• 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.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Assassin's Creed Unity - PC Performance thread

Skyzard

Banned
Jun 3, 2012
20,772
0
0
I wonder what UBI does with their PC-games to get that slow and stable framerate-diff. It's like the engine is rendering some kind of median-value of what it's capable off. Never seen another games framerate respond to the environment in the way Watch Dogs, AssCreed and Far Cry 3 does.

And those games don't even use the same engine.
Framerate smoothing?
 

ISee

Member
Feb 18, 2014
4,789
28
410
Does the streamer have the latest Nvidia drivers?
Not sure, he doesn't tell. Was already enough work to change the graphic settings.

Don't you lose a few fps streaming video?
Seems he is streaming without extra capture hardware. So yes.

UPDATE: He did not save the ultra settings so the game is still 'only' running on high settings. *sigh* :(

So the game runs @1080p 55 - 60fps ins Paris with a gtx 970

FXAA
high preset
shadows on low
Vsync off

his total CPU load is at around 60% i7 4790k @ 4ghz
 

HariKari

Member
Jun 28, 2013
7,298
0
0
You mean a large, CPU-bound open world game with a lot of background world simulation doesn't run at a constant 60 fps for the vast majority of people?!

Hate to sound like a dick hole but I told you so.
How powerful do you think the CPUs are in the XB1 and PS4, exactly?
 

Skyzard

Banned
Jun 3, 2012
20,772
0
0
Wow, walking up close through a crowd, their clothing is constantly changing when they are just a few meters away as he walks forward. Like different quality models are loading too much.
 

stufte

Member
Jan 9, 2011
8,219
7
665
Usually the PC performance threads have a better ratio of relevant PC setting talk to BS, but this one seems exceptional.
It's mostly because the game isn't quite out yet. We have barely a handful of people who have actually played it in this thread, and people are reacting to that. It's unfortunate, but I guess that's what happens with so little information to work from. :\
 

Piggus

Member
Mar 12, 2008
11,479
0
0
Ashland, Oregon
www.gtagaming.com
How powerful do you think the CPUs are in the XB1 and PS4, exactly?
Not very powerful, but there are still too many factors in games like this that prevent most people from hitting a constant 60 fps. Be it how the game streams data, wild fluctuations in CPU usage, etc.

I've been PC gaming for 10 years. But unlike a lot of people here, I realized a long time ago that it's silly to expect a solid 60 fps in games like this, Watch_Dogs, GTAIV. It's so easy to see why a game like this or GTAIV or Watch_Dogs doesn't run as well as say Sleeping Dogs yet people lump them all into the same category anyway.

The same thing is likely to happen with GTAV and it will be the same shit all over. AKA people blaming the devs without knowing how these types of games actually work.
 

Dr Dogg

Member
Nov 30, 2011
12,818
0
535
Well after watching that dudes stream, seeing his setup and settings compared to mine performance looks in around what III and IV are like for me (more over III as that is more demanding when cutscene models are pressent). Some SLI benches would be nice but
I'm quite content with the perfromance on display there.

Though those crowds are cracking me up. There about 20 of the same guy copy and pasted sometimes. I'm sure its a different cup of tea while playing but it sticks out as a passive viewer.
 

Loris146

Member
Dec 6, 2012
4,487
0
410
Not sure, he doesn't tell. Was already enough work to change the graphic settings.



Seems he is streaming without extra capture hardware. So yes.

UPDATE: He did not save the ultra settings so the game is still 'only' running on high settings. *sigh* :(

So the game runs @1080p 55 - 60fps ins Paris with a gtx 970

FXAA
high preset
shadows on low
Vsync off

his total CPU load is at around 60% i7 4790k @ 4ghz
Shadows on low ?
 

Kinthalis

Banned
Jun 13, 2013
4,750
0
0
USA
Not sure, he doesn't tell. Was already enough work to change the graphic settings.



Seems he is streaming without extra capture hardware. So yes.

UPDATE: He did not save the ultra settings so the game is still 'only' running on high settings. *sigh* :(

So the game runs @1080p 55 - 60fps ins Paris with a gtx 970

FXAA
high preset
shadows on low
Vsync off

his total CPU load is at around 60% i7 4790k @ 4ghz
He just maxed shadows to PCSS and it dropped to 45-55 FPS. Except on rooftops where he gets pretty much his old 55-60 FPS frame rate.

EDIT: WHOA! Dude just jumped througha guy's window, crossed his room,a nd out another window... that was cool ;)
 

RazorbackDB

Member
Jun 29, 2012
1,661
0
0
Valdivia, Chile
I feel like these threads are now about people whining about poor pc ports and durante doing some damage control about what people say. Anyway the game seems to have some good character models but everything else seems dissapointing, definitely not what they first showed, but it's Ubisoft sooo.... I want to see the performance with those huge crowds and if they really are huge as they were in the trailers.
 

FLAguy954

Junior Member
Jan 27, 2012
5,155
0
0
USA
Even on lowest settings I have a hard time keeping stable 60fps in the city. And it doesnt look so different (Low vs Ultra High). Guess that explains the high minimum requirements.
You still haven't stated what clocks your 2700K is running at.

Edit: Sorry OP, I read the thread and you mentioned stock clocks.
 

Lulubop

Member
May 27, 2011
23,778
3
0
Alright, just got it. I think the Origin trick worked, came out to Rs.1,958.67.

Wait a minute, this shit is telling me it came out to 1 dollar. da fuck.
 

Dinda

Member
Feb 5, 2013
2,328
0
0
After watching a bit of that stream i have to say that i really don't like the look of this game. It all looks so blurry it makes it kind of unpleasent to watch for me.
Hope this is just some weird AA he is using.
 

Skyzard

Banned
Jun 3, 2012
20,772
0
0
After watching a bit of that stream i have to say that i really don't like the look of this game. It all looks so blurry it makes it kind of unpleasent to watch for me.
Hope this is just some weird AA he is using.
He is using FXAA but I don't think that's the issue. I know what you mean. Like it really lacks edges where there should be edges and contrast, almost hurts to look at some times. Other times it looks mighty impressive...

I dunno what it is.
 

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
Jun 22, 2004
7,594
74
1,575
Durante said:
This is an accurate assessment.
Well except the part where 55-60 without VSync(according to that post?) is unlikely to be anywhere near double the console performance - granted that's not user-visible, but if we're talking raw numbers without frame-limiters.

dawid said:
I wonder what UBI does with their PC-games to get that slow and stable framerate-diff.
Most of them are literal ports. Ie. there's no shippable PC codebase, the console version is branched near release and ported in a minimum amount of time feasible(3-6months).
 

FunkyMunkey

Banned
Aug 26, 2006
6,937
0
0
For those with frame dips using in-game vsync, have you tried using D3DOverrider for vsync and triple buffering instead? I had to do that on Black Flag.
 

Dictator93

Member
Jun 29, 2011
23,813
4
570
He is using FXAA but I don't think that's the issue. I know what you mean. Like it really lacks edges where there should be edges and contrast, almost hurts to look at some times. Other times it looks mighty impressive...
It has a lot to do with the game switching to PBR whilst taking place in the a century gone by. Most surfaces back then were diffuse. Not a lot of glass, polished marble, or metal strcutres
 

Dictator93

Member
Jun 29, 2011
23,813
4
570
Physically Based rendering. Making metals and other materials react more consistently and realistically. That "dullness" of a lot of the non-metal shading is just how dull these material look in real life. Albeit, less detailed and approximated.
 

ISee

Member
Feb 18, 2014
4,789
28
410
He just maxed shadows to PCSS and it dropped to 45-55 FPS. Except on rooftops where he gets pretty much his old 55-60 FPS frame rate.

EDIT: WHOA! Dude just jumped througha guy's window, crossed his room,a nd out another window... that was cool ;)
Yep, port seems to be fine. PS4 runs @900p/30fps with some drops below 30... A good gaming PC runs the game @ higher settings in 1080p @ ~50fps. Somehow this sounds reasonable to me...

Also the stream chat asking him about a cracked EXE all the time is pretty funny.

Yes stream chat is asking him all the time to play around with settings so we can get a better look about how seetings scale performance wise. I bet some fellow GAFers are helping with this. :)
 

Kinthalis

Banned
Jun 13, 2013
4,750
0
0
USA
Well except the part where 55-60 without VSync(according to that post?) is unlikely to be anywhere near double the console performance - granted that's not user-visible, but if we're talking raw numbers without frame-limiters.
He's running at 1080p not 900p. The PS4 version drops frames below 30 FPS outside. He's runnignat higher graphics optiosn than the PS4.

So yeah, I would say that IS twice the performance of a PS4, at least.
 

Skyzard

Banned
Jun 3, 2012
20,772
0
0
Physically Based rendering. Making metals and other materials react more consistently and realistically. That "dullness" of a lot of the non-metal shading is just how dull these material look in real life. Albeit, less detailed and approximated.
Ah that explains it I think, some interior scenes look really great.

Thanks.

They should have given everyone silk clothes.
 

mattman5000

Banned
Jan 29, 2014
98
0
0
I am interested to see how this game performs at max settings at 3200x1800 with my two GTX 980s and i7-3930k. I am also interested in how much of a difference 6 cores will make. Anybody here with two 980s and a 4 core CPU? For gaming, I wonder if the additional cores where really worth the extra money.
 

Kezen

Banned
Jul 28, 2014
8,919
0
0
France
I am interested to see how this game performs at max settings at 3200x1800 with my two GTX 980s and i7-3930k. I am also interested in how much of a difference 6 cores will make. Anybody here with two 980s and a 4 core CPU? For gaming, I wonder if the additional cores where really worth the extra money.
You really should have chosen an I7 instead of an I5. No brainer really and I7 aren't expensive at all nowadays (300€/$ for a 4770K).
 

Claude

Catalina's bitch
Sep 13, 2011
2,048
0
0
Michigan
Thanks for the impressions everyone. Extra props to everyone else that provided additonal clarification. Seems like I'll be content with the performance on my mid-range rig.
 

Prophet Steve

Member
Sep 16, 2009
12,968
0
0
Netherlands
I am interested to see how this game performs at max settings at 3200x1800 with my two GTX 980s and i7-3930k. I am also interested in how much of a difference 6 cores will make. Anybody here with two 980s and a 4 core CPU? For gaming, I wonder if the additional cores where really worth the extra money.
Well, likely it won't make a difference, since resolution doesn't matter for CPU performance. Unless you'd want more than 60 FPS.

You really should have chosen an I7 instead of an I5. No brainer really and I7 aren't expensive at all nowadays (300€/$ for a 4770K).
He has no i5. And it really isn't required to have an i7. Also the price difference is pretty big.
 

Seanspeed

Banned
Sep 10, 2009
29,419
0
0
Well, likely it won't make a difference, since resolution doesn't matter for CPU performance. Unless you'd want more than 60 FPS.
Could definitely help performance in general if it was built to scale well across 6 cores. Lifting your CPU limitations can free up room for more effects/AA/resolution or whatever.
 

Felix Lighter

Member
Oct 2, 2007
20,750
1
0
I wish we could hit a reboot button on this thread. I guess I'll know my situation soon enough when I'm able to download it for myself. I appreciate your effort EzioCroft. Just remember to update the OP as relevant information becomes available.
 

Vintage

Member
May 29, 2013
1,489
0
0
Maybe there is a shitty framerate smoothing option in the settings ini?
Nah, there's just
//PC only, who cares
/shitpost

I want this game, but my GT660ti is afraid :( AC4 ran fine on high, but this time i'll better wait for more info.
 

Kinthalis

Banned
Jun 13, 2013
4,750
0
0
USA
PBR seperates the material from the texture, setting physics based rules for how lighting should behave when interacting with a particular material. This is good because it tends to create a realistic effect that is universal and that artists cannot mess with without specifically changing the material type.
 

mattman5000

Banned
Jan 29, 2014
98
0
0
Could definitely help performance in general if it was built to scale well across 6 cores. Lifting your CPU limitations can free up room for more effects/AA/resolution or whatever.
Aren't PS4 and XB One games programed with with 6 cores in mind? Shouldn't that that translate over to the PC as well? This will be the first "next-gen" only game I buy, so I interested in performance difference between 6 and 4 cores (but I am guessing there wont be much of a difference).
 

Durante

Member
Oct 1, 2006
48,836
1
0
peter.metaclassofnil.com
Well except the part where 55-60 without VSync(according to that post?) is unlikely to be anywhere near double the console performance - granted that's not user-visible, but if we're talking raw numbers without frame-limiters.
Considering that in addition to the framerate difference (and I doubt the console versions will maintain a stable 30 FPS), there's also a 45% resolution improvement and other improved graphical settings (PCSS and HBAO+ are usually pretty significant hits each) going on, I think "double" is low-balling it, frankly.
 

VisceralBowl

Member
Sep 30, 2012
7,384
1
490
earth
Has anybody confirmed if the GTX 680 minimum or better is a hard lock?

Supported video cards at the time of release: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 or better, GeForce GTX 700 series; AMD Radeon HD7970 or better, Radeon R9 200 series Note: Laptop versions of these cards may work but are NOT officially supported.
 

Prophet Steve

Member
Sep 16, 2009
12,968
0
0
Netherlands
Could definitely help performance in general if it was built to scale well across 6 cores. Lifting your CPU limitations can free up room for more effects/AA/resolution or whatever.
I am assuming that four cores already would be able to max out the game and that people are being limited by their GPUs. It is possible that six cores would give better performance, but since resolution/aa/effects don't have an effect on your CPU you can't do much with the extra performance.