I mean, this game dev so far did quite properly on optimization if I'm being honest, I already tested it on my 4070 at 2k and 4090 at 4k, with 75% DLSS + FG, and everything went cinematic, I got avg 60+ fps, compares to my same specs on CP2077, which is relatively an old game with last gen engine and graphics, I would say Game Science has given us a lot, considering they are much smaller in size compared to the Polish one. And I really appreciate they did confidently and honestly providing lots of in-game trailers and eventually a benchmark tool before releasing the game, which many other game devs should really consider doing the same for their customers, so gamers would know what they are looking at and decide to buy or not.
@@eclisis5080 In CP2077 2.0, I got 40ish fps with PTRT on and DLSS off, 60ish with DLSS on, 90ish with DLSS + FG on at 4k, I mean I have quite high end spec as 4090+14900k myself, maybe my 4090 went wrong then. And again, it is not about CP2077, I brought it up to say the least Wukong got quite optimized since it has possibly the same performance as playing CP2077 with the same spec, and it is based on UE5, which quite some game devs recently had their games released, but did not do their optimization properly on this engine.
@@JLeeCNthat’s incorrect. DLSS options have fixed percentage no matter the resolution that you have. 67% for quality, 58% for balance and 50% for performance… i really don’t know where you got the 62% from… some games with FSR you can choose exactly the percentage…
@@vaggeliskosiatzis5487 It literally specifies when you're in performance mode, balanced, quality, etc...and 62 - 66+ literally says quality mode. You're not sure where i got it from? Maybe if you had tried the benchmark before opening your mouth? Lol
In Unreal the Cinematic setting is not usually for games, you should try the one below with max RT, DLSS 50% + FG at 4k, this should be the right configuration for a 4090.
Crazy that they showed this game years ago before the 4090 was even out Running on a 2080ti and a 3090, and as you can see the 4090 can hardly handle 60 frames in an upscaled 4k experience if the render resolution is at 50% that means its upscaling from 1440p or1080p. So that means once again for high-end users we have to upgrade to a 5090 if we want to continue to play games at 4k native in the future. This always happens when the cards reach about 2 years old. That's why it's better to play at Low- mid-range like the 2060s, 3060s, and 4060s /4070s those cards last much longer because those users are at 1080p to 1440p. It's the Life of High-end users if we want to stay at the top it becomes an endless cycle of Buying at a High cost and Selling at a loss every 2 years just to stay at the top. While 1060 -4060 users are ok with playing at medium settings at 1080p as long as it runs decent. So I will be selling my 4090 in the coming weeks and keep my 14900k and I'm sure Bang4buck will do the same lol.
To clarify your confusion: You did 50%TSR Upscaling in 1st run. Quality level corresponds to 66.7%. You did 50% DLSS Upscaling in 2nd run. With FG enabled. FG yields around 60-70% more frames in this game, as far as I could see. More than usual I think. With FG disabled, your 2 results should be similar.
RTX 4090 / 7800X3D / 32GB 6000 MHz CL 30 DDR5 Cinematic settings with full Ray Tracing at 4K, 89% DLSS FG ON Average 74 FPS / Max. 89 FPS / Min. 63 FPS Game looks insane on my Samsung S95C.
The benchmark looks fantastic on my QD-OLED ultrawide. The ray tracing doesn't seem worth the performance loss. Maybe ue5 is so good that the differences are not as noticeable. I'm more amazed by the low vram usage.
I found my sweetspot to be 4k resolution, all settings on cinematic, Ray Tracing very high, Vsync with Gsync, Super Resolution set to 85, DlSS with Framegen on. My average is 78 fps with a low of 65fps. It looks amazing on Oled. I hardly see any sign of artifacts with Framegen on. Game Science has done an outstanding job with this benchmark.
@@nicknickname353 78 fps with FG is closer to 51-52fps native snd the FG makes the 51-52fps feel muuuuch smoother. Elden Ring fPs is around 50 fps on console, Bloodborne was sub 30fps, Sekiro was around 40-45fps. Though as a 4090 owner I prefer playing all my games in minimum 120fps, so I will run the game in 4K DLSS3-P and hope I get at least 90+ lol.
@@XxoxX-pc This man is lying from his a*s the game hasn't even been released yet, and you're d*ckriding it. I have a 4090 and tested it for hours, and I can say the performance isn't great at all. The developers need to address these issues before making bold claims.
Dude this game looks absolutely incredible. This is the type of design I love when it comes to a game. Has a special look to it. Also the super resolution slider it told you it was on dlss performance so im guessing when you slide it. It will change to quality or whatever you slide it to.
Yeah that 50% is tied to your dlss so 50% of you know running at 4K we're probably take it down to somewhere close to 1080p or just slightly above it so you can imagine what performance would be if set at 75% or 1440p and 85% for Ultrawide
50% DLSS is rather low res which is why it looks blury. I think 66% equals to "Quality" while 50% equals to "Performance" (i.e. 1080p internal resolution)
I tried to get this benchmark into CPU limit by setting it to 25 % of 720p at maximum RT settings. But it wouldn't budge, it remained GPU limited. However, the game ran slower at the same 25 % of 720p when the raytracing was disabled but still GPU limited. My guess is that NVIDIA's RT solution replaces Lumen and NVIDIA's solution shows higher gains with resolution decreases...
4k at 100% slider it could mean resolution is 1:1 aka native 4k, no upscale/downscale, just like in Hitman WOA game cmiiw. if you slide it down, the internal image will render at lower resolution (better performance, but less image clarity) then upscaled. So, DLSS is absolutely needed even with 4090 to run on 4k max +RT + frame gen off.
Just for the sake of comparison, I have a 4090 but my cpu is a 12700k. I ran the exact benchmarks as in this video. The first one I've got an average of 62fps (3 less than the 14900ks), and on the second run with frame gen and dlss, I got 103fps average (4 less fps). So even on dlss performance, the difference between a 12700k running at 4.9ghz is very small compared to the 14900ks at 5,9ghz.
@@CyberJedi1 yeah I got a 12700k and 4080. At Recommended settings with everything maxed out and FG Im getting around 75+ fps. This is at 4k by the way.
i understand the amount of detail and image quality that this game offers, but to spend 1600 dollars on the highest end card just to get 60 fps - 70 fps, is insane to me.
Do not do more then high settings for lighting and foliage, if you go higher then that on those settings it will tank performance with barely a difference in visual fidelity
I get 34fps at 1440p max settings (7800X3D + 4080S) and 51fps at 1080p. DLSS is a must in this game if you want to get over 60fps. The game looks and runs better on the recommended settings though, I get 78fps at 4K DLSS performance + FG. Edit- I think the resolution scale in this game isnt working correctly. I got 148fps at 1440p DLSS 75% resolution scale and maxed out settings plus FG, but then I started testing different resolution scale settings and now I only have 102fps with the same settings instead of 148fps. The game use excessive oversharpening filter regardles of which DLSS / TSR / FSR settings you will use. 4K + DLSS performance downscaled (DLDSR 80% smoothing filter) looks wayyy better but I can still see that oversharpening. I absolutely hate oversharpening because it gives the image the look of oil paint.
I don't see much difference between rtx on cinematic preset vs rtx off cinematic preset. But the fps difference is very evident. On my 4080 super I am averaging 70 fps with cinematic preset and rtx off. Dlss on with 89% super resolution and frame gen on. I feel most the devs are treating upscaling + frame gen as a way to achieve 60 fps. Rather they should develop games to run at 60 fps without frame gen.
@@prashanthdoshi9926 when I compare the graphics of rdr2 with black myth wukong. Rdr 2 still looks okay till date and performs really good. Black myth does look better than rdr2 but the amount of fps difference does not justify.
@@amanaditya6895 that ue5 for you , it needs optimization from developers side to cut out in built engine things that are not required to run the game . Ue5 by default uses all things of engine , if specifically not disabled by devs and optimised
@@amanaditya6895 do you have any type of flicker with frame gen on?I have flickering with my 4080 on Oled when i turn fg on and dlss is above perfomance,at 50% it doesn’t have any but the graphics are blurry at that bar.
@Bang4BuckPCGamer when are you selling your 4090? its almost that time , us high end users got to stay at the top.. the sooner you sell it the more return you will make for the 5090. I'm thinking of selling first thing in September. Before all the Noise and Buzz start on the 5090 and everyone starts panick selling . Sooner you sell the less competition /more return. I think Ill buy a 3060 as a backup GPU while I wait for a 5090. Dont get me wrong we all can wait before upgrading because DLSS and Frame-Gen extends the life of all GPU's but if you like to game native , then we all have to upgrade.
I always sell when it's the most convenient for me. Until there is a launch date for the RTX 5090 I don't have a date in mind, but I always move on my hardware before the new stuff gets here. I have multiple PC's so I would have zero down time, and be very comfortable while waiting.
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer Sounds like a plan, if you like a return don’t wait too long we never know what the market might do if you have a chance I would say go for it, better to the 5090 first , you could always sell the 4090 after especially since you have multiple PCs or you can sell now while you can get a high return. Idk if I can wait until the date is firm but at least a confirmed release window or month and that’s enough for me. It would suck if we sell our most powerful card and the replacement don’t come until spring of next year. That would be suck.
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer I never said you didnt know what you're doing or anything like that, I was talking in general as high end users , I have been upgrading and using my computers since the late 90s . So I have experience and was talking from experience, wasn't trying to be condescending
also no combat, particle effects shown in a benchmark is kind of odd usually you'd expect worst case scenario but whatever i guess its better then nothing
I tried the benchmark with a 3060 ti, r5 1600 and 16gb ram i managed to get 52fps average on 4k dlss performance high settings + lsfg 2.3 2x. I've never seen a game so realistic ! I also tried with tsr performance+ FG it did 56 fps and with fsr performance + FG : 59 fps. Dlss + lsfg looked awesome and fsr looked the worse ( as usual) with tsr in between( quality speaking). So i would probably play the game at 4k, tsr performance, high, FG + lsfg 2x if the inpout lag isn't to big. If it is, i would play at 4k dlss performance high settings + lsfg 2x or 3x. But tsr + FG felt really like the sweat spot, I suggest you chech this out ( for those who have not a rtx 40XX). And for the AMD fanboys who praise VRAM like god, 8 gb VRAM is absolutly not an issue with 4k tsr performance+ FG high settings the vram usage was at 5.9gb.
Would love to know what dlss dll version this demo ships with as I’ve never seen tsr looking better than dlss even at dlss “performance” at 4K as 50% is basically the performance settings on dlss so upscaling from 1080p to 4K, try swapping out dlss dll to 3.7.1 if it’s an older one.
Significant fps drops when in this (crappy) benchmark appears any character. In other games with benchmark there is at least action. Here? Only "Cinematic camera moving"... If those first two characters in benchmark appeared in one time on screen & started fighting with each other (for example) FPS would go down hill drastically...
I am getting 100fps on my 4090/13900K at 3440x1440 at Cinematic, RT-VeryHIgh and DSLL-Quality which is 75% super resolution and FG-On. I thought you needed to exit the game and relaunch each time you make changes to the graphic settings.
I have a 4090 with dlaa which is 100% the game only runs at around 20 - 30 fps with no framegen he never tried native if you notice it's running performance dlss
I couldn't run it native, there was no option to disable super resolution sampling. I got 68fps with no ray tracing at 4k with FSR it was over 100 with frame generation (7900xtx 12700k)
only more than 100fps you say , lmao , what do you expect with that insane graphics quality? also on cinematic preset im getting 65 fps at 4k , cinematic preset , dlss performance (50%) and raytracing max on a 4080 , 65 fps is more than playable , you dont need 120fps on a souls game and keep in mind that raytracing on this game is insane , it has raytraced shadows , reflections, ambient oclusion and also on lighting , so thanks if i can run it at 60fps on a 4080 and from my testing , ultra preset looks the same as cinematic (i cant see the difference) and you gain 10fps
I didn't say that so why even make that up? I said "107 FPS average, 84FPS minimum and 128 FPS maximum, Not too bad" Some how you took this conclusion as a negative.
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer ya i see that any way the TSR 50% look awful... the water was so pixelated and sparkling with white dots, eww :P too bad u didn't do only DLSS without FG :) that game looks awesome, downloading the test myself to do some 1440P testing with my 4070TI. defiantly a game to re-play with a true 4K with 6090 in 2-3 years from now. ( i think 5090 will be good for 4K DLSS Q)
My result： 5700X+3080ti desktop 2560x1440p All effect Ultra high setting Ultra high Ray tracing Low motion blur 75% DLSS Frame generation off 55avg fps
100 percent is native lol DLAA is also native 66 percent is quality 57 balanced 50 is perf If it’s like remnant 2 low settings look like high on ue4 Medium looks like high High is ultra Very high and cinematic are Uber settings Most realistic settings for none 4090 users will be medium/high raytracing medium or off with dlss quality at 1440p Or 4k dlss perf
Tried this tool on my RTX 4070 TI Super @1440p, Cinematic Preset, DLSS, FG, RT Very High and got 89 FPS Tried this tool on my RX 6700 XT @1440p, Very High Preset, FSR, FG, No RT and got 58 FPS Also tried the RTX 4070 TI Super @1440p, Very High Preset, DLSS, FG, RT High and got 115 FPS
Yeah, it's like really calming 😄 The videos are super neatly done as well. Love the thumbnails too, like the GPU being used, I can immediately scan through Nvidia/AMD.
This is just mental... I mean, when not even a 4000$ pc can run it native, without any upscaling tecnology is just crazy to me... Yeah, it has fancy graphics and whatever (yet not one of the best that I have ever seen, also it got an downgrade from their first trailers back couple of years ago)... I tried the benchmark as well, got an ryzen 5 5600X and a 6700XT, with no raytracing at all, FSR and framegen enabled I barelly get 50 fps at 1080p... They should really stop making unoptimized games, or better say, optimize them just with upscaling in mind..
because they want to milk your money to buy a new flagship gpu every new AAAAAA games released. btw you play on older systems, of course it will run barely, doesnt mean the game is unoptimize.
People might see the RTX 4090 running at around 100 FPS with DLSS and frame generation and think the game isn't well-optimized. But they need to remember that this is with all settings maxed out and full ray tracing enabled, which is very demanding. Take *Alan Wake* as an example. On consoles, the game runs on a mix of medium to low settings, and in some cases, even lower than what you can choose on a PC. Yet, the game still looks great. The real issue is that developers should rethink how they label these settings. Instead of just calling them "high" or "ultra," it might be clearer to use terms like "Performance Mode" or "Fidelity Mode." This way, it’s easier for players to understand that ultra settings don't always mean significantly better visuals but can greatly impact performance. Developers also often assume that PC gamers know how to tweak these settings themselves for the best performance, but that's not always the case. It would be helpful if games offered a "Console Mode" setting on PCs, which would match the visual quality and performance balance that consoles have. This would give PC gamers a good starting point, combining great visuals with smooth performance. And then they can customize from there.
I try it 4k, Dlss quality (70%), fg on, rt off, Cinematic quality 100+ fps average With rtx 4090/ i7 12700k Its the way for play, rt is too much expensiv ! It may be the most demanding game with alan wake 2 for an rtx 4090, very poor optimisation, 4090 is 5% of players ....
Hmm This might be the first actual game enviroment with big open world rendering (Forest, huge draw distance in the end of the benchmark) in unreal engine 5 is it not? I mean not a UE5 demo of a forest but an actual game enviroment and graphics you can expect in the game.
This game is good bud china quality oprimalization is the worst i have ever seen in my life ….. this is biger killer of gpu than crysis when it came out
Black Myth Wukong Benchmarks AMD 7900 XTX VS RTX 4090 ua-cam.com/video/n4PCJbuJlyY/v-deo.html
I mean, this game dev so far did quite properly on optimization if I'm being honest, I already tested it on my 4070 at 2k and 4090 at 4k, with 75% DLSS + FG, and everything went cinematic, I got avg 60+ fps, compares to my same specs on CP2077, which is relatively an old game with last gen engine and graphics, I would say Game Science has given us a lot, considering they are much smaller in size compared to the Polish one.
And I really appreciate they did confidently and honestly providing lots of in-game trailers and eventually a benchmark tool before releasing the game, which many other game devs should really consider doing the same for their customers, so gamers would know what they are looking at and decide to buy or not.
4k with raytracing is always gonna need DLSS, are you serious, this game has about the same performance has Cyberpunk with the 4090
@@eclisis5080 Considering it is based on UE5, so new engine and better graphics, think again?
@@cheungchingtong Cyberpunk gets the same frame rate in native 4k with max raytracing as this benchmark, I mean you can see on his channel
@@eclisis5080 In CP2077 2.0, I got 40ish fps with PTRT on and DLSS off, 60ish with DLSS on, 90ish with DLSS + FG on at 4k, I mean I have quite high end spec as 4090+14900k myself, maybe my 4090 went wrong then. And again, it is not about CP2077, I brought it up to say the least Wukong got quite optimized since it has possibly the same performance as playing CP2077 with the same spec, and it is based on UE5, which quite some game devs recently had their games released, but did not do their optimization properly on this engine.
very happy ❤
50% is dlss performance
Correct, if you slide it across you can see the it scaling name change. Push it to 62 and it says DLSS Quality
@@digzee Ain't DLSS Quality 66.667%?
@@Z3t487 Quality ranges from 62 - 66+
@@JLeeCNthat’s incorrect. DLSS options have fixed percentage no matter the resolution that you have. 67% for quality, 58% for balance and 50% for performance… i really don’t know where you got the 62% from… some games with FSR you can choose exactly the percentage…
@@vaggeliskosiatzis5487 It literally specifies when you're in performance mode, balanced, quality, etc...and 62 - 66+ literally says quality mode. You're not sure where i got it from? Maybe if you had tried the benchmark before opening your mouth? Lol
In Unreal the Cinematic setting is not usually for games, you should try the one below with max RT, DLSS 50% + FG at 4k, this should be the right configuration for a 4090.
Eh, DLSS performance mode is a bit soft. RT low plus DLSS 67% looks pretty good at 4K with a 4090.
dlss 75% + FG at 4k only for guys with 4090 for stable 60
Crazy that they showed this game years ago before the 4090 was even out Running on a 2080ti and a 3090, and as you can see the 4090 can hardly handle 60 frames in an upscaled 4k experience if the render resolution is at 50% that means its upscaling from 1440p or1080p. So that means once again for high-end users we have to upgrade to a 5090 if we want to continue to play games at 4k native in the future. This always happens when the cards reach about 2 years old. That's why it's better to play at Low- mid-range like the 2060s, 3060s, and 4060s /4070s those cards last much longer because those users are at 1080p to 1440p.
It's the Life of High-end users if we want to stay at the top it becomes an endless cycle of Buying at a High cost and Selling at a loss every 2 years just to stay at the top. While 1060 -4060 users are ok with playing at medium settings at 1080p as long as it runs decent. So I will be selling my 4090 in the coming weeks and keep my 14900k and I'm sure Bang4buck will do the same lol.
Yo quiero jugar 8k y no puedo . Vere si me hago sli de la 5090
It will still look good with dlss quality bro, native isn’t always the way and the difference ain’t night and day
4090 should still perform good with dlss quality in the coming years.. 6090 would be the more realistic approach for an upgrade
To clarify your confusion:
You did 50%TSR Upscaling in 1st run. Quality level corresponds to 66.7%.
You did 50% DLSS Upscaling in 2nd run. With FG enabled.
FG yields around 60-70% more frames in this game, as far as I could see. More than usual I think. With FG disabled, your 2 results should be similar.
RTX 4090 / 7800X3D / 32GB 6000 MHz CL 30 DDR5
Cinematic settings with full Ray Tracing at 4K, 89% DLSS FG ON
Average 74 FPS / Max. 89 FPS / Min. 63 FPS
Game looks insane on my Samsung S95C.
Frame gen improves latency as much as 50% for me in similar set up. How much latency is improved when using frame gen for you?
💪
Bro ran both benchmarks at 1080p upscaled to 4K.
If you are not interested in dlss you can set dlss to 100% so that the DLAA option is given to you
DLAA is between 90 and 100. looks best without RT (set to off). Around 80fps with a 4090.
The benchmark looks fantastic on my QD-OLED ultrawide. The ray tracing doesn't seem worth the performance loss. Maybe ue5 is so good that the differences are not as noticeable. I'm more amazed by the low vram usage.
I found my sweetspot to be 4k resolution, all settings on cinematic, Ray Tracing very high, Vsync with Gsync, Super Resolution set to 85, DlSS with Framegen on. My average is 78 fps with a low of 65fps. It looks amazing on Oled. I hardly see any sign of artifacts with Framegen on. Game Science has done an outstanding job with this benchmark.
Whats your pc specs?
78 with FG means ur playing at 39fps internally which sux for a soulslike
@@nicknickname353 78 fps with FG is closer to 51-52fps native snd the FG makes the 51-52fps feel muuuuch smoother. Elden Ring fPs is around 50 fps on console, Bloodborne was sub 30fps, Sekiro was around 40-45fps. Though as a 4090 owner I prefer playing all my games in minimum 120fps, so I will run the game in 4K DLSS3-P and hope I get at least 90+ lol.
@koolk2115 +1 I use same settings
@@XxoxX-pc This man is lying from his a*s the game hasn't even been released yet, and you're d*ckriding it. I have a 4090 and tested it for hours, and I can say the performance isn't great at all. The developers need to address these issues before making bold claims.
DLSS mode | Render scale | Internal resolution at 4K
Quality | 66.7% | 2560 x 1440
Balanced | 58% | 2227 x 1253
Performance | 50% | 1920 x 1080
Ultra Performance | 33.3% | 1280 x 720
Do you have this info but for 1440p?
@@Maxb0-__- Math my friend, multiply 1440P by 0.667 / 0.58 / 0.50 / 0.333
@@SmogSmok i didn’t know that, thanks
wew, what does this actually mean?
@@adis.g6569 Everything is written, what don't you understand?
We can tell that GameSience really wants to make a good game
Another game we should use as a benchmark for the 50 series cards when they launch
Another Nvidia gpu scam card, keep giving them your money like a good little consumer. 😆
Dude this game looks absolutely incredible. This is the type of design I love when it comes to a game. Has a special look to it.
Also the super resolution slider it told you it was on dlss performance so im guessing when you slide it. It will change to quality or whatever you slide it to.
10:22 Any game with DLSS 3 (frame gen) will use more VRAM when activated. Ray tracing also uses more VRAM. Great vid! ;)
Yeah that 50% is tied to your dlss so 50% of you know running at 4K we're probably take it down to somewhere close to 1080p or just slightly above it so you can imagine what performance would be if set at 75% or 1440p and 85% for Ultrawide
Frame gen uses more vram as it holds an extra 2 frames in buffer to approximate the generated frame and motion vector calculation
I don't know if anyone told you, but you should capitalize your voice, radio or something, it sounds so good (no Diddy)
50% DLSS is rather low res which is why it looks blury.
I think 66% equals to "Quality" while 50% equals to "Performance" (i.e. 1080p internal resolution)
The game does look pretty good in this little demo, but I guess we will just have to see how good the graphics look once we get to see the characters
Water looked kind of grainy on my 4090 with dlss quality
same with my 4080
Flim grain is enabled in post processing and depth of field , hope when full game launches we have option to disable
I tried to get this benchmark into CPU limit by setting it to 25 % of 720p at maximum RT settings. But it wouldn't budge, it remained GPU limited.
However, the game ran slower at the same 25 % of 720p when the raytracing was disabled but still GPU limited.
My guess is that NVIDIA's RT solution replaces Lumen and NVIDIA's solution shows higher gains with resolution decreases...
for how crazy the game looks i think its well optimized if the 4090 sticks in native 4k above 60.
dlss+framegen will take care of the rest.
4k nativos con ray tracing muere a 20fps la 4090 no se que decís q tiene buen optimización, tiene buenos gráficos, pero tampoco la gran cosa
4k at 100% slider it could mean resolution is 1:1 aka native 4k, no upscale/downscale, just like in Hitman WOA game cmiiw.
if you slide it down, the internal image will render at lower resolution (better performance, but less image clarity) then upscaled.
So, DLSS is absolutely needed even with 4090 to run on 4k max +RT + frame gen off.
Just for the sake of comparison, I have a 4090 but my cpu is a 12700k. I ran the exact benchmarks as in this video. The first one I've got an average of 62fps (3 less than the 14900ks), and on the second run with frame gen and dlss, I got 103fps average (4 less fps). So even on dlss performance, the difference between a 12700k running at 4.9ghz is very small compared to the 14900ks at 5,9ghz.
@@CyberJedi1 This is a GPU bound scenario, so the CPU makes very little difference.
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer Yes, at 4K it doesn't matter, even in DLSS performance where the game render at 1080p.
@@CyberJedi1 yeah I got a 12700k and 4080. At Recommended settings with everything maxed out and FG Im getting around 75+ fps. This is at 4k by the way.
My friend, you ran it at 50 ( 50%) so 1080P (DLSS performance)
i understand the amount of detail and image quality that this game offers, but to spend 1600 dollars on the highest end card just to get 60 fps - 70 fps, is insane to me.
I think.... Total VRAM used 20.0 GB : 8K Resolution, Super Resolution full 100%, Cinematic Settings, Ray Tracing, DLSS Quality.
500 is 1080p.
Also, FG from only 50-60fps could possibly add a bit of lag
Do not do more then high settings for lighting and foliage, if you go higher then that on those settings it will tank performance with barely a difference in visual fidelity
0:33纠正一下，这个游戏没有延迟过发售时间
I wonder at what settings the RX 5700XT is recommended for 1080p?
10:29 - DLSS FG uses quite a lot more VRAM than FSR FG.
How many fps did you get without frame Generation?
69 fps average and 57 fps Minimum
They finally fixed the frame generation latency penalty..In dlaa latency improved by 50% for dlss at 75% rendering resolution latency improved by 25%.
I get 34fps at 1440p max settings (7800X3D + 4080S) and 51fps at 1080p. DLSS is a must in this game if you want to get over 60fps. The game looks and runs better on the recommended settings though, I get 78fps at 4K DLSS performance + FG.
Edit- I think the resolution scale in this game isnt working correctly. I got 148fps at 1440p DLSS 75% resolution scale and maxed out settings plus FG, but then I started testing different resolution scale settings and now I only have 102fps with the same settings instead of 148fps.
The game use excessive oversharpening filter regardles of which DLSS / TSR / FSR settings you will use. 4K + DLSS performance downscaled (DLDSR 80% smoothing filter) looks wayyy better but I can still see that oversharpening. I absolutely hate oversharpening because it gives the image the look of oil paint.
I have 4090 / i7 14700kf.
I try it
4k, Dlss per (50%), fg on, rtx on very high,
Cinematic quality
100 fps average
that soo good bro 😍❤❤
Why is my 4090 ASUS TUF OC power draw getting around 300ish paired with i9-14900KF and you get around 435w in this specific benchmark!
I don't see much difference between rtx on cinematic preset vs rtx off cinematic preset. But the fps difference is very evident.
On my 4080 super I am averaging 70 fps with cinematic preset and rtx off. Dlss on with 89% super resolution and frame gen on.
I feel most the devs are treating upscaling + frame gen as a way to achieve 60 fps. Rather they should develop games to run at 60 fps without frame gen.
Ue 5 is demanding as hell , we don't know which ue5 version are they using
@@prashanthdoshi9926 when I compare the graphics of rdr2 with black myth wukong. Rdr 2 still looks okay till date and performs really good. Black myth does look better than rdr2 but the amount of fps difference does not justify.
@@amanaditya6895 that ue5 for you , it needs optimization from developers side to cut out in built engine things that are not required to run the game .
Ue5 by default uses all things of engine , if specifically not disabled by devs and optimised
@@amanaditya6895 do you have any type of flicker with frame gen on?I have flickering with my 4080 on Oled when i turn fg on and dlss is above perfomance,at 50% it doesn’t have any but the graphics are blurry at that bar.
@@Sergio-th7os I see some flickering in grasses but not much. Mostly if I try to peep into things I notice. I am using a 27inch IPS 4k display.
Sup bro can we see your Nvidia cp settings ?
My settings are default.
looks good. i will test some 4080 4090 over the week and use it. since most stress test does not use all the ram. i will give a shot
4080 super/overclocked with 5900x ... DLSS performance/4k Cinematic/high RT with frame gen I got 80 fps. This game is demanding af
4k resolution or so will be always demanding on newer AAAAAA games, what are u expect
Very low vram usage though. Low res textures?
Ue5 engine has low v ram usage
50% supersampling it mean the internal image downscaled to lower resolution, then upscaled to User's resolution choice
@Bang4BuckPCGamer when are you selling your 4090? its almost that time , us high end users got to stay at the top.. the sooner you sell it the more return you will make for the 5090. I'm thinking of selling first thing in September. Before all the Noise and Buzz start on the 5090 and everyone starts panick selling . Sooner you sell the less competition /more return. I think Ill buy a 3060 as a backup GPU while I wait for a 5090. Dont get me wrong we all can wait before upgrading because DLSS and Frame-Gen extends the life of all GPU's but if you like to game native , then we all have to upgrade.
I always sell when it's the most convenient for me. Until there is a launch date for the RTX 5090 I don't have a date in mind, but I always move on my hardware before the new stuff gets here. I have multiple PC's so I would have zero down time, and be very comfortable while waiting.
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer Sounds like a plan, if you like a return don’t wait too long we never know what the market might do if you have a chance I would say go for it, better to the 5090 first , you could always sell the 4090 after especially since you have multiple PCs or you can sell now while you can get a high return. Idk if I can wait until the date is firm but at least a confirmed release window or month and that’s enough for me. It would suck if we sell our most powerful card and the replacement don’t come until spring of next year. That would be suck.
I have been doing this for a long time now, I know how to sell at the right time.
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer I never said you didnt know what you're doing or anything like that, I was talking in general as high end users , I have been upgrading and using my computers since the late 90s . So I have experience and was talking from experience, wasn't trying to be condescending
@@Bang4BuckPCGamerdude why are you always so serious in your responses.. I’ve noticed this 🤣.. like chill dudeee
RTX 3060 ti VERY HIGH + RT very high+DLSS balanced @ 1440P = 21fps avg
LSFG 4x = 60 fps
also no combat, particle effects shown in a benchmark is kind of odd usually you'd expect worst case scenario but whatever i guess its better then nothing
it tells you the quality setting of the dlss on the right when you hover over super resolution
You forgot to change the fsr to tsr back while showing the settings :)
I changed it before I ran the benchmark. All you have to do is check the results and it clearly states TSR was enabled 5:32
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer No bad intentions, its just took my attention. Great video mate, so that I got informed about this tool too.
Wonder how my 6870s in crossfire will hold up? 🙏
You won't even be able to launch the game.
Try 8K resolution.
the game looks kinda weird when I benchmark it, like oversharpened and kinda crispy lol.
I tried the benchmark with a 3060 ti, r5 1600 and 16gb ram i managed to get 52fps average on 4k dlss performance high settings + lsfg 2.3 2x. I've never seen a game so realistic ! I also tried with tsr performance+ FG it did 56 fps and with fsr performance + FG : 59 fps. Dlss + lsfg looked awesome and fsr looked the worse ( as usual) with tsr in between( quality speaking). So i would probably play the game at 4k, tsr performance, high, FG + lsfg 2x if the inpout lag isn't to big. If it is, i would play at 4k dlss performance high settings + lsfg 2x or 3x. But tsr + FG felt really like the sweat spot, I suggest you chech this out ( for those who have not a rtx 40XX). And for the AMD fanboys who praise VRAM like god, 8 gb VRAM is absolutly not an issue with 4k tsr performance+ FG high settings the vram usage was at 5.9gb.
You got some tearing going on.
Great graphics!!!😎
Would love to know what dlss dll version this demo ships with as I’ve never seen tsr looking better than dlss even at dlss “performance” at 4K as 50% is basically the performance settings on dlss so upscaling from 1080p to 4K, try swapping out dlss dll to 3.7.1 if it’s an older one.
I think it was 3.6.0.
i think without resolution sampling is better all
Pretty bad. Current gen gpus can’t handle UE5.
Doesnt this Game Launch in a week? How can u Guys Play it or did i missed Something?
Yes you missed the part when I explained, it is a benchmark tool available free on steam
How did you get access to the game ?
The game comes out next week. This is a free downloadable benchmark tool on steam.
Significant fps drops when in this (crappy) benchmark appears any character. In other games with benchmark there is at least action.
Here? Only "Cinematic camera moving"...
If those first two characters in benchmark appeared in one time on screen & started fighting with each other (for example) FPS would go down hill drastically...
@@MrKMyL okay keyboard warrior
@@adis.g6569 Is he wrong? Not much action in this benchmark.
@@Z3t487 play first and dont talk too much upfront
I am getting 100fps on my 4090/13900K at 3440x1440 at Cinematic, RT-VeryHIgh and DSLL-Quality which is 75% super resolution and FG-On. I thought you needed to exit the game and relaunch each time you make changes to the graphic settings.
@@artyboy1377You do need to restart when enabling and disabling ray tracing.
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer Ah I see, only for RT, thanks
How to activate DLAA ?
I have 75 with all rtx on dlss and 50 performance on 4080 super.i have a ryzen 7 and 64 gb ram.
Sweet spot for 4090 for 4k 60fps is:
all max , dlss and resolution scale at 85%.
72fps average
60fps min
with fg on you get those numbers
So DLSS Perfomance and Fully maxed out gets 60 fpson a RTX 4090. Is this good?
Nope
He got 107 with dlss
@@NickYaiba That’s with FG as well. So 50% DLSS + FG gave 107 fps. Native was 65
I have a 4090 with dlaa which is 100% the game only runs at around 20 - 30 fps with no framegen he never tried native if you notice it's running performance dlss
That's with max settings. If he turned the settings down to high, it would give big performance jump
I couldn't run it native, there was no option to disable super resolution sampling. I got 68fps with no ray tracing at 4k with FSR it was over 100 with frame generation (7900xtx 12700k)
DLAA is native, so use DLSS and use the value 100.
@@bigdaddywatt crank the slider to 100
the game use sharping on all upscaling wtf ? there is no option to disable those oversharping look so bad
On FSR I get 106 AVG and 125 max fps
only more than 100fps you say , lmao , what do you expect with that insane graphics quality? also on cinematic preset
im getting 65 fps at 4k , cinematic preset , dlss performance (50%) and raytracing max on a 4080 , 65 fps is more than playable , you dont need 120fps on a souls game
and keep in mind that raytracing on this game is insane , it has raytraced shadows , reflections, ambient oclusion and also on lighting , so thanks if i can run it at 60fps on a 4080
and from my testing , ultra preset looks the same as cinematic (i cant see the difference) and you gain 10fps
I didn't say that so why even make that up? I said "107 FPS average, 84FPS minimum and 128 FPS maximum, Not too bad" Some how you took this conclusion as a negative.
Nvidia ensured this game will only play best on an rtx gpu.
hi bro first like
Is it me or the game looks blurry in every gameplay video of this game
It's you and xqc
YT compression. Game looks amazing. The benchmark tool is free try it for yourself. You can probably even use the 4080 in the cloud.
@@aberkae how much yt compressed it im watching at 4k
The guy in these replies above is correct, you're an xqc fan. 👎
Man, those intel cpus... 130-170watts and its not even doing anything.. lol
u forgot it at 4K FSR performance at the first run
No if you look at the results FSR is disabled. The magic of editing.
@@Bang4BuckPCGamer ya i see that
any way the TSR 50% look awful... the water was so pixelated and sparkling with white dots, eww :P
too bad u didn't do only DLSS without FG :)
that game looks awesome, downloading the test myself to do some 1440P testing with my 4070TI.
defiantly a game to re-play with a true 4K with 6090 in 2-3 years from now. ( i think 5090 will be good for 4K DLSS Q)
My average was 80fps while using fsr and 55fps while using dlss🤔
My result：
5700X+3080ti desktop
2560x1440p
All effect Ultra high setting
Ultra high Ray tracing
Low motion blur
75% DLSS
Frame generation off
55avg fps
Nice bang..
nice!!!!!
The graphics in this benchmark didn't impress me. Hope the game is better.
Full RT is Path Tracing
GG to electricity bill
100 percent is native lol
DLAA is also native
66 percent is quality
57 balanced
50 is perf
If it’s like remnant 2 low settings look like high on ue4
Medium looks like high
High is ultra
Very high and cinematic are Uber settings
Most realistic settings for none 4090 users will be medium/high raytracing medium or off with dlss quality at 1440p
Or 4k dlss perf
I have the same build and at dlaa no framegen getting around 20 - 30 fps on quality with framegen at around 65 - 80 fps
Waiting for a Nvidia driver
Tried this tool on my RTX 4070 TI Super @1440p, Cinematic Preset, DLSS, FG, RT Very High and got 89 FPS
Tried this tool on my RX 6700 XT @1440p, Very High Preset, FSR, FG, No RT and got 58 FPS
Also tried the RTX 4070 TI Super @1440p, Very High Preset, DLSS, FG, RT High and got 115 FPS
ah its super resolution bar... 67 should be quality and above 80 its dlaa
Frame gen always uses vram that is not a leak
Well I did say maybe it is just a frame generation thing.
Ryzen 9 7950x3d is better for gaming and i9 14900k for editing and gaming
You have a beautiful male voice, congratulations for your videos that I always follow!!!
Glad you like them
Yeah, it's like really calming 😄 The videos are super neatly done as well. Love the thumbnails too, like the GPU being used, I can immediately scan through Nvidia/AMD.
This is just mental... I mean, when not even a 4000$ pc can run it native, without any upscaling tecnology is just crazy to me... Yeah, it has fancy graphics and whatever (yet not one of the best that I have ever seen, also it got an downgrade from their first trailers back couple of years ago)... I tried the benchmark as well, got an ryzen 5 5600X and a 6700XT, with no raytracing at all, FSR and framegen enabled I barelly get 50 fps at 1080p... They should really stop making unoptimized games, or better say, optimize them just with upscaling in mind..
because they want to milk your money to buy a new flagship gpu every new AAAAAA games released.
btw you play on older systems, of course it will run barely, doesnt mean the game is unoptimize.
Rtx 4090
I7 12700kf
32gb ddr4 3200mhz
At 4k
Raytracing tsr at 50% - 59fps
Raytracing dlss at 75% fg - 70fps
Raytracing dlss at 50% fg - 98fps
Raytracing dlss at 89% fg - 70fps
Closing the recording will increase the frame rate🤣
I have a capture card on an external PC. I don't take a performance hit from recording.
i can smell my 6900xt melting...
With my RTX 3090 Ti at 4K with the same settings as the first run, I am getting 24fps 💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀
hahaha Rip RTX 3090 TI
I seen worse this dude on UA-cam benchmarked with a 7900xtx and 7800x3d and is only getting 5fps everything maxed out
Not looking good for 60fps on PS5
People might see the RTX 4090 running at around 100 FPS with DLSS and frame generation and think the game isn't well-optimized. But they need to remember that this is with all settings maxed out and full ray tracing enabled, which is very demanding.
Take *Alan Wake* as an example. On consoles, the game runs on a mix of medium to low settings, and in some cases, even lower than what you can choose on a PC. Yet, the game still looks great.
The real issue is that developers should rethink how they label these settings. Instead of just calling them "high" or "ultra," it might be clearer to use terms like "Performance Mode" or "Fidelity Mode." This way, it’s easier for players to understand that ultra settings don't always mean significantly better visuals but can greatly impact performance. Developers also often assume that PC gamers know how to tweak these settings themselves for the best performance, but that's not always the case.
It would be helpful if games offered a "Console Mode" setting on PCs, which would match the visual quality and performance balance that consoles have. This would give PC gamers a good starting point, combining great visuals with smooth performance. And then they can customize from there.
I try it
4k, Dlss quality (70%), fg on, rt off,
Cinematic quality
100+ fps average
With rtx 4090/ i7 12700k
Its the way for play, rt is too much expensiv !
It may be the most demanding game with alan wake 2 for an rtx 4090, very poor optimisation, 4090 is 5% of players ....
I hope you get a new cpu brother get a 9800x3D when it drops
@@Prioz__ my cpu is not bad, i play in 4k.
Hmm This might be the first actual game enviroment with big open world rendering (Forest, huge draw distance in the end of the benchmark) in unreal engine 5 is it not?
I mean not a UE5 demo of a forest but an actual game enviroment and graphics you can expect in the game.
but its not a open world game
This game is good bud china quality oprimalization is the worst i have ever seen in my life ….. this is biger killer of gpu than crysis when it came out