Agent_4Seven
Tears of Nintendo
Hey guys, I wonder if Fraps can actually be the cause of the artifacts? I mean, I remember that I started getting artifacts in Homeworld Remastered with MSI Afterburner for example.
-
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
Gormenghast
Member
Also, Eurogamer is still "cheating" benchmarks by putting PC console settings on "medium" foliage range when it's high on consoles. And that's the single setting with that biggest impact on FPS.
no your point is gone.
Gormenghast
Member
The point is CDP claimed the game could run with locked 60 fps with Hairworks. The end result is that it dips to 45 fps WITHOUT Hairworks. It's still far from promise even if less far than I thought.
The point of having received a massive downgrade and STILL not even meeting their own targets of performance definitely still stands.
Eurogamer article:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-the-best-pc-hardware-for-the-witcher-3
Ultra + no Hairworks = 49/65 FPS on a 980.
So, just to straighten the facts:
we got not only the major downgrade that CDP always denied, but the downgraded game also delivers half the performance they swore it had just a month ago (locked 60 on a 980 on ultra WITH Hairworks).
EDIT: Yep, I read the chart wrong, my bad
That was before the setting shake-up that increased the default levels of many options. New options were introduced, too.
EDIT: And no one ever said 'locked 60 on a 980 on ultra WITH Hairworks', or anything along those lines.
Now you're just making stuff up.
texhnolyze
Banned
receipt.gif
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
So I wouldn't mind playing about with what is the worst offender in regards to frame drops. For example, I'll be getting 30-50 fps just running around then I just come across a spot that tanks the frame rate to the mid 20's. For example a small part of fyke isle, or the very centre of novigrad or the bog during a storm or a hut in the middle of the woods.
Can anyone tel me the INI settings that completely remove shadows, trees, foliage etc
I have played with the ones that change how far they are visible from but never could find how to just straight up remove them. I have seen a video where the shadows had been completely removed and a shot with zero trees.
I dont want to play this way as it looks terrible but I wouldn't mind testing it to see what gives the biggest impact.
Hopefully a new nvidia driver for Kepler cards helps a bit because I know I feel I should be getting slightly better performance than I am.
Can anyone tel me the INI settings that completely remove shadows, trees, foliage etc
I have played with the ones that change how far they are visible from but never could find how to just straight up remove them. I have seen a video where the shadows had been completely removed and a shot with zero trees.
I dont want to play this way as it looks terrible but I wouldn't mind testing it to see what gives the biggest impact.
Hopefully a new nvidia driver for Kepler cards helps a bit because I know I feel I should be getting slightly better performance than I am.
GHG
Member
Oh just give it up will you.
There is downgrade thread for shit like this.
I'm surprised people are still hung up on this. Nobody here really cares.
facts are, it got downgraded so ppl without 2xsli titan x can play it, and of course consoles, you think they dispose of superior grapix because they wanted to?
Also blame nvidia for hairworks.
Gormenghast
Member
Referring to this specifically:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=163689940&postcount=997
I had the impression that before release the expectation was 60 fps on Hairworks. We know it creates a 10-15 fps difference, so it's rather far from that target.
But the point is more that the 980 without Hairworks was expected to be way above. Whereas it was expected of the 970 to get locked 60 fps Ultra with Hairworks off.
The patches have helped a lot.
Last night I overclocked my CPU and GPU and now I am running everything maxed out at 1440p. It looks amazing. Not a fan of those SweetFX presets though.
Gormenghast
Member
Their target wasn't even remotely feasible. Remember that this game was supposed to come out a year ago, or even earlier.
At that time the 970/980 didn't even EXIST.
CarbonFire
Member
Weird cherry picked quote. Their solution for Kepler, as I bemused in that same post, was to buy a Maxwell card. Afterall, can't get people to buy the new stuff if the old stuff is performing almost as well. I sincerely doubt we'll get much in the way of improvements on Kepler cards.
Right, yeh I figured it was joke after I quoted...
Yes, I just removed the OC, accepted my slight performance loss, and never looked back. Game has been 100% rock solid ever since.
By who ? Not me.
Yeah its stable for me without OCing too, but its strange it only happens with this game.
Dries
Member
These seems like accurate measurements. I'm running native 1440p and I've capped my framerate to 40 (using Gsync). Especially in dense forests i'll get framerates in the mid-30's. In normal all-around areas I always get around 40-45 fps. This is with everything at Ultra and no hairworks.
It still amazing that people are talking about downgrades though.... This is the prettiest game I've ever played. Sometimes, when in motion, it almost looks like a movie.
Its so weird but I have everything on Ultra except shadow and foliage distance is on high. I get a stable 60 fps all the time. EXCEPT when I'm in this town, its located in Velen.
When I'm in there, my frame rate drop to 50-55 for no reason. Its not even even a big town.. Start with an "O" I think.
Then I get fps drop too whenever it start raining. Anyone else has that problem?
When I'm in there, my frame rate drop to 50-55 for no reason. Its not even even a big town.. Start with an "O" I think.
Then I get fps drop too whenever it start raining. Anyone else has that problem?
Guess I'm giving up on Hairworks. Even with 2 970's and a 2600k@4.4, I can't get 1080p60 consistently. Also, hope this ok to post here:
Man, after all the back and forth I've had with Nvidia rgb limited/vs full over the years and Durante's toggle, I now realize (I think) that my tv supports 444. I have a Panasonic VT25, and it is displaying my pc at ycbcr444 when I switch to it in the Nvidia control panel.
So, what should I be using full RGB, or 444? I'm assuming it is displaying the 444 (it only gives me limited as an option in the NVCP) correctly, and that it wouldn't display anything if it didn't support it. I am running 2x 970 into a Denon hdmi 1.4 receiver, into a Panasonic VT25 all using HDMI.
Is there a test image or some way to know I have things set up properly? This kind of thing drives me crazy. Should I have output color depth at 12?
Man, after all the back and forth I've had with Nvidia rgb limited/vs full over the years and Durante's toggle, I now realize (I think) that my tv supports 444. I have a Panasonic VT25, and it is displaying my pc at ycbcr444 when I switch to it in the Nvidia control panel.
So, what should I be using full RGB, or 444? I'm assuming it is displaying the 444 (it only gives me limited as an option in the NVCP) correctly, and that it wouldn't display anything if it didn't support it. I am running 2x 970 into a Denon hdmi 1.4 receiver, into a Panasonic VT25 all using HDMI.
Is there a test image or some way to know I have things set up properly? This kind of thing drives me crazy. Should I have output color depth at 12?
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-the-best-pc-hardware-for-the-witcher-3
Console settings :
"Console versions equivalent to high settings"....Sure.
Console settings :
"Console versions equivalent to high settings"....Sure.
Gormenghast
Member
Btw, and then we can shut up about this, since it's not so important:
Miracle build, apparently.
Miracle build, apparently.
There are situations where Hairworks and ultra settings can run at 60fps on a 980 but not everywhere.
Gamestar's claims therefore stand up to scrutiny.
I thought I read another article say consoles were both using high foliage distance.
Core i7 4790K, Ultra Settings, No HairWorks 1080p Low/Avg FPS
GeForce GTX 980 4GB - 49.0 / 65.8
---hairworks makes a massive difference too.
I see it's been brought up.
ULTRA means hairworks disabled? :S
Core i7 4790K, Ultra Settings, No HairWorks 1080p Low/Avg FPS
GeForce GTX 980 4GB - 49.0 / 65.8
---hairworks makes a massive difference too.
I see it's been brought up.
ULTRA means hairworks disabled? :S
So its gone from a CDPR guarantee to a second hand report based on the eyeballs of some journalist. Hmm..
I'd love to know the methodology they came to the conclusion that these are the equivalent settings.
Quite a few multiplat titles release on consoles I've seen for donkeys year don't usually have hard defined PC equivalent settings but a variable mixture probably to squeeze out as much performance as possible from fixed hardware. In some titles you might see one scene where the texture quality on characters is to a very high standard but the environment textures are of a lower quality, some titles have varying levels of texture filtering, others have certain effects disabled in intensive scenes but active in less demanding ones and countless other tweaks here and there.
GoonerTRON
Banned
I tried the 30FPS lock just to see how ultra looks. Now I can't go back to medium/high 60FPS. I am usually framerate>graphics but god damn this game looks amazing on ultra with a few Nvidia control panel options enabled.
Going to play the rest of the game at 30 now.
Going to play the rest of the game at 30 now.
Hairworks is more of an additional feature than an Ultra setting imo
Wow. I run a pretty sweet High/Ultra mix averaging 45 FPS, lowest dips I've seen have been to like 35 FPS. It's nice that my middle/low-end rig demolishes the consoles. Ports should run rather well for the remainder of this console gen at least, which is exactly what I was aiming for. This on a 280x and a FX6300, both stock.
Dragon1893
Member
Just read the DF article and their numbers don't match my experience.
On a R9 280X they're getting 33.0 / 45.6 at 1080p, High Settings, No HairWorks.
That's the gpu I have, with an i7 2600k (they used a 4790K) and with textures on ultra and everything else on high, hairworks off and SSAO I get a pretty consistent 60fps.
On a R9 280X they're getting 33.0 / 45.6 at 1080p, High Settings, No HairWorks.
That's the gpu I have, with an i7 2600k (they used a 4790K) and with textures on ultra and everything else on high, hairworks off and SSAO I get a pretty consistent 60fps.
yup this game is an OC killer
i've even heard of people who have factory overclocked cards having to downclock to stop artifacting/crashes, never heard of that before as i imagine those cards are very stable.
Pjsprojects
Member
Looking at the Eurogamer tests it's nice to know AMD cpu's are being used better and so compete with Intels offerings. As soon as the console specs were revealed I thought the AMD cpu's would start to get used better.
Very happy with how Witcher 3 runs on my FX8350 black.
Very happy with how Witcher 3 runs on my FX8350 black.
If they are crashing, they aren't stable. That's the definition of stable..... If you have to bring back an overclock, it's because it isn't 100% stable.... that's just a fact. Factory or not.
zero shift
Banned
Is it true that if you are downsampling (even from 2K) you don't need to have anti-aliasing on?
what do your eyes say when you look at it? that's the answer. It's all your choice.
That number matches up with my High/Ultra config. Forgot exact settings though
Yep. I noticed that I barely see aliasing since I switched from a 19 inch 5:4 monitor running at 1280x1024 to a 21.5 inch 1080p monitor. Usually one of the first things I turn off
BuffetChamp
Banned
Yep I have the same card and it was crashing constantly even when I downgraded to the 350 driver. It kept crashing on me like 5 straight times when I moved the
cpu clock offset and also the memory clock offset sliders beyond their defaults. They weren't really moved that much really. Its only when I heard from the Steam forums that it ran much better if you didn't overclock your card that the crashes finally stopped altogether for me.
One thing I do have problems with though is that my controller was hooked into a USB hub. And my controller would disconnect everytime I did battle with enemies,and only enemies. Very strange because I could run around or ride on horseback and it would be fine,but the minute I started sword fighting the disconnects would happen constantly.
This only happened with this game,no others. Then I got it to finally stopped when I hooked my X360 pad directly into the PC's usb slot and not the hub. Strange shit I tell ya. LOL.
Dries
Member
Too bad that eurogamer/DF article doesn't mention how they've benchmarked. Did they just stick in one area or did they go to different areas and take the average of that? That's what's difficult of benchmarking an open world game. My framerate can differ 15 fps in different areas of the game.
Edit: never mind, I didn't see the video.
Also: the new TextureMipBias -1 thingie will cost around 5 fps (I thought, correct me if wrong). So did they bench 1.03 or 1.04? Probably the former.
Also: does anyone know the performance cost of Nvidia control panel applied FXAA?
Edit: never mind, I didn't see the video.
Also: the new TextureMipBias -1 thingie will cost around 5 fps (I thought, correct me if wrong). So did they bench 1.03 or 1.04? Probably the former.
Also: does anyone know the performance cost of Nvidia control panel applied FXAA?
Does anyone have any tips other than disabling Chrome in the background in regards to crashing?
I'm getting "The Witcher 3 has stopped working" error randomly since I installed patch 1.04. I got it four times last night in three hours of playtime. There seemed to be no rhyme or reason for the crashes and after two I managed to play for a good two hours before getting two more quite close together.
My system:
i5-3570 (non-K)
EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 (Factory OC, no crashes using it until 1.04, latest nVidia game ready drivers)
16GB RAM
Windows 8.1
I'm getting "The Witcher 3 has stopped working" error randomly since I installed patch 1.04. I got it four times last night in three hours of playtime. There seemed to be no rhyme or reason for the crashes and after two I managed to play for a good two hours before getting two more quite close together.
My system:
i5-3570 (non-K)
EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 (Factory OC, no crashes using it until 1.04, latest nVidia game ready drivers)
16GB RAM
Windows 8.1
Mine is factory OC'ed and, luckily, doesn't crash. But anything extra causes crashes.
It's the game causing instability, I've been using an OC setting for all other games with no trouble.
lordfuzzybutt
Member
That doesn't mean it's stable. If your OC is truly stable then no kind of load can make it unstable.
veggiesaurus
Member
Well, even at stock clocks, one could find the odd crash from time to time. There's nothing magical about stock clocks. Overclocking just raises the probability of said crashes happening.
s_mirage
Member
No. Just because it's fine on everything else doesn't mean it's stable. On my 780ti I had to reduce my clock offset from +200 to +175 because of artifacts appearing in Shadow of Mordor. That game and that game alone had problems. It will be a similar case here; if a game crashes when the card is overclocked, the oc isn't stable, period.
lordfuzzybutt
Member
That is a different kind crash which is caused by the game's code bugs.
Fascinating isn't it? It;s always interesting to see diametrically opposite opinions on the same content
It was just the sharpness for me i think, it looked great on my IPS but that ended up dieing on me the other day and now i'm back on 1080P TN downsampled. Hence the sharpness complaint =(