112fps average
4k Ultra, dlss quality and FG
Path tracing on
4090, 64gb, 7800x3D

https://youtu.be/Rw40JSgz2ws?si=_cuDD5f73kxFB7Yp

Highly recommend an oled display with this game due to all the darkness.

Originally posted by bRice153:

112fps average
4k Ultra, dlss quality and FG
Path tracing on
4090, 64gb, 7800x3D

https://youtu.be/Rw40JSgz2ws?si=_cuDD5f73kxFB7Yp

Highly recommend an oled display with this game due to all the darkness.

We get it. You got a 4090. Sorry if "Frame Generation" isn't something that particularly impresses people just because Nvidia can pull fake frames out of their ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ how game benchmarks used to be based on NATIVE performance, without any upscaling and AI techniques.

Hell, if anything, anti aliasing was used to DOWNSAMPLE from either a higher resolution to a lower resolution, or supersample from a lower resolution to a higher one WITHOUT blurring the image. It was also performance heavy, but still based on native resolution to give a better raw performance comparison between GPUs and generations. If this game actually gave you the option to run on native 4K Ultra with Path Tracing, you'd see your precious 4090's 100+ frames drop into the low 50s. Especially without FG.

Originally posted by Iggy Wolf:

Originally posted by bRice153:

112fps average
4k Ultra, dlss quality and FG
Path tracing on
4090, 64gb, 7800x3D

https://youtu.be/Rw40JSgz2ws?si=_cuDD5f73kxFB7Yp

Highly recommend an oled display with this game due to all the darkness.

We get it. You got a 4090. Sorry if "Frame Generation" isn't something that particularly impresses people just because Nvidia can pull fake frames out of their ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ how game benchmarks used to be based on NATIVE performance, without any upscaling and AI techniques.

Hell, if anything, anti aliasing was used to DOWNSAMPLE from either a higher resolution to a lower resolution, or supersample from a lower resolution to a higher one WITHOUT blurring the image. It was also performance heavy, but still based on native resolution to give a better raw performance comparison between GPUs and generations. If this game actually gave you the option to run on native 4K Ultra with Path Tracing, you'd see your precious 4090's 100+ frames drop into the low 50s. Especially without FG.

Sit your ass down.

And you realize how demanding Path tracing is at the moment genius? A 7900xtx with PT in 2077 gets around 7fps.

AMD guys were losing their minds when they announced their version of frame generation in 2 failed games lol.

What are you trying to say? I'm well aware of how demanding path tracing is. That's why I don't give a ♥♥♥♥ for what it demands. I'm talking about the game on its own merits, minus any of the fancy raytracing, doesn't nearly demand a 4080/4090 just to look that good. And I don't give a ♥♥♥♥ about AMD.

Although it's funny you should mention them, cause the consoles are running AMD GPU chips, so unless Remedy wants to say that AW2 is gonna run like ass at 20 FPS on consoles, that's not "setting a new benchmark", that's just ass optimization. Make it work and scale on lower hardware, even if you have to sacrifice graphical fidelity. But don't tell me anything less than a 4090 will be an unplayable and blurry mess. I'd tell YOU then to stick that 4090 where the sun don't shine.

AW2 on consoles runs at 800p, zero raytracing and lower than low settings genius and can't hold a solid 60fps.

Originally posted by Iggy Wolf:

What are you trying to say? I'm well aware of how demanding path tracing is. That's why I don't give a ♥♥♥♥ for what it demands. I'm talking about the game on its own merits, minus any of the fancy raytracing, doesn't nearly demand a 4080/4090 just to look that good. And I don't give a ♥♥♥♥ about AMD.

Although it's funny you should mention them, cause the consoles are running AMD GPU chips, so unless Remedy wants to say that AW2 is gonna run like ass at 20 FPS on consoles, that's not "setting a new benchmark", that's just ass optimization. Make it work and scale on lower hardware, even if you have to sacrifice graphical fidelity. But don't tell me anything less than a 4090 will be an unplayable and blurry mess. I'd tell YOU then to stick that 4090 where the sun don't shine.

And we both know you wouldn't do anything offline keyboard warrior, let's be real. So stop trying to be hard.

Originally posted by bRice153:

Originally posted by Iggy Wolf:

What are you trying to say? I'm well aware of how demanding path tracing is. That's why I don't give a ♥♥♥♥ for what it demands. I'm talking about the game on its own merits, minus any of the fancy raytracing, doesn't nearly demand a 4080/4090 just to look that good. And I don't give a ♥♥♥♥ about AMD.

Although it's funny you should mention them, cause the consoles are running AMD GPU chips, so unless Remedy wants to say that AW2 is gonna run like ass at 20 FPS on consoles, that's not "setting a new benchmark", that's just ass optimization. Make it work and scale on lower hardware, even if you have to sacrifice graphical fidelity. But don't tell me anything less than a 4090 will be an unplayable and blurry mess. I'd tell YOU then to stick that 4090 where the sun don't shine.

And we both know you wouldn't do anything offline keyboard warrior, let's be real. So stop trying to be hard.

Sounds to me like you're projecting. I wasn't implying any kind of fight or that I'd somehow stomp you. You apparently seem to have a chip on your shoulder though if you instantly resort to a hostile and aggressive attitude anytime someone criticizes you. What, you're so ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ insecure that that 4090 of yours determines your self-esteem?

Sounds to me like YOU'RE the one engaging in a ♥♥♥♥ measuring contest. Please, don't let me stop you from jerking off to your brand new $1600 card. Surely someone with specs like that, wouldn't waste their time trolling forums, trying to bait "poorer PC peasants" into stupid fights just to feel better about their purchase.

"I'd tell YOU then to stick that 4090 where the sun don't shine." Sounds pretty tough!

Just wanna rub my 4090 in your face more.

https://youtu.be/iegzvxf-584?si=XHsNUjimFfNNnW2v

Originally posted by bRice153:

"I'd tell YOU then to stick that 4090 where the sun don't shine." Sounds pretty tough!

Just wanna rub my 4090 in your face more.

https://youtu.be/iegzvxf-584?si=XHsNUjimFfNNnW2v

Hehe. Well, I can see how much you apparently define yourself by your purchase. You clearly haven't lived long enough to get past THAT phase. I remember having an 8800 GT back when Crysis 1 came out. I wasn't impressed because it could make even that card drop to its knees.

If the game can't play well even with the best hardware, then it's a glorified tech demo at best. No different than how Nvidia wanted to show off Portal RTX Remix by stuffing a 4090 in every corner of that version of the game. But at least THAT game had a version that still existed to play on lower end hardware with frames in excess of 300+. I have a 165 Hz monitor, so a game limiting me to 60 FPS even with a better card does NOT impress me.

Guys, calm your asses down. This isn’t meant for shade throwing. I gave a general impression of performance on a 3080ti, with AND without RT features. Performance is rough either way, but it also looks fantastic either way. Does anybody read? I never complained about RT/PT being demanding. We all know that already.

This is simply a reference point for those who can’t use Frame Generation. We’re well aware that FG doubles your DLSS frame rate. FG is pretty much mandatory these days, if you want good frame rates. Nvidia has a way of rendering their previous series of cards obsolete since the 2000 series.

It’s probably best to hold out for the 5000 series if you don’t own a 4000 series yet.

Originally posted by Bozz Collin:

Guys, calm your asses down. This isn’t meant for shade throwing. I gave a general impression of performance on a 3080ti, with AND without RT features. Performance is rough either way, but it also looks fantastic either way. Does anybody read? I never complained about RT/PT being demanding. We all know that already.

This is simply a reference point for those who can’t use Frame Generation. We’re well aware that FG doubles your DLSS frame rate. FG is pretty much mandatory these days, if you want good frame rates. Nvidia has a way of rendering their previous series of cards obsolete since the 2000 series.

It’s probably best to hold out for the 5000 series if you don’t own a 4000 series yet.

I gotta 3080 and no matter how low I turned the settings, I still see stutters sadly, I'm pretty new to PC gaming so don't know if I'm doing something wrong but it's depressing

Originally posted by Bozz Collin:

Guys, calm your asses down. This isn’t meant for shade throwing. I gave a general impression of performance on a 3080ti, with AND without RT features. Performance is rough either way, but it also looks fantastic either way. Does anybody read? I never complained about RT/PT being demanding. We all know that already.

This is simply a reference point for those who can’t use Frame Generation. We’re well aware that FG doubles your DLSS frame rate. FG is pretty much mandatory these days, if you want good frame rates. Nvidia has a way of rendering their previous series of cards obsolete since the 2000 series.

It’s probably best to hold out for the 5000 series if you don’t own a 4000 series yet.

I mean, I personally don't like to rely on what is considered "optimization crutches" to make up for a lack of raw performance. Nvidia might want to market DLSS as "better than native" but that's not what people buy a 4090 for, and frame generation sure as hell isn't an acceptable substitute for taking advantage of the raw power that a card offers. At least when the Titan and 1080/2080 Ti came out, getting the most frames on 1440P/4K at native res meant something because it showed real world performance based on actual increased percentages.

DLSS and FG is too easy to cheese without demonstrating why it somehow improves image quality without having to upscale from a lower resolution (DLSS only looks really good when used on 1440P/4K resolutions). It used to be, we would DOWNSCALE from a higher resolution (what supersampling did, and while that too had a hefty performance cost, it was also understood that it wasn't going to be an acceptable long-term solution for future games unless better tech came along). I guess that's what DLSS is for, but it works backwards. And I intend to hold out for a 5000 series card. But they better impress more than just using FG and DLSS as a crutch.

People who complain about frame generation and dlss, can't use it. Tbis game is the new graphics benchmark and with that title it will be demanding doe current hardware. If you don't have at least a 4080 you will have a not great time with this one.

Just about to try my build with a RTX 3080ti. Already played some on my RX 6900xt build and it played alright with most settings high and some medium with no raytracing and FSR performance and ran 40 to 60fps usually in the mid 50's. Enabling any type of ray tracing other than the last reflectons setting causes massive performance loss with below 30 fps most of the time.

edit: Oddly enough was unable to force the game to use AMD fluid motion frames in the Beta driver which pretty much doubles the framerate in most games I've tried.

edit 2: Just tried my RTX 3080ti build and it played pretty good in town 40-60fps with same settings as my AMD build, except DLSS performance and ray tracing settings enabled but not path tracing. Got back to the forest runs 30 to 40fps and dipped once in the 20's, mostly runs 30 to 35fps. I am running 4K hence why I am using DLSS and FSR set to performance 1080p.