.
• Consequences:
• Many colleagues are gone
• Investment and funding have shrunk
• He predicts that for the next 2–4 years, we'll continue seeing the after-effects of earlier mistakes.

Final takeaway from Denis Dyack
• UE5 itself is not inherently the problem.
• The real issue is:
• Reduced budgets
• Lost talent
• Tight timelines
• Industry instability
• In his view, performance issues reflect systemic industry problems, not engine design flaws.
 
I was a fan of DF and I think they are responsible in general for developers to make sure their games have better framerates. I think overall they did help the gaming comunity with their work. But lately they're going downhill in my opinion.
The High on life 2 video was really bad.
There you have a game that objectively looks bad on console and they're saying it looks good enough. The video has about 90% downvotes according to Rich and then they're saying in the Direct that those 90% are all wrong and they are right.
And then you have John saying he played it on PC while also saying in other directs that we didn't need a PS5 Pro and we don't need a PS6 yet. But he is playing on PC because the game looks too bad on PS5 Pro.
It's not that I won't watch them anymore it's just that I think they are getting worse.

In my opinion the only way to get good visuals out of UE5 is to optimize your game or don't use the advanced features of UE5 like nanite and lumen. And get rid of 30fps modes, 60fps standard. By having a quality and performance mode I think the performance mode is more an aftertought by some developers and not properly optimized.
 
DF is an utter joke these days
I think YouTube forcing creators to do long form style videos to get monetization ruined things. So many creators really don't need to have their personal opinions heard if I'm being honest - just show me how to make a demi-glace and be done with it.
 
I love Unreal Engine 5 games on PC, generally speaking. Crank Lumen to 'Epic' and that shit looks godly with no "boiling" in the latest versions of the engine. Image quality is great with DLSS. I don't have many complaints.

The games look like crap on PS5 because it's outdated hardware that isn't well suited for the engine. Image quality suffers because the internal res is low and FSR is an image garbling mess on the platform. Not much to do about that other than play on PC for the vastly better experience.
 
Last edited:
CryEngine was built for expansive worlds from the jump.
The editor loads you into an 8x8km world by default........default.
UE5 large map preset is 2x2km.....max without tinkering is 8x8km.....world partition is a solution but still aint perfect as evidenced by so many games.
Really wish more devs used Crytech more but that company has a lot of issues. Still, results are damn good.
 
Some RTX4090 / 5090 owners said in this thread that UE5 games runs like crap on their PC. Sure, even high end GPUs cannot run UE5 games at 4K native resolution, real 120 fps, and with maxed-out settings at the same time. However, it doesn't take much to achieve amazing quality on such capable GPUs. With a slower RTX 4080S, all I had to do was use DLSS (feature everybody use these days anyway) and adjust the settings from Epic to Very High or High at most (In most cases, there's barely any difference). I can understand why console gamers aren't happy with their experience in UE5 games, as they get a blurry image and a low framerate (sometimes only 720p at 40–60 fps). However, the RTX5090 is 5x times faster compared to PS5 in raster and has an amazing AI that allows it to boost framerate to insane levels. To me, it seems as though PC users with RTX 5090s have unrealistically high expectations. They either don't use DLSS features or refuse to adjust their ingame settings because they paid $3,000–$5,000 and believe that they shouldn't use AI to boost the framerate. They can run almost all of UE5 games at 4K 60 fps even without AI, but that's still not good enough for them.

Below are my own screenshots from the UE5 games I have played. They demonstrate how UE5 games will perform on next-generation consoles, as they will offer comparable GPU power and AI capabilities.

DLSS 4K DLSS Quality. These games didnt supported FGx2.

Silent Hill F


Hell is Us


Gothic Remake demo


Sillent Hill 2 Remake. This game support FG, but I don't have an FG screenshot in my library, so I would need to download the game to get one. With FGx2, the game runs at over 120 fps with maxed out settings.


Now FGx2 screenshots. Framerate could be pushed 20-30fps higher if I would use DLSS Performance instead of Quality

Robocop Unfinished Business


Borderlands 4 (high settings)


Assetto Corsa Rally


Cronos


Mafia the old country


Hellblade 2


MGS3 Delta


Black Myth Wukong, lumen lighting and high (console like) settings

4-K-DLSSQ-FG2.jpg


I can even play Black Myth Wukong with Path Tracing if I use DLSS Performance. 80-100fps is still enjoyable experience on gamepad IMO. Input Lag around 40ms. For comparison 60fps games on PS5 have around 70-110ms.

4K DLSSP + FGx2 with maxed out PT

PT-4-K-DLSSP-FG2.jpg


Even with PT set to low, the lighting in Black Myth Wukong looks much better than with software RT (lumen). With lumen, shadows flicker a lot (especially tree shadows because they constantly move). In dimly lit locations lumen lighting can look flat (especially vegetation). Water reflections also look much worse without PT.

BMW-4-K-DLSSP-low-PT.jpg


At 1800p I can get around 120fps and still use maxed out PT. This is very impressive considering PT is a feature designed for next gen GPUs.

1800p-PT-DLSSP-FG2.jpg


If my RTX 4080 Super didn't support excellent DLSS or FG, these UE5 games wouldn't run so well, but they would still be enjoyable. With console like settings my 4080S can get 55-80 fps at 4K native depending on the game. Robocop runs at 70-90fps at 4K native with high settings, black myth wukong and mafia runs between 55-70fps. However, with DLSS and especially with FGx2 on top of that, these UE5 games run smoothly as butter, and DLSSQ image still looks 4K to me.

From all UE5 games that I played I only had real problems with SH2 remake. Camera stutter was not only noticeable but affecting my experience. However, that camera stutter was drastically reduced if the game ran at high framerate, so I played this game at 1440p with 150-200 fps and still had an amazing experience.

Some games, like Resident Evil 8: Village, run much better than Unreal Engine 5 (UE5) on my PC. I get 120-160 fps at 4K native resolution with maxed-out settings and ray tracing (RT). However, I feel like the UE5 requirements are justified, given how much better the graphics look. The best looking UE5 games reminds me CGI quality at times. I haven't seen a more detailed ground surface than in Hellblade 2. In RE Village, the ground surface is just a flat texture, sometimes with POM.

Hellblade2-Win64-Shipping-2025-01-10-00-44-19-936.jpg
 
Last edited:
With giant open worlds and fully dynamic time of day with weather conditions and sometimes even different seasons?

I agree when a scene is very dynamic that RT solution makes way more sense

But say, Silent Hill 2? Time of day controlled by devs and no destructions? Fully static scenes? Makes a lot less sense

I don't care ultimately as I'm on PC.
 
thats why i said it many times, gaming PC has to be high end to brute force the optimization.

a "budget" or "console" equilavent PC is not going to do it. you are just wasting your money.
 
Last edited:
thats why i said it many times, gaming PC has to be high end to brute force the optimization.

a "budget" or "console" equilavent PC is not going to do it. you are just wasting your money.

So how well those optimized UE5 games run on consoles?
 
better than budget or mid range PC thats for sure.

Is it? On PC you can always increase internal resolution while lowering some settings, use DLSS4/FSR4 etc.

On console many UE5 games are 720p and still have traversal stuttering. Most of them with TSR or FSR2 that looks blurry as fuck.
 
This looks every bit as good as any UE5 game I have seen. It also runs many times better. I would bet you that ANY gamer would prefer the smoothness visuals of this over the garbage of UE5.
Doom TDA with standard RT is quite demanding and runs comparable to UE5 games. With PT the performance is absolutely tragic in DOOM TDA. Even PT in black Myth: Wukong is less demanding and way more scalable. The graphics in DOOM TDA is OK, but the best-looking UE5 games are in a different league when it comes to assets quality, especially texture quality.
 
This is last week's debate but since it has come up: good talk, fair points from all of them. Yet they stubbornly refuse to admit any problem with the engine at all. Yes, in part is the dev's fault. In part. Like 30%. The other 70% is that shit stinking with the CPU or the GPU or both. I guess they are not in a position to make Epic an enemy of theirs but in the end the video is unsatisfactory and leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
 
Top Bottom