People seem to forget how demanding Metro Exodus (the enhanced edition) used to be. Max out tessellation and watch that FPS dive faster than a stuka bomber lol. Comparatively for their time, this runs much better for how detailed it looks. Anyways UE5 seems to use very little vram in general across all games so far so if this trend continues then it'll be good news for next gen vram starved 5060-5070 gpus. A great example of how to use this engine in an open world scenario without stutters and great upscalling implementation (even for FSR). Awesome vid man and congrats on 3k 😃🤘
I had some people comment on my video saying the game doesnt look good too haha. My capture is probably not the best quality, but the game looks pretty good, especially the foliage and textures. Foliage is very sharp, a lot less blurry than many other games with dense foliage.
The game looks really good, I'm not sure what some people are on about. The vegetation pop in is the only thing that stands out and there is some glitches and flickering in that military base walls I looked at in this video. As an overall package though I'd say its a very good looking game.
It looks good up close, but when viewing into the distance, it sometimes seems really empty and dull. I'm not sure if I’d prefer a less detailed game but with better overall consistency instead. Running on Epic by the way.
12gb is enough for sure but 8gb GPUs have big issues after some time in game when vram is fully saturated.. I stop playing until patch comes and drivers for my AMDs.. 3080ti is nice but its power hog, 450w is no joke..
anything 8 gb vram has been a 1080p card for a while now, which is why i was always disappointed with the 3070 and never ended up buying one opted for a 2080ti instead. I think the base model 3080 should have had at least 12 gb vram Aswell and I think all cards should have the right amount of vram to begin with and if they want o make another of the same card just make it perform better, better thermals, better overclocking perhaps etc etc but they should all have the right amount of vram and you should have to buy a ti model just to get the least amount of vram you should of already had to begin with. NVidia and vram is a literal rip off, they are stealing money on purpose and there's no need for it. I can only assume they are not very intelligent. anyone could make a better gpu than them if in the same boat.
once they fix the game in about 1-6 months I hope and the mods poor in. co-op+multiplayer in the future(modded or official), throw some bodycam mods at it for the videos, the ai fully working ect. we'll have a banger💥
Btw, motion blur during gameplay is either bugged or disabled by design. You can enable it by tweaking the game's Engine.ini file, by adding: r.MotionBlurQuality=4 r.MotionBlur.Amount=1 r.MotionBlur.TargetFPS=60 👍
Without a doubt, pushing 3440x1440p epic settings dlss balanced, 10gb vram allocation and around 8.5-9gb using atm, just like yours isn't what its using right now but what it has allocated for the whole system. if you got 10-11gb allocated in afterburner/rivatuner monitor, remove atleast 1-2 gbs from that and you got your momentarily usage.
I game at 1440p and just left my 3080Ti behind for this game and a few others thinking I wouldn't be able to run at the settings I wanted. The 7900X3D/4080 combo is amazing but now that these games are out I know the 3080Ti would have still done fine and I am sad. I could have gotten a few more years out of it. Your 1440p results with FSR Framegen would have totally satisfied me. This was also very helpful for my brother who uses a 5950X and a 3090Ti. He is going to be just fine at 1440p. The media fearmongered the specs but anyone who has updated any time in the past few years is fine. While it is CPU demanding most newer CPUs will be fine. Anyone with a decent Ryzen 5000 build and an RTX3060/RX6700 should be able to get okay performance and visuals at 1080p and anyone with a better CPU/GPU combo should do fine at 1440p and that's pretty reasonable really. This is not a high paced multiplayer game.
@@icanseeall-inthisreality I think the 4080 will be good for a while. Video memory was by far my biggest limitation but only for modded games. It was fine for everything else. FWIW the 4080 was $800 which is the same price I got the 3080Ti for.
After playing for a while on a 4080 at 4kDLSS balanced with FrameGen i got 14 GB of VRAM usage and i think i also had the occasional VRAM-related hitch... So it's not that great regarding VRAM management. i also had a bug where FrameGen would basically decrease my performance below performance without framegen and on the graph it looked as if it was turning itself on and off constantly. Happened when i got attacked by a bloodsucker in a cave.
Seen your measures were largely taken without framegen and solely with FSR framegen i want to correct myself. It rather seems that DLSS framegen causes issues for me with either VRAM, framepacing, loading stutter or all 3 of them. I just did some running around with only DLSS quality at 4k and although framerate smoothness was definitely lower, the game fellt way better to control than at 100 fps due to framegen. I actually would enable framegen for scenario's where there is no gameplay but just walking around and being CPU bottlenecked by NPCS's, it just seems however that framegen is so counterproductive in almost any other scenario where input latency matters.
Do you have DLSS FG set to Auto? Same thing happened to me. I found FSR FG can generate more frames but for whatever reason FSR FG wouldnt work on my 4090, only DLSS FG does. On my other cards 7900XTX/3080TI and 6800XT FSR FG works great.
Great video and analysis. What is that lighting phenomenon at 5:22 where the closer you get to the warehouse, you go from being able to see inside to it turning pitch black. Is that an engine issue? Or can the devs reprogram this?
I play this game on a. 2080 super founders edition, i7 11700f, 16 gb of ram, DLSS quality and far frame gen, Epic preset, at 1080p. I actually get better performance because this game is cpu limited. I average 80-110 fps game looks great and plays great.
3080ti really has come out as the champ of that series of card. Like you didnt get the 24g use of the 3090 and would want to upgrade at 50 series anyway. So I think depending on price the 80ti has lasted really well compared to the 3090. Makes me wonder as well is the 90 series ever worth it for gaming. The 3090 and 4090 never utilized any of that vram and my 4080 has had no issues on anything even at 4k??
The 90 class of RTX 3000 was very different from that of RTX 4000. The 3080/Ti/3090 were practically the same thing. 4080 and 4090 however theres a much bigger difference and by the sounds of it 5080 and 5090 will be even more different.
Not even been much of a difference in quite a few games i've compared recently between the 4080 super & 4090 That's why I'd never pay close to 2 grand for it, if the 5080 Super has more vram i'd look at that and also see what AMD are doing, if there is a flagship at all The devs don't really optimize games well anyway to get a full use of the 4090 so i'd feel i've wasted an extra grand I'd be pretty pissed off tbh looking at some of these benchmarks with the 4090 & thinking it should be doing a lot better than the 4080 That's how I think
games is awesome, the big issue here is people thinking that xx60 cards can do 1440p or 4k its juust bizarre people think thats possible, they are 1080p cards. xx70 1440p and xx80xx90 are 4k. if you think otherwise il fight u irl srsly, nvidia even says so themselfes and people need to lower their excpectations when buying budget cards aka xx50 or xx60 cards. Im playing all high, framgen and DLSS DLAA on 4k downscaled to 1080p and im having 85-90 avg with 60 fps lows but thats cause i have 16 gb ram i need 32, and thats on a 2080 super i even got a video to prove it.
Very impressed with the performance of the 3080Ti here. I think the devs have done a pretty good job optimizing GPU performance and vram management but CPU optimizations should be a priority imo, and bug fixes.
Wait, is 400+w gpu or whole system draw? Because if its just the gpu, oh boy. Undervolted the heck out of my 3080 ti, stays at 300w max, its in like top 3% on userbenchmark...
Metro Exodus does look better. I'm disappointed with Stalker 2 graphics. And I'm playing on 7900XT and Ryzen 7800x3d. But games is awesome and I recommend it. Especially if you are a fan of previous Stalker games.
@@TerraWare Atomic Heart's RT is hardly worth checking out. Typical UE4 RT implementation, known as very hard on both GPU and CPU with an average visual gain, and on the lower RT settings a decrease in quality compared to off.
UE5 is very efficient when it comes to VRAM usage. Texture quality is really good here. I'd say it is on par with the most detailed recent games. RAM usage in this game is also pretty low - just about 5-8GB. Many people claim that you need 32GB of RAM to run this game, since this is what the devs put in the required PC specs. But in reality 16GB is more than enough. CPU performance though is really poor. I think R5 5700X should still be fast enough to provide locked 60 fps experience, taking into account consoles have weaker CPUs and offer "Performance mode", targeted at 60 fps.
@@MasterCorvus I've seen up to 13GB on my 4090 which is why I wanted to play it for a bit on the 3080Ti to see if it would keep going up but it was pretty consistent for the hour or two I played it.
@@TerraWare I had the highest RAM usage in that hub area / where the bar is not far from beginning of the game. Lots of NPCs my 5900x is really struggling there....avg around 48 fps no matter the settings and resolution.
12GB of vram isn't enough for me, no one should be buying anything under 16GB imo If I can't buy a GPU with more than 16GB next Gen then I won't bother
@@TerraWare When even the Playstation has just under 16GB with shared memory, I think it's crazy how they are still making 8GB My old 3070 8GB felt on the brink years ago at 1440p & pretty sure it's even worse now with all the newer games. 12GB like Stalker 2 it's fine but it's going to be on the brink with others Like you say 12GB on PC hardware should be the entry level, some less educated ppl might buy an 8GB and then find out later it's not enough for their needs
What I am interested in is the Intel cards, it's nice to see they have 12GB min I think and then the 16GB, I'm curious to see how well Intel progress with those cards Would be nice if they could put some pressure on Nvidia but likely need one more generation for them to be more of a serious contender against AMD and Nvidia
it has to do with consoles, games will be optimized for those first and that usually means videocard memory usage will remain low for quite some time still. Except of course in cases where we're moving to higher resolutions such as 4 and 8k
@maroosagaming Nah. Not even close. Id say that title goes to Silent Hill 2. This game runs miles better. You can see it in this video, despite being cpu heavy at least it doesn't have stutter issues and you can run it comfortably at 4K 60 on a mid/high end GPU
People seem to forget how demanding Metro Exodus (the enhanced edition) used to be. Max out tessellation and watch that FPS dive faster than a stuka bomber lol. Comparatively for their time, this runs much better for how detailed it looks. Anyways UE5 seems to use very little vram in general across all games so far so if this trend continues then it'll be good news for next gen vram starved 5060-5070 gpus. A great example of how to use this engine in an open world scenario without stutters and great upscalling implementation (even for FSR). Awesome vid man and congrats on 3k 😃🤘
"FPS dive faster than a stuka bomber lol"
Haha I like that.
I had some people comment on my video saying the game doesnt look good too haha. My capture is probably not the best quality, but the game looks pretty good, especially the foliage and textures.
Foliage is very sharp, a lot less blurry than many other games with dense foliage.
The game looks really good, I'm not sure what some people are on about. The vegetation pop in is the only thing that stands out and there is some glitches and flickering in that military base walls I looked at in this video. As an overall package though I'd say its a very good looking game.
It looks good up close, but when viewing into the distance, it sometimes seems really empty and dull. I'm not sure if I’d prefer a less detailed game but with better overall consistency instead. Running on Epic by the way.
excellent. Very good news. good work. Thanks
12gb is enough for sure but 8gb GPUs have big issues after some time in game when vram is fully saturated.. I stop playing until patch comes and drivers for my AMDs.. 3080ti is nice but its power hog, 450w is no joke..
it's because he has the overclocked ROG STRIX model, my TUF OC doesn't go past 350w at 2050mhz
anything 8 gb vram has been a 1080p card for a while now, which is why i was always disappointed with the 3070 and never ended up buying one opted for a 2080ti instead. I think the base model 3080 should have had at least 12 gb vram Aswell and I think all cards should have the right amount of vram to begin with and if they want o make another of the same card just make it perform better, better thermals, better overclocking perhaps etc etc but they should all have the right amount of vram and you should have to buy a ti model just to get the least amount of vram you should of already had to begin with. NVidia and vram is a literal rip off, they are stealing money on purpose and there's no need for it. I can only assume they are not very intelligent. anyone could make a better gpu than them if in the same boat.
once they fix the game in about 1-6 months I hope and the mods poor in. co-op+multiplayer in the future(modded or official), throw some bodycam mods at it for the videos, the ai fully working ect. we'll have a banger💥
Btw, motion blur during gameplay is either bugged or disabled by design. You can enable it by tweaking the game's Engine.ini file, by adding:
r.MotionBlurQuality=4
r.MotionBlur.Amount=1
r.MotionBlur.TargetFPS=60
👍
is it per pixel you know? Im not the biggest fan of MB but in some cases it can look alright
@@TerraWareit is per pixel. It’s only active during cutscenes currently. It also seems to be bugged in general right now.
Without a doubt, pushing 3440x1440p epic settings dlss balanced, 10gb vram allocation and around 8.5-9gb using atm, just like yours isn't what its using right now but what it has allocated for the whole system.
if you got 10-11gb allocated in afterburner/rivatuner monitor, remove atleast 1-2 gbs from that and you got your momentarily usage.
I game at 1440p and just left my 3080Ti behind for this game and a few others thinking I wouldn't be able to run at the settings I wanted. The 7900X3D/4080 combo is amazing but now that these games are out I know the 3080Ti would have still done fine and I am sad. I could have gotten a few more years out of it. Your 1440p results with FSR Framegen would have totally satisfied me. This was also very helpful for my brother who uses a 5950X and a 3090Ti. He is going to be just fine at 1440p. The media fearmongered the specs but anyone who has updated any time in the past few years is fine. While it is CPU demanding most newer CPUs will be fine. Anyone with a decent Ryzen 5000 build and an RTX3060/RX6700 should be able to get okay performance and visuals at 1080p and anyone with a better CPU/GPU combo should do fine at 1440p and that's pretty reasonable really. This is not a high paced multiplayer game.
Succumbing to the media hype, it happens, may it be a lesson for you, some cards do hold their own for a while.
its best to have 16gb vram now either way, i hope you can get a good few years out of your 4080.
@@icanseeall-inthisreality I think the 4080 will be good for a while. Video memory was by far my biggest limitation but only for modded games. It was fine for everything else. FWIW the 4080 was $800 which is the same price I got the 3080Ti for.
You should have waited for 5000 series at least. But hey, whats done is done.
After playing for a while on a 4080 at 4kDLSS balanced with FrameGen i got 14 GB of VRAM usage and i think i also had the occasional VRAM-related hitch...
So it's not that great regarding VRAM management.
i also had a bug where FrameGen would basically decrease my performance below performance without framegen and on the graph it looked as if it was turning itself on and off constantly.
Happened when i got attacked by a bloodsucker in a cave.
Seen your measures were largely taken without framegen and solely with FSR framegen i want to correct myself.
It rather seems that DLSS framegen causes issues for me with either VRAM, framepacing, loading stutter or all 3 of them.
I just did some running around with only DLSS quality at 4k and although framerate smoothness was definitely lower, the game fellt way better to control than at 100 fps due to framegen.
I actually would enable framegen for scenario's where there is no gameplay but just walking around and being CPU bottlenecked by NPCS's, it just seems however that framegen is so counterproductive in almost any other scenario where input latency matters.
Do you have DLSS FG set to Auto? Same thing happened to me. I found FSR FG can generate more frames but for whatever reason FSR FG wouldnt work on my 4090, only DLSS FG does. On my other cards 7900XTX/3080TI and 6800XT FSR FG works great.
Great video and analysis. What is that lighting phenomenon at 5:22 where the closer you get to the warehouse, you go from being able to see inside to it turning pitch black. Is that an engine issue? Or can the devs reprogram this?
I think it's a lumen thing, probably needs some tweaking by the devs.
i recommend watching a few optimization videos on youtube, you can get 10-15 fps more without seeing a difference in the graphics
Those Vegetations popping off is really killing the immersion
It can be immersion breaking yea
Спасибо
I play this game on a. 2080 super founders edition, i7 11700f, 16 gb of ram, DLSS quality and far frame gen, Epic preset, at 1080p. I actually get better performance because this game is cpu limited. I average 80-110 fps game looks great and plays great.
Throw FSR frame gen w/ dlss quality at 4k im running fairly well now at high some epic settings
Yeah tried it at 9:40. 90 to 110 fps. It was really good
3080ti really has come out as the champ of that series of card. Like you didnt get the 24g use of the 3090 and would want to upgrade at 50 series anyway. So I think depending on price the 80ti has lasted really well compared to the 3090.
Makes me wonder as well is the 90 series ever worth it for gaming. The 3090 and 4090 never utilized any of that vram and my 4080 has had no issues on anything even at 4k??
The 90 class of RTX 3000 was very different from that of RTX 4000. The 3080/Ti/3090 were practically the same thing. 4080 and 4090 however theres a much bigger difference and by the sounds of it 5080 and 5090 will be even more different.
Not even been much of a difference in quite a few games i've compared recently between the 4080 super & 4090
That's why I'd never pay close to 2 grand for it, if the 5080 Super has more vram i'd look at that and also see what AMD are doing, if there is a flagship at all
The devs don't really optimize games well anyway to get a full use of the 4090 so i'd feel i've wasted an extra grand
I'd be pretty pissed off tbh looking at some of these benchmarks with the 4090 & thinking it should be doing a lot better than the 4080
That's how I think
3080 Ti awesome ! :DD
This game doesn’t run that poorly, the only letdown is the typical ue5 cpu bottleneck in npc dense areas. If they address this I’d have 0 issues.
Yup exactly
games is awesome, the big issue here is people thinking that xx60 cards can do 1440p or 4k its juust bizarre people think thats possible, they are 1080p cards.
xx70 1440p and xx80xx90 are 4k. if you think otherwise il fight u irl srsly, nvidia even says so themselfes and people need to lower their excpectations when buying budget cards aka xx50 or xx60 cards.
Im playing all high, framgen and DLSS DLAA on 4k downscaled to 1080p and im having 85-90 avg with 60 fps lows but thats cause i have 16 gb ram i need 32, and thats on a 2080 super i even got a video to prove it.
Please test 6800xt, 5900x compare to 7800x3d
Very impressed with the performance of the 3080Ti here. I think the devs have done a pretty good job optimizing GPU performance and vram management but CPU optimizations should be a priority imo, and bug fixes.
Wait, is 400+w gpu or whole system draw? Because if its just the gpu, oh boy. Undervolted the heck out of my 3080 ti, stays at 300w max, its in like top 3% on userbenchmark...
@TheGoodDoctorSRB GPU. Its overclocked with 450 watt bios
i play it on a normal 3080 with a 7800x3d. i really like it but the crashes every 15 mins basically makes it unplayable
I only had crashes when overclocking the GPU on my 4090. Running it stock was fine. I've been playing it for over 12 hours that way just fine.
@@TerraWare ahhhhhh. i overclocked my card via the nvidia app. i will test it. thank you :)
450w 😢
Glad didn't buy it then, it'd sound like a jet engine, while turning my room into a sauna lmao.
Metro Exodus does look better. I'm disappointed
with Stalker 2 graphics. And I'm playing on 7900XT and Ryzen 7800x3d. But games is awesome and I recommend it. Especially if you are a fan of previous Stalker games.
The game looks amazing... But please, can I have my ray traced muzzle flash and flashlight shadows, pretty please? 🥹
Seriously. I hope all the RT stuff comes relatively soon unlike Atomic Heart for example that took so long I havent even checked it out again lol
@@TerraWare Atomic Heart's RT is hardly worth checking out. Typical UE4 RT implementation, known as very hard on both GPU and CPU with an average visual gain, and on the lower RT settings a decrease in quality compared to off.
Yea Goodluck your pc is going to go nuclear with raytracing with this game 😂
Why dont u show us the 4K Native Epic results?
I tried it. It was in the mid 30s
Nearly 400w on gpu is insane
Not really for a high end GPU, both 7900XTX and 4090 can pull that and more.
Bro try test r7 3700x
My game is using 26 gigs of ram
I will stay @ 1080p anything else your compensating for something... more pixels = fuck all!
@Gamingxoxo-mv5pi You do you. That's what PC gaming all about.
UE5 is very efficient when it comes to VRAM usage. Texture quality is really good here. I'd say it is on par with the most detailed recent games.
RAM usage in this game is also pretty low - just about 5-8GB. Many people claim that you need 32GB of RAM to run this game, since this is what the devs put in the required PC specs. But in reality 16GB is more than enough.
CPU performance though is really poor. I think R5 5700X should still be fast enough to provide locked 60 fps experience, taking into account consoles have weaker CPUs and offer "Performance mode", targeted at 60 fps.
Am wondering if I should make a CPU comparison wanted to check my 3700X.
I had well over 20GB of RAM usage, so I guess it's not the same for everyone.
@@MasterCorvus I've seen up to 13GB on my 4090 which is why I wanted to play it for a bit on the 3080Ti to see if it would keep going up but it was pretty consistent for the hour or two I played it.
@@TerraWare I had the highest RAM usage in that hub area / where the bar is not far from beginning of the game. Lots of NPCs my 5900x is really struggling there....avg around 48 fps no matter the settings and resolution.
@@MasterCorvus Yes that area is particularly heavy.
Yea f this game you need the fastest cpu in the world to keep fps above 60 that is bull 😤
Agreed
12GB of vram isn't enough for me, no one should be buying anything under 16GB imo
If I can't buy a GPU with more than 16GB next Gen then I won't bother
Going forward 12 should be the minimum but rumors are we are still getting 8GB entry cards.
@@TerraWare When even the Playstation has just under 16GB with shared memory, I think it's crazy how they are still making 8GB
My old 3070 8GB felt on the brink years ago at 1440p & pretty sure it's even worse now with all the newer games.
12GB like Stalker 2 it's fine but it's going to be on the brink with others
Like you say 12GB on PC hardware should be the entry level, some less educated ppl might buy an 8GB and then find out later it's not enough for their needs
What I am interested in is the Intel cards, it's nice to see they have 12GB min I think and then the 16GB, I'm curious to see how well Intel progress with those cards
Would be nice if they could put some pressure on Nvidia but likely need one more generation for them to be more of a serious contender against AMD and Nvidia
L take
it has to do with consoles, games will be optimized for those first and that usually means videocard memory usage will remain low for quite some time still. Except of course in cases where we're moving to higher resolutions such as 4 and 8k
12gb 24 gb 48gb does not matter if a game is badly made as this
this is the newest worst optimised game to exist
@maroosagaming Nah. Not even close. Id say that title goes to Silent Hill 2. This game runs miles better. You can see it in this video, despite being cpu heavy at least it doesn't have stutter issues and you can run it comfortably at 4K 60 on a mid/high end GPU
The game runs fine on 12gb GPUs . Only the 8gb GPUs sucks on certain areas where hd textures loads in