-
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.
The Division PC performance thread
- Thread starter JaseC
- Start date
Lockjaw333
Member
i5-2500k@ 4.0ghz
GTX 970 SSC
8GB RAM
I used the High preset and tweaked a few things up like HBAO+. Getting 50-60 fps mostly (rivatuner 60 lock). Performs fairly well and looks pretty damn good.
With Tomb Raider and now Division, I'm coming to grips with not being able to max or near max games anymore with my 970. Mental hurdle but I'm getting there haha.
GTX 970 SSC
8GB RAM
I used the High preset and tweaked a few things up like HBAO+. Getting 50-60 fps mostly (rivatuner 60 lock). Performs fairly well and looks pretty damn good.
With Tomb Raider and now Division, I'm coming to grips with not being able to max or near max games anymore with my 970. Mental hurdle but I'm getting there haha.
mullet2000
Member
Yupppp same here. I actually overclocked mine a little bit to make myself feel better haha. I don't know that I'll be able to resist Pascal later this year.
Some joker wrote a comment under Digital Foundry article about beta performance on consoles:
I tested his claim and recorded this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk7caww5GBI
As you can see, FPS was around 40, not "60+ fps all the way".
Can anyone confirm/deny his or my results? I personally call big fat bullshit on his getting "60+ all the way" with maxed settings at 1440p on a 980Ti, considering I am getting around 40. I am using Windows 7, so there is a 1% chance that the game miraculously performs 50% better on Win10, but I doubt it.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-the-division-beta-performance-analysis#comment-5923322 said:
I tested his claim and recorded this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk7caww5GBI
As you can see, FPS was around 40, not "60+ fps all the way".
Can anyone confirm/deny his or my results? I personally call big fat bullshit on his getting "60+ all the way" with maxed settings at 1440p on a 980Ti, considering I am getting around 40. I am using Windows 7, so there is a 1% chance that the game miraculously performs 50% better on Win10, but I doubt it.
ref
Member
It isn't for me. I'm getting the same performance with SLI disabled/enabled with my 980's + Afterburner showing 97-99% usage on one card, 1-3% on the other.
Yep, I get the same performance, 980Ti stock with 4770k stock and 16GB RAM with Win10.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
What is up with the high RAM usage of Tomb Raider and The Divison ? Any specific reason ? I always read I would be fine with 8GB, but 16GB seems like a must now.
People who said that were misleading You.
For like last two years 8GB was barely enough and sometimes even problematic.
I maxed it on a 970 at 1080p (minus SSAA) and i get 40-60fps depending on the area. I usually hate frame pacing all over the place but it's somehow acceptable in this game for some reason, so i just went with those settings.
Anyway it's a beta, so maybe things will be a bit better in the final release, but my point is that you can't max these games at a stable 60fps. If you can live with drops or 40fps locked with rtss, you're ok.
I don't know what's up with these games, especially ROTR, but about the bolded... it really isn't.
thehillissilent
Member
I ran into a bug where I couldn't shoot. I was like WTH! Oh well. I might try it another time before the beta is over.
Sharkiller
Member
i7 4790k + 980ti all maxed out ~70fps
ref
Member
Try alt tabbing in and out, happens to me time to time and doing that fixes it.
I so wish my i5 6600K didn't hold 980Ti back in this beta :/
Resolution?
Sharkiller
Member
Smushroomed
Banned
Anybody else getting stuttering in this game? Both me and my friend get a stutter every 10 steps or so even when the framerate is at 60fps. He's playing on a 970 and me on a 390 and we both have it at the default graphic settings (I tried lowering mine and got even worse performance amazingly).
We're both using i5 2500k's and I think he's using 8 gb's of ram where as I'm using 16gb's. Oddly enough his performance is worse than mine which I assumed would be the opposite given the nvidia licensing.
We're both using i5 2500k's and I think he's using 8 gb's of ram where as I'm using 16gb's. Oddly enough his performance is worse than mine which I assumed would be the opposite given the nvidia licensing.
Ceadeus
Member
Same, no overclock at all though so probably 40-55 but it looks very good with V Sync on and Xbox1 controller. It's very damn good I should say.
Dictator93
Member
Hbao+ everything highest it can go @ 1080p w/ Titan X yields 60fps. But in some instances just barely, I think you will have to turn down more to achieve that desired framerate @ 1440p.
Doogington
Member
GTX 650 Ti
Q6600
My desktop is dated, but I usually do not have issues running new games.
I get frequent stuttering and have gotten stuck on walls several times. Also common to fall through the world.
Q6600
My desktop is dated, but I usually do not have issues running new games.
I get frequent stuttering and have gotten stuck on walls several times. Also common to fall through the world.
i7-6700K (4.5GHz) + 980Ti all maxed out ~50-60 (1080p)
https://youtu.be/psbdH-FnBWg
Vsync was on, so it might have been more than 60 at times, but there were drops to 50s too, which means that for me max setting are not sustainable, as I am aiming for rock solid 60fps (that's why I bought 980Ti and 6700K).
Luckily, by dropping few settings by a notch I managed to achieve near perfect 1080p60 and the game still looks damn good (I particularly like real time reflections, I think Division is one of a very few games that has them).
https://youtu.be/AZYE30dEZdg
When I was buying 980Ti shortly after release, almost all games ran 1440p60 without drops at max settings, now I have to dial down settings get a stable 1080p60. Pascal can't come soon enough.
CrimsonEclipse
Member
How do you guys think this will run on a....
680 GTX 2GB (reference)
i5-2500k
16GB RAM
Win10 64-bit
@1080p?
680 GTX 2GB (reference)
i5-2500k
16GB RAM
Win10 64-bit
@1080p?
How are you setting hbao+, though.
Ceadeus
Member
30-40fps medium
Sharkiller
Member
you are recording. also i have a 850pro ssd and 32gb ram and win 7 ult. vsync off
Dictator93
Member
In the ingame menu. It is the step after ultra under the "ambient occlusion" setting.
Performance is almost the same when I am not recording. The game is installed on 850EVO. There should be no performance difference between 16 and 32 gigs.
Ah, I stopped scrolling right after seeing very high. Good deal, I'm willing to take whatever hit my fps takes for hbao+.
Dictator93
Member
Very True. But having shadow play on should cut 5+% performance, up to 10% in some instances.
Yeah, the game's options are so abnormally good for a multi-platform game that it is easy to lose a bit of the overview in them. This is a good thing of course. Love the graphics, hud, and other options.
I was under the impression that performance drops only when you are actually recording. Thanks for the tip. 5% may make a difference when you are trying to eke out a bit more performance.
Yeah the hud customization is very welcome.
Dictator93
Member
Shadow play is always recording if it is on by default, but the alt + f9 allows for discrete cuts. alt + f10 saves the last few mins. So the background recording adds that overhead.
I never really looked though to see if you can have it set to just allow discrete manual cuts, that would solve the performance dillema perhaps.
edit: you can, just set it to manual! derp
now to just test if it actually affects performance if set to manual and not "manual + automatic"
edit 2: yes it does, well now I feel like an idiot for never using the pure manual mode. So much better lol
Slackbladder
Member
I turned V-sync off and....didn't notice any difference. Odd. There was no tearing which I would have expected on my TV and the fps didn't seem to change though I was locked to 60fps. Maybe I should have restarted the game even though it didn't say I should?
First thing I did after installing GeForce Experience was to switch to pure manual mode
The GeForce experience beta and the new shadowplay overlay helps a lot with this, it allows you edit the settings in-game, turn shadow mode on and off (you can even see the difference in performance whilst in game, usually only a few fps). It's nice because most of the time I don't really need or want the shadow mode, but for games like Counter-Strike, it's useful - so I can now easily turn it on in game.
I'm dissapointed too. I too have 980Ti (OC'ed to 1440MHz) and i7-6700K (OC'ed to 4.5GHz) In order to get a consistent 60fps at 1080p I had to dial some options from the highest available. Here's my current setting - everything set to max except these options:
Shadow Quality: High (notch down from PCSS+)
Particle detail: High (notch down from Ultra)
Volumetric fog: High (notch down from Ultra)
Object detail: 80% (max is 100%)
Extra streaming distance: 80% (max is 100%)
Chromatic aberration: Yes (kidding, No, of course)
Lens flare: No (J.J. Abrams is sad)
Vignette effect: No
That gives me solid 60fps in 1080p. I tested at night, when I assume the GPU load is higher because of additional lights and shadows.
Here's the vid (performance should be a tad higher when not recording with GFE):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZYE30dEZdg
Dictator93
Member
They did not use PCSS or HBAO+ for testing sadly, but still, some nice benches
I like this as well.
Very nice CPU scaling.
This is "nvidia sponsored" game (GameWorks) and yet 4GB Fury X has more FPS than 6GB 980Ti? And nano is almost as fast as 980Ti? I'd say that's unexpected.
I wonder which setting there were using. My VRAM usage was around 4.5GB
EDIT: ok, no PCSS+ and HBAO+, that explains it. GimpWorks strikes again!
I wonder which setting there were using. My VRAM usage was around 4.5GB
EDIT: ok, no PCSS+ and HBAO+, that explains it. GimpWorks strikes again!