cereal_killerxx
Junior Member
So does Xbox One quality = medium on PC?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Quantum Break PC performance thread
- Thread starter GroinShooter
- Start date
So does Xbox One quality = medium on PC?
SmartWaffles
Member
No upscaling at Medium looks still way better than Xbox One, and higher settings don't improve the graphics enough to warrant the cost.
According to Digital Foundry - yes.
I posted this in the 1070 thread. Outside of me leaving my CPU clock at stock, my setup seems similar to yours...
At 1080p native/upscaling off, all max, I get mid 40s on average. Not really the smoothest experience with noticeable stutters.
Turning on scaling allows me to hit 60fps pretty consistently so far, the hit in IQ is noticeable but it still looks great and the higher framerate more than makes up for it.
I was able to hold 60fps pretty well without scaling with shadow resolution, shadow filtering, texture resolution, and geometry LoD maxed while having the rest set to medium.
dr_rus
Member
Seems like a double yes to these. Thankfully the h/w itself has just gotten a lot faster which means that if you really want to you can actually play the game on a Titan XP in 1080p all max. $1200 and you're good to go.
I've actually been contemplating upgrading my R9 Nano to the GTX 1070 miniITX (my setup does not allow room for a full width card), and I was wondering if I would get better performance by sticking to my Nano than upgrading to the 1070 for this game. I don't really intend to overclock, and don't mind if scaling is kept off, but I'd want to at least maintain 60fps with all settings maxed out. (Current screen resolution of monitor is 1336x768.)
R9 Nano may actually have better performance than 1070 in QB (not in many other games, maybe in Hitman DX12 and Doom with Vulkan - but that's just guessing), but if you play in 1336x768 then I think you will easily achieve 60fps on 1070, even with disabled scaling. Just don't put everything on ultra.
Seems so: the last patch was more than two months ago now and Remedy hasn't updated its "State of the Game" post since the end of April.
sertopico
Member
Latest statement: http://community.remedygames.com/fo...-not-caring-for-your-fans?p=317147#post317147
I think they are done with the patching.
I think they are done with the patching.
icecold1983
Member
Def reads like the game is final. Did they ever improve performance like he claims tho?
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
I am playing the game now using the Geforce Experience on my recommended settings.
On my 1070 it performs well, but I hate that I am forced to use the ingame upscaling instead of native.
Nevertheless, it runs well enough with the recommended settings.
On my 1070 it performs well, but I hate that I am forced to use the ingame upscaling instead of native.
Nevertheless, it runs well enough with the recommended settings.
tearsintherain
Member
It probably will. Hitman lets you run DX11 or DX12, and DX12 has been nothing but problems for every Nvidia user I know, with all kinds of minor niggling bugs (alt-tab hitching and window disappears, controller input lag, FPS drops when rapidly turning) and a LOT more crashing. Whereas DX11 is solid. DX12 gave a slight perf boost in FPS, but I'll trade not crashing over FPS any day.
I wonder if there will be any graphics differences between DX12 and DX11 versions.
dr_rus
Member
I'm sure the DX11 version will run even better than the DX12 one
We'll see. Even if the rendering code itself will remain the same IHVs (namely NV) will have a lot more options in optimizing its execution within the driver in DX11. It will probably run a bit better on NV h/w if only because of this.
There won't be as there aren't any quality related features in DX12 which are absent from DX11. Performance can be somewhat different between Win7/DX11.1, Win8/DX11.2 and Win10/DX11.4 though.
Inspectah_Deck
Member
I wonder if the Steam version will finally allow the download of the live action episodes.
Well shit. I hope they'll push the DX11 version to the store too?
Augustiner
Neo Member
Are you saying that the PC version does not have any of the live action cutscenes? That's a huge part of the experience to just omit.
I think they force you to stream and no option to download.
It does, in 4K even, but you have to stream them.
Augustiner
Neo Member
Oh, wow. I wonder why they decided to do that? That's a huge bummer if you don't have reliable internet.
tioslash
Member
Don´t think so. Remedy´s head of PR response on twitter to someone asking if the Steam version would allow to at least lower the stream quality:
thehillissilent
Member
The download requirement for Windows 10 store version: Approximate download size
42.3 GB
Steam version: 68 GB available space
I wonder if they included a compressed version of the video files.
EDIT: I guess that we still have to stream according to above post
SmartWaffles
Member
Steam HDD requirement tends to be higher than it actually uses because of unpacking.
Alethebeer
Member
My Quantum Break folder is 68 gb though. It should be base game plus the big patch (27gb).
The download requirement for Windows 10 store version: Approximate download size
42.3 GB
Steam version: 68 GB available space
I wonder if they included a compressed version of the video files.
EDIT: I guess that we still have to stream according to above post
The download size is 42.3GB, but after decompression during installation, the size-on-disk is 68GB. This is the Windows Store version, so I assume the same or similar will be true for Steam.
icecold1983
Member
curious to see benchmarks but im not expecting much. performance is so far off base it would have to improve massively. i mean a 980ti provides slightly better than 2x the xbone experience. thats just dreadfull
sertopico
Member
So basically, in order to get a playable version of the game i should buy it twice.
Yeah, it's...less than ideal. But I did really like the game, so assuming that it runs better and is priced reasonably, I will end up buying it again. I'm hoping, since the physical edition with all that extra swag is $40, that it'll be $20 digitally.
we don't know how it's going to run in DX11 though.
...and man, just like that, Quantum Break on steam with DX11 support...
The availability (and price) of a 1070 miniITX is still pretty high, though. About as high as the R9 Nano when I bought it. I might wait till there are some good deals or something.
Dictator93
Member
Beat the game
Has the strangest scaling graphics and graphics options I have yet to witness so far in AAA release.
1080p with medium global illumination, medium volumetrics, medium SSR, High Shadows
2160p, upscaling, high global illumination, high volumetrics, medium SSR, Ultra Shadows
60fps smoothness vs. 30 fps slowness and massive TAA trails behind everything. All summed up in those two images. This game's higher graphical settings are scarcely worth it at all. Likewise, 60fps helps eliminate the horribly obvious trailing the TAA has... but the problem is there is no way to cap the game to an actual 60 fps. The steam port will at least.
Also, I figured out what the anti-aliasing option does (it is a stabilising and temporal super sampling) ... and it does cost you about 5 or 6 frames or so if you are at about 70-80 fps btw.
Has the strangest scaling graphics and graphics options I have yet to witness so far in AAA release.
1080p with medium global illumination, medium volumetrics, medium SSR, High Shadows
2160p, upscaling, high global illumination, high volumetrics, medium SSR, Ultra Shadows
Open up and flick between the two (there are slight differneces due to dynamic lighting in the two).
60fps smoothness vs. 30 fps slowness and massive TAA trails behind everything. All summed up in those two images. This game's higher graphical settings are scarcely worth it at all. Likewise, 60fps helps eliminate the horribly obvious trailing the TAA has... but the problem is there is no way to cap the game to an actual 60 fps.
The steam port will at least.Also, I figured out what the anti-aliasing option does (it is a stabilising and temporal super sampling) ... and it does cost you about 5 or 6 frames or so if you are at about 70-80 fps btw.
icecold1983
Member
is the 1080p image with upscaling on or off? what is the aa option doing?
Shame that the performance is still not great, this game benefits quite a bit running in higher resolutions.
Dictator93
Member
1080p has upscaling off. It is a 3840 X 2160 capture because to get downsampling resolutions at all in shitty UWP games you have to have it set to your desktop resolution. Ergo, 2160p and how the game capture via windows captures at that in spite of it being set to 1920X1080 in the menu.
The AA option stabilises thin geometry in the distance quite obviously, I assume by temporal super sampling or something. But at the same time, frame cost it incurs makes me wonder if they actually have Transparency SSAA or A2C like in Alan Wake. I am trying to find a host to upload the vid showing off the AA difference as we speak... gamersyde upload just doesn't work for me anymore.
edit: Download link to the video on Filehorst.de
edit2: gamersyde upload function has not worked for months btw. Same for everyone else?
Beat the game
but the problem is there is no way to cap the game to an actual 60 fps.
How is that possible? You can't set your monitor refresh rate to 60Hz to get 60fps cap?
The fact that it's DX11 does not guarantee that performance will improve (but one may hope).
RamaTheVoice
Member
E: nevermind.
icecold1983
Member
how representative are the framerates in these images of performance across the game? i would imagine based on what is being displayed that they are less demanding but dont have the game myself to know for sure. but yeah 1080p with basically xbone settings on a very well overclocked titan x should be performing much better.
watched video, yeah its immediately noticeable
Nostremitus
Member
So... Anyone have benches for the RX 460 on this yet? I just ordered one for my htpc and am curious.
RamaTheVoice
Member
Volumetric lighting (Ultra to High) and Effects Quality (High to Medium). No discernible difference in gameplay and pretty big performance impact. The rest depends on what rig you have.
I'm packing a 6600K and a 1080 and still have to dial down the aforementioned settings if I want 60fps at 1440p upscaled.
Dictator93
Member
It is not frame paced properly. Even dropping my monitor to 60 hz causes 60 fps scenarios to dance around 59 to 60, with runt / dropped frames I am assuming.
xb1 quality settings @ 1080p non-upscaled does not guarantee you 60 fps on my card. Far from.
You need to do like 1440p upscaling to start seeing a much more locked experience.
SmartWaffles
Member
Set medium preset, disable upscaling, go from there. Effects and Global Illumination are the biggest performance killers, followed by shadows and texture (if you are VRAM limited).
sertopico
Member
Call it a hunch, but i am pretty sure it will work better than the windows store version. I think the combination UWA + DX12 just brought a ton of issues which can't be totally fixed.
Same combination works well in Forza Apex.
What is really shitty is that UWP version will no longer be updated. They are screwing their most loyal fans who bought the game on release despite it being on an inferior platform (and costing a lot).