Support NeoGAF

[Sky Saw]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zwnk7XE22o8

NXGamer analysis... looks pretty terrible for PC, with barely better performance than consoles at same settings with even an i5 and gtx 970. Don't even try with AMD

Is it just me, or is this guy always underselling the PC versions? He always maxes every game out with every performance killing option and talks about how good the PS4 is in every platform comparison? Maybe it's just me.

 

[Kezen]

Is it just me, or is this guy always underselling the PC versions? He always maxes every game out with every performance killing option and talks about how good the PS4 is in every platform comparison? Maybe it's just me.

No, his agenda is clear as day.

The PC version is packed with effects only the remaster on PS5 will have, and if some do not understand what max settings are supposed to be then they are better left rotting in their ignorance.

 

[dex3108]

I don;t understand why he is so popular on GAF. I am sure that he doesn't have equipment and software that Digital Foundry have and it seems to me that many of his statements are made by measuring with an eye rather than with software.

 

[Deepo]

No, his agenda is clear as day.

The PC version is packed with effects only the remaster on PS5 will have, and if some do not understand what max settings are supposed to be then they are better left rotting in their ignorance.

NXGamer also claims that the Nvidia Game Ready driver is locked behind Geforce Expericence. That's not the case, though I understand why one would think that, seeing as that was all over the news a few months ago. I would expect someone doing a technical analysis like this (even on a machine with a 970) to get facts like that correct though.

 

[Kezen]

NXGamer also claims that the Nvidia Game Ready driver is locked behind Geforce Expericence. That's not the case, though I understand why one would think that, seeing as that was all over the news a few months ago. I would expect someone doing a technical analysis like this (even on a machine with a 970) to get facts like that correct though.

I made the mistake myself, when I saw the JC3 Geforce guide and now link to DL the driver I wrongly assumed GE was required.

However, there are reports Nvidia will indeed make GE mandatory for "game ready" drivers.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2993272/software-games/nvidia-plans-to-lock-game-ready-drivers-behind-geforce-experience-registration.html

 

[roadrunn3r]

NXGamer also claims that the Nvidia Game Ready driver is locked behind Geforce Expericence. That's not the case, though I understand why one would think that, seeing as that was all over the news a few months ago. I would expect someone doing a technical analysis like this (even on a machine with a 970) to get facts like that correct though.

He even calls FX8350 + 7870 a "medium range pc" and his 970 performance is far lower than what everyone else with a 970 is getting. It's a bit strange to say the least.

 

[chiliboy]

Hey gaf,

anyone running this on Gtx 980 and i7 4790k?
Wondering what settings to use to get 1080p60FPS

 

[JaseC]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zwnk7XE22o8

NXGamer analysis... looks pretty terrible for PC, with barely better performance than consoles at same settings with even an i5 and gtx 970. Don't even try with AMD

It's actually a fairly solid port. It demands a bit more than Unity for max settings, but that's to be expected.

 

[chromatic9]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zwnk7XE22o8

NXGamer analysis... looks pretty terrible for PC, with barely better performance than consoles at same settings with even an i5 and gtx 970. Don't even try with AMD

Weird I get 60-80 fps at 1080p with the highest settings with PCSS off on 970

With the GPU being around 2.25x the power, I'm running at 1080p, not 900p, double the frame rate and HBAO+. Seems like a solid port to me and about right. Also there's probably not a great match between settings as well with PC doing more so.

With lower hardware, the problem is you can most times replicate the PS4 performance but a handful of games are going to need 3GB+ vram as that it most likely what the consoles are running in the ram pool for video memory. You can't buy many budget GPUs with 3.5-4gb of vram, normally it's 2gb. A game like AC has no care for sub 3gb cards sadly.

Also running with HBAO on and PCSS is not how you do a fair test, not only that PCSS and HBAO have another even more demanding setting called PCSS Ultra and HBAO+ Ultra which is another killer but nice if you have the hardware. It's an option not a thing to beat the PC like a stick with or set in stone you have to enable or go throw your PC out the window. What is wrong with people that they can't drop a setting down. I get 40-45fps with all the extra extra settings enabled

 

[Zushin]

My verdict is that it's really stellar. Great performance, great visuals.

With your 970 the best settings would be assuming you are targetting 60fps at 1080p :
Env. : Very high or high.
Textures : high
Shadows : high
AO : HBAO+
AA : FXAA

The "ultra" options as well as MSAA/TXAA are not wise in your case, they're extremely expensive.
It's objectively a very significant jump over the console versions (sub 30fps in busy areas, sub 1080p).

Awesome, thanks

 

[PHOENIXZERO]

Those were also my settings before I locked it to 30.

 

[Lockjaw333]

Is it just me, or is this guy always underselling the PC versions? He always maxes every game out with every performance killing option and talks about how good the PS4 is in every platform comparison? Maybe it's just me.

Well I don't think he has a console biased agenda, if that's what you're trying to say. I do think that he appreciates each machine on its own, be it Xbone, PS4 or one of his few PC setups.

He does seem to focus a little more heavily on the console side of things in his detailed analysis videos, and that's fine. Honestly that's probably what the majority of his subs are more interested in.

It wasn't quite clear what settings he was using on PC here to compare to PS4. It was similarly nebulous in a few of his other videos. I 100% do agree with him though in that much of the improvement you are seeing on the PC version of games this gen is from brute force power alone. That is sort of how it has always been on PC, true. Just because your PC is 2x as powerful as a PS4 for example, does not mean that it will perform twice as well in games.

Optimization on the PC side gets much less attention than on the console side from developers. We all understand why that is, but its definitely frustrating that the power of your hardware is not being utilized fully in most games. Especially games with Nvidia Gameworks, those settings are basically only achievable through brute force and see little to no optimization at all.

I do think this game is a decent port though. With an i5-2500k @ 4.0ghz and a 970 SSC, I run:

Environment: Very High (difference from Ultra just seems to be LOD)
Shadows: High
AO: HBAO+
FXAA

I get a mostly locked 60fps in the city at 1080p. It looks significantly better than the PS4 version (I own that as well).

However I won't call it a good port until they fix the 30fps cloth. Its jarring.

 

[Dictator93]

I 100% do agree with him though in that much of the improvement you are seeing on the PC version of games this gen is from brute force power alone. That is sort of how it has always been on PC, true. Just because your PC is 2x as powerful as a PS4 for example, does not mean that it will perform twice as well in games.

TBH, I am not sure what this means and I am pretty sure I disagree with the core sentiment.
This generation has quite readily shown that achieving 2x the framerate on PC with modest hardware (read 2x hardware at console settings) is quite doable.

 

[icecold1983]

TBH, I am not sure what this means and I am pretty sure I disagree with the core sentiment.
This generation has quite readily shown that achieving 2x the framerate on PC with modest hardware (read 2x hardware at console settings) is quite doable.

i think hes referring to the options you can enable above console settings. when it comes to nvidia gameworks options in particular, i tend to agree some of the time.

 

[Kezen]

Especially games with Nvidia Gameworks, those settings are basically only achievable through brute force and see little to no optimization at all.

I have no engine or profile data but from my experience most of them have a very good visual to perf ratio. I don't value PCSS much but it looks very nice.

 

[Garrett Hawke]

What a joke, with my i5 4590 and 970 neither of which are over clocked I get a really solid 60fps except in cutscenes with better than console visuals at 1080p. What's he on about?

 

[Parsnip]

Yeah, what NXGamer is claiming doesn't seem to have much basis in reality, based on my own experience.
One more reason to not visit any NXGamer analysis threads.

 

[CybernatonEvolution]

The game runs like shit on my Gtx 780. I just reached London and

Spoiler

met Henry

, and the framerate have been all over the place.

I am getting 40-55fps outdoors in London streets. I have shadows on high, environment quality on very high, HBOA+ and FXAA. My GTX 780 and my i7 4770k are both overclocked, and I have the latest drivers.

I wasted a lot of time trying to receive the code to redeem the game; then I had to deal with getting 38GB of free space on my SSD because the game gets stuck on the logo screen and never starts. So I start the game just to be forced to watch a DOWNSAMPLED cutscene (because the game's display res was 4k) that I can't skip. AND AGAIN I had to mess around with graphics settings that require restarting the game.

The result? 40-75fps depending on where you are (even indoors in the first mission are not high fps areas); I am certain that even on low settings, I will see drops to 50fps. Overall, I am glad that I didn't pay a dime to get the game.

 

[Setsuna]

The game runs like shit on my Gtx 780. I just reached London and

Spoiler

met Henry

, and the framerate have been all over the place.

I am getting 40-55fps outdoors in London streets. I have shadows on high, environment quality on very high, HBOA+ and FXAA. My GTX 780 and my i7 4770k are both overclocked, and I have the latest drivers.

I wasted a lot of time trying to receive the code to redeem the game; then I had to deal with getting 38GB of free space on my SSD because the game gets stuck on the logo screen and never starts. So I start the game just to be forced to watch a DOWNSAMPLED cutscene (because the game's display res was 4k) that I can't skip. AND AGAIN I had to mess around with graphics settings that require restarting the game.

The result? 40-75fps depending on where you are (even indoors in the first mission are not high fps areas); I am certain that even on low settings, I will see drops to 50fps. Overall, I am glad that I didn't pay a dime to get the game.

I dont see what the issue is

 

[Kezen]

The game runs like shit on my Gtx 780. I just reached London and

Spoiler

met Henry

, and the framerate have been all over the place.

I am getting 40-55fps outdoors in London streets. I have shadows on high, environment quality on very high, HBOA+ and FXAA. My GTX 780 and my i7 4770k are both overclocked, and I have the latest drivers.

I wasted a lot of time trying to receive the code to redeem the game; then I had to deal with getting 38GB of free space on my SSD because the game gets stuck on the logo screen and never starts. So I start the game just to be forced to watch a DOWNSAMPLED cutscene (because the game's display res was 4k) that I can't skip. AND AGAIN I had to mess around with graphics settings that require restarting the game.

The result? 40-75fps depending on where you are (even indoors in the first mission are not high fps areas); I am certain that even on low settings, I will see drops to 50fps. Overall, I am glad that I didn't pay a dime to get the game.

Well this is the performance I expected on a single 780 at 1080p. You may try lowering the shadow setting to medium perhaps for something closer to 60fps, otherwise I don't see anything wrong per se with the performance you are getting.

 

[Älg]

Yeah, what NXGamer is claiming doesn't seem to have much basis in reality, based on my own experience.
One more reason to not visit any NXGamer analysis threads.

What is he claiming?

 

[Linearskillz]

They should have put PCSS and TXAA in big red bold font with PERFORMANCE WARNING. People would probably still complain anyway though.

I'm getting a (mostly) solid 60fps at 1080p maxed minus the two aforementioned settings. GTX 970/i7 2600k @ 4.2ghz.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zwnk7XE22o8

NXGamer analysis... looks pretty terrible for PC, with barely better performance than consoles at same settings with even an i5 and gtx 970. Don't even try with AMD

Didn't watch the video, but what? That's a straight up lie.

it 2500k and GTX 970 here. Everything maxed except shadows and AA at 1080p. The game looks fantastic and runs between 50 ~ 70 FPS for me.

The game runs like shit on my Gtx 780.

I am getting 40-55fps outdoors in London streets.

40-75fps depending on where you are

That doesn't sound like a game that "runs like shit" to me. Of course, the tearing would get annoying if you didn't have a G-Sync monitor.

 

[keltickennedy]

They should have put PCSS and TXAA in big red bold font with PERFORMANCE WARNING. People would probably still complain anyway though.

I'm getting a (mostly) solid 60fps at 1080p maxed minus the two aforementioned settings. GTX 970/i7 2600k @ 4.2ghz.

Same here.

 

[Rodin]

Awesome, thanks

You can easily use HBAO+ Ultra and put the environment on very high. If you can't stand a few (very rare) drops here and there to 54-55fps just use the normal HBAO+ and you will never drop from 60fps. That nxgamer analysis is nuts.

 

[30IR]

The game is NOT well optimized at this point in time.

Here's my analysis so far:

1.) On my RoG Swift G-Sync rig w/ 2x 980 Ti Classified OC'd to 1443Mhz, I'm getting sub-40 FPS with everything maxed out, including TXAA 4x, PCSS Ultra, and HBAO+ Ultra (or whatever the max setting is called for AO).

Here is the proof!

2.) On the Uber Rig - 5K w/ 4x Titan X SuperClocked @ 1329Mhz, I'm getting ~ 20 FPS with everything maxed out including FXAA, PCSS Ultra (Shadows), and HBAO+ Ultra AO. With no AA, I'm still at sub-25 FPS!

Here is the proof!

The same settings in AC Unity, I'm getting around 75 - 80 FPS with everything maxed out at 5K (including all GameWorks settings but no AA). With FXAA, I'm still at over 60 FPS at 5K which is phenomenally good. This is due to the game being patched and updated with the latest drivers. So, I assume Syndicate will also improve once newer patches and drivers are released.

I will be doing an AC Unity vs. AC Syndicate comparison video soon.

Here's a full 5K image of AC Syndicate w/ OSD:

 

[bede-x]

He always maxes every game out with every performance killing option and talks about how good the PS4 is in every platform comparison? Maybe it's just me.

No, it's not just you. He turns up settings to max which no single GPU can handle and then complains about performance, instead of turning down settings to console level and then looking at what performance is turned in. At 8:17 he complains about getting 20fps when he maxes out everything, but of course the 970 can't handle that load. Turn down AA and shadows instead of using MSAA + TXAA at max levels and PCSS and see what kind of performance you get.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

It sounds more like TXAA is either just that performance demanding or it's not optimized. As soon as you turn it off (or at least down), everything runs better.

Did Unity even have a TXAA 4x setting or multiple levels of PCSS shadows?

Another difference between the two games might be due to the fact that the time of day lighting changes dynamically in Syndicate where it was static in Unity.

 

[JaseC]

<snip>

The game could certainly better support multi-GPU configurations, but that's about the extent to which it's poorly optimised. That's not to say performance on single-GPU setups could not be improved, but when I think "poorly optimised", I think "Black Flag with PhysX enabled".

It sounds more like TXAA is either just that performance demanding or it's not optimized. As soon as you turn it off (or at least down), everything runs better.

Did Unity even have a TXAA 4x setting or multiple levels of PCSS shadows?

Another difference between the two games might be due to the fact that the time of day lighting changes dynamically in Syndicate where it was static in Unity.

Yes and no, respectively.

 

[Felix Lighter]

HBAO + Ultra was not available in Unity either.

 

[Dictator93]

The game could certainly better support multi-GPU configurations, but that's about the extent to which it's poorly optimised.



Yes and no, respectively.

This is the least hottest your avatar has been JaseC. You're slacking mate.

 

[Kezen]

It sounds more like TXAA is either just that performance demanding or it's not optimized. As soon as you turn it off (or at least down), everything runs better.

Did Unity even have a TXAA 4x setting or multiple levels of PCSS shadows?

Another difference between the two games might be due to the fact that the time of day lighting changes dynamically in Syndicate where it was static in Unity.

MSAA in a deferred renderer is always very taxing, even when no expenses were spared when it comes to optimization.

 

[UrbanRats]

It's actually a fairly solid port. It demands a bit more than Unity for max settings, but that's to be expected.

Doesn't even look as good though.
I don't have the game, so maybe it moves a lot more.

 

[JaseC]

This is the least hottest your avatar has been JaseC. You're slacking mate.

Haha, that's the intention.

 

[Kezen]

Doesn't even look as good though.
I don't have the game, so maybe it moves a lot more.

It has more sophisticated Gameworks effects than Nvidia so understandably the performance hit is greater.

Demanding does not equate unoptimized or "brute force".

 

[UrbanRats]

It has more sophisticated Gameworks effects than Nvidia so understandably the performance hit is greater.

What do you mean?

 

[Akronis]

MSAA in a deferred renderer is always very taxing, even when no expenses were spared when it comes to optimization.

Aren't deferred renderers difficult to do with multi-GPU solutions?

 

[Felix Lighter]

Doesn't even look as good though.
I don't have the game, so maybe it moves a lot more.

It has more taxing effects. I agree that the art was better in Unity but that's not something that's going to impact performance.

 

[IcyRhythms]

The game doesn't run very well. Is anyone getting a locked/consistent 60FPS? If so, help a guy out.

4690K
980 Ti
16GB RAM

I've turned things down to what would likely match the console settings and still get drops to high 30's/low 40's. Even switched to SSAO. Game is a mess

 

[Setsuna]

I was able to get 60 on a 780 and 4670k


If you cant get 60 with a more powerful setup you are obviously being to hard headed to turn down settigns

 

[IcyRhythms]

I was able to get 60 on a 780 and 4670k


If you cant get 60 with a more powerful setup you are obviously being to hard headed to turn down settigns

I can GET 60, but It won't stay there. lol

The settings I've adjusted with no success.

 

[Kezen]

Aren't deferred renderers difficult to do with multi-GPU solutions?

I have no idea, but multi-GPU configurations in general seem not to be supported very well these days.

What do you mean?

HBAO+ ultra and PCSS ultra. Technologically very advanced but the visual return might not be worth it for everyone. Unity did not have those.

The game doesn't run very well. Is anyone getting a locked/consistent 60FPS? If so, help a guy out.

4690K
980 Ti
16GB RAM

I've turned things down to what would likely match the console settings and still get drops to high 30's/low 40's. Even switched to SSAO. Game is a mess

No such a thing as "locked" 60fps in complex open world games. Best you can get is very close, it is entirely possible your CPU is holding back your GPU somewhat, what environment setting have you chosen ?
This game benefits significantly from 4+ cores CPU.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Doesn't even look as good though.
I don't have the game, so maybe it moves a lot more.

I wonder if this is due to switching to dynamic lighting. Someone else posted it earlier (maybe in another thread), but it seems like it can't quite stack up to the baked lighting of Unity.

Honestly, I would have preferred that model especially in this game, since I would have been able to lock it into the night time lighting, which looks amazing.

 

[GavinUK86]

The game could certainly better support multi-GPU configurations, but that's about the extent to which it's poorly optimised. That's not to say performance on single-GPU setups could not be improved, but when I think "poorly optimised", I think "Black Flag with PhysX enabled".

When I hear "poorly optimised" my mind goes straight to Batman Arkham Knight. No PC version comes close to that mess.

 

[IcyRhythms]

When I hear "poorly optimised" my mind goes straight to Batman Arkham Knight. No PC version comes close to that mess.

Not even GTA IV?

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Saints Row 2 is what comes to mind for me.

Arkham Knight, too, of course.

 

[Kezen]

When I hear "poorly optimised" my mind goes straight to Batman Arkham Knight. No PC version comes close to that mess.

Not even GTA IV?

GTA IV may have been severely bottlenecked by DX9, honestly the multithreading in this game is quite impressive, although it is possible some of that could be due to Nvidia's more modern drivers.
http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Retro-Grand_Theft_Auto_IV-test-GTAIV_intel.jpg
http://gamegpu.ru/retro-test-gpu/grand-theft-auto-iv-2008-retro-test-gpu.html

The game was also nowhere near a straight 360 port. It might have tried to simply achieve too much at a time when DX9 was the major PC API and quad core were not as commonplace.

No really, neither GTA 4 nor AK and most certainly not Syndicate comes anywhere close to Splinter Cell Double Agent on PC.
Limited to 720p, missing graphical features, atrocious performance, game-breaking bugs, crashes galore, visual issues etc...
Now this is what I have problem calling a disaster. AK is not even in the same league from my experience although it deserves its reputation.

 

[CybernatonEvolution]

I was able to get 60 on a 780 and 4670k


If you cant get 60 with a more powerful setup you are obviously being to hard headed to turn down settigns

I just tried setting the game to low and I still get constant drops to 45-55fps on roofs and around the streets during the day. I currently stuck with very high environment, medium shadows, high textures, SSAO (HBAO+ has a large performance impact) and FXAA. I get 43-50fps on roofs, and slightly higher 48-55fps on streets during the day; 60fps+ only in certain tight places and indoors.

 

[CHC]

I was able to get 60 on a 780 and 4670k


If you cant get 60 with a more powerful setup you are obviously being to hard headed to turn down settigns

Just curious what settings, resolution you're running? I have a 780 and 2500k and can't really break ~45 FPS. It's playable, but I'm wondering if my 2500k is holding things back.

 

[Google]

I have 2 x 980's and I'm seeing a lot of the same issues as the rest of you as the FPS hovers between 50-60 at 1440p

I'm not quite sure why the expectation is that this game should run perfectly on your middling to good (but not perfect) PC.

If we think of the scope of this game (indoors, outdoors, water, sky, lighting, NPCs, trains, carriages, London, etc) then we should all expect that this game would need a behemoth of a PC to play at 60FPS with all settings maxed out.

What other games are doing that? The Witcher 3? No. GTA 5? No. Both of those get similar FPS averages as this game. Fuck, even the latest Anno runs at sub 40 with all settings maxed.