Fractal Design Focus 2 chassis review
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
Wolfenstein II The New Colossus: PC graphics analysis benchmark review
Posted by: on: 11/05/2017 11:47 AM [
39 comment(s) ]
It's time to check out the PC release of Wolfenstein II The New Colossus for Windows 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
pages « < 5 6 7 8
JonasBeckman
Senior Member
Posts: 17562
Senior Member
Posts: 17562
Posted on: 11/08/2017 09:43 AM
A low cache will restrict texture quality though you have to gimp it pretty heavily to affect things dramatically instead of having the game slowly fade in/out as it manages data.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4564/24388003648-9c88c9837b-o.jpg
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4577/37548283654-1bc4ce1934-o.jpg
First image is with a is_poolsize value of 128, textures just can not load, 512 - 1024 works most of the time though but with more noticeable fade in and transitions between quality levels.
Second image is a full on 6144 or 1.5x 4096, higher isn't possible without the game refusing to load up the main menu at start so that's the limit until I can get a 8 GB GPU whenever. :p
Textures are sharp and stay sharp, framerate goes straight down of course and it doesn't take much for things to go really poorly for the GPU because there's no way it can cope with the cache being so high ha ha.
Even slightly improves gun detail in this comparison but not by much, certainly nowhere near what the promo images showcase and NPC faces are also curiously low detail even for more major actors.
EDIT: There are different systems in play though, image_ related settings and cvars affect some textures, vt_ related cvars and such affect a few other things and then there's these is_ settings for streaming affecting some things too.
The game loves VRAM though, a 12 GB Titan or full on 16 GB Vega Frontier/Pro would be fun to see just how much you can increase these settings by without running into VRAM issues or artifacts from trying to push texture detail from 8192x8192 pages to full 16384x16384 and possibly even remove some of the compression settings.
(Nothing going to do much if the source assets themselves are a bit lower quality of course, can only make small improvements which might explain gun and face texture blurriness.)
A low cache will restrict texture quality though you have to gimp it pretty heavily to affect things dramatically instead of having the game slowly fade in/out as it manages data.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4564/24388003648-9c88c9837b-o.jpg
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4577/37548283654-1bc4ce1934-o.jpg
First image is with a is_poolsize value of 128, textures just can not load, 512 - 1024 works most of the time though but with more noticeable fade in and transitions between quality levels.
Second image is a full on 6144 or 1.5x 4096, higher isn't possible without the game refusing to load up the main menu at start so that's the limit until I can get a 8 GB GPU whenever. :p
Textures are sharp and stay sharp, framerate goes straight down of course and it doesn't take much for things to go really poorly for the GPU because there's no way it can cope with the cache being so high ha ha.
Even slightly improves gun detail in this comparison but not by much, certainly nowhere near what the promo images showcase and NPC faces are also curiously low detail even for more major actors.
EDIT: There are different systems in play though, image_ related settings and cvars affect some textures, vt_ related cvars and such affect a few other things and then there's these is_ settings for streaming affecting some things too.
The game loves VRAM though, a 12 GB Titan or full on 16 GB Vega Frontier/Pro would be fun to see just how much you can increase these settings by without running into VRAM issues or artifacts from trying to push texture detail from 8192x8192 pages to full 16384x16384 and possibly even remove some of the compression settings.
(Nothing going to do much if the source assets themselves are a bit lower quality of course, can only make small improvements which might explain gun and face texture blurriness.)
xxela
Senior Member
Posts: 231
Senior Member
Posts: 231
Posted on: 11/10/2017 03:20 PM
Fury has some problem (probably vram related) with just one setting TSSAA (8TX). When applied GPU usage drops and also the frames. There is more than 20 fps difference between Mein leben! - TSSAA (8TX) preset and Mein leben! - SMAA (1TX).
1080p Mein leben! - TSSAA (8TX)
1080p Mein leben! - SMAA (1TX)
So if lowering one setting on a 2 year old GPU is a
Fury has some problem (probably vram related) with just one setting TSSAA (8TX). When applied GPU usage drops and also the frames. There is more than 20 fps difference between Mein leben! - TSSAA (8TX) preset and Mein leben! - SMAA (1TX).
1080p Mein leben! - TSSAA (8TX)
1080p Mein leben! - SMAA (1TX)
So if lowering one setting on a 2 year old GPU is a
disaster
and make the card "trash" I take this trash gladly.
JonasBeckman
Senior Member
Posts: 17562
Senior Member
Posts: 17562
Posted on: 11/10/2017 08:19 PM
Memory limit I'm guessing but I have noticed TSSAA is pretty demanding, it's not quite the same as full on super sampling and from my understanding TSSAA 8x would take the eight previous frames into consideration for it's final image and calculation, using the r_antialiasing console commands this can be fine tuned a little bit though I wonder if keeping the info from those past 8 frames around for doing these calculations is too much for the Fury GPU, memory limit perhaps but could be some other bottleneck entirely.
Memory limit I'm guessing but I have noticed TSSAA is pretty demanding, it's not quite the same as full on super sampling and from my understanding TSSAA 8x would take the eight previous frames into consideration for it's final image and calculation, using the r_antialiasing console commands this can be fine tuned a little bit though I wonder if keeping the info from those past 8 frames around for doing these calculations is too much for the Fury GPU, memory limit perhaps but could be some other bottleneck entirely.
alanm
Senior Member
Posts: 11339
Senior Member
Posts: 11339
Posted on: 11/10/2017 08:40 PM
Would not be surprised if in weeks or months newer drivers significantly improve its performance.
Memory limit I'm guessing but I have noticed TSSAA is pretty demanding, it's not quite the same as full on super sampling and from my understanding TSSAA 8x would take the eight previous frames into consideration for it's final image and calculation, using the r_antialiasing console commands this can be fine tuned a little bit though I wonder if keeping the info from those past 8 frames around for doing these calculations is too much for the Fury GPU, memory limit perhaps but could be some other bottleneck entirely.
Would not be surprised if in weeks or months newer drivers significantly improve its performance.
pages « < 5 6 7 8
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Of course their is a problem with Vram in Fury x at 1080p.At Mein leben i get from 4.7 gb to 5.8 gb in average in most places and almost 7.9 gb in other.If reviewer search the setting the you easy find that Fury is hammered by image streaming above medium settings.Its cache pool that has nothing to do with quality settings.I set all Settings Ulta/uber except Shadows "ultra" and image streaming "medium" and my vram was at 3.8gb.With this setting Fury will be in gtx1070 level performance.RETEST NORMAL and everything will be in the right order.