Support NeoGAF

[Sylonious]

How do the downsampling options work?

 

[littlegrasshopper]

Also, for anyone that can't get the Texture pack to show up in their DLC tab use this link https://steamdb.info/app/311670/ install it and it will fail, then restart Steam.

Thanks for this, downloading the HD pack now!

 

[Mozz-eyes]

This game is not a looker and never will be. I thought ultra was gonna make all the difference in the world but honestly you'll question whether or not this game is "next gen" by the looks alone. Drop it down to high even med and you're not missing out. The most important part is that it's a consistent performer and it's a blast to play.

FWIW though, I'm playing on a 780ti 4670k. 80fps average all stock settings maxed (no ultra texture pack)



Fudge enough of the settings and you'll probably have something that looks and plays identical to the PS4 version. Up to you. PC is cheaper so I'll direct you there.

Thanks for the info. I might wait a couple of months because I'm looking at the gtx 970 for Christmas.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

The benchmark looks so terrible but in-game, it looks much better. Am I the only one noticing this, lol?

 

[Qassim]

Ultra preset, 1080p, haven't downloaded the 'Ultra' textures so it'll be defaulting to the 'high' textures.

i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz
GTX 780 SLI (2x)

SLI off (stutter to 25fps also seemed to happen before it loaded):

SLI on (the stutter to 10fps happened before it loaded):

I'm reasonably happy with that. I'm using the F.E.A.R 3 SLI compatibility bit that Romir suggested (had to add the game's executable to get it to work).

I'm on a G-Sync monitor and it looked rather good performance wise. Can't play it at the moment though, just wanted to bench it then run. G-Sync capping my FPS at 144, so i'll redo that SLI one after to see if I can get a higher average.

 

[neorej]

The benchmark looks so terrible but in-game, it looks much better. Am I the only one noticing this, lol?

Nah, everyone seems to have that; the Min FPS are a false value, since the first few frames the test is still initializing it seems.

 

[xBladeM6x]

i7-3770k
980 SC

Ultra textures and all, and get no frame dips below 58 from what I can tell. Even if it wants to utilize more than 4GB, it seems to be doing the job just fine.

 

[stufte]

SLI seems to work fine using the F.E.A.R. 3 sli bits with nvidia inspector. I also added the game's exe to the profile but don't know if that was necessary.

I just wanted to say that this is legit. Both gpus were active on my 690. was able to peg out the settings to the max (ultra on all) and got an average of 60fps in the bench.

 

[Dr Dogg]

So asides from everyone running benchmarks how is the actual in game performance? Some of the videos released of the PC version and the Nvidia Game 24 event stuff looked like this hitched every now and then, mainly when zooming into for character/orc close ups. Smooth experience? Any crashes of note? Any open world streaming issues? Any other glaring issues of note? Cheers in advance.

 

[Autofokus]

I'm running a 2gb EVGA 660ti. I'll be wanting to run the game at 1080p.

Do you gents reckon I'd be better off buying the PS4 version?

Have a look at my post, could be helpful to you.

I can't nudge you in any direction (PC/PS4) though. I got the steam version for free, so I will probably gonna check out the PS4 version later today.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

Nah, everyone seems to have that; the Min FPS are a false value, since the first few frames the test is still initializing it seems.

I don't mean the stats, I mean it graphically seems to look terrible, but the graphics seem quite good in game. A subjective impression.

 

[TheVampire]

Textures look like shit in this game.

 

[wrathloki]

So I tried injecting SMAA at Ultra settings and I'm seeing no difference at all. Has anyone else tried this? Is it not working or is it just me? Would be a bummer if it didn't work, considering this game is jaggy as hell and SSAA is a huge hit to my machine.

 

[LabouredSubterfuge]

So I tried injecting SMAA at Ultra settings and I'm seeing no difference at all. Has anyone else tried this? Is it not working or is it just me? Would be a bummer if it didn't work, considering this game is jaggy as hell and SSAA is a huge hit to my machine.

Can force FXAA if you're willing to take the blur hit to even the jaggies out.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

So I tried injecting SMAA at Ultra settings and I'm seeing no difference at all. Has anyone else tried this? Is it not working or is it just me? Would be a bummer if it didn't work, considering this game is jaggy as hell and SSAA is a huge hit to my machine.

I'm not noticing nearly as much jaggy in game as I was in the benchmark. Once again- not sure if that's just my subjective interpretation.

 

[d00d3n]

Ultra preset, 1080p, haven't downloaded the 'Ultra' textures so it'll be defaulting to the 'high' textures.

i7 4770k @ 4.5Ghz
GTX 780 SLI (2x)

SLI off (stutter to 25fps also seemed to happen before it loaded):



SLI on (the stutter to 10fps happened before it loaded):



I'm reasonably happy with that. I'm using the F.E.A.R 3 SLI compatibility bit that Romir suggested (had to add the game's executable to get it to work).

I'm on a G-Sync monitor and it looked rather good performance wise. Can't play it at the moment though, just wanted to bench it then run.

That is awesome. Pretty much my exact setup. Did you notice any issues with the graphics using SLI?

 

[Seanspeed]

He forgot to reload game between the screenshots, that's why textures are the same, only changes are geometry (i.e. fur), maybe not even post-processing depending on how the game treats changes in graphics.

Would make sense.

So can somebody do a proper comparison with some of the settings, particularly textures?

 

[Kiyoshi]

I'm not noticing nearly as much jaggy in game as I was in the benchmark. Once again- not sure if that's just my subjective interpretation.

Those were my thoughts too. Tried the benchmark a few times with various catalyst settings to try and force AA on (which didn't work), so I gave up. But when I played the game it seemed a lot better. Not sure if my eyes/brain are playing tricks on me, but it seemed better.

 

[Qassim]

That is awesome. Pretty much my exact setup. Did you notice any issues with the graphics using SLI?

No graphical issues until I crank up the resolution to 4K on SLI in which I get a flickering texture or two.

Benchmark on 2880x1620, same 'Ultra preset' settings (high textures).

Again, quite happy with this - no real drops once the game has loaded and it looks smooth at 150% resolution.

 

[Sanctuary]

How the hell do you even get 1080p with this game? My choices are:

1600 x 900
2128 x 1197
2290 x 1260
2560 x 1440
etc...

 

[Seanspeed]

How the hell do you even get 1080p with this game? My choices are:

1600 x 900
2128 x 1197
2290 x 1260
2560 x 1440
etc...

I think people were saying you have to disable any custom resolutions you have.

 

[Joey Ravn]

I'm at work, so I can't try it yet, but knowing that at least you can force SLI through compatibility bits is a huge relief. I was fearing my 680 SLI wouldn't be able to maintain 60 FPS at High settings if I was left with just one card. Turning things down is OK, playing at 30 FPS is most definitely not.

 

[Sanctuary]

I think people were saying you have to disable any custom resolutions you have.

Yeah that was it. I actually tried that right after posting. I just unticked GPU scaling and it worked. First game I've had to bother with that.

 

[AndyBNV]

I'm away from my PC - can someone show me some overlay proof of FEAR 3 SLI is working? And preferably take some video too to show that it's not a glitchy mess? Thanks in advance!

 

[dreamfall]

Alright y'all, I'm rocking a GTX 680 2GB, i7 3770K, 8GB RAM. These are my settings, dips in half with Vsync on, but I think I'm happy.

Also, put textures on High, still averaging close to 60 with dips.

 

[Saiyan-Rox]

So now it's out in the wild anyone figure what my rig should get on it?

i5 3370 (or something like that lol)
AMD 7950
12GB Ram

probably not get ultra but I expected that anyway really.

 

[neorej]

How well does auto config work? Does it really configs the game to optimal settings, or does it do a best guess and leaves room for improvement?

 

[Ragus]

why can't I see 1080p option in settings? After 900p I see 1197p. Wtf?

Ok, deleting customs resolutions fixed it

 

[ruddiger7]

7970's CF with 4770k runs ultra at 1440p no problem.

Struggled to get good frames at 4k though even with textures turned down.

 

[Sylonious]

Um, could somebody please post an image with high downsampling at 1080p?

 

[Drama Zed Nod]

Preloaded last night, woke up this morning, put everything to max (with the exception of Texture Quality which i have at High). I'm running at 1440p on an OCd 780ti and a 4770k @4.4

 

[Rip]

Is there a way to force triple buffering?

 

[Kezen]

The game seems to run well enough on capable PCs. Maybe I'll pick it up someday.

 

[x3sphere]

980 SLI @ 4096x2160, all settings Ultra, getting nearly 60 FPS average.

 

[UrbanRats]

So is there a breakdown of the visual differences of these settings? Like Ambient Occlusion on Ultra is HBAO+? What is it on High? And so on.


I hate when they just have "medium high ultra", as it doesn't mean much.

 

[itllgrobak]

GTX 670 2gb oc, 2500k @ 4.5, 8gb ram.

Mostly high settings with some medium, Benchmark gets me 60 fps average (with vsync), however in game I'm getting pretty substantial drops which are very distracting

I'll have to lower more settings, need constant 60!

 

[Vuze]

Wow, this game looks... ugly to say the least. Eagerly waiting for some more of them 4K Ultra shots (preferably not on imgur).

 

[InfYn]

Sadly the game doesn't support crossfire, so I'm running on only 1 R9 270X 2GB


This game runs beautifully. Always above 60 FPS on a mix of high-ultra settings, AO and Motion Blur off and textures to medium. A little weird there is no AA option though.

Wonderfully stable. This thing will be a joke to run when it gets crossfire support.


All the options in the settings menu are clearly explained as well. There's no awful mouse acceleration on menus or in-game.

Awesome. Just awesome.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

GTX 780
i5 3570k @ 4.4 GHz
8GB RAM
Win 8 64 bit

everything maxed except for AO on high and textures on high (can't seem to find the ultra download anywhere). had a 78 fps avg first run on the benchmark. Enabled vsync for kicks and was entirely locked to 60 except for the first second of the benchmark where it was 42.

So runs great, would really love some AA over super sampling though, don't like going in 50% intervals.

 

[wagamer]

Anyone tried with R9 280 yet? Retail copies are delayed till 10th October here ughhh.

I'd like to know this as well. There should be a demo, or at least a benchmark demo.

 

[Auto-Reply]

These are some weird settings/options? No AA... only downsampling via percentage slider?

 

[pixlexic]

the benchmark is weird .. i get a constant 60 fps with 2 spikes to above 100 but it says max 120 and min 43

where does the 43 come from?

 

[KojiKnight]

So by the sounds of it, this game doesn't seem to have an option for triple buffering? Why do so many games not have triple buffering as an option?

the benchmark is weird .. i get a constant 60 fps with 2 spikes to above 100 but it says max 120 and min 43

where does the 43 come from?

There seems to be a slight delay at the start of the benchmark for just about everyone that is throwing it off.

 

[sgs2008]

sigh my download speed is liek 300kb/s, this is gonan take a while

 

[Drama Zed Nod]

We got any benches of the Ultra textures on a 780Ti running at 1440p?

I can do some later but with the Textures at "high" and getting 60FPS, i think the hit is going to be too big at 1440p.

 

[riflen]

Could someone post some FRAPS frametime graphs, please? Average FPS is an awful metric for judging performance consistency.

 

[poopninjamvc3mk]

Sadly the game doesn't support crossfire, so I'm running on only 1 R9 270X 2GB


This game runs beautifully. Always above 60 FPS on a mix of high-ultra settings, AO and Motion Blur off and textures to medium. A little weird there is no AA option though.

Wonderfully stable. This thing will be a joke to run when it gets crossfire support.


All the options in the settings menu are clearly explained as well. There's no awful mouse acceleration on menus or in-game.

Awesome. Just awesome.

This is good to know

 

[MaLDo]

Pretty much. I was surprised to see even Maldo claiming a poorly optimised engine when this bench video was released.

Maybe tesselation, or reflections, or one of the other settings is a massive system hog. It's happened before. The 970 might be capable of 100FPS if they turned down just one setting. We don't know for sure yet. Not until other people with different systems start testing things out tomorrow.

Variables like this exist so it's tough to write off the game for now, based on a single video.

I did not say it's an poorly optimised engine. I said that evaluating the performance I can see in that particular video running in that particular computer, the engine doesn't seem a very optimised engine. Not very optimised is not equal to poorly optimised, you know.

Anyway that doesn't stop the game to have good performance and good graphics. I just think that performance could have been higher with these graphics in that benchmark (I'm not talking about minimun framerate).

 

[Ikuu]

Anyone know how to disable startup videos?

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

vsync causing some nasty lag.

Anyone know which shadow of mordor exe to use in nvidia control panel? There are three, two seem to be the same while a 3rd is labeled differently.