How are u guys doing 120hz on a Vizio? I thought they only allowed 4k at 30hz the most.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Batman AK PC Perf Thread of DARKNESS, NO SETTINGS [30fps cap / intro removal in OP]
- Thread starter Peterthumpa
- Start date
Mad Season
Banned
Started playing batman origins again and wow.... Night and day. Shows you how fucked this knight version really is
I"m curious for anyone with 6GB+, does it run about the same as City/Origins for you?
It hitting 5GB for me at 1920x1080. For my set-up, I'm kinda getting the performance I would have expected compared to what I got in the previous games. Runs a little worse, but looks a whole lot better.
I applied all the stuff in the OP for ini tweaks.
It hitting 5GB for me at 1920x1080. For my set-up, I'm kinda getting the performance I would have expected compared to what I got in the previous games. Runs a little worse, but looks a whole lot better.
I applied all the stuff in the OP for ini tweaks.
I haven't gotten the update yet since Vizio controls when you get it. I did confirm with a rep earlier today that the 120Hz issue is fixed with it, though.
The P-series last year, and the 60+ inch models of this year's M-series have an HDMI 2.0 port which allows for a native 120Hz signal at 1080p, as well as 60Hz at 4K.
RobbieNick
Junior Member
Did they put out a patch recently? Played for about an hour tonight. Noticed the rain effects are hitting Batman now and my game never chugged and ran smooth as silk. I'm not even on the recommended settings!
Lates patch was released 9 days ago. New patch could arrive this week based on SteamDB entries.
New patch fixed the visual bugs, nothing was touched about the performance issues to my knowledge.
RobbieNick
Junior Member
Hunh.
batman2million
Member
From my experience. Performance was fine during the beginning of the game and got progressively worse. I'm assuming b/c a lot changes as you play the game and might hamper performance.
Itachi87
Member
i5 3450K @ 3.4 GHz
16 GB DDR3
SSD
Win 7 64x
I edited the .ini file to improve framerate and am getting 60fps except when flying/driving around the city. This guide on steam helped a lot (https://steamcommunity.com/app/208650/discussions/0/594821545178755667/).
I made it to about halfway through the game and now I can't even throw a batarang without it skipping frames.
Coma Ecliptic
Member
Some interesting stuff in this guide.
I'm currently using the tool he compiled and have it set to "Balanced" and it's running great locked at 60fps. I notice some of the texture pop-in, but not nearly like before and the textures actually load now!
http://steamcommunity.com/app/208650/discussions/0/523890046870624615/?tscn=1436162573
Specifically this is the page that has the tool he's compiled.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/20865...70624615/?tscn=1436162573#c523890681414010786
I'm currently using the tool he compiled and have it set to "Balanced" and it's running great locked at 60fps. I notice some of the texture pop-in, but not nearly like before and the textures actually load now!
http://steamcommunity.com/app/208650/discussions/0/523890046870624615/?tscn=1436162573
Specifically this is the page that has the tool he's compiled.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/20865...70624615/?tscn=1436162573#c523890681414010786
Mad Season
Banned
Was probably on the receiving end of a bunch of hate messages. Still, they've been way too quiet in general when they really shouldn't.
I think people just want some kind of update. I'd like to hear "we are still a few days/weeks/months out" just to have an idea of what to expect. doesn't have to be an exact date.
My new config is
Tweaks in the OP
Everything on or high
1920x1080 Borderless fullscreen
In game v sync off
Nvidia inspector
Frame rate limit 30
Max Prerendered Frames = 1
With this I don't get the blips to 60 when not much is happening, but my framerate while driving fast or gliding in geometry is WAY better.
Right now I'll take the 30 lock since it brings the lows up a whole lot.
AMD 1100T and OG Titan
60% GPU usage and 5.2GB of vRAM at the highest. Average over 4.75GB
Still interested in hearing from people with 6GB of vRAM. I'm hypothesizing this game is just a vRAM behemoth. Sign of things to come?
I'm thinking everyone who got a 4GB card is going to be bad sooner than they thought. :/
Tweaks in the OP
Everything on or high
1920x1080 Borderless fullscreen
In game v sync off
Nvidia inspector
Frame rate limit 30
Max Prerendered Frames = 1
With this I don't get the blips to 60 when not much is happening, but my framerate while driving fast or gliding in geometry is WAY better.
Right now I'll take the 30 lock since it brings the lows up a whole lot.
AMD 1100T and OG Titan
60% GPU usage and 5.2GB of vRAM at the highest. Average over 4.75GB
Still interested in hearing from people with 6GB of vRAM. I'm hypothesizing this game is just a vRAM behemoth. Sign of things to come?
I'm thinking everyone who got a 4GB card is going to be bad sooner than they thought. :/
Holdfing
Member
Nah, I think this port is just a bit shit. It also uses ~5GB system RAM (for me at least), so it uses more memory (RAM + VRAM) on PC than consoles have access to.
Edit: Then again, I'm not an expert in hardware things, so I might be just spewing bullshit.
It's been 2 weeks tomorrow.
Right, but we get a lot of "shit port"s. I'm wondering if vRAM mongering is going to be a common thing this generation. I"m just speculating bullshit too, but since consoles are CPU limited but RAM wealthy, will multiplatform games be fundamentally developed to lean on a big memory pool rather than processing power? We've got a few ports that could point toward that.
We'll probably know by holiday season this year if 4GB is going to be a good standard. I'm already using 5+ at 1080p without AA.
We'll probably know by holiday season this year if 4GB is going to be a good standard. I'm already using 5+ at 1080p without AA.
Reizo Ryuu
Member
They aren't "ram wealthy", games on consoles can only use ~5gb of the ram they have, the other 3 is reserved for the OS.
So batman using 8gigs of ram and 4gigs of vram is just shit porting.
Mad Season
Banned
2 weeks too long
SirMossyBloke
Member
Arkham City with everything maxed at 1080p and PhysX fully enabled, I get 60fps all the time, indoors and outdoors.
With Arkham Knight, all PhysX turned off and 720p, I get dips below 30fps.
I have an i5 4690k, a GTX 970 OC and 16GB Ram.
It's a bit shit.
Just hit 6059MB of vRAM.
If you're on a 970 you probably don't have enough memory for 60fps. We can blame Nvidia and AMD for doling out vRAM in very incremental amounts per hardware revision. We should really be up to 8 for the standard now and 4-6 should have been standard in the 6xx generation. I was bumping my head on 2GB the day I got my 680 and I'm already hitting it on my Titan.
We'll know for sure when Battlefront and Fallout 4 come out.
If you're on a 970 you probably don't have enough memory for 60fps. We can blame Nvidia and AMD for doling out vRAM in very incremental amounts per hardware revision. We should really be up to 8 for the standard now and 4-6 should have been standard in the 6xx generation. I was bumping my head on 2GB the day I got my 680 and I'm already hitting it on my Titan.
We'll know for sure when Battlefront and Fallout 4 come out.
Yup, seeing similar usage on my 770 4GB with 8GB of system RAM.
That is, once I've been playing the game for a while, my VRAM hits 4300GB+, which spills over into my RAM, which is already using 6GB on average, which then spills into my 3072 pagefile.
This can potentially explain most of the issues players are experiencing with this game (stutter, low memory warning, full on game halts for seconds at a time, crashes, etc). I'm starting to think the real issue is downright horrible mishandling of VRAM.
I have tried the tweaks in the OP, but once the game is running for a while, the RAM and VRAM usage climbs steadily, tweaks or no tweaks.
Hopefully the next patch is coming soon; I wanna get that Knightfall ending.
Felix Lighter
Member
The steady increase in memory usage being reported since the beginning indicates a memory leak. There have been plenty of reports of people playing for an hour and then suddenly the performance drops off a cliff, again, indicating a memory leak. Resources aren't being properly released and the game just eats memory until there's no more left to eat. Play the game long enough and you'll probably be bumping up against the 12 GB TitanX. The port isn't indicative of what is required now. The game has been temporarily removed from store shelves, no one should be using this port as a target for next gen games.
Indeed.
Although, it looks like the only reason the game uses so much RAM, is because it uses so much VRAM. For instance, while my 770 has 4096GB of RAM, it can "share" up to 4GB of my system RAM when it goes over budget.
Of course, seeing as this game can easily exceed 4096Gb of VRAM, it's constantly borrowing from my system RAM. This probably causes the system RAM's over-usage, and also can cause the stuttering/hitching issues when loading textures due to the discrepancy in transfer speeds between RAM types (DDR3 vs the much faster GDDR5).
No doubt the memory usage is at fault here, not our systems. With proper memory management, cards with 3GB of VRAM and up should be handling this game with ease. That said, in my opinion, I think the issue has less to do with a leak (semantics incoming), and more to do with a caching issue (once the VRAM is built up, it never seems to clear/swap out unused data), but overall, agreed.
d00d3n
Member
WB clearly promised a patch within 24 hours when they included the text "FullPatch" in a depot file name on Steam yesterday. Where is the patch, WB? Time to deliver what you promised!
Actually, that is completely stupid and unreasonable, but please hurry up with the patch WB ... Makes people sad to have to wait.
Corvo Jensen
Banned
If they patch in the ultra stuff, I suppose 4GB of VRAM would be acceptable. After all, Arkham Knight has the potential to look drop dead gorgeous.
In its current state where textures are locked at normal, I'd say 2GB is kinda even stretching in, unacceptable.
Amen.
Corvo Jensen
Banned
Just the fact they're calling it "normal" at most is why I think it was a glitch of some sort. There is literally no reason for adding in High details and shadows but leaving the textures on normal.
I think the "Normal" title has more to do with making some of us feel paranoid that the textures aren't maxed out, and less to do with the actual texture resolution the "Normal" setting affords.
Again, that setting is already using 4-6GB of VRAM (or more), which, by that logic, would mean an "Ultra" texture preset could require 12GB+ of VRAM, which is ridiculous, of course.
The VRAM usage is currently broken, that much is clear. And when the textures do fully load in, they are currently in line with what I'd expect to be "Ultra" quality, at least if you take the scope and scale of the game into account.
Also, it's becoming a trend for texture resolution to max out at the "High" setting (Dying Light and The Witcher 3 are two I can think of off hand), with the "Ultra" setting being reserved solely for a larger cache for the same "High" resolution textures, thus reducing the amount they load in/swap out.
That said, I wouldn't mind if they renamed the "Normal" texture preset to something more fitting in a future patch.
PHOENIXZERO
Member
Yeah, since increasing my RAM to 16GB it routinely reaches 6.4GB but at least it's not needing to hit my page file/swap anymore.
Memory pool limitations and usage aren't why people are having issues running the game at 60FPS, people are barely seeing a difference in performance going from the highest settings to lowest at 720p. The game is using way more VRAM than the "ultra" requirements and more than their lowest requirements. Never mind system RAM usage.
Just hit 6059MB of vRAM.
If you're on a 970 you probably don't have enough memory for 60fps. We can blame Nvidia and AMD for doling out vRAM in very incremental amounts per hardware revision. We should really be up to 8 for the standard now and 4-6 should have been standard in the 6xx generation. I was bumping my head on 2GB the day I got my 680 and I'm already hitting it on my Titan.
We'll know for sure when Battlefront and Fallout 4 come out.
Memory pool limitations and usage aren't why people are having issues running the game at 60FPS, people are barely seeing a difference in performance going from the highest settings to lowest at 720p. The game is using way more VRAM than the "ultra" requirements and more than their lowest requirements. Never mind system RAM usage.
time flies when you're not playing video games, i guess.
Changing the names of the settings would have as much effect in people's mind as actually changing what it does in some cases.
What game are people comparing this to when they say it should run better?
I think this might be one of the best looking games of all time. I have a really hard time coming up with anything to compare it to when judging performance. The amount of stuff going on is staggering. To me it's more like Rocksteady fucking nailed the console versions so hard and it's disorienting expectations of the PC version.
I'm not saying it doesn't need a few more performance patches, but to be pulled from shelves in craziness considering the state it's in right now. It's more playable than AC Unity almost a year later. It's really a disservice to the PC gamers sitting on the sideline. There is no reason for anyone who plays video games not to be playing this one right now. Holy shit it's that good.
What game are people comparing this to when they say it should run better?
I think this might be one of the best looking games of all time. I have a really hard time coming up with anything to compare it to when judging performance. The amount of stuff going on is staggering. To me it's more like Rocksteady fucking nailed the console versions so hard and it's disorienting expectations of the PC version.
I'm not saying it doesn't need a few more performance patches, but to be pulled from shelves in craziness considering the state it's in right now. It's more playable than AC Unity almost a year later. It's really a disservice to the PC gamers sitting on the sideline. There is no reason for anyone who plays video games not to be playing this one right now. Holy shit it's that good.
matrixman92
Member
my game dropped to 0 fps and hung there when the batmobile came on screen for the first time. And it still has drops when I turn off all gameworks stuff on a 970. Then many textures never even load for me. Just look like giant blotches, even if I stand in front of them for several minutes. Even after they patched rain textures, I was told that I would need to start a new game to be able to see them. I will just wait for an actual good patch and start the game over again. And I should also mention the constant crashes that I had. They pulled it because PC gamers finally had their voices heard with steam refunds. Same thing probably would have happened to Unity, if refunds were around then.
Good for you that you seem to be having minimal issues, but for others, this game is still a fucking mess. I almost just decided to go get the ps4 version the other night, but decided to just wait for a patch. I have other stuff to play anyway
Reizo Ryuu
Member
Maybe you need to read all 8000 posts in this thread again, or the numerous articles online. Or maybe RPS's fucking video.
Unity runs like a fucking dream compared to this and also tech wise it's absolutely beyond what arkham knight is doing, the lighting alone crushes the lighting in AK.
Just out of curiosity what are your specs and settings you are running at right now?