-
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.
Far Cry 4 PC performance thread
- Thread starter JaseC
- Start date
This guide is incredible. For someone that doesn't really have a great handle on what all the PC settings are and what effect they have, the guide is brilliant and will really help me fine tune the best performance for my system with the features that look good to me.
It's actually a little surprising to me that texture quality has so little real performance impact as long as you have the VRAM for it. Learn something new every day.
Lol
How long did that take? I read the whole thing and it was great and easy to understand.
That was weird. UPlay updated and all of a sudden I was able to play FC4.
Not gonna complain...
i2500 stock
Geforce 770 GTX - 2 GB version
8 GB Ram
I'm running everything on High (Ambient Occlusion off, hate those much too black edges around objects/people) with SMAA and get a steady 60 FPS. Putting the textures higher seems to make the game stutter on occasions (VRam issue maybe). It will probably run a bit better with the proper Nvidia drivers coming out soon.
I don't want to dip below 60 FPS while playing so these settings work best for me atm.
Not gonna complain...
i2500 stock
Geforce 770 GTX - 2 GB version
8 GB Ram
I'm running everything on High (Ambient Occlusion off, hate those much too black edges around objects/people) with SMAA and get a steady 60 FPS. Putting the textures higher seems to make the game stutter on occasions (VRam issue maybe). It will probably run a bit better with the proper Nvidia drivers coming out soon.
I don't want to dip below 60 FPS while playing so these settings work best for me atm.
CyberPunked
Member
This is an amazing port. A large amount of graphical options to tweak, and great performance across the board. I'm averaging ~35fps on Ultra @ 4K with one 980.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Oh baby.
Corpsepyre
Banned
Not particularly good performance on an R9 270x. FPS all over the place. Using a mix of Very High and High, with a couple of things set to Ultra, and SMAA.
@ AndyBNV, am I right in saying there is a mistake on the two performance guide charts?
http://www.geforce.com/sites/defaul...e-settings-table-gtx-900-and-700-series-3.png
http://www.geforce.com/sites/defaul...-playable-settings-table-gtx-600-series-3.png
It mentions 4GB 780s and 3GB 660s - which I'm fairly sure I'm right in saying don't exist.
Really great guide though! The PC version of this looks to be rather great.
http://www.geforce.com/sites/defaul...e-settings-table-gtx-900-and-700-series-3.png
http://www.geforce.com/sites/defaul...-playable-settings-table-gtx-600-series-3.png
It mentions 4GB 780s and 3GB 660s - which I'm fairly sure I'm right in saying don't exist.
Really great guide though! The PC version of this looks to be rather great.
That SSBC vs HBAO+ is pretty impressive when comparing performance to results.
Aha love you Andy
PC is getting some of them console exclusive features!
Aha love you Andy
PC is getting some of them console exclusive features!
That's pretty good. I wonder how much I'll get with my two 780tis @4k.
Gawd, still locked here. US or Europe?
About a week. Play the game, find spots in the first half that aren't spoilerific, do tons of testing, writing, screens, coding, yadda yadda yadda
They exist. Were custom models made by some of our AIBs.
diggmcbadass
Member
Europe.
Also, the mouse issues I mentioned seems to be related to refresh rate. At 144hz, it was unplayable. At 120hz it seems to work better. Still something strange going on though.
kostacurtas
Member
As always, an excellent guide!
Hmmm, gonna try that as well. That mouse drag is getting a bit annoying.
razgriz417
Member
About a week. Play the game, find spots in the first half that aren't spoilerific, do tons of testing, writing, screens, coding, yadda yadda yadda
They exist. Were custom models made by some of our AIBs.
Awesome guide Andy, appreciate the hard work. I guess I'll use your 970 suggestion as a starting point. I'm running 2 1920X1200 monitors with a 970 and i52500k. What would you suggest I would turn down first to boost performance?
I just finished that Nvidia article and this part seems pretty important.
It's a noticeable framerate hit, only affects grass, and if you're already using some other type of alpha AA it's going to provide very little benefit.
You need to go into the GamerProfile.xml file to disable it, which can be located at
and set
Seriously though, that was super comprehensive. Great work Andy. You deserve that vacation.
It's a noticeable framerate hit, only affects grass, and if you're already using some other type of alpha AA it's going to provide very little benefit.
You need to go into the GamerProfile.xml file to disable it, which can be located at
Code:
C:\Users\USERNAME\Documents\My Games\Far Cry 4\Defaultand set
Code:
AlphaToCoverage to "0"Seriously though, that was super comprehensive. Great work Andy. You deserve that vacation.
Yeah. I'm probably going to change that instantly regardless of how well everything else is performing.
diggmcbadass
Member
I seem to have spoken too early. Didn't seem to help.
Aww man, why isn't my game unlocking
Come on uplay
COME ON
Thanks for the heads up btw, I've also got a 144hz monitor so at least I know what I'll try first if I'm having mouse problems.
e: or not
It's all rather subjective... People are always getting mad on our site because we recommend x instead y, so that's why I've included literally every setting. Folks can review what everything does and decide if Water Low is an acceptable trade off to increase Shadows to Ultra.
The only firm advice I would give is to avoid Terrain Medium and Shadows High, as they're unequivocally 'bad'.
BloodMoney
Banned
Yup. Wonder why the chose to hide that setting in the config file this time around instead of having it as an in-game option, like in Far Cry 3.
Just looked through the GamerProfile.xml and apparently this setting was set to "1":
There is another setting in there called:
which was set to "0". This was probably not working. Or they must have messed up the ingame menu with the wrong command.
I just changed MouseAcceleration="0" and it seems to work ingame. It feels a lot more responsive
.Usually in December when the madness has ended, but then someone went and set Metal Gear for Dec 18th....
Should be damned good, but like I say, can't account for the other elements of your system so it's only a starting point.
Cool. I have an Intel Core i7 2600 3,4 GHz and 12 GB RAM for that matter. Looking to upgrade my processor too if needed during christmas.
Ah, 660s were a mistake. I just couldn't find any reference anywhere to 4GB 780s but I was probably just being stupid.
stufte
Member
Ahhh. I love this, my 690 is ready to go!
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
diggmcbadass
Member
Just looked through the GamerProfile.xml and apparently this setting was set to "1":
There is another setting in there called:
which was set to "0". This was probably not working. Or they must have messed up the ingame menu with the wrong command.
I just changed MouseAcceleration="0" and it seems to work ingame. It feels a lot more responsive
Can't really say it helped setting MouseAcceleration to 0. I did set the mouse sensitivity to 1.00 in the xml and doubled the dpi on my mouse instead. It got rid of the worst acceleration it seems, but whenever I use the mouse to look around, I get jaggy movement. Same thing kind of happens when I drive a vehicle, leaving me to think there are some bigger issues than just the mouse here. Generally, looking around feels like a 30 fps experience in a 60+fps world.
This is in addition to the mouse losing focus from my main monitor and suddenly allowing me to click on my second monitor. When this happens during combat, it gets old real fast.
not_so_special
Banned
i have problems booting the game,a black screen with the logo and then another black screen who turns intro gey and keeps on that state
Here's a comparison. There's something wrong with SMAA in this game, but MSAA makes vegetation all jaggy.
Nvidia's performance guide recommends 2x TXAA on anything above a 4GB 770, and I agree.
I think SMAA looks pretty good
Moral Panic
Member
Whoa. Maybe they saw the GAF thread.
Corpsepyre
Banned
The game runs like complete ass on AMD cards it seems. A friend with a 290 can't go above 40-45 fps. I'm running it on lower settings on my 270x as well, and it tops out at 40.
I have an AMD r9 290 so no TXAA for me, it's an Nvidia exclusive, though from that comparison i cannot see a lot of difference between the 2, both look good, maybe the SMAA looks even better
Indeed, it's almost the same of MSAA and should be pretty less demanding, i guess i'l have to see them directly in my game to decide which one to use
That's a bad news, i've got a 290 OC too, and i expected 50-60fps on Ultra like a gtx 970, will see, i'll dive into this game once beaten Unity(i'm almost there), i hope meanwhile an update could improve performance for AMD cards
razgriz417
Member
Can confirm this. Getting horrible fps with crossfire HD 7970GHz. I can barely even break 30fps at just 1920x1200, ultra settings and 2xMSAA. By comparison, I could run Far Cry 3 with the same rig at 2720x1700, 4xMSAA, ultra settings and get a rock solid 30fps and solid 60fps at 1200p .
The only other game that has been so demanding on my rig like this is Unity.
That's why I hate all this "the way it's meant to be played" and "AMD Evolved" crap. One side is always going to get fucked with shitty optimization efforts or none at all.
On another note, does anyone know if AMD included a Far Cry 4 profile in the latest beta driver? I tried adding the game to CCC and it keeps telling me there's already a profile for this game, but I can't find it anywhere in the list.
Visualante2
Member
nvidia promoted game that runs shit on competitor hardware. what a surprise. especially after last year's game ran fairly well...
will be avoiding for a good while.
will be avoiding for a good while.
I'm getting really sick of this hardware marketing bullshit that performs better on one manufacturer vs the other. I had an HD6950 for FC3 and could run it at pretty solid settings even in 1440p. If my 290 can't maintain 60fps on high I'm going to be pissed.