The Division 2: PC graphics performance benchmark review

Posted on: 03/15/2019 04:23 PM

---

Dx11 lookin good!

Posted on: 03/15/2019 04:29 PM

---

I wish we had 1% and 0.1% charts too, the average alone is kinda not enough because some cards will tank more than others.

Posted on: 03/15/2019 04:36 PM

---

Especially those with lower amount of vram. Try playing Apex on 8gb insane texture setting and 6gb card will choke and stutter.

Posted on: 03/15/2019 05:10 PM

---

Is Apex still running on Source engine like Titanfall 2 if that's the case chances are it's using the same configuration and the texture is a cache value defined in Megabytes where ultra is 8192 and doesn't really do that much if you lower it down a bit.
(Keeps more textures in VRAM so less swapping around.)

For this game there's a few additional settings in the config file like the neutral lighting from the first game ("full bright" though not quite that drastic.) and it's possible to disable a few things like temporal anti-aliasing and some minor tweaking though a bit less than the first game. Similar glitches too such as upping reflection quality to ultra (3 in the config file.) breaking several reflective surfaces most notably on the character models.

Well time to give this a more thorough read, always fun to see a performance comparison and now there's D3D11 and D3D12 too and it's not just CPU either since even higher-end systems reportedly see a 10 - 15 percent gain.
Think Turing and also Pascal handles async fairly well so AMD probably sees some competition here since the 1080Ti and the upper end NVIDIA cards outperform Vega although the VII probably does alright but the 2080 and 2080Ti should be faster overall.

No NVIDIA or AMD specific effects and many things mentioned in the tech feature video also applied to the first game but I think CPU usage has improved further and probably a bigger focus on async compute as well.
(Wonder if that's D3D11 and D3D12 or just D3D12, Crackdown 3 has a toggle for it for DX11 though I expect Division 2 here to focus heavily on DX12 though some users are reporting crashes so it might be sensitive to third party software, overclocks and of course also the display driver itself.)

Might try it but I like using ReShade so a 10% perf hit isn't that bad of a compromise from going with D3D11 though I should probably compare them at some point.
(RAM and CPU are hitting their limits though, Ryzen 3000 and DDR4 next perhaps but eh who knows. )


EDIT: Realistic visuals like this though I wonder what ray-tracing can eventually accomplish once it's developed further and more common, that's probably beyond my lifetime however but I am curious seeing the natural limits of screen-space effects, rasterization and what is approximated with global illumination, light and shadows and all that stuff but yeah decades until this can be phased out in full.
(And at point it's all about streaming and renting and the power of some cloud somewhere. :p Well perhaps not quite but that's also been quite in focus recently but also quite a ways off yet.)

The game isn't bad looking but it's going to be a balance of visual quality and performance and of course feature parity and console and PC and the whole thing so kinda curious seeing what's going to happen for the next gen or two although it will take time. Oh well, this isn't bad either.
(AI? Physics? NO! Shiny visuals better. Ha ha! Well maybe that too can catch up eventually. Maybe.)

Posted on: 03/15/2019 05:14 PM

---

Is Apex still running on Source engine like Titanfall 2 if that's the case chances are it's using the same configuration and the texture is a cache value defined in Megabytes where ultra is 8192 and doesn't really do that much if you lower it down a bit.
(Keeps more textures in VRAM so less swapping around.)

So that means less texture popin and stutter. That translates in better experience even if you have slower gpu like rx580 compared to 1660.