-
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.
NVIDIA RTX 4090 cannot run Remnant 2 with 60fps at Native 4K/Ultra
fran.fernandez
Member
Back to Unity
SantaC
Member
5090 is coming 2025. Amd might have a chance now.
Last edited:
Buggy Loop
Member
Again with the PS5 power extrapolation from bad ports? How many times must this blow up in your face time and time again as devs fix the problems?
Cute
The cycle of hoping that AMD catches Nvidia with their pants down begins!
Cute
The cycle of hoping that AMD catches Nvidia with their pants down begins!
Minsc
Gold Member
4k Ultra is yesterday's news. How does it run it at 8k Ultra on this rip-off card? Probably not even 30 fps. And shit, 16k Ultra probably can't even get 10fps, I imagine that's because of the paltry 32GB RAM, they should have gone for at least 512GB of RAM so then 16k Ultra would be possible. Don't even get me started on 32k or 64k Ultra settings. Can't even launch the game on those.
Not even sure why you'd not just wait for PS5 Pro, it'll be able to run it in performance mode at 8k.
Not even sure why you'd not just wait for PS5 Pro, it'll be able to run it in performance mode at 8k.
StereoVsn
Gold Member
Smaller teams? Majority of AAA releases have been terrible.
Dr.D00p
Member
That's because all triple A development is now focused on the consoles, with the PC versions being given minimal care.
lastmessiah
Member
I don’t see what the big deal is. 4K at Ultra settings is the most demanding claim on GPU power and will naturally be difficult to push at 60+ FPS. I don’t know much about these devs but like most they probably targeted consoles and PC was an afterthought.
If you’re on PC and going for performance you likely aren’t playing at 4K unless it is some single player showpiece/tech demo.
If you’re on PC and going for performance you likely aren’t playing at 4K unless it is some single player showpiece/tech demo.
KyoZz
Tag, you're it.
Please don't take a few people on GAF as a generality.
Remnant 2 is just a shitty unoptimized mess and the devs should be ashamed. End of the story.
MikeM
Member
Stutters and more stable framerate seem like an odd pairing.
Low Moral Fibre
Member
So is this an actual bad port or a ‘bad’ port where the PS5 version runs at sub 1080p with frame rate drops like Dead Space or sub 720p with a completely erratic frame rate like Jedi Survivor?
hyperbertha
Member
But I can't think of ports that got better. Tlou, Hogwarts, Callisto all remain pretty bad.Again with the PS5 power extrapolation from bad ports? How many times must this blow up in your face time and time again as devs fix the problems?
Cute
The cycle of hoping that AMD catches Nvidia with their pants down begins!
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
PS5 is not running anywhere near Ultra settings at native 4K, so it's not really comparable.Runs great on PS5
Turn 4090 down to PS5 settings/res and this will be running in the hundreds.
Last edited:
Gorgon
Member
Most gameplay on big TVs is probably done by console players, at least in relative numbers. And historically this makes total sense, of course. But it's becoming increasingly popular for PC players to go the coutch way. Personaly, what I can say is that I will probably return to PCs next gen (because I miss mods and nothing else) and leave consoles behind (or at least the Xbox) but I certainly won't go back to sitting in a chair in front of a monitor.
Dream-Knife
Banned
Nvidia needs to launch the 4090ti ASAP.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
So a new $2500 rig can’t pull off 4k/60 in all games yet people will continue to bitch about how their $500 3 year old console can’t do it.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
2500 for the GPU/CPU/MB combo (4090/79050X3D/X670E). Then you need the rest of the rig lol
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
PC gamers could easily brute force PS4 games- 60fps has been a standard for PC gamers since forever.
Mister Wolf
Member
As long as it's looking and running far better than the consoles that's all I care about. That's what I paid all the money for. A superior experience.
Dr.D00p
Member
Except no amount of extra brute force can overcome shader stuttering now that the UE has become so ubiquitous.
marjo
Member
Once again, someone blaming diversity for poor gaming optimization.
phant0m
Member
No? Is this whole thread just a troll? If a 4090 can’t run it @ 4K maxed out with no supersampling it’s a bad port?
I’m playing Remnant 2 early access with a 3080 and it runs fine? I mean I guess if blew like $1500 on a 4090 I’d probably be upset too but honestly the game is fine guys:
- 1440p/Ultra/DLSS Balanced: holds 72fps locked (half rate of 144hz monitor)
- 1440p/Ultra/DLSS Quality: holds 60fps locked
- 1440p/High/DLSS balanced: easily reaches 100 fps, I leave it unlocked because of gsync
- 1440p/High/native: holds 60fps locked
Last edited:
Kataploom
Gold Member
When a game constantly falls below target frame rate it's different than it meeting or exceeding it with 100 ms of stutters every few seconds or minutes for the first few hours of gameplay.
phant0m
Member
The visual difference between High and Ultra is pretty insignificant unless you’re comparing side-by-side screencaps. The performance difference is easily 10 if not 15 fps.
At 4K/High/DLSS balanced a 4090 should easily crush 100+ fps on this. But no, let’s make it run in the most extreme configuration possible (4K/Ultra/no DLSS) and whine instead.
Dr.D00p
Member
The whole point of buying the best of the best is to run stuff without compromise.
..and that applies to all consumer products
StereoVsn
Gold Member
Yes, which is why Jedi Survivor and FF XVI have such amazing image quality and rendering at high res!
yamaci17
Member
they can technically up the shadow resolution by 36x and buckle the 4090 down to 5 fps and call it a ultra setting.
who determines the compromise line?
ac valhalla has ugly draw distance despite everything at "max/ultra". but yeah, you can then simply say you get 4k ultra 60 fps on a 2080ti (nearly). so now you think you didn't compromise on quality?
there's no universal way of labeling something low, med, high or ultra.
hogwarts legacy had 4 texture options at launch,
low: 3000 mb of budget
medium: 3500 mb of budget
high: 4100 mb of budget
ultra: 5000 mb of budget
and then, they went and made the old low new high. now
low: 1200 mb
medium: 1800 mb
high: 3000 mb
ultra: 5000 mb
for some other user, such as 4080 with 16 gb, 5 gb ultra texture is still a compromise. you can have 10 gb texture cache and get extremely high detailed textures even at an extreme view distance. however the option is simply not there.
or imagine Game A calling a 1/8 dithered ray tracing reflections as "epic mega max ray tracing". will you be simply that you get high framerate with their "label"?
then imagine Game B calling full resolution ray tracing reflections "medium" and 2x resolution ray tracing reflections "high". now what happens in relation to the game above?
so you didn't compromise on image quality on Game A because you could run "epic mega max ray tracing "label with high framerates, but you did with Game B?
we don't even know what ultra settings entail. for all we know, there could be one crucial setting that hampers framerates by %40 with any barely image quality difference. there's a reason most gtx 1000 and midrange 2000 users do not bitch as much as 3000 and 4000 users do. they simply go on and set their games to sane medium high settings and get great performance across most of the titles.
this even includes last of us part 1, which runs majestic at med/high mix settings on a 1070/2060. but once you push ultra, even a 3070 buckles down at 1080p. that's how it is.
spiderman's remastered pc version literally calls obnously bad ray tracing resolution "high". from their perspective, it is high. so we have to take up their word for it? and they labeled a setting "very high" because it makes reflections somehow bareable. worse is, you can still get higher reflection quality and there are indeed cards that can handle it, but they won't. why would they? run off the mill users should be happy that they play at very high ray tracing without a compormise and get great performance while doing that.
so it is how it is, huh?
people have to stop think in "preset" terms. just focus on what is on the screen. if high and ultra looks %99 the same and one is %50 more performant, then I hope devs present epic settings that take %250 more performance for a %0.5 improvement in image quality just to mess with you guys who do not want to compromise on image quality that somehow you believe are determined by some random dev.
Last edited:
phant0m
Member
Diminishing returns applies to all consumer goods (particularly electronics/hardware) as well. “I spent twice as much on my GPU” does not translate to twice the frame rate, twice the resolution or anything else and never has.
The extreme ends of gaming in both presets and actual hardware have never really been optimized for. In some cases, the devs will flat out say “our ultra/extreme/insane preset is meant to the capabilities of future hardware”.
While I like the capability to tweak game settings on my PC to my heart’s content, I’ve determined over the last several years that just letting GFE optimize my graphics settings for my hardware yields the best results to just play the game.
TrebleShot
Member
Wtf this is utter bullshit so NVIDIA release the most expensive GFX card in centuries.
Devs start relying on the super expensive card for their games to run at minimum 60fps so gaming at the threshold becomes stupidly expensive.
This is pathetic. PC gaming is in a right state.
Devs start relying on the super expensive card for their games to run at minimum 60fps so gaming at the threshold becomes stupidly expensive.
This is pathetic. PC gaming is in a right state.
GymWolf
Member
Shadow on normal insted of ultra make you save a lot of frames without much loss.
At least this is what i readed on reeee, i still have to try because i didn't had much problem yet.
phant0m
Member
i can't speak for a 4090 but my 3080 easily holds 72 fps @ 1440p/High/DLSS Quality
the bigger issue is not using DLSS.
as the devs said, they designed and optimized the game around upscaling tech. so i don't know we're whining about performance when we disable that.
but i suppose "RTX 4090 gets 80+ fps @ 4K/Ultra/DLSS Balanced" doesn't really make for much of a headline, does it?
Last edited:
kiphalfton
Member
This is just sad, considering how basic looking this game is.
I played the prologue of Remnant 2 at 1440p @ Max Settings with a RTX 4060 (a $300 card) and I get a solid 60 FPS experience, and would get more if not by frame generation forcing vsync on for some reason. I think some people confuse DLSS 2/3 with console upscalers and that's the main problem. They are not the same, at all. It has been proven (and you can see for yourself in the imagen comparison) that DLSS 2 Quality looks even better than native, so you get improved visuals and can literally double the performance in some games with DLSS 3. I know, FG is exclusive to RTX 40, but it's not like the gains aren't woth it. I did a full review of the 4060 with lots of videos and image comparison, and FG is truly a change changer. Being able to play games like Cyberpunk 2077, Sackboy, APT: Requiem Jedi: Survivor at 1440p @ Max Settings at 60 FPS say a lot about how much a proper upscaling technology can make a difference between being playable to fully enjoyable.
Here is an image comparison between 1440p Native (27 FPS), DLSS 2 Quality (46 FPS) and DLSS 3 Quality (60 FPS+): https://www.pcmrace.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/remnant24060.html
Here is an image comparison between 1440p Native (27 FPS), DLSS 2 Quality (46 FPS) and DLSS 3 Quality (60 FPS+): https://www.pcmrace.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/remnant24060.html
Last edited:
GetInTheRobot
Banned
TheAmazingSpiderMan
Member
Lol PC gaming taking L after L, every time I see a new game released it’s always the same comment wherever you go “bad optimisation” this should written as a disclaimer before purchasing.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
The game runs at 720p on consoles.
