Reizo Ryuu
Member
Day 1 is today, but steam doesn't update until 6 hours from now; they'll probably start up communication when the game is officially out everywhere.
-
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.
Hogwarts Legacy PC Performance Thread
- Thread starter LiquidMetal14
- Start date
zkorejo
Member
Camera sensitivity settings helps? That's a new oneHoly tinfoil hat batman. I'm pretty sure if they had an AMD agenda they would go with a category more alluring than fucking 1080p Ultra + RT lmao.
Playing with a controller? Turn off the camera acceleration settings in the options if you haven't already and max the camera sensitivity.
I'm also playing on a 3080 (with a 5800X3D), and done all the above as you. That + capping the FPS to 75 and I would say the game is 95% playable now. and I have everything on High except Materials/Textures/Foliage and NPC Density are Ultra.
. I will definitely try that too thanks.
Desaccorde
Member
My rig is possibly the best combination in the gaming arena (13900K + 4090 + 32GB 7400MHz DDR5 + PCI-e 4.0 SSD), but the unfortunate truth is the game is a stutterfest. Apparently, shader compilation at the beginning only compiles the crucial assets that doesn't help to overall performance.
Tried everything so far including FG On vs. Off, DLSS On vs. Off, engine.ini, Gameusersettings.ini etc... Nope, nothing works and that bears the question, does it worth all these troubleshooting when I am getting older day by day? It's very close for me to go pure console gaming very very fucking soon because if I cannot play the game even with the best hardware, Nvidia can shove their precious graphics cards to their assess unless they either help developers to implement impeccable Ray Tracing features along with the optimization or make it mandatory. Because this will only hurt their sales in the future if developers keep ignoring PC gaming with brute force optimization now that they can hide that with the features like DLSS + Frame Generation.
Sad and angry.
Tried everything so far including FG On vs. Off, DLSS On vs. Off, engine.ini, Gameusersettings.ini etc... Nope, nothing works and that bears the question, does it worth all these troubleshooting when I am getting older day by day? It's very close for me to go pure console gaming very very fucking soon because if I cannot play the game even with the best hardware, Nvidia can shove their precious graphics cards to their assess unless they either help developers to implement impeccable Ray Tracing features along with the optimization or make it mandatory. Because this will only hurt their sales in the future if developers keep ignoring PC gaming with brute force optimization now that they can hide that with the features like DLSS + Frame Generation.
Sad and angry.
Last edited:
Spyxos
Member
How nice i have 8gb 3060 ti and a 3070 with 8gb.Yeah, it's a massacre for these GPUs with lower vram capacity.
Moriah20
Member
Camera sensitivity settings helps? That's a new one
This is a trick also on console. It obviously doesnt help performance but makes the camera feel much more responsive.
zkorejo
Member
Yes I turned rtx off right after I got to the castle. I'm pretty sure about that.
It sounds silly I know. It may not make an actual performance difference, and its just a combination of all the other changes making it better but I feel its best to be thorough on every setting in the off chance it helps with the 'feel' of playing the game, and those camera settings definitely make using the camera feel better. I hope you get performance to a level you're happy with.Camera sensitivity settings helps? That's a new one
It's understandable that you feel this way. I personally enjoy tinkering with settings, reading about other people experiences and what they have tested, but for every me there's like 1000 like you who just want to play the fucking game without silly performance problems that should have been resolved way before early access. Games are becoming more expensive, GPUs are more expensive and its not acceptable that we get half-assed optimisation on release with a 'we'll fix it later' attitude.
Last edited:
Spyxos
Member
Dead Space is also vram limited on 3080. It is just the beginning. We will get more and more games that need more vram then 8-10.
zkorejo
Member
The Cockatrice
Member
That game is a stutter mess. Not exactly a good example either tho I've seen ppl with modest PC's running it fine. Ofc 4k 8gb is dead. 10 gb is at the limit tho but should be fine for many years if they use dlss and lower settings which lets be honest, no one should just straight up go for max, because visually theres rarely any difference. Most PC gamers know this, which is why u'll only see on gaf or 4080+ owners complaining about vram.
Buggy Loop
Member
Yeah it’s clearly broken and the devs don’t know what they are doing on PC or RT. It’s a steaming pile of shit in performance and here we are discussing memory limits.. I mean yeah, if it looked like it was optimized and visually pushing for that VRAM usage, then sure, but it really doesn’t. There’s a wave of shit ports on PC lately.
If a game like plague tale requiem which is DRIPPING with high quality textures at every pixels doesn’t choke a 3070, while yours looks like a PS4 game and does, then you fucked up.
Dead space memory management quirks found by digital foundry, Hogwarts legacy, calisto protocol, plague tale before patch, forspoken.. what a bad wave of ports. I hope Returnal is not on that list.
MMaRsu
Member
Try the Windows options like turning off flow control that helped a ton
Buggy Loop
Member
Watch Digital Foundry’s video. The behaviour is not normal. We can’t point fingers at an architecture and just swipe under the carpet how incompetent devs are for PC ports lately.
Spyxos
Member
I mean we will get more and more unoptimized games of this kind. I have already seen the video.
DanEON
Member
I just hope UE5 solves this shit.
MMaRsu
Member
I also have a 3070, everything on high at 1440p with dlss set to quality, I get about 100 frames in the open world. Nothing to scoff at
zkorejo
Member
I have a 3070. I'm curious if my CPU is the issue? I have 3700x.
Also, are you running on high or medium or a mix of both?
Last edited:
Irobot82
Member
You're on a dead platform like me. I had a 3700x, I upgraded to a 5600X, get like 10% better sometimes. If you want the best upgrade you can I would get the 5800X3D. It's as good as all the current new CPU's on new platforms. But after that, it's new MOBO time.
zkorejo
Member
Just 10% better performance? Should I not wait in that case? Unless CPU is holding performance back massively.
winjer
Gold Member
A 5600X should be around 20% faster than a 3700X. Unless you are playing at 4K.
But then, it's the 3070 that is limiting your performance, not the CPU.
Also, remember that Zen likes fast memory.
Irobot82
Member
The 5800X3D would be like 40% better.
I may be off on my numbers.
I run 3600 CL16 ram. Not sure what zkorejo has.
The 5600/5600X's are super cheap right now. But honestly, If I had the cash I would spring for a 5800X3D.
MMaRsu
Member
I recently upgraded to a 5700x, and I have 32gb ram. X470 mobo. I did a benchmark and it put it all on High, I may have turned the textures to medium but I dont think it did much. I might have put it back to high.
The windows fixes about flow control helped I think, and then I found out my RT shadows was still on and on ultra. So turned that off and the stuttering was 90% gone. Still some slight stutter but not 15fps.
winjer
Gold Member
I upgraded from a 3700X to a 5800X3D. I noticed a nice boost in averages.
But the big improvement was in minimum frame rate.
Games a re much smoother on the 5800X3D, than on the 3700X.
zkorejo
Member
G.Skill Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin SDRAM PC4-28800 DDR4 3600 CL16-19-19-39 1.35V
I think mine is same as you.
GymWolf
Gold Member
Ok the game run 98% flawlessly with rtx off (all 3 settings), almost zero stutter and no pop in at all.
I'm not sure if i would call this a bad port, but i also have a 4000 series with framegen.
Rtx seems to be what makes the game stutter a lot, at least in my case.
I'm not sure if i would call this a bad port, but i also have a 4000 series with framegen.
Rtx seems to be what makes the game stutter a lot, at least in my case.
Last edited:
DanEON
Member
There is no RTGI right? So RT doesn't make much difference graphically I guess
Of course, my computer is far from ideal (AMD Ryzen 5 3600 - 16 GB - RTX 2070), I tried to play with the settings, installed the latest nvidia driver, but it didn’t work out to have any effect on the game. I started playing on my PS5, my girlfriend continued to play on PC, and if the beginning of the game was more or less acceptable and playable, as soon as she entered the open world, my computer was literally bent over and roughly entered from behind ... She still continues play despite the problems. I still hope that they will at least do something in the end, but given that this is a heavily modernized Unreal 4 engine, not many hopes...
3090 FE / R9 5900X / 32GB RAM / NVMe
Running 1440p, all settings ultra but framerate lock at 75 (I like when it's quiet, I should have removed it while testing).
RT ON: Extremely high load, playable but not crazy stable
RT OFF: With or without quality DLSS in both case constant hit of fps lock, GPU so low in load it stay around 140W (and a bit lower with dlss), I can even enable aggressive undervolt.
I do note the menu are horribly slow but it's probably same on console, probably more a need of speeding up the animations for QoL.
Running 1440p, all settings ultra but framerate lock at 75 (I like when it's quiet, I should have removed it while testing).
RT ON: Extremely high load, playable but not crazy stable
RT OFF: With or without quality DLSS in both case constant hit of fps lock, GPU so low in load it stay around 140W (and a bit lower with dlss), I can even enable aggressive undervolt.
I do note the menu are horribly slow but it's probably same on console, probably more a need of speeding up the animations for QoL.
Yeah. Pretty annoying changing it every start up.
zkorejo
Member
It does make a difference imo. It's much more vibrant as lights shadows and reflections make everything look better. Especially Rtx AO. Reflections also make things look shiny alot more but I can live without it. AO did make it seem much better to my eyes though.
GHG
Member
That's all good and well but they are the first outlet that I've seen take this approach to GPU benchmarks. It's bizarre and I don't think it's a coincidence given their following skews heavily towards the AMD side of things.
GHG
Member
Those are specific CPU benchmarks, no?
The Cockatrice
Member
Use nvidia or any other injector sharpness like reshade(but not with frame generation on as that will cause the game to crash). THey are almost always better anyway.
winjer
Gold Member
They were done for several reasons. Sometimes it was to test CPU scaling with new GPUs, sometimes scaling with memory, sometimes with CPU overclocking, etc.
In this case, what HU is important, because if someone has a weaker CPU and can't upgrade, choosing a GPU that doesn't scale well would be very limiting to performance.
Now this is not so much for the people that can afford a 4090, since these can also afford a Zen4 or Raptor lake CPU.
But for people considering mid to low range GPUs, this is important.
Last edited:
GHG
Member
From that perspective it's fair enough, but it that is indeed their intention then they should frame it as such. Plenty of people in the comments saying their results don't match up with what they are experiencing on an identical GPU, most likely due to their odd choice of CPU.
winjer
Gold Member
They have done plenty of these CPU scaling tests, with several games. And they have explained this in some of their monthly Q&As.
One of the things they repeat constantly through the video is that this game has weird performance scaling. You can see that best when they talked about the test on the Hogsmead vs Hogswards Ground. They also kept repeating that the CPU had very low utilization.
There is also the issue with the game applying settings that the user didn't choose. Like the one with the DLSS3.
Then there are the variations in what is running in the background. What memory is being used, both clocks and timmings.
This is why if you go to more tech focused forums, people tend to look at several reviews. Because journalists will use different hardware configurations, different test methodologies, etc.
GHG
Member
If they're going to purposefully go down that road then I'd at least like to see a couple of CPU scaling benchmarks.
What they have come up with is unhelpful for anyone but 7700x (or similar) owners because other than at 4k it doesn't provide an insight into how GPU's actually scale with the game.
winjer
Gold Member
Other CPUs will have similar scaling.
But yes, a benchmark run with several CPUs with this game would be really nice, if they can make it.
Consider just how much they have made already. This is 53 GPUs, multiplied by 1080p, 1440p and 2160p, then Medium, Ultra and Ultra+RT.
And they run each benchmark 3 times, then average the result. This is a lot of work.
GymWolf
Gold Member
I'm not the right guy to ask this type of questions, i barely notice notice any form of rtx, even the most bullsh... emh "transformative" ones...
Last edited:
All this back and forth just because they used an AMD CPU that is 5% slower than a 13900k... Come on. The HU video and their analysis is fine.
Just over 3 hours until we see the standard edition release on PC. I haven't seen any word on consoles receiving an update on their standard release, but perhaps there is a shred of hope they will release something for PC since there is no verification required for Steam patches. Either way, we will soon see if Steam users will tear the game apart in their reviews regarding the games current performance.
Just over 3 hours until we see the standard edition release on PC. I haven't seen any word on consoles receiving an update on their standard release, but perhaps there is a shred of hope they will release something for PC since there is no verification required for Steam patches. Either way, we will soon see if Steam users will tear the game apart in their reviews regarding the games current performance.
Last edited:
Irobot82
Member
My math may be wrong but that is 1431 test runs?
winjer
Gold Member
If anyone wants RT Global Illumination, try adding this command to the engine.ini
r.RayTracing.GlobalIllumination=2
But it might be heavy. If you want, you can add SSGI. This will be less demanding, but not as good.
r.SSGI.Enable=1
r.SSGI.HalfRes=1 (set to 0 if you have enough performance)
r.SSGI.Quality=3 (choose a level between 1 and 4, higher number means higher quality)
r.RayTracing.GlobalIllumination=2
But it might be heavy. If you want, you can add SSGI. This will be less demanding, but not as good.
r.SSGI.Enable=1
r.SSGI.HalfRes=1 (set to 0 if you have enough performance)
r.SSGI.Quality=3 (choose a level between 1 and 4, higher number means higher quality)
winjer
Gold Member
Irobot82
Member
Each resolution was ran at three settings each, so 3 times 3 is 9. Each one of those were ran three times each. 9*3 = 27. Then 53 GPUS so 53*27 = 1431. Maybe?I think that's the right number. But what do I know
