I find the IQ even with upscaling off somewhat disappointing. Even on 1440p I don't get a crystal clear image like I used to from other games even when they offer TAA making the image slightly blurry.On those settings is running smooth on my machine as well, but the overall IQ is too bad IMO. Once I saw the game without upscaling i couldn't go back.
True, I am playing also on a 2k screen and the temporal reconstruction is still there, causing that ugly ghosting effect plus the blur, as pointed out many times. It looks much better without the upscaling though.
I've seen most nVidia users usually talk how settings other than shadows seem to take a higher hit (like MGSV TPP). From what I understand, shadows only affects shadow resolution, and how shadow lines appear.The real performance killer here are upscaling off, volumetric lighting and reflections. Lowering these settings results in a huge FPS gain. I'd recommend to leave shadows as high as possible to increase depth and realism to scenes. Volumetric Lighting seems to be a very subtle effect on high settings and reflections are there when using the "medium" option but are slightly less in resolution than on higher settings.
60 fps should be possible, then. But keep upscaling on.
I've seen most nVidia users usually talk how settings other than shadows seem to take a higher hit (like MGSV TPP). From what I understand, shadows only affects shadow resolution, and how shadow lines appear.
I don't know if there are any other AMD users here to help test.
Don't nvidia gpus tend to have more rops(or at least they're more efficient)?
That could reduce the hit from shadows, since they tend to be strongly rop bound.
Remedy did: https://imgur.com/a/pPwblHas anyone taken any shots comparing 1080 with upscaling on and 720p with upscaling off? I want to see how effective it is.
nvidia has more rops but amds rops are much better
http://techreport.com/review/30328/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-reviewed/5
That's not what this article indicates. The 960 has a lower theoretical pixel fill rate than the 480, yet scores higher anyway... Seems like Nvidia is much better in this area.
all thats testing is memory efficiency which is better on nvidia due to better compression and TBDR
amd runs more pixel formats at full speed and performance doesnt bottom out when blending is used
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/953-6/performances-theoriques-pixels.html
Remedy did: [/QUOTE] Thanks, but the most obvi...ructed shots are a decent improvement though.
all thats testing is memory efficiency which is better on nvidia due to better compression and TBDR
amd runs more pixel formats at full speed and performance doesnt bottom out when blending is used
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/953-6/performances-theoriques-pixels.html
I have. Only used fraps to monitor for a little while though, for all I know I could now be getting dips to the 50's using time powers and gsync is just eating the noticeability really well.
Thank you for the link.
Thanks, but the most obvious things those shots show is that upscaling from 720 isn't nearly as bad as most people seem to think. The reconstructed shots are a decent improvement though.
That's unfortunately only true regarding Qunatum Break since even with non-upscaled 1080p you don't have a crisp image like in other games (film grain already switched off, of course). And I for christ's sake don't know why that is.Thanks, but the most obvious things those shots show is that upscaling from 720 isn't nearly as bad as most people seem to think. The reconstructed shots are a decent improvement though.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-quantum-break-tech-analysis said:Quantum Break's approach renders the game at 1280x720 with 4x MSAA while using four previous frames to reconstruct the image in such a way that resolution appears higher. It's different from the re-projection seen in Killzone in that the image must be re-constructed every time the camera moves - it also varies from Rainbow Six Siege which used MSAA samples rather than past frames, as we see in Quantum Break. The issue here is that while the effect looks very nice in stills, things break down somewhat in motion. Obvious stair-steps become evident whenever the camera is touched and gameplay appears chunkier as the action heats up. In addition, texture filtering is hit or miss with a number of surfaces appearing rather blurry from the gameplay camera angle
That's unfortunately only true regarding Qunatum Break since even with non-upscaled 1080p you don't have a crisp image like in other games (film grain already switched off, of course). And I for christ's sake don't know why that is.
Yep, it's slightly better but only noticeable on screenshots. I guess I'll just leave the upscaling on for the performance. IQ is bad no matter what settings I use.Did you try turning off anti-aliasing?
Why would they? The game was running much better on AMD hardware from the start.
DX11 runs as well as DX12 on AMD cards. No need to improve anything.
It does run (way) worse if you couple the GPUs with weaker CPUs and even with an 6700K the frametimes are better under DX12 for Radeons:DX11 runs as well as DX12 on AMD cards. No need to improve anything.
It is from the upscale/taa (yep, even when you turn it off). It decreases in accordance with framerate. So sadly.. it is really obvious at 30fps.
It does run (way) worse if you couple the GPUs with weaker CPUs and even with an 6700K the frametimes are better under DX12 for Radeons:
https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=en&tl=de&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.computerbase.de%2F2016-09%2Fquantum-break-steam-benchmark%2F3%2F%23abschnitt_benchmarks_auf_dem_amd_fx8370&edit-text=
One would wish DX11 for UWP (Nvidia) and DX12 for Steam (AMD).
You are effectively playing in 720p on a 980Ti. Disable upscaling to achieve native 1080p and you'll understand the complaints.So, with the GeForce recommended settings (mostly high and ultra, upscalling on) I'm getting consistent over 60fps with some dips into 55fps with a 980Ti. Honestly, I was expecting much worse performance reading the comments.
I think PS4 Pro upscaling works differently, more like R6: Siege (checkerboard).
You are effectively playing in 720p on a 980Ti. Disable upscaling to achieve native 1080p and you'll understand the complaints.
So, with the GeForce recommended settings (mostly high and ultra, upscalling on) I'm getting consistent over 60fps with some dips into 55fps with a 980Ti. Honestly, I was expecting much worse performance reading the comments. What is the most distracting, apart from the softness and upscalling & temporal artifacts of course, is that the game stutters whenever there's a cutscene or other scripted event, which are fairly common. Any fix for this?
About the looks of the game. The lighting is impressive, as well as the overall scene complexity, too bad is all muted due the bad IQ of the upscalling algorithm the game uses. Can't tell if the texture are good or not due all the blur. Is this similar what the PS4 Pro is gonna do?
I only know the video comparison from DF and they used only a single CPU and four different GPUs, the RX 480, 390(X?) and the 970 + GTX 1060.I did not know that it runs worse. Digital Foundry reported it works the same.
Both Windows Store and Steam versions should offer same features and I am wondering why is that not the case. What is preventing Remedy from adding DX12 support to Steam version and DX11 support to UWP version?
As an Nvidia user don't even think about the UWP/DX12-Version:I was interested in buying this but is this a good PC port and which version is better ?
Steam or Windows Store ?
This is my PC:
i7 4770
GTX1080
32GB RAM
Which AA technique is present in the game?
I only know the video comparison from DF and they used only a single CPU and four different GPUs, the RX 480, 390(X?) and the 970 + GTX 1060.
So it doesn't showed the whole story.
And it's also a complete mystery to me why Remedy decided to make the different APIs store exclusive, I mean the bulk part of the work is done, writing a new rendering path, the remaining work should be relatively small.
As an Nvidia user don't even think about the UWP/DX12-Version:
https://translate.google.de/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.computerbase.de%2F2016-09%2Fquantum-break-steam-benchmark%2F2%2F
Over 30% more performance are possible with the GTX 1080 running under DX11 (Steam-Version).
Also you could try out reshade/sweetFX to sharpen the image like in these examples:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/186265
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/186264
But these tools don't work under UWP-Apps at all, since UWP is hiding the data-files.