How to: Firmware Update the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT
MSI Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming Z review
Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 5600 XT OC review
ASUS STRIX Radeon RX 5600 XT TOP review
Gigabyte Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming OC review
Arctic Liquid Freezer II 280 liquid cooler review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro licenses for under 10 USD
Team Group MP33 NVMe 512 GB SSD Review
ADATA SE800 1TB Portable SSD review
Promo: Microsoft Office 2016 for $29.82
Review: Red Dead Redemption 2: PC graphics benchmark analysis
We take a look at Red Dead Redemption II (2019) in our usual in-depth ways. That would be tested on the PC gaming wise relative towards graphics card performance with the latest AMD/NVIDIA graphics card drivers. Multiple graphics cards are being tested and benchmarked.
Review: XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT THICC III Ultra - 10/31/2019 04:23 PM
Extra, extra, extra THICC. Yes, don't get confused in a deja-vu moment as we indeed already reviewed the THICC II, this is the THICC III edition of the XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT. This brother from anothe...
Review: MSI GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER GAMING X - 10/29/2019 02:01 PM
MSI released their GTX 1660 SUPER GAMING X, a product with a more than capable cooler as well being factory tweaked. The SUPER edition card comes with faster GDDR6 memory but remains pretty much to be...
Review: Gigabyte GTX 1660 SUPER GAMING OC - 10/29/2019 02:01 PM
We review the Gigabyte GTX 1660 SUPER GAMING OC 6G, a product with a triple-fan cooler as well being factory tweaked with a Boost allowance of 1860 MHz. Read article...
Review: Palit GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER GamingPRO OC - 10/29/2019 02:00 PM
We check out the Palit GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER GamingPRO OC, a product with a dual-slot cooler as well being factory tweaked, hence that OC in its name. The SUPER edition card comes with faster GDDR6 m...
Review: GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER - MSI, ZOTAC, Gigabyte and PALIT - 10/29/2019 02:00 PM
ZOTAC joins the GTX 1660 SUPER launch party with their AMP edition, a compact product with a capable cooler as well being factory tweaked. The SUPER edition card comes with faster GDDR6 memory but rem...
SpajdrEX
Senior Member
Posts: 2138
Joined: 2006-05-07
Senior Member
Posts: 2138
Joined: 2006-05-07
#5728001 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:21 PM
There is a missing benchmark picture for
There is a missing benchmark picture for
Graphics card performance 1440p
EDIT.: nevermind, it's together with 1080p resolution
EDIT.: nevermind, it's together with 1080p resolution
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5728002 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:22 PM
This game sure is demanding on GPU power. Though oddly enough, not especially demanding on VRAM. I'm sure performance will get better over time. Not sure how it looks compared to consoles either.
This game sure is demanding on GPU power. Though oddly enough, not especially demanding on VRAM. I'm sure performance will get better over time. Not sure how it looks compared to consoles either.
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 12293
Joined: 2008-08-28
Senior Member
Posts: 12293
Joined: 2008-08-28
#5728003 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:22 PM
Insane system req. Its anew gpu killer.
Amd is doing better though. 580 faster than 1070, vega56 faster than 1080 and 5700xt faster than 2070S.
Insane system req. Its anew gpu killer.
Amd is doing better though. 580 faster than 1070, vega56 faster than 1080 and 5700xt faster than 2070S.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36826
Joined: 2000-02-22
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36826
Joined: 2000-02-22
#5728010 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:27 PM
Roger, on it, yeeaahaw.
@Hilbert Hagedoorn@SpajdrEX - 1440p results are on the wrong page.
Roger, on it, yeeaahaw.
AcidSnow
Senior Member
Posts: 419
Joined: 2013-08-09
Senior Member
Posts: 419
Joined: 2013-08-09
#5728020 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:34 PM
I'm REALLY glad I just bought an 5700 XT, because I had considered buying a used Vega 56 for $150 (@ 1080p gaming) but I thought to myself that if Borderlands 3 @ Ultra was already taxing a 5700 XT today then imagine what games will be like next year and beyond...
I'm REALLY glad I just bought an 5700 XT, because I had considered buying a used Vega 56 for $150 (@ 1080p gaming) but I thought to myself that if Borderlands 3 @ Ultra was already taxing a 5700 XT today then imagine what games will be like next year and beyond...
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 12293
Joined: 2008-08-28
Senior Member
Posts: 12293
Joined: 2008-08-28
#5728021 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:36 PM
5.2gb vram usage on 1080p is not demanding? Its basically showing people should be looking at 8gb cards and forget about something like 1660super.
This game sure is demanding on GPU power. Though oddly enough, not especially demanding on VRAM. I'm sure performance will get better over time. Not sure how it looks compared to consoles either.
5.2gb vram usage on 1080p is not demanding? Its basically showing people should be looking at 8gb cards and forget about something like 1660super.
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 7662
Joined: 2011-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 7662
Joined: 2011-07-20
#5728023 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:37 PM
From Rockstar
Minimum Specifications:
OS: Windows 7 - Service Pack 1 (6.1.7601)
Processor: Intel® Core™ i5-2500K / AMD FX-6300
Memory: 8GB
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB / AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB
HDD Space: 150GB
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
Recommended Specifications:
OS: Windows 10 - April 2018 Update (v1803)
Processor: Intel® Core™ i7-4770K / AMD Ryzen 5 1500X
Memory: 12GB
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB / AMD Radeon RX 480 4GB
HDD Space: 150GB
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
Why my 1060 so slow Boss? ....need new Drivers?
From Rockstar
Minimum Specifications:
OS: Windows 7 - Service Pack 1 (6.1.7601)
Processor: Intel® Core™ i5-2500K / AMD FX-6300
Memory: 8GB
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 2GB / AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB
HDD Space: 150GB
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
Recommended Specifications:
OS: Windows 10 - April 2018 Update (v1803)
Processor: Intel® Core™ i7-4770K / AMD Ryzen 5 1500X
Memory: 12GB
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB / AMD Radeon RX 480 4GB
HDD Space: 150GB
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
Why my 1060 so slow Boss? ....need new Drivers?
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5728028 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:41 PM
Considering the framerate, no, it's not that bad. I'd expect higher memory usage from such a demanding game.
Keep in mind that games nowadays come with very high-res textures. When you set the texture settings to the highest level and you're playing at 1080p, there's a good chance you can barely see any difference at all compared to medium settings, but it's soaking up all your VRAM. For a game like RDR2, you could probably drop down to medium textures, save yourself 2GB of VRAM, and barely be able to notice any thing changed at all (especially if you have AA on). The only time you'll really notice a difference is if you bring an object impractically close to the camera.
5.2gb vram usage on 1080p is not demanding? Its basically showing people should be looking at 8gb cards and forget about something like 1660super.
Considering the framerate, no, it's not that bad. I'd expect higher memory usage from such a demanding game.
Keep in mind that games nowadays come with very high-res textures. When you set the texture settings to the highest level and you're playing at 1080p, there's a good chance you can barely see any difference at all compared to medium settings, but it's soaking up all your VRAM. For a game like RDR2, you could probably drop down to medium textures, save yourself 2GB of VRAM, and barely be able to notice any thing changed at all (especially if you have AA on). The only time you'll really notice a difference is if you bring an object impractically close to the camera.
mohiuddin
Senior Member
Posts: 786
Joined: 2010-11-06
Senior Member
Posts: 786
Joined: 2010-11-06
#5728033 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:48 PM
Thanks a ton dude. Was waiting for this.
Thanks a ton dude. Was waiting for this.
ladcrooks
Senior Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 2016-12-29
Senior Member
Posts: 369
Joined: 2016-12-29
#5728035 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:49 PM
thank you Hilbert, I least I know can buy this game in ten yrs time, then there will be card cheap enough to able to play in 4k mode at 60fps :p
thank you Hilbert, I least I know can buy this game in ten yrs time, then there will be card cheap enough to able to play in 4k mode at 60fps :p
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36826
Joined: 2000-02-22
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36826
Joined: 2000-02-22
#5728036 Posted on: 11/05/2019 06:54 PM
Remember, we tested with close to best image quality settings here in this first test run of the article. This is a massively huge open world game with ultra quality textures enabled, so no that 5 GB is not something extreme at all, even at Full HD. Tomorrow I'll look at lowering quality settings which will lower that vram usage one way or the other, there is a sweet-spot setting that nearly doubles the framerate.
5.2gb vram usage on 1080p is not demanding? Its basically showing people should be looking at 8gb cards and forget about something like 1660super.
Remember, we tested with close to best image quality settings here in this first test run of the article. This is a massively huge open world game with ultra quality textures enabled, so no that 5 GB is not something extreme at all, even at Full HD. Tomorrow I'll look at lowering quality settings which will lower that vram usage one way or the other, there is a sweet-spot setting that nearly doubles the framerate.
jbscotchman
Senior Member
Posts: 3502
Joined: 2004-01-28
Senior Member
Posts: 3502
Joined: 2004-01-28
#5728042 Posted on: 11/05/2019 07:04 PM
Loving this game. It's gorgeous and the production value is through the roof! Never played any RDR game so I'm in heaven right now.
Loving this game. It's gorgeous and the production value is through the roof! Never played any RDR game so I'm in heaven right now.
AndroidVageta
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 2014-04-07
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 2014-04-07
#5728048 Posted on: 11/05/2019 07:11 PM
Pretty pathetic if you ask me. The 2060 Super faster at 1080p than a 1080Ti? Please!
If Nvidia performance doesn't balance out more I'd be inclined to think they're gimping last-gen GPU performance, not like they haven't done similar before.
Pretty disappointing so far performance wise as a 1080Ti owner. Disappointed as in it makes no sense.
Pretty pathetic if you ask me. The 2060 Super faster at 1080p than a 1080Ti? Please!
If Nvidia performance doesn't balance out more I'd be inclined to think they're gimping last-gen GPU performance, not like they haven't done similar before.
Pretty disappointing so far performance wise as a 1080Ti owner. Disappointed as in it makes no sense.
kanenas
Member
Posts: 35
Joined: 2019-07-07
Member
Posts: 35
Joined: 2019-07-07
#5728057 Posted on: 11/05/2019 07:24 PM
Pretty pathetic if you ask me. The 2060 Super faster at 1080p than a 1080Ti? Please!
If Nvidia performance doesn't balance out more I'd be inclined to think they're gimping last-gen GPU performance, not like they haven't done similar before.
Am afraid is true.
Pretty disappointing so far performance wise as a 1080Ti owner. Disappointed as in it makes no sense.
Pretty pathetic if you ask me. The 2060 Super faster at 1080p than a 1080Ti? Please!
If Nvidia performance doesn't balance out more I'd be inclined to think they're gimping last-gen GPU performance, not like they haven't done similar before.
Am afraid is true.
Pretty disappointing so far performance wise as a 1080Ti owner. Disappointed as in it makes no sense.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 231
Joined: 2006-11-13
OS: Windows 10 v1909 Pro for Workstation
Processor: i7-9900K, all cores 5.0GHz
RAM: 16GB DDR4 4133MHz
GPU: RTX 2080Ti Watercooled
Resolution: 3440x1440@100Hz, G-Sync
Settings: Enabled the recommended settings in GeForce Experience and adjusted everything that was set to below high to high. So pretty much everything is set to high besides textures that are set to Ultra. Running Windowed Borderless, disabled TAA and FXAA as it makes thing look way too blurry. Enabled 2x MSAA instead, not ideal would need at least 4x to get rid of all the jagginess but performance is just not good enough for more than 2x.
FPS: Seems to be stable 60 FPS on average according to the benchmark. In-game it seems more like 70 FPS. The benchmark dips to 34 FPS and I don't really know why.
Didn't really know what to expect, but this isn't all that impressive to me. Looks similar to my Xbox One X, just more jagginess due to not having native 4K downscaled to 2560x1440. 3440x1440 with 2x MSAA looks worse in-terms of aliasing compared to Xbox One X with native 4K and TAA downscaled to 2560x1440. Besides that the details seems to be somewhat the same.
So I finally have ultrawide and 60 FPS, but aliasing is worse and running textures on ultra and everything else on high don't seem to provide any noticeable improvements when compared to the Xbox One X.
Barely pegs my CPU at all so seems to be crazy GPU bound. My 2080 Ti doesn't provide much else than ultrawide (which is still lower resolution than native 4K on Xbox One X) and 60 FPS instead of 30 FPS. Should be room for much better optimisation here. I would expect my 2080 Ti to be capable of running this at 100 FPS at 3440x1440 with the same overall settings as the Xbox One X. That's clearly not the case here.