Mr Moose
Member
He's talking about vsync on and off in that pic, I am talking about adaptive v triple buffered.
I forgot which video it was but I'll have a look see if I can find it.
Last edited:
-
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.
Digital Foundry, Alan Wake 2 PC - Rasterisation Optimised Settings Breakdown - Is It Really THAT Demanding?
- Thread starter Gaiff
- Start date
I forgot which video it was but I'll have a look see if I can find it.
systemr123
Member
I’m just criticizing Alex for his PS5/Sony hate boner. He’s not even subtle about it. The other DF guys are less obvious but Alex…. Brrrrrrr…
Senua
Member
Oh dear, everyone's out to get Sony huh?
systemr123
Member
No, but Alex has a reputation for it.
Mr Moose
Member
Last edited:
Vergil1992
Member
But the thing is, what he says doesn't make sense. Vsync on and off is exactly the same result as triple buffered vs adaptive vsync (in terms of performance). In the video it seems to talk about vsync activated vs deactivated.
When you use adaptive vsync and the frame rate drops, vsync is disabled. If it is vsync triple buffered, it is still enabled. There is no difference, it is exactly the same as comparing vsync on vs off if the frame rate is below the target.
In any case, no matter what he said, I don't agree with Alex. Unless there is some bug in the implementation that breaks the game, it doesn't matter if it is adaptive and "standard", the performance will be the same. I don't know why he says that in the video.
Example:
Vsync on:
Adaptative vsync:
Last edited:
Does Alan Wake 2 on consoles use nearly the equivalent of LOW/MEDIUM PC settings?
Yes.
Does Alan Wake 2 still look amazing despite that?
Yes.
As for the whole mesh shaders thing and the game not being viable to play on a GTX 10 series or lower, I get it but those cards over seven years old now and there always comes a point when it times to aim for higher hardware. GPU prices do suck at the moment but we can't expect studios to sit around and stay on older hardware, even though that's what the majority do, it's nice to have something in PC actually designed for "modern" hardware.
Yes.
Does Alan Wake 2 still look amazing despite that?
Yes.
As for the whole mesh shaders thing and the game not being viable to play on a GTX 10 series or lower, I get it but those cards over seven years old now and there always comes a point when it times to aim for higher hardware. GPU prices do suck at the moment but we can't expect studios to sit around and stay on older hardware, even though that's what the majority do, it's nice to have something in PC actually designed for "modern" hardware.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
In that game specifically which has about 10 modes, including a HFR Vsync Mode that is seemingly broken. As I said before, it can happen at times due to issues with the game's renderer but this isn't expected behavior. As far as I could tell in Alan Wake, it doesn't happen, nor does it in most games.
Alex and John are talking about the Vsync in this game's HFR mode, not in general.
ChoosableOne
ChoosableAll
Wants to get high, but it's not allowed by the system.
Leonidas
Member
Can you give examples? You've already taken his statements out of context at least twice in this thread already...
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
If DLSS is NEEDED it's not a good port is what I'm saying
No one is saying DLSS isn't good.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
All of them hate on PlayStation.(John the least)
Alex just cries about PC ports.
Leonidas
Member
Where are examples of this, I have not seen any signs of DF hating on PS.
But I have seen people take DF comments out of context...
He doesn't just complain about PC games, he praises the good PC versions like Alan Wake 2
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
I am not watching through the countless videos where they either take a jab at PlayStation or when PlayStation has the advantage say it's minor.Where are examples of this, I have not seen any signs of DF hating on PS.
But I have seen people take DF comments out of context...
He doesn't just complain about PC games, he praises the good PC versions like Alan Wake 2
It needs DLSS with a 4090...
Either the 4090 isn't up to par or its not a good port.
Last edited:
Leonidas
Member
You can't even name one example
You don't need DLSS with a 4090, but you'd be an idiot to not turn it on. DLSS Quality often looks equal to and sometimes even better than native.
This is a great PC version. An RTX 3070 (a mid-range GPU from 3 years ago) is running 43-46% faster than the PS5. That's better than usual.
Last edited:
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
I did give a example.You can't even name one example
You don't need DLSS with a 4090, but you'd be an idiot to not turn it on. DLSS Quality often looks equal to and sometimes even better than native.
This is a great PC version. An RTX 3070 is running 43-46% faster than the PS5. That's better than usual.
When PS wins in a area they say it's slight but when Xbox (for example) has the advantage it's bigger.
They been suspect for years as many notice.
'Alan Wake 2' Benchmarks Show RTX 4090 Hitting 130+ FPS at 4K With Maxed Out Ray Tracing
Thank frame generation and Ray Reconstruction
www.tomshardware.com
"With DLSS disabled, Nvidia's benchmarks reveal that frame rates plummet to just 32.8 fps on the RTX 4090, 22.2 fps on the RTX 4080, and 17.4 fps on the 4070 Ti."
Yeah no
Leonidas
Member
Link me to the vids where this occurs.
4K isn't the only resolution of PC displays. 4090 runs maxed with path tracing at native 1440p at around 60 FPS average (much faster than PS5 Quality mode, which uses much lower settings).'Alan Wake 2' Benchmarks Show RTX 4090 Hitting 130+ FPS at 4K With Maxed Out Ray Tracing
Thank frame generation and Ray Reconstruction
"With DLSS disabled, Nvidia's benchmarks reveal that frame rates plummet to just 32.8 fps on the RTX 4090, 22.2 fps on the RTX 4080, and 17.4 fps on the 4070 Ti."
Last edited:
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Are you purposefully glossing over the part where this is with path tracing?
Max settings 4K, most cutting-edge game on the market right now. Where does it "need" DLSS? It doesn't, unless you throw ray tracing and path tracing at it. Now, do you "need" those features? No, you don't. If you want them, go right ahead and enable DLSS and Frame Generation. You'd be a retard not to take advantage of those features.
Furthermore, I don't even think this is a PC port. More than likely, it was ported to consoles, assuming they even did a port.
Last edited:
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Are you purposefully glossing over the part where this is with path tracing?
Max settings 4K, most cutting-edge game on the market right now. Where does it "need" DLSS? It doesn't, unless you throw ray tracing and path tracing at it. Now, do you "need" those features? No, you don't. If you want them, go right ahead and enable DLSS and Frame Generation. You'd be a retard not to take advantage of those features.
Furthermore, I don't even think this is a PC port. More than likely, it was ported to consoles, assuming they even did a port.
"At 1440p with the same graphical settings, the RTX 4090 was able to pump out 170.1 fps, 4080 133.1 fps, 4070 Ti 108.3 fps, and 4070 91.9 fps with DLSS 3.5 enabled. Without Nvidia's performance-enhancing tech enabled, frame rates plummeted to 62.7 fps on the RTX 4090, 44.6 fps on the 4080, 35.3 fps on the 4070 Ti, and 28 fps on the 4070."
63 fps at 1440p with a 4090 isn't good.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Yeah, that's with path tracing you troll.
Says who? What are you comparing it to? How many games using path tracing are out there? What is the benchmark for path traced games?
Last edited:
Leonidas
Member
With path tracing it's very good for native.
But again, it goes back to what everyone is telling you, you're a fool if you use native. Turn on DLSS and the FPS goes way up and the IQ is similar.
Bojji
Member
This is with path tracing, the most expensive (and realistic) thing we have in graphics right now. What do you expect?
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Here comes the pcmr fanboy name calling smh
It's a 4090!
Lol@ any of yaw buying a 4090 to play in 1440p.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
You're literally trolling. "1440p gaiz!!!" ignoring that it's path traced...when you turn it off, you suddenly jump 116fps. Imagine that!
Idiot.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
He's been told this multiple times but since when can you reason with trolls?
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Again using a 4090 for 1440p is lol worthy.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Thank you for exposing yourself. Not that we didn't already know this, but it's nice of you to put it out on full display.
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
As a PC gamer and even as a PS5 owner I'm chasing FRAMES not resolution or max settings.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
And to the ignore list the hurt fanboy goes.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Little troll got exposed and is plugging his ears now. You embarrassed yourself.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
I hear that but.....
With single player games?
I want 4K and as many bells and whistles as possible.
owandeseis
Member
I did give a example.
When PS wins in a area they say it's slight but when Xbox (for example) has the advantage it's bigger.
They been suspect for years as many notice.
'Alan Wake 2' Benchmarks Show RTX 4090 Hitting 130+ FPS at 4K With Maxed Out Ray Tracing
Thank frame generation and Ray Reconstruction
"With DLSS disabled, Nvidia's benchmarks reveal that frame rates plummet to just 32.8 fps on the RTX 4090, 22.2 fps on the RTX 4080, and 17.4 fps on the 4070 Ti."
Yeah no
"As many notice"
Many = some Gaf users and a few twitter troll warriors maybe lol, haven't seen DF guys being called out for hating Playstation or being Xboxers in any other forum
But like that spanish guy who posts game version comparisons is also banned here for being xboxer? or anti PS guy i guess
Ppl in this forum specially sees enemies of playstation everywhere rofl
Last edited:
Bojji
Member
And you get that, 4090 is above 30fps with fully max out settings at native 4K.
On PS5 you have 30fps at sub 1440p resolution without any RT and many settings on medium.
Leonidas
Member
Why don't you have an RTX 4090 then?
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Because of 4090 Super and ti early next year rumors and because of the 16gb 4070 variant that's rumored.
I am building me and my son a build with him getting the 4070.
Right
CamHostage
Member
Alan Wake 2 is now running on Steam Deck.
(At launch, it would not even boot on Deck, but users have figured out a solution and it's now playable.)
Some sever downsides of how it performs and looks, but also a few surprises in how it works out on the PC handheld (generally in the <30FPS range with liveable low/mid settings.) This video shows a few gameplay areas, then goes into the methods to get it to boot.
(At launch, it would not even boot on Deck, but users have figured out a solution and it's now playable.)
Some sever downsides of how it performs and looks, but also a few surprises in how it works out on the PC handheld (generally in the <30FPS range with liveable low/mid settings.) This video shows a few gameplay areas, then goes into the methods to get it to boot.
Last edited:
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
Different strokes for different folks. On PC or PS5 I'm going with 60fps or 120fps if I can get it. It's not even purely about input latency reduction. Fidelity modes look ok until you move the camera then they look worse than Performance, imo. There's a certain clarity you get from smoother camera movement with less intrusive motion blur due to higher frame rate.
I don't have Alan Wake 2 yet. I'd prefer it on PC over PS5, but being EGS exclusive is a bummer. If I played on PS5 I'd go for Performance mode, and on PC I'd be shooting for 60-70fps and then using FG to take it over 100fps. I play on a 32" 1440p/165Hz monitor and the difference between 1080p and 1440p isn't massive.
P.S.- I don't have a 4090. I'm playing on a 4060Ti 16GB. I wanted the most memory I could get for fucking around with hobbyist projects, so I'm using this until I can afford a 4080 or 4090.
Last edited:
daninthemix
Member
The bad ones are definitely more obnoxious than fanboys of any other platform, for some reason.
They I my grew up with PlayStation. The old with Nintendo and Xbox and PlayStation .
Yeah, that was a bit weird.
PeteBull
Member
Time to upgrade, bruh, ur trusty 1080ti served well, from 2017, so 6,5 years, but find her some nice retirement home-kid's or wifey's pc or just sell it for bit of buck, and get urself 4090, its not like in marriage- till death do us part
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Lysandros
The captures were done with a 3600 with Vsync Off.
The 3070 is unusually strong here, comfortably beating the 2080 Ti when they're usually within 1-5% of one another, with the 2080 Ti even beating it sometimes. The 2080 Ti is 29% faster than the PS5, so within the norm. The PS5 is in turn 9% faster than the 2070S, again, within normal range. The 3070 is a bit of an outlier, albeit, not a massive one.
winjer
Gold Member
The 3070 is unusually strong here, comfortably beating the 2080 Ti when they're usually within 1-5% of one another, with the 2080 Ti even beating it sometimes. The 2080 Ti is 29% faster than the PS5, so within the norm. The PS5 is in turn 9% faster than the 2070S, again, within normal range. The 3070 is a bit of an outlier, albeit, not a massive one.
Could be a matter with pixel fill rate.
The PS5 has a higher pixel fill rate than the 2070S. And the 2080Ti has higher than the PS5. And the 3070, higher than the 2080Ti.
Bojji
Member
2080ti is just more powerful GPU overall (than PS5 and 2070S). Difference between 3070 and 2080ti is most likely driver or game optimizations for newer architecture.
winjer
Gold Member
With the game using mesh shaders, it means a ton of triangles being drawn.
Now consider that rasterization is process of converting geometric primitives (points, lines, triangles) into pixels.
This means we are rasterizing a lot more pixels than usual, hitting the ROPs a lot harder.
Horseganador
Member
I should focus these videos on PC, on how they work in different configurations, what are the recommended settings according to the different GPUs, if it is well optimized and things like that, but that would be asking too much of Alex, what he likes is to compare PS5 with PC to make a fool of the console and that's it, it's an absurd comparison.
Ronin_7
Banned
Quality mode settings are Medium High and a setting or other on Ultra.
He shows that in the video, the reason he used performance was to benchmark the game on PC with identical settings.
You guys are crazy
Bojji
Member
With mesh shaders who knows, this is first game using it. Usually 3070 and 2080ti are on par outside of some RT workloads.
He wants to know what settings console versions uses to get best "bang for the buck" settings that according to developers themselves are the most optimal. For Alan Wake this doesn't work that well because Remedy set some things too low and they look ugly but for most games it works really well.
Quality mode settings are Medium High and a setting or other on Ultra.
He shows that in the video, the reason he used performance was to benchmark the game on PC with identical settings.
You guys are crazy
Yeah, hate for DF and Alex here is quite stupid. It's probably thanks to him that shader stuttering was even brought to light and now it's not a problem in most new releases.
Last edited:
HeWhoWalks
Gold Member
"The bad ones" of any group are as bad as any other.
Last edited:
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
This video was to address the system requirements controversy. "WTF, unoptimized game! Consoles are running this at 60fps and you need a 3070 for 540p!?"
Then Alex set out to demonstrate that the Medium preset isn't Medium at all and why the requirements are so high such as the game having ray traced reflections even in non-RT mode. A 3070 was very specifically picked because this is what was in the specs sheet for 1080p Medium/DLSS Performance. It turns out that the game isn't badly optimized at all on PC and the console performance very much falls in line with expectations. He's working on another deep dive video due next week.
Possibly, but in real life scenarios, the 3070 would have about a 10-12% pixel fill rate over the 2080 Ti. Their reported boost clocks heavily undersells the 2080 Ti. NVIDIA says 1545MHz for the 2080 Ti but 1725MHz for the 3070. They're both way below real world results but the 2080 Ti more so. Typically, a 2080 Ti will boost to around 1900MHz in games and the 3070 to around 1960 ish. 96 vs 88 ROPs in favor of the 3070 would result in a small pixel fill rate advantage but I don't think this explains the overall 11% advantage at the end of the pipeline that has way more variables than just ROPs/pixel fill rate.
Last edited: