Scythe Mugen 5 Rev.C CPU Cooler review
be quiet Pure Loop 2 FX 280mm LCS review
HP FX900 1 TB NVMe Review
Scythe FUMA2 Rev.B CPU Cooler review
SK Hynix Platinum P41 2TB M.2 NVMe SSD Review
Corsair K70 RGB PRO Mini Wireless review
MSI MPG A1000G - 1000W PSU Review
Goodram IRDM PRO M.2 SSD 2 TB NVMe SSD Review
Samsung T7 Shield Portable 1TB USB SSD review
DeepCool LS720 (LCS) review
Ghost Recon: Wildlands PC graphics performance benchmark review





We will look at Ghost Recon: Wildlands in a PC graphics performance and PC gamer way. We'll test the game on the PC platform relative towards graphics card performance with the latest AMD/NVIDIA graphics card drivers. Multiple graphics cards are being tested and benchmarked. We have a look at performance with the newest graphics cards and technologies.
Read article
Advertisement
« GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Review · Ghost Recon: Wildlands PC graphics performance benchmark review
· AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Review »
pages « 3 4 5 6 > »
Sartnir
Junior Member
Posts: 3
Junior Member
Posts: 3
Posted on: 03/08/2017 05:20 PM
Hello
Are they remove the v-sync parse fps when v-sync is "on"?
In beta it was very annoying
Please reply...........thank you...........!!!
Hello
Are they remove the v-sync parse fps when v-sync is "on"?
In beta it was very annoying
Please reply...........thank you...........!!!
JonasBeckman
Senior Member
Posts: 17562
Senior Member
Posts: 17562
Posted on: 03/08/2017 05:22 PM
That's understandable, to me both are important and compared to Division then for Wildlands where the map or terrain is more open and the player can pretty much go anywhere such as climbing up some mountain or just take off in a helicopter and overlook much of the game world without anything blocking the view I find it quite impressive how they manage to make it look detailed with vegetation and things like vehicle lights and what not during night time extending almost to the edge of the view area. (Without things looking too 2D or sparse.)
Division gets a bit of help from it's weather and fog setup with snow obscuring the players vision plus the square map design and building layout and other obstructions so they have focused on adding a lot of clutter and other details and then culling and occlusion takes care of not rendering everything taking advantage of the player only being able to see part of the city at a time whereas Wildlands is very open so perhaps for this game they sacrificed a bit of fidelity to allow better blending between near and far detail.
Vehicles also allow for faster transportation including air which is when the game really starts reducing terrain detail as you start flying across the different regions so it needs a quick system for streaming to avoid pop-in and noticeable transitions between low and high detail model and texture states.
Not the best explanation perhaps but bit of a fine line between performance and graphical quality for a open world game with such a large playing area trying to give the illusion of trees and grass extending across the far distance even if it's probably pretty low detail to maintain performance but it works pretty well.
The more immediate area isn't that bad either though even if it's more urban smaller towns or ruined villages and not some bigger city environments.
Shader wise thought the lighting in Division is definitively a step above and the material system is pretty amazing too from the usual effects such as having plastic and metallic surfaces being clearly defined to smaller touches such as the various degrees of melted snow and of course the large number of reflections found in the environment.
Well I'm not the best at describing or explaining things or well not sure what to say but I do find both games to be pretty good looking, Division might not quite match the very first marketing footage though whereas Wildlands hasn't changed much far as I can tell though both look really good.
(Probably still look really good on the PS4 and XBO platforms even without some of the PC enhancements though I don't know what the actual display resolution for the games are on console.)
And for the game well for the moment I guess waiting and seeing how the developer proceeds now after the games launch will be important, don't really know how well it's selling but if they can keep the game maintained and patch up bugs and such quickly they might be able to retain a decent sized player base though who knows, last I heard For Honor had seen a pretty big drop already in player activity though this game isn't strictly online-only even if it focuses on co-op. (And has a in-game cash store...)
Well don't care of lod if the near stuff looks fairly good. I prefer detailed objects in immediate nearing instead of increased lod, among the two. But guess goes by taste
That's understandable, to me both are important and compared to Division then for Wildlands where the map or terrain is more open and the player can pretty much go anywhere such as climbing up some mountain or just take off in a helicopter and overlook much of the game world without anything blocking the view I find it quite impressive how they manage to make it look detailed with vegetation and things like vehicle lights and what not during night time extending almost to the edge of the view area. (Without things looking too 2D or sparse.)
Division gets a bit of help from it's weather and fog setup with snow obscuring the players vision plus the square map design and building layout and other obstructions so they have focused on adding a lot of clutter and other details and then culling and occlusion takes care of not rendering everything taking advantage of the player only being able to see part of the city at a time whereas Wildlands is very open so perhaps for this game they sacrificed a bit of fidelity to allow better blending between near and far detail.
Vehicles also allow for faster transportation including air which is when the game really starts reducing terrain detail as you start flying across the different regions so it needs a quick system for streaming to avoid pop-in and noticeable transitions between low and high detail model and texture states.
Not the best explanation perhaps but bit of a fine line between performance and graphical quality for a open world game with such a large playing area trying to give the illusion of trees and grass extending across the far distance even if it's probably pretty low detail to maintain performance but it works pretty well.
The more immediate area isn't that bad either though even if it's more urban smaller towns or ruined villages and not some bigger city environments.
Shader wise thought the lighting in Division is definitively a step above and the material system is pretty amazing too from the usual effects such as having plastic and metallic surfaces being clearly defined to smaller touches such as the various degrees of melted snow and of course the large number of reflections found in the environment.
Well I'm not the best at describing or explaining things or well not sure what to say but I do find both games to be pretty good looking, Division might not quite match the very first marketing footage though whereas Wildlands hasn't changed much far as I can tell though both look really good.
(Probably still look really good on the PS4 and XBO platforms even without some of the PC enhancements though I don't know what the actual display resolution for the games are on console.)
And for the game well for the moment I guess waiting and seeing how the developer proceeds now after the games launch will be important, don't really know how well it's selling but if they can keep the game maintained and patch up bugs and such quickly they might be able to retain a decent sized player base though who knows, last I heard For Honor had seen a pretty big drop already in player activity though this game isn't strictly online-only even if it focuses on co-op. (And has a in-game cash store...)
Noisiv
Senior Member
Posts: 8187
Senior Member
Posts: 8187
Posted on: 03/08/2017 05:25 PM
I didn't expect this.
Looks frigin AWESOME!!!
I tried a lot of options in the settings menu. Eventually I turned off Vsync and use almost ultra settings, but without FXAA/TAA, also no motion blur. And I get like an average fps of 35.
I'd kill myself if I had to use Vsync ON
I didn't expect this.
Looks frigin AWESOME!!!
I tried a lot of options in the settings menu. Eventually I turned off Vsync and use almost ultra settings, but without FXAA/TAA, also no motion blur. And I get like an average fps of 35.
I'd kill myself if I had to use Vsync ON
kilyan
Senior Member
Posts: 601
Senior Member
Posts: 601
Posted on: 03/08/2017 05:29 PM
I didn't expect this.
Looks frigin AWESOME!!!
I'd kill myself if I had to use Vsync ON
It doesn't work as intended, and ubisoft failed through the years to understand, because it has never been fixed LOL
I didn't expect this.
Looks frigin AWESOME!!!
I'd kill myself if I had to use Vsync ON
It doesn't work as intended, and ubisoft failed through the years to understand, because it has never been fixed LOL
pages « 3 4 5 6 > »
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 601
The view distance is certainly impressive though but it does have fairly aggressive LOD scaling (Nothing new there since Assassin's Creed 2 or so heh.) though it's quite impressive although some of the textures can be a bit low-res too like the terrain or ground for example although unless you specifically focus on it you won't generally notice.
(Blends better than AC Unity did though, all of Paris but a few meters away from the players position it's a blocky low-poly low-textured soup or how to describe it ha ha.)
Well don't care of lod if the near stuff looks fairly good. I prefer detailed objects in immediate nearing instead of increased lod, among the two. But guess goes by taste