Support NeoGAF

[DodgyGeezerFella]

Just something I remembered from Doom BFG Edition, a patch introduced an option that I forget the name of, but setting it to the lowest possible made textures further out sharper (like AF, but wasn't called that). Does anything like that exist in Wolf ?

 

[Morphine_OD]

Something with this game is very wrong. I have 4.3Ghz 2600k + 3Gb 680GTX + 8Gb 2333 RAM and this game started on everything maxed out with a very inconsistent frame rate. It went 20-40 with no apparent reason. After that, I've changed the shadow resolution to 4096 and everything went up to locked 60 fps.

Duh

But then I decided to compare the shadow quality to the 8k one and the game became literally unplayable. 1-2 fps. I mean WTF it's not even that pretty and it gave me at least 20-40 fps on 8k before. Well, OK I thought and went back playing with 4k shadow resolution.

Now every 20 minutes or so I have freezes, cutscenes generally begin with a freeze and have at least 1 freeze in the middle of it. Sometimes level loads to a black screen, which goes away in 2-3 minutes and the loading is pretty damn fast, since I have an SSD.

I don't know where did Carmack we all knew and loved go, but idTech5 is a mess of an engine.

So can anyone tell me, is the difference between 4k and 8k shadows noticeable?

 

[sertopico]

Well I only played through the opening tutorial segments and apart from a few scenes it was pretty empty so don't know how well that setup would perform later on in the game. Plus there was no AA and with what I had the settings adjusted to there was a distinct lack of shadowing. A lot of that would come down to preference though but in no way would my setup posted about run any of the higher settings or effects let alone paired with AA and not have a fit. Low to medium seams about the ball park which didn't look that bad to me but again that's subjective.

Personally I'm not going to be playing on my old PC so that might say something but I'm sure there's some benchmarks out there from a much wider sample and more thorough testing than the 30-40 mins I spent this morning.

I understand, thanks for your feedback. Afaik, the opening sequence is quite demanding anyway, so it should be a good benchmark for the system. Of course, if you are forced to lower the details too much, maybe it's better buying the console version.

It's not unoptimized from where I'm at. With the latest beta drivers I'm getting very good framerates (45-60) on my Core 2 Duo 3GHz + 560Ti at 1080p medium settings and it looks phenomenal. ATI people are not so lucky since their openGL support has been garbage.

Thanks. I'm reading mixed comment about performance, someone states it runs better on AMD, others on nVidia, I'm confused.

For instance, a user from another forum reported 45-50 fps on ultra settings, 1440p, on a 2600k and a 780, not very encouraging I might say.

 

[Vintage]

Something with this game is very wrong. I have 4.3Ghz 2600k + 3Gb 680GTX + 8Gb 2333 RAM and this game started on everything maxed out with a very inconsistent frame rate. It went 20-40 with no apparent reason. After that, I've changed the shadow resolution to 4096 and everything went up to locked 60 fps.

Duh

But then I decided to compare the shadow quality to the 8k one and the game became literally unplayable. 1-2 fps. I mean WTF it's not even that pretty and it gave me at least 20-40 fps on 8k before. Well, OK I thought and went back playing with 4k shadow resolution.

Now every 20 minutes or so I have freezes, cutscenes generally begin with a freeze and have at least 1 freeze in the middle of it. Sometimes level load to a black screen, which goes away in 2-3 minutes and the loading is pretty damn fast, since I have an SSD.

I don't know where did Carmack we all knew and loved go, but idTech5 is a mess of an engine.

So can anyone tell me, is the difference between 4k and 8k shadows noticeable?

Similar to this happened to me - tried changing settings during the game and something bugged out - 1-2 fps. It fixes after some time if I stare at one place, but once I tried rotating camera it went to 1-2fps again. It seems that all textures are unloaded and loaded again, until then game becomes unplayable. Funny how the engine is focused on textures but most of the problems are texture related.

Overall, the game runs fine on my i5-3570k, 660ti on med-high settings. Some noticeable slowdowns in some areas, also texture pop-in is still very visible.

 

[SandMan2233]

Here's a question...

I've got an i5 3570K with a 660 TI from MSI. 8 gigs of ram. I'm assuming, from what I've seen, that I will run this game with no problem. But I'm buying it later today, and I'm having one of those confidence tests, lol.

So I ask this: Can I play this game without trouble at max (that is, at 1920x1080p and 60 fps with everything maxed).

My 660 TI and my processor have been kind to me for two years... Let me know if I am good or ready to upgrade, hahaha!

 

[zugzug]

Jeebus that was fun watching Lirik play all day and finish the game on brutal difficulty. Him having from 16k to 24k people watching was good stuff.

I just wish his sub tracker sounds would go away forever. I need more Kripparian styled streams, less fanfare on stream taking away from game your playing.

 

[LicenceToK1ll]

My Radeon 280X is gonna own this

 

[Vintage]

Here's a question...

I've got an i5 3570K with a 660 TI from MSI. 8 gigs of ram. I'm assuming, from what I've seen, that I will run this game with no problem. But I'm buying it later today, and I'm having one of those confidence tests, lol.

So I ask this: Can I play this game without trouble at max (that is, at 1920x1080p and 60 fps with everything maxed).

My 660 TI and my processor have been kind to me for two years... Let me know if I am good or ready to upgrade, hahaha!

As mentioned above, I have the same PC. I'm playing on 1080p, not max settings (shadow resolution lowered, reflections to low, some other setting to medium), most of the time It runs well, but in some bigger areas there are visible slowdowns. So no, you cant play it 1080p/60fps locked on max settings.

But don't let it stop you from buying it, it's still a great game and plays well.

 

[Morphine_OD]

Here's a question...

I've got an i5 3570K with a 660 TI from MSI. 8 gigs of ram. I'm assuming, from what I've seen, that I will run this game with no problem. But I'm buying it later today, and I'm having one of those confidence tests, lol.

So I ask this: Can I play this game without trouble at max (that is, at 1920x1080p and 60 fps with everything maxed).

My 660 TI and my processor have been kind to me for two years... Let me know if I am good or ready to upgrade, hahaha!

I would say - no, because the game somehow hogs all VRAM and starts stuttering while trying to manage it. Although if you turn down shadows to 4k you'll probably do fine.

 

[banjoted]

No sure if the info will be of any use to anyone but my rig was running this very well last night at 1080p/60fps with only the very occasional and temporary stutter in some cutscenes.

i7 3770k
780 Windforce
8GB RAM

 

[Guiberu]

i3 2120
8gb Ballistix
Radeon R250x (OC'ed)

Runs on medium/high perfectly fine. Hitting 60, with drops to 35/40 every now and then.

Will be tweaking further via RadeonPro at some point.

Edit: Forgot to mention, my entire setup is aimed toward 720p.

 

[dawid]

i5 4670k @ 4,3
(on-par-with-770-clocked)GTX 760

Never drops a frame on ultra @ 1080p. However the flickering from no AA makes my eyes bleed.

Much better with forced MSAA, but it causes wierd stuttering and even desktop crashes.

I'm a little sad about the terrible screentearing i gotta say. I just can't play a game like this with the input lag that vsync brings.

 

[Corpekata]

Here's a question...

I've got an i5 3570K with a 660 TI from MSI. 8 gigs of ram. I'm assuming, from what I've seen, that I will run this game with no problem. But I'm buying it later today, and I'm having one of those confidence tests, lol.

So I ask this: Can I play this game without trouble at max (that is, at 1920x1080p and 60 fps with everything maxed).

My 660 TI and my processor have been kind to me for two years... Let me know if I am good or ready to upgrade, hahaha!

Not at max, but close. I have a pretty similar rig, same CPU, and it hitches badly on the shadow setting, which I think might just be bugged in some way. You should be able to play on High though. I can crank everything but shadows up to max.

 

[TJP]

I don't have an ultra setting for the VT cache setting for whatever reason. I own an EVGA GTX 680 2GB model so I'm guessing the VRAM is an issue. Anyone shed some light on this please.

I saw the following on Guru3D: http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4821549&postcount=784 - it does work as I found a 1 GB file 'FileCache000.bin" in the folder 8)

Found something that someone posted over on the steam forums that also worked in rage that will significantly reduce texture pop-ins if youre having them:

>>>>>>>>>>>>
The config variable is fs_cachepath. You can call up the console with CTRL ALT ` to check where NWO wants this folder to be created.
It should be under your AppData\Local\MachineGames\Wolfenstein The New Order\

If this directory does not exist, create it. The iDTech5 engine will write a texture cache to hold the recently used/converted texture pages in. This will help some of the stuttering provided your drive is decently quick.

Credit goes to hazardd for testing things out for me in-game (since I don't own NWO yet) and figuring out the proper directory needed.

All other config tweaks from Rage should apply. I had the most success reducing pop-in tweaking the vt_maxPFF variable in Rage, and I assume the same holds true here.

 

[SandMan2233]

As mentioned above, I have the same PC. I'm playing on 1080p, not max settings (shadow resolution lowered, reflections to low, some other setting to medium), most of the time It runs well, but in some bigger areas there are visible slowdowns. So no, you cant play it 1080p/60fps locked on max settings.

But don't let it stop you from buying it, it's still a great game and plays well.

I would say - no, because the game somehow hogs all VRAM and starts stuttering while trying to manage it. Although if you turn down shadows to 4k you'll probably do fine.

Not at max, but close. I have a pretty similar rig, same CPU, and it hitches badly on the shadow setting, which I think might just be bugged in some way. You should be able to play on High though. I can crank everything but shadows up to max.

Thanks guys for the input there... It would seem that this title has some need for optimization of resources, but I can live with not-so-perfect shadows and reflections, along with tweeks here and there.

I'll be happy with my purchase in any case. I just can't wait for someone to actually look at what this game eats up in-terms of resources. I mean, I can max RAGE, no problem (again, 1920x1080p at 60fps with all in-game options at their highest). Which makes me wonder what this game is doing differently from RAGE, resource-wise. I know that the recommended specs called for an i7 and whatnot, but it's still using id Tech 5 engine, and I can't imagine it suddenly became some sort-of benchmark.

In any case, thanks again for the input, and I can't wait to give the game a go tomorrow (or later today, since it's 4 in the morning where I am, hahaha!).

 

[Arkanius]

Guys for an i5 3570k, what max ppf should I select? 16 or 64?

 

[JaseC]

The game being so VRAM-heavy is rather strange considering the biggest selling point of the MegaTexture tech is that it affords greater detail diversity with a fraction of the memory cost. My guess would be that Machine Games wanted to avoid Rage's texture pop-in issues by loading far larger portions of the environment at any given time, but I think this "solution" could be pared back a fair bit without any discernible impact -- as it stands the game uses around 3x as much VRAM as Rage.

 

[thefunkyman]

I am getting the strange flickering of random colored squares/triangles. Using the 337.81 drivers on a 780. Otherwise the game runs extremely smooth.

I'm sorry to hear that, but then I'm glad it's not just me! I wonder what could be causing it. Outside of that, the game runs great on my machine so I'd love to find a fix.

 

[BBboy20]

I'm still using a GTX260 and eventually figured out that apparently, for whatever reason, Depth of Field on High was what making the performance go below 60 (below 30 for cut-scenes). It wasn't until the cut-scene of mission 2 was when everything dipped below 30 and now, at mission 3 I'm pretty much playing the game at the lowest settings. Yeah, even I seem to notice some flat textures at the highest setting but to be honest, the game doesn't appear that bad like most games with low setting would so I have to accede MachineGames for not making everything look like flat shit (From the last-gen pics I've seen, even at the lowest setting, the PC version still looks better).

I am getting graphical glitches though, fortunately, they are not a regular occurrence. Mostly just hands or NPCs being stuttering, cut-scenes have flashes of random colors on the NPCs, one point, Deathhead didn't lip-sync with his voice, and even noticed the fabled white-texture at a distance in mission 1. Anybody figured out how to deal with those?

 

[sertopico]

The game being so VRAM-heavy is rather strange considering the biggest selling point of the MegaTexture tech is that it affords greater detail diversity with a fraction of the memory cost. My guess would be that Machine Games wanted to avoid Rage's texture pop-in issues by loading far larger portions of the environment at any given time, but I think this "solution" could be pared back a fair bit without any discernible impact -- as it stands the game uses around 3x as much VRAM as Rage.

Aren't textures more detailed than Rage though?

 

[JaseC]

Aren't textures more detailed than Rage though?

I'd say so, generally, but not to a large degree. My max VRAM usage throughout the first chapter has been 1995MB (1680x1050, max in-game settings, 4x MSAA and 16x AF), so if this remains consistent then I may be able to scrape by without enabling compression.

 

[Dice]

Reading how good of performance nVidia owners are getting is filling me with RAGE.

There is no excuse. I don't even know if I want Doom 4 now. Like, on principle. If you're going to have such a massive performance difference, just come out and say you don't support AMD/ATI, because you obviously fucking don't. It doesn't have shit to do with the ability of the hardware, it is their prejudiced asses not even trying.

 

[ColEx]

I don't think its about how detailed the textures are, more to do with the fact there are a TON of textures being used and not recycled. I remember watching a video with Carmack explaining how texture streaming works with Id Tech 5, and something about it allowing them to stream unique textures with minimal performance loss through out the game. RAGE textures may of been low res but the game hardly recycled any textures, which gave the game world a more realistic vibe, i think its the same with Wolfenstein too. He explained that most game engines recycle textures for performance reasons, but with Id Tech 5 its not the case.

 

[JaseC]

I don't think its about how detailed the textures are, more to do with the fact there are a TON of textures being used and not recycled. I remember watching a video with Carmack explaining how texture streaming works with Id Tech 5, and something about it allowing them to stream unique textures with minimal performance loss through out the game. RAGE textures may of been low res but the game hardly recycled any textures, which gave the game world a more realistic vibe, i think its the same with Wolfenstein too. He explained that most game engines recycle textures for performance reasons, but with Id Tech 5 its not the case.

Yeah, the way id Tech 5 works is that the environment of a level is dressed with one giant (up to 128k x 128k) MegaTexture, which is procedurally loaded/unloaded, while characters (and dynamic objects?) are wrapped with their own smaller MegaTextures.

 

[Arkanius]

Reading how good of performance nVidia owners are getting is filling me with RAGE.

There is no excuse. I don't even know if I want Doom 4 now. Like, on principle. If you're going to have such a massive performance difference, just come out and say you don't support AMD/ATI, because you obviously fucking don't. It doesn't have shit to do with the ability of the hardware, it is their prejudiced asses not even trying.

The performance is wonderful for me with my 280X.
Have you upgraded to Catalyst 14.4?

 

[ymgve]

How many else are seeing issues where the game freezes completely for half a second every few minutes? I wonder if that's an AMD-specific problem or if it's a low-CPU-problem.

(i5-3550, 16G, 7870 3G, Radeon 14.4 non-beta)

 

[seph1roth]

I can't downsample this game, the image is bigger than my 1080p monitor, even with the guide from neogaf...

Is this game an exception?

 

[Dice]

The performance is wonderful for me with my 280X.
Have you upgraded to Catalyst 14.4?

Yes I got the very most recent drivers. The game wouldn't even launch until I did. And I do have it at a playable level as long as I keep Max PPF at 16 and compression enabled (I have 4GB VRAM, WTF), but otherwise it drops to 5-10fps. With these settings I get 40-60fps inconsistency. If I drop screen space reflections (what does that even do?) and then additional quality settings to low, then I get 55-60fps.

Meanwhile this guy with half the machine that I have, yet intel/nvidia combo can max everything and get same performance as me on these low settings. Then of course you have people with 290X who are getting 5fps no matter what they do.

It's obvious that AMD/ATI is not important to them. I don't know if they are getting moneyhats from nvidia or what, but it's obvious that whatever they said in the past were all lies. I don't like liars, especially liars who lie so they can make more money while treating thousands of people unfairly.

 

[Morphine_OD]

How many else are seeing issues where the game freezes completely for half a second every few minutes? I wonder if that's an AMD-specific problem or if it's a low-CPU-problem.

(i5-3550, 16G, 7870 3G, Radeon 14.4 non-beta)

I have freezes every 15-20 minutes, I have 2600k/680GTX setup.

Reading how good of performance nVidia owners are getting is filling me with RAGE.

This is presumably due to AMD not updating their OpenGL drivers, while since a few years back, NVidia hopped on board with it.

 

[SandMan2233]

The game being so VRAM-heavy is rather strange considering the biggest selling point of the MegaTexture tech is that it affords greater detail diversity with a fraction of the memory cost. My guess would be that Machine Games wanted to avoid Rage's texture pop-in issues by loading far larger portions of the environment at any given time, but I think this "solution" could be pared back a fair bit without any discernible impact -- as it stands the game uses around 3x as much VRAM as Rage.

And that's what I was looking for... Basically, MachineGames shot for consistency in every area, but that presents a strain on VRAM. I guess id Tech 5 is not good at streaming assets... Or, Machine Games wanted a more "seamless" product, at odds with what the engine with current-tech could do.

 

[SandMan2233]

Yes I got the very most recent drivers. The game wouldn't even launch until I did. And I do have it at a playable level as long as I keep Max PPF at 16 and compression enabled (I have 4GB VRAM, WTF), but otherwise it drops to 5-10fps. With these settings I get 40-60fps inconsistency. If I drop screen space reflections (what does that even do?) and then additional quality settings to low, then I get 55-60fps.

Meanwhile this guy with half the machine that I have, yet intel/nvidia combo can max everything and get solid 60fps. Then of course you have people with 290X who are getting 5fps no matter what they do.

It's obvious that AMD/ATI is not important to them. I don't know if they are getting moneyhats from nvidia or what, but it's obvious that whatever they said in the past were all lies. I don't like liars, especially liars who lie so they can make more money while treating thousands of people unfairly.

But then again, this screams of inconsistency of hardware performance, which intuits a developer problem. I'd guess this game has several more patches coming up, at some point.

 

[codhand]

i7 2600k, 16gb, gtx 570

runs great, Custom to a mixture of high and medium options at 1080p/60fps

oh i'm definitely gonna need to force Vsync and Triple buff,

as was mentioned the built in Vsync doesnt seem to work, but i was lazy and enjoying myself too much to change it yet.

 

[doomquake]

need to scan the thread some more for any similar issues, fixes and etc - but

i7 4930k
asus rampage IV with 32gb ram
samsung ssd with wolf
780ti

after i died trying to jump from the plane, framerate was 1fps and stuttering until i managed to jump anyway. Not sure why. Otherwise it is smooth but a bit less than Rage, most likely due to heavier VTMs being used this time.
everything maxed and no vsync

 

[riflen]

i5 4670k @ 4,3
(on-par-with-770-clocked)GTX 760

Never drops a frame on ultra @ 1080p. However the flickering from no AA makes my eyes bleed.

Much better with forced MSAA, but it causes wierd stuttering and even desktop crashes.

I'm a little sad about the terrible screentearing i gotta say. I just can't play a game like this with the input lag that vsync brings.

Why would you not be disabling in-game v-sync and forcing triple buffering using Inspector? I've only played 1hr, but I don't experience tearing using that configuration.

One thing that I've not seen mentioned at all here is people taking into account the compute performance of their GPUs and performance of the disk that holds their virtual texture cache. I don't know about AMD and how the engine implements its features on that architecture (perhaps OpenCL?), but with a nvidia GPU, the texture decompression is handled by GPU compute using CUDA. The GPU is better suited for this workload than a general purpose CPU.

Some users might have to tweak the virtual texturing settings or cvars depending on the compute performance of their GPU. Inappropriate settings could lead to problems loading textures in an instant and general interruptions to smooth experience. Now, you can choose to not use texture compression, but in general gameplay it's hard to justify that decision unless you have a very fast GPU with lots of VRAM and a fast disk. The compression algorithm used can achieve up to a 6:1 compression ratio, although its lossy, you're going to be hard pressed to see the result unless you specifically look for it.

AndyBNV's RAGE performance article has a lot of info that's probably also relevant to this game for nvidia users. He linked it earlier in the thread.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/ar...-resolution-textures-with-a-few-simple-tweaks

SLI users; from my brief testing, it seems that if you want to use GPU transcoding (use GPU compute to decompress textures more efficiently), you must disable SLI. SLI is not compatible with GPU transcoding. You may also have to force CUDA to be performed on your active GPU in the nvidia control panel. This post from a mod on nvidia forums confirms SLI is broken:

https://forums.geforce.com/default/...fenstein-the-new-order-/post/4222138/#4222138

 

[derFeef]

Rage ran great with my 7970 - hopefully this will too (haha)
Also want to test downsampling with Durante's tool - anyone tried?

 

[doomquake]

i tried rage and it didn't work because i don't think the engine supports arbitrary res

 

[AndyBNV]

I can't downsample this game, the image is bigger than my 1080p monitor, even with the guide from neogaf...

Is this game an exception?

Working here - 3840x2160 down to 1920x1080.

AndyBNV's RAGE performance article has a lot of info that's probably also relevant to this game for nvidia users. He linked it earlier in the thread.

Appears the .co.uk version of the story never got updated. Go to http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/ar...-resolution-textures-with-a-few-simple-tweaks instead. As I mentioned on a previous page, have no time to try these out, unfortunately.

 

[HowZatOZ]

All I can say is god damn does this game look spectacular on my 770. So glad I upgraded, a two gen jump was just mind blowing.

 

[riflen]

Rage ran great with my 7970 - hopefully this will too (haha)
Also want to test downsampling with Durante's tool - anyone tried?

GeDoSaTo is a DirectX9 only tool at this time. This game uses an OpenGL renderer.

 

[GoaThief]

Is the sound mixing a bit off for your guys? My Sound output is via creative xfi, and Nova amp, while using my HD650, and I find the sound in the game to be a bit on the muddy side.

If it's the same as PS4 then yes, the sound mixing is terrible. Worst aspect of the game by a mile which is a shame as the effects, virtual acoustics and the like are really damn good.

Hope it gets fixed, or at the very least a volume slider for Blaz monologue / non cutscene dialogue.

Surprised more aren't talking about it.

 

[Dr Dogg]

Appears the .co.uk version of the story never got updated. Go to http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/ar...-resolution-textures-with-a-few-simple-tweaks instead. As I mentioned on a previous page, have no time to try these out, unfortunately.

Working on a Performance Guide for a specific game launching next week maybe?

Actually does GPU transcoding work with SLI setups with current drivers? I haven't had time to check properly but the flag that was showing in Inspector seams to have disappeared a few driver versions back.

 

[doomquake]

phew..so on my measily machine it seems 8k shadow maps will slow things down at some points. I suspect some bug with loading. Anyway..dof at highest doesn't seem to do anything for the game, only when underwater perhaps or during cutscenes (are they movies or ingame renders? i cant tell actually)
this..is one ugly game. The beach landing looks like something from Quake 4.
uninstall and off

 

[Damian.]

Might want to check out your card's heat situation, sounds like artifacting which is not usually software related. I've had it happen on A) a card that was about to shit the bed and B) a card that wasn't being properly ventilated.

Definitely not heat related, GPU is at ~70c. My GPU gets up to 90c on Battlefield 4/Crysis 3 without any artifacting whatsoever. I think it may have been triple buffering that was causing it. Turning it off and I have only noticed one or two flashes since. Game seems to be running fine now, except for shadow resolution. 8192 gives about 1-2fps and completely unplayable. When I first booted up the game 8192 ran great. Now I am forced to run at 4096 until the game is patched.

 

[AndyBNV]

Working on a Performance Guide for a specific game launching next week maybe?

Actually does GPU transcoding work with SLI setups with current drivers? I haven't had time to check properly but the flag that was showing in Inspector seams to have disappeared a few driver versions back.

Among other things, yes.

 

[sertopico]

I'd say so, generally, but not to a large degree. My max VRAM usage throughout the first chapter has been 1995MB (1680x1050, max in-game settings, 4x MSAA and 16x AF), so if this remains consistent then I may be able to scrape by without enabling compression.

Wow, that's a lot of VRAM indeed, having 1280MB won't help in my case. I'd like to know if the game adapts itself to the amount of memory available on a system, btw.

I don't think its about how detailed the textures are, more to do with the fact there are a TON of textures being used and not recycled. I remember watching a video with Carmack explaining how texture streaming works with Id Tech 5, and something about it allowing them to stream unique textures with minimal performance loss through out the game. RAGE textures may of been low res but the game hardly recycled any textures, which gave the game world a more realistic vibe, i think its the same with Wolfenstein too. He explained that most game engines recycle textures for performance reasons, but with Id Tech 5 its not the case.

Yes I know, but just the fact resources (i. e. textures) are tiled they can be loaded only when necessary, so even if every texture is different from another, you shouldn't incur into VRAM/RAM saturation.

 

[riflen]

Actually does GPU transcoding work with SLI setups with current drivers? I haven't had time to check properly but the flag that was showing in Inspector seams to have disappeared a few driver versions back.

A few posts above.

https://forums.geforce.com/default/...fenstein-the-new-order-/post/4222138/#4222138

SLI is broken right now for this game. You should disable it entirely in my opinion, because the SLI profile just forces single GPU. I don't know how that affects GPU transcoding, because in RAGE, GPU transcoding cannot be used with 2 GPUs active in your system, even if you set single GPU or globally disable SLI using the nvidia control panel.

I've not tried this for Wolfenstein, but for RAGE, I achieve the best performance by doing the following:

1. Disable SLI in nvidia control panel.
2. Disable your 2nd GPU in Windows Device Manager.

I'll be testing more later on.

 

[Dr Dogg]

Among other things, yes.

Good, good. I'll say no more.

A few posts above.

https://forums.geforce.com/default/...fenstein-the-new-order-/post/4222138/#4222138

SLI is broken right now for this game. You should disable it entirely in my opinion, because the SLI profile just forces single GPU. I don't know how that affects GPU transcoding, because in RAGE, GPU transcoding cannot be used with 2 GPUs active, even if you set single GPU or globally disable SLI using the nvidia control panel.

I've not tried this for Wolfenstein, but for RAGE, I achieve the best performance by doing the following:

1. Disable SLI in nvidia control panel.
2. Disable your 2nd GPU in Windows Device Manager.

I'll be testing more later on.

Cheers. Yeah when I tried getting SLI to play ball in Rage a while back it wouldn't let you select the setting in game and even adding it to a .cfg file didn't work unless you disabled the second card. I'll have a proper play around when I get home.

 

[GavinUK86]

I don't have an ultra setting for the VT cache setting for whatever reason. I own an EVGA GTX 680 2GB model so I'm guessing the VRAM is an issue. Anyone shed some light on this please.

I have a 2gb GPU and I don't have an Ultra VT Cache setting either. It only goes up to High. Maybe you're right.

 

[Morphine_OD]

uninstall and off

Sounds like an overreaction, the game is actually awesome, it's not Serious Sam or Crysis, it's something like Singularity.

 

[TranceKuja]

The game feels very much like RAGE indeed in the sense that changing videosettings actually achieves almost nothing for me. I can set everyting to highest or everything to lowest and there is hardly any difference in performance.

Sadly, it runs like poop even on the lowest settings, which makes me sad, since i can play Battlefield 4 and Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn on max settings and they are generally far better looking games. And the framerate is just as choppy when I put everything on high. Makes no sense to me.

Thankfully the texture pop-in isn't as bad as RAGE, because that made that game unplayable for me. Just wish I vould get the framerate steady, it's all over the place in Wolfenstein.