You did all the work for my setup. I was wondering about the results. This is the first time i've seen a developer release a benchmark before the game.
Motion Blur - Off View Distance Quality - Cinematic Anti-Aliasing Quality - Cinematic Post-Effects Quality - Cinematic Shadow Quality - High Texture Quality - Cinematic Visual Effect Quality - Very High Hair Quality - High Vegetation Quality - Very High Global Illumination Quality - Very High Reflection Quality - Very High Ray Tracing - Off FSR - 70(Quality) Frame Generation - On With These Settings You get 120fps Average on 7800xt My Spec - Sapphire Nitro+ 7800XT , 7800x3d , 32 GB RAM
@@RahulSingh-uk2sy but 480 resolution are you happy with your gpu? Wake up people kids now are happy for fsr and ray tracing and dlss !! you guys can't play any game with 1080p resolution with 60fps !!
@@RahulSingh-uk2sy I do all very high, dlss on 75, ray tracing on very high and I get 90-110 on 4070 ti super (1440p) frame gen is on too and I noticed that it actually looks best at 75% dlss. On 89% dlss the frame gen started messing up
@@CuttinInIdaho you shouldn't be, fsr looks hawful comparing to tsr and dlss, fsr looks like being 2 generations behind dlss and 1 generation behind tsr.
@@vndragonslayer1 What? Lumen is demanding but its demanding on any gpu AMD or Nvidia. Lumen does not use hardware RT (well, it can but that is the RT setting that even the 4090 is having trouble with). Unreal does have higher performance on Nvidia generally but this has always been the case, including older unreal versions.
On a laptop RTX 3060 with 6gb of vram I was able to get a decent close to 60 but had to set the global illumination to low and ssr scale to 60. Rest set to combination of high and low presets and believe with day 1 drivers for nvidia it might get better.
good choice of different scenarios. and I found your "hidden" optimized settings: everything to very high / cinematic except for Shadow Quality and Global Illumination Quality down to high, FSR Q and if necessairy Frame Generation on. However, I think this benchmarks lacks are some action scenes with some lightning effects (spells, explosions, fire, etc.), now it is only showing some scenery (foliage, water) and almost no buildings
this and the 4090 bechmark video were really good thank you. just for your note: the global lumen and shadows slider dont work when path tracing is enabled. those are the raytracing setttings for ue5, so when pathtracing is enabled it will bypass those settings. raytracing is always on, cant disable it completly we just can decide between ue5 raytracing and pathtracing.
Yup, reflections as well are also replaced. I was running some benchmarks today turning all three Shadows, GI and Reflections to LOW or Cinematic it made no difference in visuals or performance with Ray Tracing enabled
@@TerraWare im with a 4070 on a 4k tv and im trying everything to work it make with pathtracing... its only possible at ultra performance with an fps of 90 with fg. i wish those quality sliders for dlss would work. i think a 0.40 resolution with high settings and pathtracing on very high might be around 70 fps with fg which could be playable. maybe with a new nvidia driver we could gain a little too. right now it looks like i wont be able to play with pathtracing and dlss on performance unfortunatly :( that pathtracing really makes the game pop. like you said if we just could use medium pathtracing and use the ue5 shadows, but i think its not possible technicaly.
@@azamat19 4K will require a lot of sacrifice to the point it may not be worth it with that setup. I'm planning a 3080Ti video I captured all the footage earlier. I was able to do very high ray tracing at 1440P with mixture of very high and high settings DLSS Quality averaging 54 fps. With FG its actually pretty good. I looked into 4K too but the cost was way too high even with RT Medium which has blurry reflections
It's hilarious to see people go to war over gpu brands for a Chinese game that doesn't seem to even be optimized enough for 90% of PC gamers to even play it. "Durrr why not spend an extra $1000 on your card so you can have minute differences in lighting that are still debatable and only subjectively better" I honestly think most people who say these things are probably running a 4070 or worse and have 0 authority to even comment on performance. Crazy to see the 2m concurrent on steam. I expect at least 500k refunds over the next day or so. I'll just wait until the game is more optimized and/or when cards can truly run this game. I was scared when DLSS and FSR came out. I thought to myself, " well, now devs are going to cut even more corners and are going to lean on these features for a game to even be playable" and that's what is seeming to happen with this one. I'd never spend 1200-2000 on a GPU to play a game it can't even run without DLSS on max settings at at least 1440p. If the by far most powerful card on the market right now is struggling that bad without DLSS, what are we even doing?
@@Healcraft I don't care what anyone says. If a game can't get 144+ fps on max settings in 1440p with a 4090 without using DLSS it's optimization is not acceptable. Remember the jump from PS2 gen to PS3 gen? It's crazy to compare what they were doing with such worse hardware. The ps3 literally had 256mb vram, look at the amazing games that were made. Even up to today's standards. PS4 Generation had some great games as well but you can tell that devs started cutting corners and taking advantage of the surplus of VRAM from new hardware. Now this generation memory leaks and insane vram usage in games is commonplace. In my opinion on an unacceptable level. And now this is now being compounded with devs relying on FSR and DLSS. Almost seems like they are using 4080 and 4090 as their baseline during development. Idk, just seems like hardware keeps advancing so quick that developers can't keep up so they just end up using the beefier hardware as a crutch.
@@I_am_Dad_Son Well I agree with you mostly. After playing wukong mostly through (in chapter 6 and also a certain secret boss starting with E kicking my ass) The game could be more optimized, and also the shadows could look better on lower settings. Chapter 3 especially in later areas the shadows on anything but cinematic are very bad for some reason, maybe because less foliage to hide distance ones. But at the same time cinematic shadows are just too much for my AMD card. Also chapter 3 especially the last area performs much worse than the benchmark area which is good representation of chapter 1, and chapter 2 probably runs better.
At this point just wait for the 5090 if u have like 2.5k lying around or finance it. Even without ray tracing, 4k native fps on 7900 xtx and 4090 on new games is disappointing.
@@Chicken-o5e Exactly. If your flagship cards can't run max settings natively then the optimization is a joke. Can you even imagine if the Rtx Titan couldn't run a game in max settings in 2014. But 2024 it's somehow acceptable even though gpus are 2x the price.
This game is optimized well if you consider the environment, movement, characters etc. However the special effects, fightscenes and cutscenes drop frames like crazy. So yeah more optimization on that part.
FG works really for me on First Descendant which is an UE5 game on AMD, so probably going to use FG in this game I actually just use Native AA AMD and FG on that and been fine. Probably going to need to use FSR however in this one
maybe i missed something, when you say fsr quality i don't recall seeing that listed on the game settings is this where the % slider comes into play? if so what % is considered fsr quality? or can you point me somewhere i can look it up? thx for the video!
protip u can change settings individually without just using the preset, look at hardware unboxed setting, keep view distance and global illum on medium , and you gain many fps
Tried this on the 7900 XTX too and thought it runs extremely heavy. Didn't realize that it is that heavy on Nvidia too. Turning the settings down didn't seem to make too much difference to the image, so that's good. Ray tracing is just unplayable, AMD users shouldn't bother with it as you said. I'll check out your 4090 video now to see how that does with RT.
4090 at 23 FPS native RT very high. RT off still has Raytracing on because its unreal Engine Lumen. Which is also why you don't see any big graphical differences with RT on or Off.
4090 it is 80 fps to 90 fps with max out 4k at dlss 2 quality + fg. Personally, it's more than enough for me the visuals are incredible. If you bought a amd gpu you shouldn't even do ray tracing imo you made the decision.
@@asaneouji15 I have a 7800, 7900XTX , 4080 super and 4090. This performance on the 4090 is terrible. The light refraction on grass and flicker is atrocious. Also this game always has some form of raytracing on even when its off. UE5 Lumen is Raytracing in itself. Which is also why theres not a big graphical difference in this game with RT on vs RT off. You have no idea what you're even talking about. You can get 70 fps RT very high with frame gen using FSR on the 7900XTX that means nothing. What actually matter is native performance and for a $2,000 gpu 23 fps is not acceptable. DLSS performance is not acceptable and frame generation to have a game playable on a 4090 is not acceptable. People like you thinking this is OK is why we have crap games that run horribly on a 2,000$ GPU.
@@SemperValor Ok so wat do you suggest AMD is better for value.. Ok U r right.. But nobody bought 4090 siting value. The top tier GPU on planet earth that's 4090 and it does beat 7900 xtx even if it's by just 20%. Thats what 4090 buyers want
@@1989rs500 This isn't about AMD im saying even AMD can Raytrace this game with gimmicks like upscaling and frame generation. If Nvidia going to charge 2,000$ for a GPU it should be able to handle Nvidia's own Features without gimmicks.
Turn down tessellation if you use 4k or set it to 16X or 32X. NVIDIA has been doing that automatically and that's why they lock the setting. They use 16 X to 32X depending on the game.
Leave the game at ultra, fsr at 75%, activate frame generation, leave the game resolution at 2k, lock the FPS at 30, in the video card driver, in the game profile activate Super Resolution and AFMF, game locked at 30, the frame generation will double to 60 fps, and when AFMF is turned on it will take 60 FPS and double it to 120 FPS, that's it, you will play at 120FPS with low video card consumption, my Rysen 7 system 7700X, RX 7800XT, 32GB DDR5 6000mhz, for Nvidia users do this, lock the FPS to 30 use Frame generation, and if you have the Loss Scaling application leave it in 2x mode, the game is locked to 30, it will double to 60 and the Loss will double to 120, I recently did the test and it worked, test it and come back with the feedback.
Hey man long time no see 😂 Been Balkan country hopping so I'm catching up with your vids now lol. I just tried this on my 6800xt on 1440p UW with quality FSR Very high settings and Reflections and GI set to low (obviously RT is completely out of the question although I would have loved those sweet reflections I saw on your 4090 vid). I managed to get 65 fps average with the lowest being 50 so that's absolutely great for me, got 109 average with FG on. Think I would have liked to see a bit more performance, seems like the native fps is a bit low for a 4090 before even turning RT on, imagine if it had PT, would have probably crippled the card without Performance DLSS or something. But overall it's definitely playable at high fidelity and 60 fps avg on mid range+high end GPU's. The damn thing looks amazing though and I'm still not getting over the fact of how little Vram UE5 uses, dunno if that could be a downside when it comes to performance though but if it's not then it's a massive plus for future 8gb GPU's (which unfortunately will still be a thing as far as we know...). My GPU only used 6 gigs. Also gg FSR looks amazing here, I only noticed extremely little shadow flickering before the camera got closer on 2-3 parts only, rest was rock solid stable. Nice. Xess and TSR not so much unfortunately.
Hey man, nice to see you. Was wondering where you've been I remember you said you was traveling. That's great hope you enjoyed. My family is from that area. Good people, weather and food lol. The ray tracing here is actually path tracing, that's why is crazy heavy, it doesn't stand out as much as say Cyberpunk probably because UE5 does a pretty good job in general. The GI and shadows especially are the biggest improvement.
@@TerraWare Yeah it was great, gonna be leaving again on Sunday LOL. So NVM my comment then, I thought it was just RT, my bad. I'm actually surprised in that case that my card even managed to load it 😂 Anyways combat looks sick in this game as well so really looking forward to it.
@@constantinesoldatos Nice man enjoying the life that's great. One thing about this game's combat though is that it's being presented by the mainstream media and some others as a souls-like and I know how much you love your souls games but this isn't supposed to be that. It's more of an action game which is fine of course but just saying.
I tested it with my RTX 4080 in 1440p. Cinematic + RT Very High, DLSS Quality (67) + FG on top. I got a 96 fps average (80-110 fps). Its fine. I don’t think 5090 will capable run this game native 4k.
I tested my 4090 in the previous video. No way a 5090 would be able to do native 4K with RT very high at 60 FPS. It would have to be more than twice as fast for that to happen and I don't see that happening. The way UE5 works with all the features it will be very difficult to run games at native resolutions.
@@TerraWare As far as I experienced UE5 games built around upscaling, to be honest I have no problem with upscaling DLSS nowadays looks similar if not the same as Native. We reached a point in gaming where DLSS is a “kind of AA” because in the past there were a lots of AA options and non of them were perfect, they were very taxing on the performance like SMAA, MSAA and only FXAA was good enough and performed well but looked bad in my opinion . TAA today is the best option but far from perfect. DLSS looks sometimes better or just different, FSR 3.1 usable and it has a good image overall and XeSS is a good option as well. Edit: I’m an “old” gamer I had 3dfx Voodoo videocards before nVidia and AMD and I saw how PC graphics evolved and now people are very critical against upscaling and some jagged edges and when I was younger I played in 640x480 or 800x600 without upscaling on CRT monitors and oh man the graphics evolved a lot.
just bump down Shadows, VE, GI and you will get 60+ FPS (im on a UVed 6800XT). Double if you toggle FG of course. Performs fine considering we haven't gotten release drivers yet.
Congratulations, you are on Amd. Nv 4070 gives out here at 1440p for max, RT-max!, with dlss-quality and fg standard 60 fps everywhere with a picture of beauty, without a scratch of sandpaper like TSR.
its like 30 fps less than 1080p on paper, it says 60 fps but its really 30, if u dont see any impefection at that low fps, sry but u have bad eyes, if u had 60 and fg that brings it at 120 or so, then i would belive ya, ofc amd would have worse experience, i dont deny that, but u are giving nvidia too much credit
I just ran the test immediately after the download without touching any settings on my 4070 @ 1440p and the results were pretty good. I got 86fps and everything was set by default to Very High. I'm happy with these results.
@@stixktv__9999 From the information I have gathered it comes down to differences in texture compression methods and other factors. It has been this way for a long time. It also depends on the game, some games its only a little higher on AMD like a couple hundred MB some games it can be 1 or 2 GB and in some rare games like Starfield for example its about the same.
4070Ti Super, 7800x3d 32 gigs and i have 43FPS avg on 1080p, cinematic settings everything to the fullest with RT on very hight and DLSS off Same settings but RT off and avg is 64 fps, with DLSS it jumps to around 120fps avg Is it me or i barely see any difference with RT on or off, and they keep pushing that DLSS agenda
Ray tracing is path tracing in this game and it improves the GI, shadows especially, massively, reflections and AO. Look at my previous 4090 video if curious I compare RT at the 5:17 mark
@piotrj.451 That's a good question that will depend on the person. For me, yea probably I'm not a big fan of UE5 shadows sometimes they look soft and flickery. RT improves it very nicely.
That's because AMD is stubborn and they don't see the future with ray tracing. It's their politics. Sad that Microsoft and Sony are going straight with AMD.
With my RTX 4070 in 1440p all maxed out + DLSSq (67%) i get 40 FPS, 15 FPS more than this crap 😂😂😂 and i payed 600€ in 2023 😂😂😂 LoL trashdeon GPUs are dead
Well yeah RTX 4000 has a massive advantage with path tracing. There's only like 4 or 5 games with path tracing though. Regular ray tracing the XTX would have very similar or better performance and rasterization it can keep up with my 4090. I think for $900 the XTX is a beast.
@TerraWare sorry but no, there's no one radeon card that make worth to pay! No one! Because all games come out from beginning of 2024 is based on UE5 most of the time with Lumen RT or Hardwared RT, rasterization is dead! All actually radeon gpus on the market are useless
@@OmnianMIU Well the truth is I've made a ton of UE5 comparisons between my 7900XTX and RTX 4090. The XTX is within 20% of the 4090's performance sometimes even matching it at half the cost. How is that useless? These path traced games are far from the norm and there's only a handful of them. Truth is so far UE5 games have been using software lumen where Radeon GPU's are very competitive. I have comparisons to prove it not theories. I wish developers would use the hardware RT as I feel it does a much better job but so far they aren't using it unless its some Nvidia sponsored title like this one.
@@OmnianMIU Oh I understand why someone would rather have the 4080 Super since they are so close in price. For someone like me who really likes ray tracing and the superior upscaling. Others may rather have the extra raster depending on their preferences.
You did all the work for my setup. I was wondering about the results. This is the first time i've seen a developer release a benchmark before the game.
I wish more devs did this. Hopefully its representative of the real game and if not I hope the game is more performant.
Motion Blur - Off
View Distance Quality - Cinematic
Anti-Aliasing Quality - Cinematic
Post-Effects Quality - Cinematic
Shadow Quality - High
Texture Quality - Cinematic
Visual Effect Quality - Very High
Hair Quality - High
Vegetation Quality - Very High
Global Illumination Quality - Very High
Reflection Quality - Very High
Ray Tracing - Off
FSR - 70(Quality)
Frame Generation - On
With These Settings You get 120fps Average on 7800xt
My Spec - Sapphire Nitro+ 7800XT , 7800x3d , 32 GB RAM
@@RahulSingh-uk2sy Nice. Will have to try that on my 7800XT
@@RahulSingh-uk2sy but 480 resolution
are you happy with your gpu?
Wake up people
kids now are happy for fsr and ray tracing and dlss !!
you guys can't play any game with 1080p resolution with 60fps !!
framegen is dumb, always off same with fsr, way too grainy looking and input lag from frame gen. Best is XeSS 100% the water doesnt go smudgey then
@@RahulSingh-uk2sy I do all very high, dlss on 75, ray tracing on very high and I get 90-110 on 4070 ti super (1440p) frame gen is on too and I noticed that it actually looks best at 75% dlss. On 89% dlss the frame gen started messing up
This is the best FSR example I have seen to date. I am impressed.
@@CuttinInIdaho you shouldn't be, fsr looks hawful comparing to tsr and dlss, fsr looks like being 2 generations behind dlss and 1 generation behind tsr.
@@stixktv__9999 lol I have a 4070 ti super and I get what you are saying. I think in this case it is beyond what I thought it could do
@@stixktv__9999 lmao in 4k fsr looks absolutely fine, however in 1080 it looks like trash (and so does dlss anyway)
@@guigothesorcz I suggest you to put glasses then.
fsr makes the water look smudgey even on 100% scale, its the worst thing in this game
This game is demanding because Lumen is always active.
@@rkeith7766 what is lumen? Can u explain?
its comical when amd fanbois said rtx is a gimmick. now theyre angry their temu gpu can't handle a chinese game with all the bells and whistle
@@vndragonslayer1 angry? I guess the amd fanboys told you they're angry, lol. In other words, do you sleep better making things up?
@@vndragonslayer1 What? Lumen is demanding but its demanding on any gpu AMD or Nvidia.
Lumen does not use hardware RT (well, it can but that is the RT setting that even the 4090 is having trouble with).
Unreal does have higher performance on Nvidia generally but this has always been the case, including older unreal versions.
@@vndragonslayer1 🤣🤣🤣
good info, thanks. Looks like FG is doing a good job
On a laptop RTX 3060 with 6gb of vram I was able to get a decent close to 60 but had to set the global illumination to low and ssr scale to 60. Rest set to combination of high and low presets and believe with day 1 drivers for nvidia it might get better.
Nice, hopefully the full game is not all that different than this benchmark too and if it is hope its better. Wishful thinking I know.
good choice of different scenarios. and I found your "hidden" optimized settings: everything to very high / cinematic except for Shadow Quality and Global Illumination Quality down to high, FSR Q and if necessairy Frame Generation on.
However, I think this benchmarks lacks are some action scenes with some lightning effects (spells, explosions, fire, etc.), now it is only showing some scenery (foliage, water) and almost no buildings
Oh yeah, we need the game to definitively judge the performance.
Maybe a dedicated driver update can increase performance a bit as well
@@qarim350xd I'm sure there will be.
I'm on a R9 9900x with this card, getting 140 constant with frame gen and fsr on native AA
At 4k and fsr on I get 100fps on my 7900xtx and the 7950x. Cinematic on all.
@@PureTazr i have Same CPU und gpu. But 60fps
@@PureTazr разрешение 2к
@@dimakrutoj93 I have a 4080 super and ryzen 7 7800x3d thats about what i get 90-100
this and the 4090 bechmark video were really good thank you. just for your note: the global lumen and shadows slider dont work when path tracing is enabled. those are the raytracing setttings for ue5, so when pathtracing is enabled it will bypass those settings. raytracing is always on, cant disable it completly we just can decide between ue5 raytracing and pathtracing.
Yup, reflections as well are also replaced. I was running some benchmarks today turning all three Shadows, GI and Reflections to LOW or Cinematic it made no difference in visuals or performance with Ray Tracing enabled
@@TerraWare im with a 4070 on a 4k tv and im trying everything to work it make with pathtracing... its only possible at ultra performance with an fps of 90 with fg. i wish those quality sliders for dlss would work. i think a 0.40 resolution with high settings and pathtracing on very high might be around 70 fps with fg which could be playable. maybe with a new nvidia driver we could gain a little too. right now it looks like i wont be able to play with pathtracing and dlss on performance unfortunatly :( that pathtracing really makes the game pop. like you said if we just could use medium pathtracing and use the ue5 shadows, but i think its not possible technicaly.
@@azamat19 4K will require a lot of sacrifice to the point it may not be worth it with that setup. I'm planning a 3080Ti video I captured all the footage earlier. I was able to do very high ray tracing at 1440P with mixture of very high and high settings DLSS Quality averaging 54 fps. With FG its actually pretty good.
I looked into 4K too but the cost was way too high even with RT Medium which has blurry reflections
Thanks for the video. The graphics are best for 4k. FPS are very hard to get for the initial release.
It's hilarious to see people go to war over gpu brands for a Chinese game that doesn't seem to even be optimized enough for 90% of PC gamers to even play it.
"Durrr why not spend an extra $1000 on your card so you can have minute differences in lighting that are still debatable and only subjectively better" I honestly think most people who say these things are probably running a 4070 or worse and have 0 authority to even comment on performance.
Crazy to see the 2m concurrent on steam. I expect at least 500k refunds over the next day or so. I'll just wait until the game is more optimized and/or when cards can truly run this game.
I was scared when DLSS and FSR came out. I thought to myself, " well, now devs are going to cut even more corners and are going to lean on these features for a game to even be playable" and that's what is seeming to happen with this one.
I'd never spend 1200-2000 on a GPU to play a game it can't even run without DLSS on max settings at at least 1440p. If the by far most powerful card on the market right now is struggling that bad without DLSS, what are we even doing?
its optimized u just set view distance to medium and gain +30 fps
@@Healcraft I don't care what anyone says. If a game can't get 144+ fps on max settings in 1440p with a 4090 without using DLSS it's optimization is not acceptable.
Remember the jump from PS2 gen to PS3 gen? It's crazy to compare what they were doing with such worse hardware. The ps3 literally had 256mb vram, look at the amazing games that were made. Even up to today's standards.
PS4 Generation had some great games as well but you can tell that devs started cutting corners and taking advantage of the surplus of VRAM from new hardware.
Now this generation memory leaks and insane vram usage in games is commonplace. In my opinion on an unacceptable level. And now this is now being compounded with devs relying on FSR and DLSS. Almost seems like they are using 4080 and 4090 as their baseline during development.
Idk, just seems like hardware keeps advancing so quick that developers can't keep up so they just end up using the beefier hardware as a crutch.
@@I_am_Dad_Son Well I agree with you mostly. After playing wukong mostly through (in chapter 6 and also a certain secret boss starting with E kicking my ass) The game could be more optimized, and also the shadows could look better on lower settings. Chapter 3 especially in later areas the shadows on anything but cinematic are very bad for some reason, maybe because less foliage to hide distance ones. But at the same time cinematic shadows are just too much for my AMD card. Also chapter 3 especially the last area performs much worse than the benchmark area which is good representation of chapter 1, and chapter 2 probably runs better.
At this point just wait for the 5090 if u have like 2.5k lying around or finance it. Even without ray tracing, 4k native fps on 7900 xtx and 4090 on new games is disappointing.
@@Chicken-o5e Exactly. If your flagship cards can't run max settings natively then the optimization is a joke. Can you even imagine if the Rtx Titan couldn't run a game in max settings in 2014. But 2024 it's somehow acceptable even though gpus are 2x the price.
This game is optimized well if you consider the environment, movement, characters etc. However the special effects, fightscenes and cutscenes drop frames like crazy. So yeah more optimization on that part.
FG works really for me on First Descendant which is an UE5 game on AMD, so probably going to use FG in this game
I actually just use Native AA AMD and FG on that and been fine. Probably going to need to use FSR however in this one
Feels like a 2080ti and Cyberpunk release all over again with those fps
LOL Very true.
maybe i missed something, when you say fsr quality i don't recall seeing that listed on the game settings is this where the % slider comes into play? if so what % is considered fsr quality? or can you point me somewhere i can look it up? thx for the video!
FSr Quality is 67%
Balanced is 58%
Performance 50%
Ultra performance 33%
Makes me want to trade my 7900xtx for a 4080S
10-15 fps diff from the 4090 in 4K im starting to see this trend with UE5 games
it is just an overall trend thats 35 percent
protip u can change settings individually without just using the preset, look at hardware unboxed setting, keep view distance and global illum on medium , and you gain many fps
Increasing resolution doesn't not require high tessellation because it is a wast or resource and power.
Tried this on the 7900 XTX too and thought it runs extremely heavy. Didn't realize that it is that heavy on Nvidia too. Turning the settings down didn't seem to make too much difference to the image, so that's good. Ray tracing is just unplayable, AMD users shouldn't bother with it as you said. I'll check out your 4090 video now to see how that does with RT.
4090 at 23 FPS native RT very high. RT off still has Raytracing on because its unreal Engine Lumen. Which is also why you don't see any big graphical differences with RT on or Off.
4090 it is 80 fps to 90 fps with max out 4k at dlss 2 quality + fg. Personally, it's more than enough for me the visuals are incredible. If you bought a amd gpu you shouldn't even do ray tracing imo you made the decision.
@@asaneouji15 I have a 7800, 7900XTX , 4080 super and 4090. This performance on the 4090 is terrible. The light refraction on grass and flicker is atrocious. Also this game always has some form of raytracing on even when its off. UE5 Lumen is Raytracing in itself. Which is also why theres not a big graphical difference in this game with RT on vs RT off. You have no idea what you're even talking about. You can get 70 fps RT very high with frame gen using FSR on the 7900XTX that means nothing. What actually matter is native performance and for a $2,000 gpu 23 fps is not acceptable. DLSS performance is not acceptable and frame generation to have a game playable on a 4090 is not acceptable. People like you thinking this is OK is why we have crap games that run horribly on a 2,000$ GPU.
@@SemperValor
Ok so wat do you suggest AMD is better for value.. Ok U r right.. But nobody bought 4090 siting value.
The top tier GPU on planet earth that's 4090 and it does beat 7900 xtx even if it's by just 20%. Thats what 4090 buyers want
@@1989rs500 This isn't about AMD im saying even AMD can Raytrace this game with gimmicks like upscaling and frame generation. If Nvidia going to charge 2,000$ for a GPU it should be able to handle Nvidia's own Features without gimmicks.
great stuff. i hope next gen AMD can get RT right. rasterization actually looked and ran great.
Yes very true. Rasterization looks fantastic.
Frame generation isn't working for me. I go to the games menu, turn it on/off and I get the same FPS... Any help?
you have to restart the game/program usually
@@Healcraft It got fix on its own in the end, thanks though. On chapter 3 now. What a game!
Turn down tessellation if you use 4k or set it to 16X or 32X. NVIDIA has been doing that automatically and that's why they lock the setting. They use 16 X to 32X depending on the game.
Leave the game at ultra, fsr at 75%, activate frame generation, leave the game resolution at 2k, lock the FPS at 30, in the video card driver, in the game profile activate Super Resolution and AFMF, game locked at 30, the frame generation will double to 60 fps, and when AFMF is turned on it will take 60 FPS and double it to 120 FPS, that's it, you will play at 120FPS with low video card consumption, my Rysen 7 system 7700X, RX 7800XT, 32GB DDR5 6000mhz, for Nvidia users do this, lock the FPS to 30 use Frame generation, and if you have the Loss Scaling application leave it in 2x mode, the game is locked to 30, it will double to 60 and the Loss will double to 120, I recently did the test and it worked, test it and come back with the feedback.
Sadly, game companies no longer optimize their product's software and we need to rely on frame generation.
Hey man long time no see 😂 Been Balkan country hopping so I'm catching up with your vids now lol. I just tried this on my 6800xt on 1440p UW with quality FSR Very high settings and Reflections and GI set to low (obviously RT is completely out of the question although I would have loved those sweet reflections I saw on your 4090 vid). I managed to get 65 fps average with the lowest being 50 so that's absolutely great for me, got 109 average with FG on.
Think I would have liked to see a bit more performance, seems like the native fps is a bit low for a 4090 before even turning RT on, imagine if it had PT, would have probably crippled the card without Performance DLSS or something. But overall it's definitely playable at high fidelity and 60 fps avg on mid range+high end GPU's. The damn thing looks amazing though and I'm still not getting over the fact of how little Vram UE5 uses, dunno if that could be a downside when it comes to performance though but if it's not then it's a massive plus for future 8gb GPU's (which unfortunately will still be a thing as far as we know...). My GPU only used 6 gigs.
Also gg FSR looks amazing here, I only noticed extremely little shadow flickering before the camera got closer on 2-3 parts only, rest was rock solid stable. Nice. Xess and TSR not so much unfortunately.
Hey man, nice to see you. Was wondering where you've been I remember you said you was traveling. That's great hope you enjoyed. My family is from that area. Good people, weather and food lol.
The ray tracing here is actually path tracing, that's why is crazy heavy, it doesn't stand out as much as say Cyberpunk probably because UE5 does a pretty good job in general. The GI and shadows especially are the biggest improvement.
Bro rt very high means path tracing in this game
@@TerraWare Yeah it was great, gonna be leaving again on Sunday LOL.
So NVM my comment then, I thought it was just RT, my bad. I'm actually surprised in that case that my card even managed to load it 😂
Anyways combat looks sick in this game as well so really looking forward to it.
@@umutnengin4951 I take what I said back then, had no clue it was PT, thanks man!
@@constantinesoldatos Nice man enjoying the life that's great. One thing about this game's combat though is that it's being presented by the mainstream media and some others as a souls-like and I know how much you love your souls games but this isn't supposed to be that. It's more of an action game which is fine of course but just saying.
I tested it with my RTX 4080 in 1440p. Cinematic + RT Very High, DLSS Quality (67) + FG on top. I got a 96 fps average (80-110 fps). Its fine. I don’t think 5090 will capable run this game native 4k.
I tested my 4090 in the previous video. No way a 5090 would be able to do native 4K with RT very high at 60 FPS. It would have to be more than twice as fast for that to happen and I don't see that happening.
The way UE5 works with all the features it will be very difficult to run games at native resolutions.
@@TerraWare As far as I experienced UE5 games built around upscaling, to be honest I have no problem with upscaling DLSS nowadays looks similar if not the same as Native. We reached a point in gaming where DLSS is a “kind of AA” because in the past there were a lots of AA options and non of them were perfect, they were very taxing on the performance like SMAA, MSAA and only FXAA was good enough and performed well but looked bad in my opinion . TAA today is the best option but far from perfect. DLSS looks sometimes better or just different, FSR 3.1 usable and it has a good image overall and XeSS is a good option as well.
Edit: I’m an “old” gamer I had 3dfx Voodoo videocards before nVidia and AMD and I saw how PC graphics evolved and now people are very critical against upscaling and some jagged edges and when I was younger I played in 640x480 or 800x600 without upscaling on CRT monitors and oh man the graphics evolved a lot.
Is your XTX overclocked, cause that's a lot of juice it's pulling.
Yes it is.
This game is mighty demanding. Only top tier GPUs are able to get 60 fps at 1440p with no RT... This is insane. My 6800XT does not stand a chance. :D
just bump down Shadows, VE, GI and you will get 60+ FPS (im on a UVed 6800XT). Double if you toggle FG of course. Performs fine considering we haven't gotten release drivers yet.
Should be able to replicate at 1440P with the 6800XT what I am getting at 4K in this video to some extent.
Congratulations, you are on Amd. Nv 4070 gives out here at 1440p for max, RT-max!, with dlss-quality and fg standard 60 fps everywhere with a picture of beauty, without a scratch of sandpaper like TSR.
its like 30 fps less than 1080p on paper, it says 60 fps but its really 30, if u dont see any impefection at that low fps, sry but u have bad eyes, if u had 60 and fg that brings it at 120 or so, then i would belive ya, ofc amd would have worse experience, i dont deny that, but u are giving nvidia too much credit
hellblade 2 too
I just ran the test immediately after the download without touching any settings on my 4070 @ 1440p and the results were pretty good. I got 86fps and everything was set by default to Very High. I'm happy with these results.
You've got to restart to apply full Ray tracing
I was getting 120 FPS without RT on, 100 with. 4090 and 14900k at 4k
With DLSS + Frame Generation yea
Maybe some performance will be gained with a game ready driver
Probably.
Can it run Crisis now becomes "Can you run Wukong?"
I'm sure they'll drop something although from my experience this GPU's performance is right where it should be for a highly detailed UE5 game.
Even 7900 xtx struggling at 4k cinematic!? 😮
Big difference in vram utilization between the 7900 xtx and the 4090 : INTERESTING.
That's actually quite normal. I have tons of comparison videos between these two or my 6800XT and 3080Ti
@@TerraWare oh okay, can you explain the reasons please ?
@@stixktv__9999 From the information I have gathered it comes down to differences in texture compression methods and other factors. It has been this way for a long time. It also depends on the game, some games its only a little higher on AMD like a couple hundred MB some games it can be 1 or 2 GB and in some rare games like Starfield for example its about the same.
@@TerraWare okay, thanks for the explanation.
4070Ti Super, 7800x3d 32 gigs and i have 43FPS avg on 1080p, cinematic settings everything to the fullest with RT on very hight and DLSS off
Same settings but RT off and avg is 64 fps, with DLSS it jumps to around 120fps avg
Is it me or i barely see any difference with RT on or off, and they keep pushing that DLSS agenda
Ray tracing is path tracing in this game and it improves the GI, shadows especially, massively, reflections and AO. Look at my previous 4090 video if curious I compare RT at the 5:17 mark
@@TerraWare Yeah, now i see it, but individiual question is, does it's really worth 20 fps in this case?
@piotrj.451 That's a good question that will depend on the person. For me, yea probably I'm not a big fan of UE5 shadows sometimes they look soft and flickery. RT improves it very nicely.
hi dear, are you interested in a game controller review?
No thank you.
Adrenaline version?
24.7.1
Imagine this with Lossless on.
PT is broken, looks at those blue branches..
The problem is windows 11 still sucks too fps compared to windows 10 even nowadays
Poor optimization. Second strongest gpu and you get 55-60 fps on 1440p? Hope updates and AMD drivers will make it better
It's a feature packed UE5 game. It's not too different from other AAA examples
I feel your frustration in communicating the matters at hand. Uneducated ignorant gamers are dodgy at best, at worst they aren't worth talking to.
@donloder1 lol people can be intentionally frustrating sometimes. That's a minority though, it comes with the territory.
Even fsr as has ghosting issues ahahah gosh amd why the fuck i bought a 7900xtx ready sell it and pay premium for nvidia.
I have 1080 TV 🗿🗿🗿
Only can use ray tracing on 4080 super or a 4090 with this game. RIP AMD
Yes that is true. Path tracing is too much for AMD GPU. Most Nvidia gpu too to be fair
Look like this is nvidia s game not amd
Ray Tracing still pointless in 2024 unless you have a 4090 😄
I have a 4090 and I still turn RT off in most cases.
Depends on the game and type of ray tracing.
@@Krenisphia Fr, I think Ray tracing looks good but not that good
So so heavy on systems but doesn't even look that good. 🤔
35% of rtx 4090.. amd need to do better.
Ray tracing makes no sense for a game like this anyway.
lol, 15 fps you call that good
I did? Where?
AMD GPU? That's user error.
My RTX 4060 looks better and had more frames than this.
The 4060 can barely hit 30 fps at 1080P without ray tracing.
@@thornstrikesback I tested 3060 and it was terrible, there aint no way your 4060 is anywhere near this.
So 7900XTX still sucks
That's because AMD is stubborn and they don't see the future with ray tracing. It's their politics.
Sad that Microsoft and Sony are going straight with AMD.
Just buy 4060 😂😂😂
I have a 4090
@@TerraWare This is an appeal to those who bought 7000 amd, because RT dlss and generators are nothing more than marketing blah blah blah.....))))
With my RTX 4070 in 1440p all maxed out + DLSSq (67%) i get 40 FPS, 15 FPS more than this crap 😂😂😂 and i payed 600€ in 2023 😂😂😂 LoL trashdeon GPUs are dead
Well yeah RTX 4000 has a massive advantage with path tracing. There's only like 4 or 5 games with path tracing though.
Regular ray tracing the XTX would have very similar or better performance and rasterization it can keep up with my 4090.
I think for $900 the XTX is a beast.
@TerraWare sorry but no, there's no one radeon card that make worth to pay! No one! Because all games come out from beginning of 2024 is based on UE5 most of the time with Lumen RT or Hardwared RT, rasterization is dead! All actually radeon gpus on the market are useless
@@OmnianMIU Well the truth is I've made a ton of UE5 comparisons between my 7900XTX and RTX 4090. The XTX is within 20% of the 4090's performance sometimes even matching it at half the cost. How is that useless?
These path traced games are far from the norm and there's only a handful of them. Truth is so far UE5 games have been using software lumen where Radeon GPU's are very competitive. I have comparisons to prove it not theories. I wish developers would use the hardware RT as I feel it does a much better job but so far they aren't using it unless its some Nvidia sponsored title like this one.
@TerraWare it's useless because if I spent 1k$ for 7900xtx I regret and I choose 4080 for same price. Do you understand why is useless??
@@OmnianMIU Oh I understand why someone would rather have the 4080 Super since they are so close in price. For someone like me who really likes ray tracing and the superior upscaling.
Others may rather have the extra raster depending on their preferences.