Nah you should be able to hit an average 30 fps on ultra with gameworks off at 1080p so that should be better than the ps4. Even if these benches have the 780 just under 30 (28.5 to be exact) I would imagine this could be improved depending on your oc and future patches.
-
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.
Witcher 3 PC Performance Thread
- Thread starter batman2million
- Start date
Nah you should be able to hit an average 30 fps on ultra with gameworks off at 1080p so that should be better than the ps4. Even if these benches have the 780 just under 30 (28.5 to be exact) I would imagine this could be improved depending on your oc and future patches.
opticalmace
Member
So turn it down from max, you'll get fine performance.
Dreathlock
Member
According to PCGH i will get 22.8 FPS with my 780 @ 1440p without hairworks. What is going on here?
Your PC is much more powerful than the PS4. What do you think. I really wish games would come with "console" profiles so people don't continue to ask this dumb question.
Didn't know PS4 version is 1440p and Gameworks...You should just get the PS4 one...
Star Citizen is not visually complete though. It does not surprise me at all that "max settings" bring such GPU to its knee, it will happen to the 980 as well one day.
It's easy to understand : max settings are bound to destroy any hardware.
A 780 won't get you max settings and 60fps but it should do better than either console.
Your CPU is fine.
I've personally done exactly this with a 1080p TV and benchmarked Alien Isolation and Crysis. It works, but it simply doesn't use one of the cards. Disabling one card will yield the same performance. This was less than 2 months ago before I bought a 4K TV.
texhnolyze
Banned
Mine is HD 7870 GHz edition. I think it's quite comparable to yours.
*fingers crossed.
Those are maximum settings, the PS4 won't be equivalent to that.
My 7970ghz and 4670k are hopefully ready as well!
I believe it when I see it tomorrow. Benchmarks are always so inaccurate
UnrealEck
Member
Here's the thing, though, most UE3 games at max settings are not nearly as demanding as Crysis 3 at low settings, which is why they run better, even though it's "ultra".
You can't judge performance just by looking at the settings names.
Not being able to run games on ultra is natural, it only means graphics are evolving and devs are using the extra power from newer cards (and also future proofing their games).
Now, of course there are situations where it's just a poorly optimized game, but that's still not based on settings names, but how demanding it is for how much it pushes the system.
The Witcher 3 won't run as well as Saints Row on max settings, but it will look far better than Saints Row on max settings even if you have to play it on medium, for example.
You'll still most likely get the graphics and performance you should for your card, you just need to let go of the meaningless "ultra" thing.
Ground Zeroes did, IIRC.
con-ca-te-nate
Member
I5 4590
8GB
Sapphire r9 270X Dual X
Will I be able to play with this build? Thanks GAF.
8GB
Sapphire r9 270X Dual X
Will I be able to play with this build? Thanks GAF.
Ill have to check then. I mentioned csgo cause thats what I had running at the moment.
This would mean I couldave played gta v with 90+ FPS maxed then as i was averaging 45 most of the time
I just dont want to loose the sharpness os DSR as my custom res feels blurry, and has a hint of ghosting on high contrast text (like RTSS for example)
What cards do you have?
Toreal
Member
Anyone rocking a dedicated physx card?
Atm my setup is i5 -4670k, 16GB ram and a 970 GTX but I do have an old gtx 560ti that I could use as a physx card.
Do you guys think it would be worth it to insert the 560?
It seems physx is coded into the engine to use the cpu, but maybe forcing it the Nvidia control panel will make it use a dedicated physx card.
I am not sure but I think GameWorks is a separate thing and does not benefit from a dedicated physx card?
I do not have the extra power cable to test this atm, so please post your results if you are using a dedicated physx card, I am very interested to see if it helps
Edit: If you don't know about a dedicated physx card:
How much difference does a dedicated PhysX card make?
Atm my setup is i5 -4670k, 16GB ram and a 970 GTX but I do have an old gtx 560ti that I could use as a physx card.
Do you guys think it would be worth it to insert the 560?
It seems physx is coded into the engine to use the cpu, but maybe forcing it the Nvidia control panel will make it use a dedicated physx card.
I am not sure but I think GameWorks is a separate thing and does not benefit from a dedicated physx card?
I do not have the extra power cable to test this atm, so please post your results if you are using a dedicated physx card, I am very interested to see if it helps
Edit: If you don't know about a dedicated physx card:
How much difference does a dedicated PhysX card make?
Yes, you can run it.
SoraanTribal
Member
So if I have a 3570k overclocked to 4.1GHz, 16gb RAM, and a Radeon 7870 HD... what kind of performance should I expect? Would it be better to get the PS4 version?
Agent_4Seven
Tears of Nintendo
Oh, I know what I have, HD 7950 is basically R9 280, but to overclock it I need to install a better cooler (the stock one is not good enough for OC) and I don't have the money for this now.
I never do.
OmegaDL50
Member
I would think so.
Your processor and gpu are better then what the AMD APU the PS4 has.
Not in my experience.
What the fuck at these benchmark results. What the fuck. Am I gonna have to run this shit at sub-PS4 quality on my 280X? The ps4/ultra quality video comparison showed almost no discernible difference whatsoever.
That honestly doesn't mean much in the real world. He has a 7870. It will struggle.
That honestly doesn't mean much in the real world. He has a 7870. It will struggle.
I think I'm pretty well set for the game with a 3570k @ 4.2 and a GTX980 +200/+300, but I'm having a really difficult time deciding if I'd rather be complaining about downgrades and consolitis or the game being too heavy and poorly optimized. Could we have a poll on this so CDPR could patch accordingly?
Good. Should be an industry standard.
You should be above 60 anywhere in the game as long as you have grass on very high. I run at 4k60 too
But don't expect anywhere near 90s as GTA V doesn't seem to scale that well outdoors
Edit: O hey im a member now
Congrats!
SoraanTribal
Member
The "I would think so" is answering my question on getting the PS4 version? The second part of your reply implies I should get the PC version though.
lolI don't know how my PC compares to the PS4 since the PS4 is a closed system, though.
SoraanTribal
Member
I wish more games made benchmarks that ran on your computer so you could see the performance like a lot of MMOs have. Or a demo... something.
Or a demo... something.
UnrealEck
Member
How has that served the PS4's performance in games compared to an equivalent PC thus far though?
Kenzodielocke
Banned
This is not a worst case scenario benchmark, it could and will get worse, at least when the weather system hits.
Zera_Bloodwinter
Member
Currently running an i5-2500k, Nvidia 770, 16gb DDR3, and an SSD. Time to upgrade the good ole pc :-(
You should be above 60 anywhere in the game as long as you have grass on very high. I run at 4k60 too
Congrats!
Ill redownload GTA and try 4K DSR vs driver res. Lets hope the fps doesn't suck when in windowed cause thats the only way I can work over rcons.
Drama Zed Nod
Member
Hey, could you explain this to me?
I have a 780Ti SLI set-up and a G-Sync Monitor (ROG Swift). This will be fine for the Witcher right?
Is it DSR and G-Sync that don't play nice?
The only mode that worked well for me is fullscreen, though others have reported some success with windowed fullscreen
Star CItizen runs in CryEngine
con-ca-te-nate
Member
Thanks. What FPS can I get at 1080P, medium settings? 30FPS would be okay I guess.
How about a 7870XT, eh? It's a lower spec 7950 essentially but mine is clocked to 1100MHz.
SWEET JESUS,SOMEONE TELL ME I'LL BE FINE! ... please?
Felix Lighter
Member
Looking forward to SLI benchmarks. Hopefully the scalability reported by Nvidia is accurate. I've had good luck with SLI as of late.
opticalmace
Member
Or you could just turn down the settings? I don't get this "ultra or bust" mentality..
Burgess_101
Member
Come on 780, don't fail me now.
Is this nvidia chart for 1080/60? Should I be looking at ultra/high mix for a 780 and 2700k?
Is this nvidia chart for 1080/60? Should I be looking at ultra/high mix for a 780 and 2700k?
daninthemix
Member
Sssh. Neurotic PC gamers are good for the hardware industry.
Fingers crossed. I'm really counting on that to get a stable 4K60. My original hope was to have enough headroom for ini tweaks, but now I don't know what to think.
OmegaDL50
Member
Yeah I got a HD7950, I know I won't be maxing the game and will turn down the settings, but I at least will enjoy the game.
Besides it'll always been in my GoG library, Even after I rebuild PC I can always come back to the game and run it even better then before.
I'll have that to look forward to, and I'm not the type to simple abandon a game once I finish it, I go back to old PC games I've played 4 to 5 years ago time and time again.
Depends how much you have to turn down and what kind of resolution and framerates you find acceptable.
It's not always people just chasing the term "ultra" or "max". Perfectly valid for PC enthusiasts to want to play the games with all settings enabled if they offer significant visual improvement.
Its dsr + gsync + sli (any combination of two of these things will work ). So with your set up you wouldn't be able to use dsr if you want both sli and gsync