People who have less than 3GB shouldn't expect to play at next-gen console asset quality. This is entirely unsurprising and nothing to get worked up about.
The game seems to perform very well with suitable settings.
-
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.
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor PC Performance Thread
- Thread starter batman2million
- Start date
The game seems to perform very well with suitable settings.
SixtyTonAngel
Neo Member
K Guys
GTX 660
i7 3770 3.4
16gb ram
Benchmarked at High Settings, with tesselation & depth of field on Im getting 40-60 fps @ 1080p with 1.5gb vram very happy with that
Also to force triple buffering you turn of vysnc ingame turn it on in the drivers and turn on triple buffering aswell in the drivers
As far as I'm aware, triple buffering doesn't work with DirectX unless you use D3DOverrider, which doesn't seem to work with this game.
AngryPuppy
Banned
I have a 2gb 680 and every console multiplat game has run faster and looked better on my system than on the PS4.
I wasn't too sure about it myself, but even if that's the case my VRAM usage isn't going any higher than 3.6GB and I'm absolutely certain my textures are of Ultra quality (rocks are the same colour and detailed like the Ultra screens posted here).
The only way to test if this is only the case for people with an GTX 970/980 is for someone with an high-end Nvidia card from the 7XX series (ultimately also with 4GB of VRAM) to use the same settings I'm using and report their VRAM usage. But at least people with an 970 don't have to worry their card is already not capable of maximum settings anymore.
In case anyone is interested in this little experiment; I've got all graphics settings maxed at 1080p 60hz with Vsync enabled in-game (and the HD textures installed of course). In the Nvidia settings menu I'm forcing 16x Anti-aliasing, multisample transparency AA and using the 'Quality' texture filtering option I previously mentioned. Everything else influencing this game's performance is either application-controlled or off.
ussjtrunks
Member
Seems to be an opengl game as its clearly triple buffered while im playing it atm, i assume thats why d3d didnt work as id usually use that
I still think you're missing the point that the actual *result* is not impressive in many cases. We are not getting much better looking textures for the extra vRAM usage.
This is what he said:
http://international.download.nvidia...aper_FINAL.PDF Tiled Resources and related techs from page 23 on. With that you can take a 1.6GB VRAM scene and render it using just 156MB VRAM. That's going to require a game being programmed in DX11.3 or DX12, but when they arrive we're going to see a massive leap in visual detail, with far fewer repeated textures.
I have no problem with this *if* it means we're getting a jump in texture quality compared to before.
Coolcat_FTW
Neo Member
You should head over to: https://steamdb.info/app/311670/, then install.
Afterwards Steam shows HD content under properties/DLC:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Mitte...re-Pack-installieren-1137744/galerie/2267258/
Now checkmark this and start the download
And that's not surprising either, since aside from sheer amount of memory a 680 is significantly faster than a PS4.
People just need to differentiate a lot more. Graphics aren't monolithic. You'll get higher quality pixels, faster, and with higher quality effects (or at a higher resolution) with a 2 GB card like the 680. But if a game uses more than 2 GB of unique assets per frame, you'll also get lower asset quality.
Thank you good sir!
Burgess_101
Member
So all of a sudden I keep getting a crash to desktop saying;
"Video device removed or reset" (or something along those lines).
Any news on this?
My specs:
1440p
i7 2700k 4.4Ghz
GTX 780
8GB RAM
I thought it might be because I was forcing Vysnc in control panel but even with it off it crashes.
"Video device removed or reset" (or something along those lines).
Any news on this?
My specs:
1440p
i7 2700k 4.4Ghz
GTX 780
8GB RAM
I thought it might be because I was forcing Vysnc in control panel but even with it off it crashes.
It's hard to do comparison screenshots because you need to restart the game each time for changes to take affect, but doing it will also make the time of day, weather, lighting and etc. change. Here's the best I can get so far.
1440p:
HIGH
ULTRA
The only difference I can clearly see is the ground textures are better on ULTRA.
1440p:
HIGH
ULTRA
The only difference I can clearly see is the ground textures are better on ULTRA.
It's hard to do comparison screenshots because you need to restart the game each time for changes to take affect, but doing it will also make the time of day, weather, lighting and etc. change. Here's the best I can get so far.
1440p:
HIGH
ULTRA
The only difference I can clearly see is the ground textures are better on ULTRA.
Um. Those don't look different in the slightest.
Not to ask the "are you plugged in question" but did you actually download the ULTRA texture pack? lol
That is a tragic waste of 6gigs of VRAM if that's all you get for the ULTRA upgrade.
ussjtrunks
Member
Oddly triple buffering works in the benchmark but there is tearing ingame
Doctor Hades
Member
Seriously...the PC version has no anti-aliasing options at all?!?! What is this...2002??
Do the PS4 and Xbox One versions use a post-process FXAA filter? I cannot believe any developer outside of Wii U ones would release a game in 2014 without any AA on PC. Truly shocking IMO.
Do the PS4 and Xbox One versions use a post-process FXAA filter? I cannot believe any developer outside of Wii U ones would release a game in 2014 without any AA on PC. Truly shocking IMO.
Prophet Steve
Member
On page 10 the technique we are talking about is listed and it is separate from the tiled resources listed on the pages that Andy refers to, which is a lot more substantial.
Also it seems that the difference between Ultra and High is pretty significant in my opinion and I really doubt that the consoles are going to have better textures than high on the PC. It is an open world, they cannot spend as much time on every texture, it doesn't all have to be a technical problem.
Not in my opinion.
I had this when I was using Ultra textures with 'High Quality' texture filtering (on a 4GB VRAM card, the 780 often has 3GB right?). Check your VRAM usage and texture filtering options or try a lower texture setting in the option menu.
By the way; I'd also recommend Nvidia users to force FXAA in this game, the aliasing going on without downsampling is a bit too much and there aren't any adjustable in-game AA settings.
Prophet Steve
Member
There is a downsampling option to use as AA, but it still is not ideal.
They are different, look at the ground.
SixtyTonAngel
Neo Member
Holy shit, I think you're right. For some reason it kicked in after alt-tabbing out and back in. Runs brilliantly now.
Cheers!
If anyone's interested:
i7 860 @ 3.2, Gigabyte GTX770OC, 16GB RAM
Everything on highest, except textures on High, motion blur off and SSAO on medium.
Runs at 60fps most of the time, dipping into the 50s occasionally and I'm sure into the 40s very occasionally.
UnrealEck
Member
any bench on a GTX 770 2Gb?
I'm at work right now (I live in Brazil), can't wait to try it out
Not the in-game benchmark but this video shows a little gameplay
Yes. I have the HD Content (Ultra) pack installed and the VRAM usage between High vs Ultra shows that it's enable.
Kiru
Member
Made a mouse-over comparison, but yeah, ground textures look like the only difference in that shot:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/93681
For those of you saying VSync isn't triple buffered isn't there options to run this displayed as borderless windowed and an option to limited the framerate in game? There's your solution right there.
And it's clearly not an OpenGL game as all the shots with the Afterburner Overlay present in the show D3D11.
And it's clearly not an OpenGL game as all the shots with the Afterburner Overlay present in the show D3D11.
It's hard to do comparison screenshots because you need to restart the game each time for changes to take affect, but doing it will also make the time of day, weather, lighting and etc. change. Here's the best I can get so far.
1440p:
HIGH
ULTRA
The only difference I can clearly see is the ground textures are better on ULTRA.
Yeah the ground textures have a noticeable change, but is that really it?
Page 10 and 11 are live now, but 'merely' improve performance. Tiled Resources and associated techs have the potential to dramatically improve IQ.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Compare textures... post screens to imgur.
ussjtrunks
Member
Only way i found to keep the game running with triple buffering was to use borderless fullscreen + ingame vsync. Running this Im getting 50-60 fps ingame atm
Rehosted those:
HIGH:
ULTRA:
OK, this is very visible distance. Rocks on the ground are better on Ultra.
Prophet Steve
Member
I know, tiled resources have the potential to make a big impact. But right now a lot of people are worried about the big VRAM requirements for this game, and the delta color compression should help a bit.
Thanks, that fixed it.
Force through drivers.
SneakyStephan
Banned
So it's just like bf3 where it uses whatever vram you have for caching, shocker /s
Well the marketing drones who came up with the 6GB vram thing mission accomplished I guess, got people to talk/troll about the game
Well the marketing drones who came up with the 6GB vram thing mission accomplished I guess, got people to talk/troll about the game
Like I already stated, with even the screenshots off my computer, I can only tell that the ground textures are better which you can already see in the pictures I posted, but if you have another site you wish me to upload, tell me.
OldAsUrSock
Banned
Because its not 60fps.
So, all we get is a slighly better looking ground, and a few rocks in different colors?
Disappointing, but fully expected. I knew the developers wouldn't invest in a PC-exclusive setting which transforms the look of the game. Still, it's embarassing to even say this requires 6 GBs of VRAM...
Disappointing, but fully expected. I knew the developers wouldn't invest in a PC-exclusive setting which transforms the look of the game. Still, it's embarassing to even say this requires 6 GBs of VRAM...
Kiru
Member
I think the contrast/color settings are just off in the HIGH shot, look at the UI. Also you can clearly see better textures on the ground AND on the wall rocks.
Prophet Steve
Member
I think the different colors have to do with the time of day.
But you get higher resolution textures by downloading a high resolution texture pack, how could you have different expectations?
No. It's because the two shots are taken at different time of day, weather, lighting and etc. And, that's why It's hard to do comparison shots because you need to restart the game to make changes take affect, but doing that will also changes other things.
Well yeah, I did say they are better... but the difference is very slight compared to high setting, especially since the dev states a double amount of VRAM is needed to run it properly.
Also, the part about different rock color is just slight sarcasm on my part!
Well it happened with Daylight as well and that was a stink created by users not suits. There was panic it was 'using' masses and masses of VRAM instead of smartly caching assets. Personally I think that's a good thing, especially when UE3 was a bit iffy in some games regards to streaming in textures and that's putting it lightly. If you got the overhead may as well put it to good use and it's not exactly like the warning signs of running out of VRAM like lockups and low memory dialog boxes were present.
So you can play with High textures with a 2GB card and have no problems at all?
UnrealEck
Member
Usually in games you get stuttering as it's swapping textures in and out but in SoM, I don't seem to have this problem.
Seems to run fine, though I'd have to play extensively and travel through loads of environments to get a really accurate picture.
But it seems like it can run on high without stuttering.