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.

There is a missing benchmark picture for Graphics card performance 1440p EDIT.: nevermind, it's together with 1080p resolution 🙂

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.

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.

schmidtbag:

@Hilbert Hagedoorn@SpajdrEX - 1440p results are on the wrong page.

Roger, on it, yeeaahaw.

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...

schmidtbag:

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.

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?

Undying:

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.

Thanks a ton dude. Was waiting for this.

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 😛

Undying:

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.

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.

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.

AndroidVageta:

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.

Yes i was expecting better from the 1080ti. How can a xbox oneX run this at native 4k? is the first post correct?

2060 on top of 1080 ti, nvidia please.. can't you be less obvious

AndroidVageta:

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.

They haven't done similar before. There can be a hundred different reasons why Turing performs better than Pascal in this particular game that's not related to Nvidia artificially gimping performance.

You only tested vulkan vs DX12 on 5700XT What about nvidia GPU. How does vulkan compared to DX12 ? In this website, they said that nvidia got higher 5 fps on vulkan

Wouldn't be the first time nvidia pulled something like this, they have quite the track record, after all. I don't trust them one bit.