-
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.
RTX 2080 Ti Can Barely hit 30fps at 1080p ultra running Watch Dogs Legion
ZywyPL
Banned
Good tip, but it was much better to simply not to get current RTX cards at all to begin with
But I get it, someone (NV) had to do it, RT was a needed baby step to move things forward, so the future generations of hardware can shine, just like consoles launched with shitty Jaguar just to jump on the x86 architecture, so we can have now Zen2 CPUs, and in the exact same fasion, the upcoming RDNA2 and Ampere GPUs will show how it's done.
As a PC newbie, all this jargon makes my head spin. I just want a card that can play any triple AAA game in 4k 60fps.
At max settings?
Might be the RTX 3080 TI. Even the 2080 TI struggles with certain high-end games, such as the incredibly beautiful Red Dead Redemption 2.
Thugnificient
Banned
This guy needs to STFU.
GHG
Member
Max settings are so overrated in a lot of cases. With RDR2 in particular there is no perceptible difference between high and max for a lot of the available settings other than the fact that they tank your framerate. Tree tessellation I'm looking at you. The same goes for other games like AC Odyssey.
The 2080ti is a perfectly good 4k 60fps card, especially as DLSS 2.0 becomes more prevalent.
Last edited:
shoegaze
Member
Watch Dogs: Legion on GeForce RTX 2080 Ti: 1080p can barely hit 30FPS
Ubisoft locked the preview build of Watch Dogs: Legion to 1080p 30FPS -- RTX 2080 Ti could barely handle that.
In their hands-on time with Watch Dogs: Legion, Digital Foundry may have been using the most powerful graphics card you can buy in the GeForce RTX 2080 Ti -- yet it couldn't handle the game at 1080p and anything over 30FPS. Ubisoft had locked Watch Dogs: Legion's preview build to 30FPS, for some stupid reason.
Watch Dogs: Legion on GeForce RTX 2080 Ti: 1080p can barely hit 30FPS
Ubisoft locked the preview build of Watch Dogs: Legion to 1080p 30FPS -- RTX 2080 Ti could barely handle that.www.tweaktown.com
I'm sure it's just Ubisoft being shit at coding their games rather than 2080ti being weak.
pawel86ck
Banned
I'm not surprised because RT cores on 2080ti cant run every RTX effect at 1080p 60fps, so there's a huge bottleneck. I'm sure game will run at 4K 60fps without RTX and something like high settings instead of ultra.
But RT cores doesn't need to bottleneck entire GPU as long as developers will not exceed their rays budget for 1080p 60fps, and later on they can upscale RTX effects to 4K. That's what GT7 on PS5 is doing, so game is running at 4K and still use RT.
For example in metro exodus 2060S has only 3-5fps less with RTX at 1080p, so if developers will balance their rays budget then RT performance impact is minimal. Watch dogs 3 will probably run at 4K 30fps with upscaled RT effects on both PS5 and XSX.
But RT cores doesn't need to bottleneck entire GPU as long as developers will not exceed their rays budget for 1080p 60fps, and later on they can upscale RTX effects to 4K. That's what GT7 on PS5 is doing, so game is running at 4K and still use RT.
For example in metro exodus 2060S has only 3-5fps less with RTX at 1080p, so if developers will balance their rays budget then RT performance impact is minimal. Watch dogs 3 will probably run at 4K 30fps with upscaled RT effects on both PS5 and XSX.
Isn't Gran Turismo 7 doing ray tracing at 4k 60 fps?
The developers of Observer System Redux have said the same about their game, too.
ZywyPL
Banned
At quarter the resolution (1080p). But the results are still MUCH better than any rasterization technique allows for, I think it's the best of two worlds when it comes to graphical fidelity vs performance.
supernova8
Banned
Weird because the game doesn't even look good.
pawel86ck
Banned
RTX performance penalty is not big in metro exodus at 1080p and RT GI makes a clear difference in this game.
Last edited:
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
you check prebuild prices?
i managed to get a 2080ti+ i9 9900k watercooled for 1600
that 2080ti gonna be a paperweight
Ubisoft games never look good to me. Even Assassins Creed Origins, which looks better than most, I still find underwhelming compared to the best PS4 games.
I'm not sure if it's just me.
supernova8
Banned
Only impressive Ubisoft stuff recently has been the Rainbow Six Siege and Watch Dogs 1 reveal back in like.. years ago..? And those turned out to be bullshit in the end.
Yeah, and The Division.
Probably the worst thing about them revealing bullshit trailers is they don't even make attractive games compared to what's actually possible.
So the downgrades are ludicrously drastic.
That Ghost Recon game was another one.
GaviotaGrande
Banned
I disagree. 2080Ti was an amazing upgrade for those who could afford it. It provided ultimate performance for 2 years.Good tip, but it was much better to simply not to get current RTX cards at all to begin with
Bo_Hazem
Banned
As a PC newbie, all this jargon makes my head spin. I just want a card that can play any triple AAA game in 4k 60fps.
Wait for RTX 3000's series and RDNA2 and see what fits your budget.
Bo_Hazem
Banned
Hmm, sounds like the theory of a 36+36=72CU PS5 Pro by 2023-2024 is pretty much inline with AMD's roadmap of only using 40CU dies max (40+40=80CU for the premium model of Big Navi). Just like PS4 Pro's 18+18=36CU butterfly-like chiplet, but this time around could be stacked.
ZywyPL
Banned
I don't know, I'm still rocking very hard with my 1080Ti @2.1GHz, I just don't have the some RT effects in what, 6, 7 titles? Which I'm personally not even interested in to begin with? RT won't seriously took off until PS5/XBX launch and the vast majority of games will be made with RT effects in mind from the get-go, and before that happens Ampere and Big Navi GPUs should be available and wipe the floor with 20xx RTX cards when it comes to RT performance.
GaviotaGrande
Banned
RT is just a cherry on top, I was talking more about general performance in 4k gaming. Again, the only downside to 2080Ti is the price. Let's say money is non-issue to you. Why would you not pick up 2080Ti?
Arun1910
Member
Ubisoft worlds are some of the biggest you will come across, they have to sacrifice something.
Don't they have like 1000 people developing these games?
ZywyPL
Banned
Nah, I'm already playing at 60-120FPS in 4K, so why bother with even more? When I'll be searching for a new card I expect similar performance, except with RT turned on.
BlitzerRadic
Member
It's you. Division 2 looks phenomenal on PC.
PC isn't exactly a fair comparison to console though.
GaviotaGrande
Banned
I get what you're saying. But trust me 2080Ti is nice to have.
Danteyke223
Member
I kinda feel like the original Unity and Watch Dogs concepts were just that. Great looking games, but then the consoles turned out to be shit tier hardware so they had to keep downgrading the games.
I think Unity is the one big Ubisoft game that looked really good (I presume the PC game looks pretty much like the reveal?).
All the others seem to be technically mediocre and artistically awful.
GaviotaGrande
Banned
Watchdogs 1 with mods looks amazing to this day. Unity is hands down one of the better looking games this generation.
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
Yea it might be you. One thing Ubi does right, is production values. Games like Wildlands, FC5, AC Odyssey, and Division are some of the best looking of the gen.
Last edited:
Arun1910
Member
Yeah, but that doesn't mean they can make consoles or min specs stupidly high to accommodate for the best in everything. Software development has compromises.
BlitzerRadic
Member
I guess I misunderstood what I was responding to. I thought the comment about how UBI games don't look great on PC since this is a thread about WD Legion on PC.
I actually looked up The Division 2 on max settings after it was recommended above, and it looked fucking ugly to me. Definitely below average.
Wildlands from what I remember is ugly too. The Division is just about average.
Far Cry 5 isn't bad looking, but nothing like one of the best of the generation.
SantaC
Member
Yes they do.
Rikkori
Member
Thugnificient
Banned
Yes, because the price is a non-factor.
GaviotaGrande
Banned
To some people, yes.
below average
Dunno what to tell you. I watched footage on YouTube of the PC version with max settings.
The game sure looked nothing like those screens.
Maybe you could link to an alternative video?
Rikkori
Member
You can't judge based on youtube video, because games like TD2 are foliage heavy which looks worse on youtube due to bitrate & how that looks in highly compressed video. Same way you shouldn't judge racing game quality on youtube etc.
You can find high quality videos here, but you need to log-in to download: https://www.gamersyde.com/news_washington_d_c_in_hdr-21503_en.html
And ofc, they're HDR, so you'd need a display that can show it.
The thing about Ray Tracing is that if a game isn't made with it in mind from the very beginning, it turns into a VERY expensive effect. Don't get me wrong, when implemented correctly, it looks wonderful, but at this rate, it's too costly on performance. At this rate a 4K, ultra settings, high/ultra RT settings game at 60fps is highly unlikely on current cards.
Reindeer
Member
There's no dedicated hardware on Series X GPU for machine learning, so we'll have to wait and see how good the solution will be on Series X and how it will impact performance.
Dontero
Banned
I played Div2. The screenshots show game at best not on average what game looks like. Game does look average for this gen. Graphics simply do not stands out from rest.
Here is similar example. GT5. This is screenshot i made years ago back on GT5 premiere on PS3:
Here is same game from different angle with different car on different tracks:
Here is similar example. GT5. This is screenshot i made years ago back on GT5 premiere on PS3:
Here is same game from different angle with different car on different tracks:
Last edited:
Reindeer
Member
"So Nvidia GPUs will have no advantage in upscaling techniques."
This is nothing but assumption on your part as we have no way to test the two against each other right now. That Unreal Demo's upscaling also isn't looking all that great for performance as it's running at 1440p natively most of the time with little going on in the demo and it only runs at 30fps. I would say for now DLSS definitely takes the performance crown.
Last edited by a moderator:
magnumpy
Member
Watch Dogs: Legion on GeForce RTX 2080 Ti: 1080p can barely hit 30FPS
Ubisoft locked the preview build of Watch Dogs: Legion to 1080p 30FPS -- RTX 2080 Ti could barely handle that.
In their hands-on time with Watch Dogs: Legion, Digital Foundry may have been using the most powerful graphics card you can buy in the GeForce RTX 2080 Ti -- yet it couldn't handle the game at 1080p and anything over 30FPS. Ubisoft had locked Watch Dogs: Legion's preview build to 30FPS, for some stupid reason.
Watch Dogs: Legion on GeForce RTX 2080 Ti: 1080p can barely hit 30FPS
Ubisoft locked the preview build of Watch Dogs: Legion to 1080p 30FPS -- RTX 2080 Ti could barely handle that.
2080ti not enough for next gen, years of hard labor and years of debt is your sentence for choosing to participate in next generation
geordiemp
Member
And its nothing but assumption on your part to state otherwise. I would say the UE5 definately takes the performance crown,. cant recall anything that impressive being played in real time so...
And the Nannite renders in 4.25 ms, fine for 60 FPS, its the lumen GI that is being worked on to get it to 60.
If you prefer DLSS thats fine, I disagree. UE5 demo was more impressive than any PC game with RT, and it will also be on PC so everybody wins.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll