Yeah, every single day for the rest of time, WB will release a patch for AK, with only one patch note - "performance improvements". Rich has to find whether this is true or not.
not really, he said that it works better if its caped to 60 (most guides for modern games always say to cap framerate ) and then he mentions kalderans texture optimizer, which again people on PC probably know about especially if your trying to improve performance. So unless your a total noob to this version, then you probably already know about these
Allan Sh This game has one of the best textures out there. If you have the game try zooming in into some of the books, newspapers or anything that can be read and you’ll see just how good the textures are.
@@NexGenTek No, apart from the lack of HDR, a good CRT especially a widescreen one with good geometry rocks everything hard with it's ultra high contrast/black levels, and unrivelled response time.
This game looks insane. The assets and textures are probably the best I've ever seen, zooming in on objects shows how detailed and high quality everything is.
@@JoshEckerman Because it wasn't developed by Rocksteady, so the fanboys didn't give it a chance, though it was great and had the best boss battles in the series.
I played Arkham Knight on Steam about 5 months ago. Honestly, I thought the port was great. On my i5-8400+1070ti, I played it fully maxed out (including all the nvidia effects on) at 1440p, it stayed above 60fps 99% of the time. So no complaints from me. And it's basically another reason I never buy games at launch, you're paying full price for an unfinished product. Glad I waited to play it.
@@null643 Well i mean there definitely is while driving no doubt other than that i never had a problem i could also do 60 at 1440p. But just locking it to 30 and pumping up them swweeet graphics is where its at. Mostly because that stutter driving was a little annoying.
After watching the whole video, you can really appreciate that there are UA-camrs out there who put a lot of time behind their content. Plus, this finally gives me the chance to finish the game when i don’t have the console version anymore.
This game is incredible man, these issues are barely noticeable when playing, unless you put a graph on it, this is the best game I ever played, the story is fantastic, gameplay amazing, and the graphics are unreal, give it a try if you didn't play. Totally worth the money.
I played this last month on a Ryzen 3600+2070 Super+16 GB RAM system at 1440p capped at 90 fps and I had a great experience. Very few stutters or framerate drops as compared to my GTX 960 @ 1080p.
1:25 - It's because it wasn't developed by Rocksteady and wasn't quite up to that standard either. It was a good game, but honestly, a lot of the charm in the environments and whatnot was missing.
Ohhh Richard you are the best man, espectacular analysis again, wanted to see that so badly. Thank you man! And thanks for quoting NX Gamer, a very underrated channel!
2023 here playing the epic version with all settings cranked up (yes even all 4 of the NVidia settings) and it runs locked 90 so far, benchmark gave me 50 lowest fps and around 90 average. R5 3600 PBO+AutoOC, 2x8GB @3200MHz, GTX 1070Ti OC'd @1080p. And yes the game looks so so good!
Metro Exodus, Control, Devil May Cry 5, Death Stranding, God of War, Red Dead Redemption 2, Last of Us Part II, Horizon Zero Dawn, and the list goes on. Sure Arkham knight still looks amazing but don't pretend like we're on a decline for visual fidelity.
I literally spent over 80 hours on Arkham Knight getting all the achievements on Steam, and I gotta tell you after spending 10 hours on the Arkham Tweak tool, I just played it on 1440p/60 and called it a day
@@TheAnig140895 Which begs the question: what do you mean? Your comment is still confusing - if it works when you droped it to 1440p, why the hell did you decide to call it a day AFTER it worked?
Good thing Epic made this free, or I'd never have gone back to finally play and finish it. Ran well enough on my 970 but saw no issues on the 1080 that I have now. And damn, such a good game.
We need a 2021 revisited. It still has stutter issues even with 2080 ti, i9 9900k, 16gb ram. FPS is very high but microstuytters when gliding/driving still happen. Sad
That "Bat Tweak" tool has strange results... the creator of the tool said on the Steam forum that nobody should use it because it's outdated since the interim patch... but it does help with the texture streaming stutter issues.
I still think the console versions of Return to Arkham and Arkham Knight NEED a PS5 and Xbox Series X optimisation update to run at a Checkerboard 4K 60 Fps Performance Mode and a Native 4K 30 FPS Fidelity Mode with added things like Ray-Tracing while finally fully optimising the PC Port of Arkham Knight with it's added Nvidia Gameworks Effects and Ray-Tracing as Well, also possibly releasing the Return To Arkham Remasters with the Additional effect the Original PC Ports had like AA tiles falling off the walls in the first Scarecrow Boss and Arkham City's additional effects like Mr. Freeze's Freeze Gun dropping additional Ice Particles, but the RTA Game being added to PC would be a bit of a stretch.
I recently played through this game for the first time and I was nervous because I heard so many bad things about performance but honestly it wasn't bad at all. If I remember correctly there were some dips but very minimal and didn't take away from the experience. I played at 1440p with a GTX 1070, 16 gb of ram, and a Ryzen 7 1700.
I’m playing at 1080p, 60fps on an i7 9700k & RTX 2060 Super as recommended in this video. So far I have only experienced 1-2 very minor stutters, this was when exiting the GCPD building in batmobile and also during the cutscene where ACE Chemicals plant blows up, briefly dropped from 60 down to like 57, nothing major at all. 99% of gameplay is flawless.
Somewhat related note, I wish Arkham Knight got a 4K patch on the Xbox One X. Also that Batman in the thumbnail is from Arkham Origins, not Knight. It doesn’t bother me (it’s from the same series so it’s close enough) but others won’t be as... “friendly”. One last note, I’m so used to the console version running at 30fps that seeing it running here at 60fps looks weird.
I finished Arkham series, even including Origin, as a matter of fact I did enjoy Origin's more stylistic boss fights, from Deathstroke to Viper, love it, enjoyed it thoroughly. I didn't finish all riddles in City. But I'll be damned if I didn't finish it 100% in Knight, the tag team fight with Catwoman against Riddler was way to entertaining. Especially the part where you smash his face over and over and over, honestly the best stress reliever ever.
Insider tip here... The reason this game ran so god awfully bad was because it had to be super optimized for an APU and more specifically the shared memory between cpu and gpu of said APU. When they made the port they used that same modified version of the engine and it's the constant moving of things between storage and the different memory pipelines that was the biggest factor in terrible performance. There is some more nuance to it than that alone but that's the major issue. With proper hardware on PC you can brute force your way to 4k60. You could do it with the patched version on an AMD 290x at all times EXCEPT when the batmobile was on screen and that's because it has effects enabled that aren't when you are gliding and it's using higher LOD textures that swap more often
Im running it on a core i5 6500 and a 1060 6gb, got it on the epic store and I’ve had no issues, running it on high and locked the frame rate to 60fps. I haven’t exactly been monitoring the FPS but I’ve barely seen any stuttering or noticed any frame rate loss
If you combine in game vsync (wich is double buffered) with rtss's scanline sync set to its third state, you will end up having a fully factional triple buffered vsync. Then cap your fps through rtss to half of your refresh rate and boom! No stutters, no tearing, no framedrops (if you have an ideal ring and your settings optimized), no texture streaming, no frame skipping issues at all. Just a smooth locked performance! So for 60fps make sure you are playing on a 100hz-120hz monitor and for 30 play at 60hz and problems solved!
It seems even when the texture pool is restricted to less than the card's available VRAM, streaming is still going on. Maybe it's hardcoded and restricting the texture set just reduces the size of textures being streamed (making it faster), rather than stopping streaming. The bottleneck then is either driver's texture management or the PCIe connection. Both the 390 and 2060S have a PCIe3 x16 interface, but maybe the 390 can't use all that bandwidth internally. Limiting the PCIe bandwidth using risers or an older motherboard might help narrow down whether this is the case (390 performance would remain unchanged while 2060S would deteriorate).
DF, please tell us about technology behind some realistic looking episode of "Love, Death & Robots" CGI, and how far we are from real time graphics with such quality
Thank you for this, it has always been a mystery to me how people had such a rough time with this game, and you inadvertently revealed it here. I was gaming at 2560*1600 with vsync on back when this game launched and it was more or less fine for me - the odd bit of a stutter, but nothing that could explain the outrage that was being shown by people in general.
I actually do not remember how it got fixed for me (I have a hexacore CPU i7-5820K with Nvidia GTX 970), but I did not have that many issues. I used the tweak tool you mentioned in the video, but it only worked for a while. I may have still have Batman Arkham Knight installed, I may give it a try to see if newer drivers fixed it for me. It is so refreshing to actually hear about someone that had the resources to investigate after all this time (and the patience to do it). You won a subscriber right here.
the performance in arkham knight was fixed just a month or two after launch. a lot of the launch issues were fixed almost immediately. part of the texture streaming issues are down to the implementation of insanely huge textures of basically everything. newer games are turning to more procedural texture techniques meaning theres less need to stream in huge amounts of data from the storage drive. I think the large part of the problems are entirely down to the dated unreal engine 3. arkham knight literally pushes the UE3 to its limit. the use of mostly PBR materials and shaders in a game engine that was really never built around this method shows how badly its effecting things. every main character in the game has dozens of materials, each needing a roughness map, normal map, albedo map, ect, so for every 4k albedo texture you need at least 3 other textures to give the material its proper look. proof of this is that issues are MUCH reduced when loading from an SSD , but when loading from a traditional mechanical hard drive the texture streaming is terrible. I think its time people realised what an accomplishment they managed to pull off when they made arkham knight in a game engine from the previous generation. with the resources they have, of course its primarily a console port, but when you can run a game that looks THIS good on a gtx750ti and hit a solid 40fps at all times, sure, performance still isnt amazing but tbh , performance in crysis1 still isnt amazing either.
True but for some reason DF and console fanboys bring it up like the whole pc catalogue is based on this single game, I played through it at 4k 60fps max settings while console guys were telling me it was better at 1080p 30fps with all the nvidia gameworks missing ? 🤔
Arkham Knight is one of THE best looking PC games ever made PROVIDED you have the power. The level of detail & texture quality in this game and the sheer scale is mindblowing. And yes this game REQUIRES bruteforce to run with all bells and whistles enabled if you want to have smooth gameplay. Accept it, respect it and you will be treated with one of the best looking games of all time. Do not complain of performance issues with suboptimal hardware hoping for a "fix" if you want to have the game look at its best, not gonna happen.
So if the texture streaming is the issue, can you run the game on TITAN RTX and somehow force the game to load up all the textures into the buffer and keep them there?
I still think that with this game is that the problem is trying to throw power at it. When I initially played this at the time of release it was on a R9 270x 2GB. A very mid-range card. I was having issues with motion blur, so had to turn that off, but otherwise, the game ran really well. Friends with much more powerful cards were having trouble. And it seemed like myself and others with more middling hardware were able to have a decent play experience. Maybe because we're willing, able, and accepting of compromising detail settings? I can't remember what I set everything to, I do remember the game was (and frankly still is) glorious to look at.
does this game have some unstoppable stutter that will happen no matter what you do to fix it. mainly the one where it micro stutters when flying and driving
Yes I can confirm that even with it installed on NVME, 2080 ti, 9900k, 16gb ram, ther microstutters are still there even though i run the game at 4k with max settings 80 fps
Having a 760 ti, this game was lagging no matter what setting i put on low. Now that i got a 1070, i can finally play it.. years later. It still drops frames, but at least its 80 % smooth with the right settings.
I play on 1060 6GB and it`s 60fps most of the time. 1080p maxed without fog of course.I highly recommend turning it off. Also depends on your CPU. I`m on i7 2600.
Basically it's a case of four years later we finally have hardware that can brute-force past the issues and deliver more consistent performance. This is why you just wait to buy games, get them free or dirt cheap, and by then you'll be able to run them well enough to enjoy them too.
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet or if you've tested this or not, but I just happened to be doing some research on physics engines in games and came across an old LTT video documenting increased frames in Arkham Knight using a secondary NVIDIA GPU for PhysX. It might be worth a shot to see how that configuration works (something like a 1080Ti+1080 on a system with a 9900K to eliminate any bottlenecks). I had forgotten this game was even a PhysX title, so it might be worth looking into should you have the urge to revisit this topic again.
Still my personal pick for best looking game this gen. All the technical and gameplay issues aside, this is one of the most aesthetically incredible games ever created. It has the perfect balance of realism/detail and artistic style. I actually think it'll age super nicely in the years and decades to come as well
Ive run the Arkham games from the Epic games store on my PC. I'm using an i5 8400 16GB of RAM @2666MHz and a GTX 1060 6GB overclocked @2000MHz. My PC ran all of the Arkham games at 1080p with all graphics settings set to the max and they all perform perfectly fine. Although occasionally *all* of the Arkham games, not just Arkham Knight, have had some really weird behaviors where my GPU usage would just randomly drop to like 7% and it would stutter especially Arkham Asylum. As for the whole Arkham Knight situation I've never seen the framerate drop any lower than 55-60 fps at any time except when there is a lot of the Nvidia interactive smoke/fog filling up at least half of the screen.
So that's probably why it ran well on my system when I last played it (Steam version). I used an i5-6500, RX 480 8 GB and 8 GB RAM at the time and I locked my GPU's framerate to 60 FPS in Radeon Settings. I might have used Enhanced Sync as well, but I'm not sure. Other settings were 1080p and I believe high settings - aside from things like Physx for obvious reasons. I don't recall experiencing any problems. I felt I was lucky, given the game's reputation. I got it a while after all the patches were out.
i hate denuvo. And this is what i have to say about it: - CLEARLY the loading time increases with denuvo - maybe the high-end CPU's don't get affected by denuvo, BUT the older CPU's are...way more then the newer CPU's ...it's still a BS software that hurts the end user, the consumer. There are a lot of types of pirates: some just try the game as a demo, other play the whole game without paying...but a pirate will never think something like: "oh, this game isn't cracked yet, i better buy it" ... usually they don't have money, or better to say, they don't have their own income, salary. BUT those without salary will grow up and buy the games or series that they liked.
Yep. Denuvo does hurt performance. Loading time is a part of performance. Nobody wants to sit around on loading screens, they want to be playing the game. And yeah, I'm kind of sick of channels that do a video comparing Denuvo VS Denuvo free using a Core i7 processor. Cool, Denuvo doesn't have enough overhead to impact a game on a super expensive processor. Nobody expected it to. Test it on lower end CPUs where there's a possibility Denuvo could be taking away CPU resources the game needs or the test is meaningless.
I'm probably one of the few people that considers Knight their favorite in the series. I'm not denying it has problems, but I ended up going back to that one the most compared to the other games.
I really enjoyed the first game and beat it multiple times, but I just could never get into Arkham City. I wish I got this when it was free because I think I would enjoy this more than City.
@@chrisrichfield8906 City is a game I love, but the main campaign feels a bit too rushed and underdeveloped at parts that makes return trips less enticing for me. A lot of people prefer Origins and City due to the lack of Bat-Tank combat, which is understandable. However, what keeps me coming back to this game is that the 3 islands of Gotham are probably my favorite Arkham hub world. As for its story, while I think the main villain plot has its issues, I feel AK has the best introspective moments for Batman/Bruce Wayne in the series at this point. That and I like the feel of the gliding, driving, combat and stealth mechanics. Nonetheless, I like Arkham City, Asylum and Knight almost equally, with Knight coming out slightly ahead. Origins is cool, but it has some issues with its design that doesn't feel as graceful as how the Rocksteady games did, but it atleast had some neat bosses.
@@XZ-III You're probably right that I'm overstating it. I guess it seems that way from the circles I'm around. I've encountered plenty of people who liked the Knight or considered it better than Origins, but whenever it's a discussion of favorites, Knight's often been the least popular option, it's usually City, followed by Asylum or Origins.
@@greatdelusion7654 Back when I played this game I had a GTX 970 and a 4770k CPU @4.3Ghz. I played it in 4k at 30fps but had to turn some graphics settings down. I have a 1080 Ti now.
jonnyX06 I played this game first on PS4 and enjoyed the 30fps experience, but playing at 60fps 1080p is more preferable for me cause I find the combat is more fluid and responsive at 60fps.
Are you considering doing the frame capped tests without v-sync as well? I would like to see if there's a difference compared to just capping the framerate with something like nvidiainspector. Since variable refresh rate monitors are more standard these days, I think it would be useful information.
Huh, honestly didn't expect a performance difference between the versions. Usually assumed an Epic Store game is the exact same as a Steam game, just with a different launcher. Interesting finds.
love how they still use a 400$ from Nvidia vs a 350$ amd gpu but wont use the 5700 XT which is a 400$ gpu vs the 400$ super. once again you can tell how they have to make Nvidia look good. than when it comes to the 1060 NOW they use the proper class of gpu with the 480 to compare since the 1060 is better in this game....
I have a similar performance in Ryse: Son of Rome. I play it on my new PC I bought a couple of weeks ago and I installed Ryse expecting to stay above 60 or maybe even 100 fps at all times. But often in executions or scripted events, the frames drop into the 50s and even outside of fights when I have well above 100 fps the game just doesn't feel fluid. Then I turned on Vsync and everything runs just fine, no stutters, no frame drops. I feel that with my new PC I finally understand why Vsync exists, turning it on in more and more games for different reasons.
Pretty odd that we're still looking into a game that came out over 4 years ago. Though it is one of the most infamous PC ports whilst looking incredible for it's time and today. Quite interesting.
Well, the in-game settings say that anything above 90 FPS will have issues, it's cool that the game recognizes if you put a custom fps limit in the ini files. Also there is no benefit playing above the 90
I just built a new PC just at the time Epic give away all those Batman games so it was perfect timing to test out the most demanding one. Cpu is the 3700x, gpu is the RX5700 and I've got 32GB of 3200 memory, and I was expecting the worse with that game but to my surprise after playing it for about 40 or so minutes to test how stable my PC was, the game seem to run slick smooth even when in the car whiles only using about 40% to 60% of the gpu at max settings at 1080p, I was expecting stutters everywhere but nope, it ran well, maybe as the video above is saying, powering through it with more powerful hardware seems to fix the flaws in the game.
@@VargVikernes1488 No, despite the poor PC Port, a Lot of people think this is the worse game on the trilogy because of the batmobile being used to almost every puzzle/fight.
So it's finally playable, if you run it through hardware half a decade more advanced than it was built with. Jesus. You shouldn't have to HAVE a Cray in order to use Wayne's.
![[4K] Batman Arkham Knight PC Revisited: Can We Hit 4K60 On One Of PC's Worst Ports?](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/w3g4QQnIqco/mqdefault.jpg)
![[4K] Batman Arkham Knight PC Revisited: Can We Hit 4K60 On One Of PC's Worst Ports?](/img/tr.png)
Richard testing this game over and over is how he finally became the joker
"Have I ever told you the definition of insanity?"
Richard's personal hell (heaven?) will be benchmarking Arkham Knight for an eternity.
Yeah, every single day for the rest of time, WB will release a patch for AK, with only one patch note - "performance improvements". Rich has to find whether this is true or not.
@@DanielSantana-jo1is lol
Lmfao
I dunno, does anyone else imagine Richard wakes up in a cold sweat in the middle of the night after dreaming about dropped frames?
Dwopped fwames!!!!
I think he fears Frame-pacing more...
Late Night Gaming I’m dying 🤣🤣🤣 this comment is f**king Gold!!!!
Evaquiel I agree with you!!! 🤣
@@joshb8215 Yeah, don't bother defending such an unsubstantiated allegation or anything, clown.
Richard is the Bat-detective we deserve but didn't know we needed. 😂
not really, he said that it works better if its caped to 60 (most guides for modern games always say to cap framerate ) and then he mentions kalderans texture optimizer, which again people on PC probably know about especially if your trying to improve performance. So unless your a total noob to this version, then you probably already know about these
He's plunging his hands back into the filth so ours stay clean.
Nothing less than a knight. Shining.
Your pronunciation is so clear tha I can use youtube auto caption.
ikr he speaks so well but he also has quality microphones for sure
Diction and enunciation is important
He has most of the standard pronunciation. Other UA-camrs have heightened british or american accents which stray away from intended pronunciations.
His speech is clear for the most part, but I'm personally sometimes confused by how he pronounced the sound R. "Wed and owange"? :)
@@SgtZaqq Holy Gwail
Feels good every time we revisit this title and throw more power at it.
If you play Arkham Knight at 1440p/4k high refresh with everything cranked, it reminds you this is a flawed but beautifully detailed game.
spork8655
Some textures ain’t detailed enough in 4K. This game is clearly designed for vanilla 1080p consoles.
Allan Sh This game has one of the best textures out there. If you have the game try zooming in into some of the books, newspapers or anything that can be read and you’ll see just how good the textures are.
@@allansh828 i played at 2560x1440 and the game was beautiful. Ran very good maybe only encountered 1 issue from start to finish
I trowed 377 Watts at it! V56 OC
4:04 “SETTINGS?”
weird to see a youtuber with a checkmark and no replies, love your content lng.
But how does it look on a CRT?!
Gorgeous, obviously
It looks great! Bat that's old tech Man! ☹️
it is 2019 and i am tired waiting for OLED PC monitors so I think I will get a CRT haha
Horrid. CRT are only good for certain games
@@NexGenTek No, apart from the lack of HDR, a good CRT especially a widescreen one with good geometry rocks everything hard with it's ultra high contrast/black levels, and unrivelled response time.
This game looks insane. The assets and textures are probably the best I've ever seen, zooming in on objects shows how detailed and high quality everything is.
I can't wait to have this re-analyzed again in a DF Retro 10 years from now. ;)
That thumbnail is from Batman Arkham Origins :D
Such an underrated gem of a game
alternativemusefan It is and just as Richard said, “always overlooked for some bizarre reason”.
@@JoshEckerman Because it wasn't developed by Rocksteady, so the fanboys didn't give it a chance, though it was great and had the best boss battles in the series.
War624 It also had the best dialogue, character development, and art direction.
And the batsuit was way better than the previous games.
I played Arkham Knight on Steam about 5 months ago. Honestly, I thought the port was great. On my i5-8400+1070ti, I played it fully maxed out (including all the nvidia effects on) at 1440p, it stayed above 60fps 99% of the time. So no complaints from me. And it's basically another reason I never buy games at launch, you're paying full price for an unfinished product. Glad I waited to play it.
That’s the funny thing, one of the worst pc ports turned into one of the best pc ports
I've forgotten how badass that game looks...
Batass*
Probably top 5 graphics ever. W3 RDR2 are the others i think of.
Juan Marquez graphics for this game were beyond amazing for the time. Poorly optimized beyond belief, but beautiful.
@@maddawgzzzz not even that poorly optimized, i mean did you watch the video? And shit its UE3. Ran pretty good on my 1070 at 4K 30 back in the day
@@null643 Well i mean there definitely is while driving no doubt other than that i never had a problem i could also do 60 at 1440p. But just locking it to 30 and pumping up them swweeet graphics is where its at. Mostly because that stutter driving was a little annoying.
After watching the whole video, you can really appreciate that there are UA-camrs out there who put a lot of time behind their content. Plus, this finally gives me the chance to finish the game when i don’t have the console version anymore.
Still looks phenomenal.
Ah yes, the game that taught me the hard way to never ever pre-order games.
Piratebay
Same, fam. Same.
Did they return your money .?
This game is incredible man, these issues are barely noticeable when playing, unless you put a graph on it, this is the best game I ever played, the story is fantastic, gameplay amazing, and the graphics are unreal, give it a try if you didn't play. Totally worth the money.
Always look forward to a video from you guys :)
~cheers from Singapore!
I played this last month on a Ryzen 3600+2070 Super+16 GB RAM system at 1440p capped at 90 fps and I had a great experience. Very few stutters or framerate drops as compared to my GTX 960 @ 1080p.
1:25 - It's because it wasn't developed by Rocksteady and wasn't quite up to that standard either. It was a good game, but honestly, a lot of the charm in the environments and whatnot was missing.
panic button was given super little time to get it working, though. the entire fault, as it usually is, is on the publisher, wb games.
Ohhh Richard you are the best man, espectacular analysis again, wanted to see that so badly. Thank you man!
And thanks for quoting NX Gamer, a very underrated channel!
9:44 Rich appearing from the shadows for a split second! Great (unintentional?) moment
Ha ha, nice catch! Maybe he just wanted to subliminally slip more hand motions into the video.
I am OK with this.
"Arkham Knight optimizations here." That was a good laugh.
2023 here playing the epic version with all settings cranked up (yes even all 4 of the NVidia settings) and it runs locked 90 so far, benchmark gave me 50 lowest fps and around 90 average. R5 3600 PBO+AutoOC, 2x8GB @3200MHz, GTX 1070Ti OC'd @1080p.
And yes the game looks so so good!
This game still looks absolutely amazing compared to what we have today.
We've been getting like 1 or 2 games a year that offers good graphics, it sucks
@@suli559 The gameplay was also pretty legit.
2007: Yeah, but can it run Crysis?
2012: No seriously, can it run Crysis?
2019: Fuck that, can it run Arkham Knight?
Metro Exodus, Control, Devil May Cry 5, Death Stranding, God of War, Red Dead Redemption 2, Last of Us Part II, Horizon Zero Dawn, and the list goes on. Sure Arkham knight still looks amazing but don't pretend like we're on a decline for visual fidelity.
@@JagsP95 Read again what I wrote, then close your eyes, ponder on it, open and read again...
I literally spent over 80 hours on Arkham Knight getting all the achievements on Steam, and I gotta tell you after spending 10 hours on the Arkham Tweak tool, I just played it on 1440p/60 and called it a day
CaptainCarmine What do you mean?
@@GhettoPCbuilds you can't get 2160/60 consistent, but if I drop it to 1440 and with the recommended settings on the arkham tweak tool it works
@@TheAnig140895
Which begs the question: what do you mean? Your comment is still confusing - if it works when you droped it to 1440p, why the hell did you decide to call it a day AFTER it worked?
@@greatdelusion7654 because I was trying to get it to 4K/60.
CaptainCarmine
If you wanna play at 4k, you gotta go down to 30fps I think. Arkham Knight still feels great at 30fps actually.
4:03 This made me laugh way more than it should
He sounded like a villain
*... the settings??* 🤔
Good thing Epic made this free, or I'd never have gone back to finally play and finish it. Ran well enough on my 970 but saw no issues on the 1080 that I have now. And damn, such a good game.
We need a 2021 revisited. It still has stutter issues even with 2080 ti, i9 9900k, 16gb ram. FPS is very high but microstuytters when gliding/driving still happen. Sad
2 years later still the same on high end pc…
That "Bat Tweak" tool has strange results... the creator of the tool said on the Steam forum that nobody should use it because it's outdated since the interim patch... but it does help with the texture streaming stutter issues.
Yeah, that was fcking strange
I truly love Arkham Knight. Thankfully I never got to play it until after the original performance issues were "fixed"
I still think the console versions of Return to Arkham and Arkham Knight NEED a PS5 and Xbox Series X optimisation update to run at a Checkerboard 4K 60 Fps Performance Mode and a Native 4K 30 FPS Fidelity Mode with added things like Ray-Tracing while finally fully optimising the PC Port of Arkham Knight with it's added Nvidia Gameworks Effects and Ray-Tracing as Well, also possibly releasing the Return To Arkham Remasters with the Additional effect the Original PC Ports had like AA tiles falling off the walls in the first Scarecrow Boss and Arkham City's additional effects like Mr. Freeze's Freeze Gun dropping additional Ice Particles, but the RTA Game being added to PC would be a bit of a stretch.
11:29 when an "ultra" preset doesn't actually set every single graphical setting to "ultra"
Rich the way you said settings it totally made you sound like a Bond Villain.
Denuvo has been PROVEN to significantly impact frame rate but only in later implementations of the DRM when they have upped to number of calls.
I recently played through this game for the first time and I was nervous because I heard so many bad things about performance but honestly it wasn't bad at all. If I remember correctly there were some dips but very minimal and didn't take away from the experience. I played at 1440p with a GTX 1070, 16 gb of ram, and a Ryzen 7 1700.
I’m playing at 1080p, 60fps on an i7 9700k & RTX 2060 Super as recommended in this video. So far I have only experienced 1-2 very minor stutters, this was when exiting the GCPD building in batmobile and also during the cutscene where ACE Chemicals plant blows up, briefly dropped from 60 down to like 57, nothing major at all. 99% of gameplay is flawless.
Somewhat related note, I wish Arkham Knight got a 4K patch on the Xbox One X. Also that Batman in the thumbnail is from Arkham Origins, not Knight. It doesn’t bother me (it’s from the same series so it’s close enough) but others won’t be as... “friendly”.
One last note, I’m so used to the console version running at 30fps that seeing it running here at 60fps looks weird.
I finished Arkham series, even including Origin, as a matter of fact I did enjoy Origin's more stylistic boss fights, from Deathstroke to Viper, love it, enjoyed it thoroughly. I didn't finish all riddles in City. But I'll be damned if I didn't finish it 100% in Knight, the tag team fight with Catwoman against Riddler was way to entertaining. Especially the part where you smash his face over and over and over, honestly the best stress reliever ever.
@Griff - YES.
Where’s my 2021 Batman Arkham Knight revisited beatdown?!...
"A performance rabbit hole."
i expected tech vid but found a drama
Insider tip here... The reason this game ran so god awfully bad was because it had to be super optimized for an APU and more specifically the shared memory between cpu and gpu of said APU.
When they made the port they used that same modified version of the engine and it's the constant moving of things between storage and the different memory pipelines that was the biggest factor in terrible performance.
There is some more nuance to it than that alone but that's the major issue. With proper hardware on PC you can brute force your way to 4k60. You could do it with the patched version on an AMD 290x at all times EXCEPT when the batmobile was on screen and that's because it has effects enabled that aren't when you are gliding and it's using higher LOD textures that swap more often
Im running it on a core i5 6500 and a 1060 6gb, got it on the epic store and I’ve had no issues, running it on high and locked the frame rate to 60fps. I haven’t exactly been monitoring the FPS but I’ve barely seen any stuttering or noticed any frame rate loss
If you combine in game vsync (wich is double buffered) with rtss's scanline sync set to its third state, you will end up having a fully factional triple buffered vsync. Then cap your fps through rtss to half of your refresh rate and boom! No stutters, no tearing, no framedrops (if you have an ideal ring and your settings optimized), no texture streaming, no frame skipping issues at all. Just a smooth locked performance! So for 60fps make sure you are playing on a 100hz-120hz monitor and for 30 play at 60hz and problems solved!
Can you explain how Scanline Sync works? I never understood. Why is there double and triple options? What values should I use there? What do they do
It seems even when the texture pool is restricted to less than the card's available VRAM, streaming is still going on. Maybe it's hardcoded and restricting the texture set just reduces the size of textures being streamed (making it faster), rather than stopping streaming.
The bottleneck then is either driver's texture management or the PCIe connection. Both the 390 and 2060S have a PCIe3 x16 interface, but maybe the 390 can't use all that bandwidth internally. Limiting the PCIe bandwidth using risers or an older motherboard might help narrow down whether this is the case (390 performance would remain unchanged while 2060S would deteriorate).
DF, please tell us about technology behind some realistic looking episode of "Love, Death & Robots" CGI, and how far we are from real time graphics with such quality
Imagine how many times Rich has played the first 15-30 minutes of Batman Arkham Knight
Anyone else notice the audio in this video is really fuzzy? For a second I thought my phone speakers were going.
Man this is my favorite channel hands down. It's a geek dream come true play
Thank you for this, it has always been a mystery to me how people had such a rough time with this game, and you inadvertently revealed it here. I was gaming at 2560*1600 with vsync on back when this game launched and it was more or less fine for me - the odd bit of a stutter, but nothing that could explain the outrage that was being shown by people in general.
Good morning DF! From New Orleans. Love your videos.
We need to test this game on CRT!
I think it will look ok but man it's time to save up to buy new monitor :P
I actually do not remember how it got fixed for me (I have a hexacore CPU i7-5820K with Nvidia GTX 970), but I did not have that many issues. I used the tweak tool you mentioned in the video, but it only worked for a while. I may have still have Batman Arkham Knight installed, I may give it a try to see if newer drivers fixed it for me. It is so refreshing to actually hear about someone that had the resources to investigate after all this time (and the patience to do it). You won a subscriber right here.
the performance in arkham knight was fixed just a month or two after launch. a lot of the launch issues were fixed almost immediately.
part of the texture streaming issues are down to the implementation of insanely huge textures of basically everything. newer games are turning to more procedural texture techniques meaning theres less need to stream in huge amounts of data from the storage drive. I think the large part of the problems are entirely down to the dated unreal engine 3. arkham knight literally pushes the UE3 to its limit. the use of mostly PBR materials and shaders in a game engine that was really never built around this method shows how badly its effecting things. every main character in the game has dozens of materials, each needing a roughness map, normal map, albedo map, ect, so for every 4k albedo texture you need at least 3 other textures to give the material its proper look.
proof of this is that issues are MUCH reduced when loading from an SSD , but when loading from a traditional mechanical hard drive the texture streaming is terrible.
I think its time people realised what an accomplishment they managed to pull off when they made arkham knight in a game engine from the previous generation. with the resources they have, of course its primarily a console port, but when you can run a game that looks THIS good on a gtx750ti and hit a solid 40fps at all times, sure, performance still isnt amazing but tbh , performance in crysis1 still isnt amazing either.
True but for some reason DF and console fanboys bring it up like the whole pc catalogue is based on this single game, I played through it at 4k 60fps max settings while console guys were telling me it was better at 1080p 30fps with all the nvidia gameworks missing ? 🤔
Yes I'm not sure why this video has been made. I play this game on Steam all the time and it has no issues whatsoever.
A lot of people do have issues with it, me included. Saying you didn't doesn't mean everyone else that did were lying.
“This game only respects two things: Overhead and power”
It’s not a bad port, it just has high standards.
only batcomputer able to run this game optimize
11:29 when Alex says "wolfenstein".
He pronounces it as it should be pronounced.
Wichard likes Wifenshtien
when John says "then"
ALph4 I know, I still find it funny 😂
Thumbnail image is from Arkham Origins?
Lol true
Yep
Arkham Knight is one of THE best looking PC games ever made PROVIDED you have the power. The level of detail & texture quality in this game and the sheer scale is mindblowing.
And yes this game REQUIRES bruteforce to run with all bells and whistles enabled if you want to have smooth gameplay. Accept it, respect it and you will be treated with one of the best looking games of all time. Do not complain of performance issues with suboptimal hardware hoping for a "fix" if you want to have the game look at its best, not gonna happen.
3080 + 5800X3D at 4K is pretty damn smooth. Maxed out Gimpworks too!
So if the texture streaming is the issue, can you run the game on TITAN RTX and somehow force the game to load up all the textures into the buffer and keep them there?
If you "keep" it there then it wouldn't be "streaming"
wow why didnt richard do that?
Yes I do it with my 2080ti
@@hkoizumi3134 Well that's the entire point. If streaming is the issue, we can get rid of that issue by getting rid of streaming.
I still think that with this game is that the problem is trying to throw power at it. When I initially played this at the time of release it was on a R9 270x 2GB. A very mid-range card. I was having issues with motion blur, so had to turn that off, but otherwise, the game ran really well. Friends with much more powerful cards were having trouble. And it seemed like myself and others with more middling hardware were able to have a decent play experience. Maybe because we're willing, able, and accepting of compromising detail settings? I can't remember what I set everything to, I do remember the game was (and frankly still is) glorious to look at.
does this game have some unstoppable stutter that will happen no matter what you do to fix it. mainly the one where it micro stutters when flying and driving
Yes I can confirm that even with it installed on NVME, 2080 ti, 9900k, 16gb ram, ther microstutters are still there even though i run the game at 4k with max settings 80 fps
Bold using the Origins thumbnail on Rocksteady's game haha
Man I had almost forgotten about what a disaster the original pc launch of Arkham tank was.
Arkham ‘tank’ lmao
Having a 760 ti, this game was lagging no matter what setting i put on low. Now that i got a 1070, i can finally play it.. years later. It still drops frames, but at least its 80 % smooth with the right settings.
I play on 1060 6GB and it`s 60fps most of the time. 1080p maxed without fog of course.I highly recommend turning it off. Also depends on your CPU. I`m on i7 2600.
Basically it's a case of four years later we finally have hardware that can brute-force past the issues and deliver more consistent performance. This is why you just wait to buy games, get them free or dirt cheap, and by then you'll be able to run them well enough to enjoy them too.
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet or if you've tested this or not, but I just happened to be doing some research on physics engines in games and came across an old LTT video documenting increased frames in Arkham Knight using a secondary NVIDIA GPU for PhysX. It might be worth a shot to see how that configuration works (something like a 1080Ti+1080 on a system with a 9900K to eliminate any bottlenecks). I had forgotten this game was even a PhysX title, so it might be worth looking into should you have the urge to revisit this topic again.
Still my personal pick for best looking game this gen. All the technical and gameplay issues aside, this is one of the most aesthetically incredible games ever created. It has the perfect balance of realism/detail and artistic style. I actually think it'll age super nicely in the years and decades to come as well
Can confirm it still looks great!
Ive run the Arkham games from the Epic games store on my PC. I'm using an i5 8400 16GB of RAM @2666MHz and a GTX 1060 6GB overclocked @2000MHz. My PC ran all of the Arkham games at 1080p with all graphics settings set to the max and they all perform perfectly fine. Although occasionally *all* of the Arkham games, not just Arkham Knight, have had some really weird behaviors where my GPU usage would just randomly drop to like 7% and it would stutter especially Arkham Asylum. As for the whole Arkham Knight situation I've never seen the framerate drop any lower than 55-60 fps at any time except when there is a lot of the Nvidia interactive smoke/fog filling up at least half of the screen.
So that's probably why it ran well on my system when I last played it (Steam version). I used an i5-6500, RX 480 8 GB and 8 GB RAM at the time and I locked my GPU's framerate to 60 FPS in Radeon Settings. I might have used Enhanced Sync as well, but I'm not sure. Other settings were 1080p and I believe high settings - aside from things like Physx for obvious reasons. I don't recall experiencing any problems. I felt I was lucky, given the game's reputation. I got it a while after all the patches were out.
i hate denuvo. And this is what i have to say about it:
- CLEARLY the loading time increases with denuvo
- maybe the high-end CPU's don't get affected by denuvo, BUT the older CPU's are...way more then the newer CPU's
...it's still a BS software that hurts the end user, the consumer. There are a lot of types of pirates: some just try the game as a demo, other play the whole game without paying...but a pirate will never think something like: "oh, this game isn't cracked yet, i better buy it" ... usually they don't have money, or better to say, they don't have their own income, salary. BUT those without salary will grow up and buy the games or series that they liked.
Yep. Denuvo does hurt performance. Loading time is a part of performance. Nobody wants to sit around on loading screens, they want to be playing the game. And yeah, I'm kind of sick of channels that do a video comparing Denuvo VS Denuvo free using a Core i7 processor. Cool, Denuvo doesn't have enough overhead to impact a game on a super expensive processor. Nobody expected it to. Test it on lower end CPUs where there's a possibility Denuvo could be taking away CPU resources the game needs or the test is meaningless.
Need...more ....POWAAAAAH!! (I swear I could hear my r9 390 crying as I watched this video)
lmao
SpontaneousWeasel I cannot dooo it Captin’! The delithium crystals are breakin’ up! She’s gunna blow!
play with powahhhhh nintendo powahhhh
Same and I'm still not upgrading yet and upload more r9 390 videos
I'm probably one of the few people that considers Knight their favorite in the series. I'm not denying it has problems, but I ended up going back to that one the most compared to the other games.
I really enjoyed the first game and beat it multiple times, but I just could never get into Arkham City. I wish I got this when it was free because I think I would enjoy this more than City.
@@chrisrichfield8906 City is a game I love, but the main campaign feels a bit too rushed and underdeveloped at parts that makes return trips less enticing for me. A lot of people prefer Origins and City due to the lack of Bat-Tank combat, which is understandable. However, what keeps me coming back to this game is that the 3 islands of Gotham are probably my favorite Arkham hub world. As for its story, while I think the main villain plot has its issues, I feel AK has the best introspective moments for Batman/Bruce Wayne in the series at this point. That and I like the feel of the gliding, driving, combat and stealth mechanics. Nonetheless, I like Arkham City, Asylum and Knight almost equally, with Knight coming out slightly ahead. Origins is cool, but it has some issues with its design that doesn't feel as graceful as how the Rocksteady games did, but it atleast had some neat bosses.
@@XZ-III You're probably right that I'm overstating it. I guess it seems that way from the circles I'm around. I've encountered plenty of people who liked the Knight or considered it better than Origins, but whenever it's a discussion of favorites, Knight's often been the least popular option, it's usually City, followed by Asylum or Origins.
This has to be the most entertaining Richard solo video on the channel
When I first bought my 4k TV and was trying out a bunch of games in 4k, Arkham Knight was the first to blow me away. This game looks phenomenal in 4k.
4k TV…uhmmm, you mean 4k monitor, right? ‘4k TV’ makes it sound like you’re referring to consoles, lol.
@@greatdelusion7654 My PC is hooked up to my TV. I don't even own a PC monitor.
jonnyX06
Cool. What are your specs, may I ask? And do you run this game on 4k at 30 or 60fps?
@@greatdelusion7654 Back when I played this game I had a GTX 970 and a 4770k CPU @4.3Ghz. I played it in 4k at 30fps but had to turn some graphics settings down. I have a 1080 Ti now.
jonnyX06
I played this game first on PS4 and enjoyed the 30fps experience, but playing at 60fps 1080p is more preferable for me cause I find the combat is more fluid and responsive at 60fps.
Thx for all the effort you put into these analysis! A lot of people deeply appreciate it :)
Are you considering doing the frame capped tests without v-sync as well? I would like to see if there's a difference compared to just capping the framerate with something like nvidiainspector. Since variable refresh rate monitors are more standard these days, I think it would be useful information.
I always thought something was screwed up on my pc. Thanks for the info. 👍
Recently played through Arkham Knight in 1440p on my Radeon VII and that was a smoooooth experience. Would the 16gb HBM2 VRAM be a reason for it?
Partly, maybe... I'd say it's more likely that you're just throwing way more GPU power at it than was available at launch.
Possibly, or the VRAM bandwidth; that card has 1TB/s memory bandwidth, which is the highest of any consumer card currently available on the market.
Did you also cap the Framerate?
My i7 4790k 8gb R9 390x is running this game maxed out at 1440p 60fps smooth as well, using the epic store version.
Skip to 4:42 for the clip you’ve been waiting for
Huh, honestly didn't expect a performance difference between the versions. Usually assumed an Epic Store game is the exact same as a Steam game, just with a different launcher. Interesting finds.
No more denuvo in epic version
Neither did I. But the fact that Denuvo's not on the Epic version it kinda makes sense.
This game is why I prefer console. I know my console will play any game I put in it
The game runs pretty good now other than microstutters while gliding through the city.
love how they still use a 400$ from Nvidia vs a 350$ amd gpu but wont use the 5700 XT which is a 400$ gpu vs the 400$ super. once again you can tell how they have to make Nvidia look good.
than when it comes to the 1060 NOW they use the proper class of gpu with the 480 to compare since the 1060 is better in this game....
I am an nvidia owner and you are goddamn right..
I have a similar performance in Ryse: Son of Rome.
I play it on my new PC I bought a couple of weeks ago and I installed Ryse expecting to stay above 60 or maybe even 100 fps at all times.
But often in executions or scripted events, the frames drop into the 50s and even outside of fights when I have well above 100 fps the game just doesn't feel fluid.
Then I turned on Vsync and everything runs just fine, no stutters, no frame drops.
I feel that with my new PC I finally understand why Vsync exists, turning it on in more and more games for different reasons.
Honestly this is exactly why I have a freesync monitor.
the problem is on the UE 3-4 since forever. imo
Richard satisfies that technical geekiness that lies within all of us.
Wow, Richard has come a long way since Mean Machines Sega magazine...
Pretty odd that we're still looking into a game that came out over 4 years ago. Though it is one of the most infamous PC ports whilst looking incredible for it's time and today. Quite interesting.
They're still using Crysis 3 for benchmarks and it came out around the time when PS4 was only announced, months before it actually came out.
Well, the in-game settings say that anything above 90 FPS will have issues, it's cool that the game recognizes if you put a custom fps limit in the ini files. Also there is no benefit playing above the 90
Big thumbs up for giving NX Gamer a shout out :)
9:44 have you noticed that?
Another lovely video by the one and only godfather of performance analysis !
I just built a new PC just at the time Epic give away all those Batman games so it was perfect timing to test out the most demanding one.
Cpu is the 3700x, gpu is the RX5700 and I've got 32GB of 3200 memory, and I was expecting the worse with that game but to my surprise after playing it for about 40 or so minutes to test how stable my PC was, the game seem to run slick smooth even when in the car whiles only using about 40% to 60% of the gpu at max settings at 1080p, I was expecting stutters everywhere but nope, it ran well, maybe as the video above is saying, powering through it with more powerful hardware seems to fix the flaws in the game.
6:44 not so suprising, M-render is almost always better on equivalent card from nvidia than AMD
Arkham Knight is a real master piece way ahead of his time... One of the most glorious and underated game i've seen.
Underrated? It was well received as a game, especially on consoles. It's just the PC port that was an utter garbage from a technical standpoint.
@@VargVikernes1488 No, despite the poor PC Port, a Lot of people think this is the worse game on the trilogy because of the batmobile being used to almost every puzzle/fight.
I think after all these years the GoG version seems to be running very smoothly
time for Richard to re re re review it lol
It's one of the most breathtakingly gorgeous and yet complex games out there, that's why it struggles at times.
With RTSS's Scanline Sync, I get a solid 60 fps 16.6ms experience. No hitching or stutter, even when driving in the Batmobile.
So it's finally playable, if you run it through hardware half a decade more advanced than it was built with.
Jesus. You shouldn't have to HAVE a Cray in order to use Wayne's.