Yes... damn the jaggies. And I am sitting at a GTX 870 with Maxwell :/
Do you mean a 780 or 970? Since the 870 doesn't exist, unless I totally missed it of course ![]()
Yes... damn the jaggies. And I am sitting at a GTX 870 with Maxwell :/
Do you mean a 780 or 970? Since the 870 doesn't exist, unless I totally missed it of course ![]()
Lol I meant in a new pc. A console is a much more tightly controlled environment, like an apple product. I don't worry as much about driver issues and SLI and resolution on a console. On a PC, with so much variation between pc's both in terms of hardware and software, my experience with AMD in the long run has always been disappointment. That's not to say Nvidia hasn't had their share of driver issues as well, but overall with the type of games I play, especially MMOs, Nvidia has mostly proven to be the less complicated and better overall choice.
Fair enough
Personally I haven't had any issues with my R9 290 at all or any driver related problems (though I do wish they had DSR or something similar).
@Rolfgang: It is a mobile one :x
Guest_E-Ro_*
This is with MSAA, an enhanced engine and BF4 is a totally different game compared to DA:I.
They have the same specifications and use the same engine, sooooo yeah. And i play bf4 with aa on 4x, not sure what type of aa though i would have to check. More likely this needs driver support.
They have the same specifications and use the same engine, sooooo yeah. And i play bf4 with aa on 4x, not sure what type of aa though i would have to check. More likely this needs driver support.
AA x4 is not the same as MSAA (Multi-sampling). And altough BF4 and DA:I both use the Frostbite 3 engine, the one DA:I uses is and enhanced version of it, so it's not exactly the same version.
Guest_E-Ro_*
AA x4 is not the same as MSAA (Multi-sampling). And altough BF4 and DA:I both use the Frostbite 3 engine, the one DA:I uses is and enhanced version of it, so it's not exactly the same version.
Ok, lets do this one more time.
The recommended specs for the two games are the same. They are using the same engine too. I play bf4 at 1440p which has 80% more pixels then 1080p. I play bf4 MAXED out with a minimum of 50 fps. According to this chart, at a resolution 80% lower then the one I run, this game gets a minimum of 41 fps with my graphics card.
Here are the specs to bf4 and inquisition Straight from origin
Ok, lets do this one more time.
The recommended specs for the two games are the same. They are using the same engine too. I play bf4 at 1440p which has 80% more pixels then 1080p. I play bf4 MAXED out with a minimum of 50 fps. According to this chart, at a resolution 80% lower then the one I run, this game gets a minimum of 41 fps with my graphics card.
Here are the specs to bf4 and inquisition Straight from origin
Recommended System RequirementsOS: Windows 8 64-bitProcessor (AMD): Six-core CPUProcessor (Intel): Quad-core CPUMemory: 8 GBHard Drive: 30 GBGraphics card (AMD): AMD Radeon HD 7870Graphics card (Nvidia): NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660Graphics memory: 3 GBRecommended:OS: Windows 7 or 8.1, 64-bitProcessor (AMD): Six core @ 3.2 GHzProcessor (Intel): Quad core @ 3.0 GHzMemory: 8 GBGraphics Card (AMD): Radeon HD 7870 or R9 270Graphics Card (NVIDIA): GeForce GTX 660Graphics Memory: 2 GBHard Drive: 26 GBDirectX: 11Internet: 1 Mbps up and down
You do realise that recommended requirements got nothing to do with maxed out/ultra settings right? Recommended is usually the required system to play on high settings. Play the game on ultra with AA x4 and with a high-end card you'll probably get 80-100 fps. It's really the MSAA that makes the difference.
Those are some relatively low framerate for such a powerful graphic cards.
I'm sure optimized version will be better. Exciting.
It's same as BF4. If you use Ultra setting for BF4, by default the MSAA (deferrred AA) is still disabled.
At 4xMSAA you need very powerful PC to get 60fps for BF4, but with 0xMSAA and low settings you can reach 60fps with much weaker graphics card:
Okay, so how screwed am I with a GeForce GT 545?
Guest_E-Ro_*
You do realise that recommended requirements got nothing to do with maxed out/ultra settings right? Recommended is usually the required system to play on high settings. Play the game on ultra with AA x4 and with a high-end card you'll probably get 80-100 fps. It's really the MSAA that makes the difference.
I just checked geforce experience, guess what AA I am running? you guessed it! 4X MSAA. You can google some bf4 benchmarks with the 780 ti running this to back that if you wish.
Also my card has only a very light overclock so that is not what is throwing this off. Maybe this game IS that hard to run, but I very much doubt it. No way this runs worse at 1080 then bf4 does at 1440, there should not be that much difference.
ETA: here is a benchmark http://www.guru3d.co...-review,17.html
Okay, so how screwed am I with a GeForce GT 545?
You won't run it High or Ultra but, depending on your CPU, how much you turn down in settings, and your resolution, you might be able to cruise at medium settings. That's just my guess.
My R9 290 will run this game just fine. ![]()
Please note that optimized drivers for DA:I haven't been released for neither AMD or Nvidia yet.
I was thinking same thing however with AMD R9 390 card and mantle support
.
Oh yeah, I heard about the R9 390X with HBM memory that is allegedly going to be released in January/February.
Amazing stuff. ![]()
You won't run it High or Ultra but, depending on your CPU, how much you turn down in settings, and your resolution, you might be able to cruise at medium settings. That's just my guess.
I figured as much. I passed the recommended specs with flying colours, except for video ram which is 2 GB. I have 1 GB on this card. I can deal with that.
Geeze. Glad I sprung for that GTX 980 SC when I rebuilt my comp last month.
Huh, guess who has a cat avatar and isn't playing DA:I on max settings?
I posted this review in the review super thread too, but I think a part of it is relevant here. The reviewer was able to play in 4K at near max settings except with Antialiasing turned off. I'm trying to find out what hardware he was using.
"I played some on the Xbox One as well—PS4 review copies were generally not sent out due to the problems with that console’s update 2.0—and while the game looks lovely, it simply doesn’t compare to the sort of visuals you can squeak out on PC. (I’ve played a lot of the game so far at 4k resolution with settings near to maxed out and anti-aliasing turned off, and it’s simply stunning.)

The terrain is where graphics in this game really shine. Facial and body animation are improved over previous games in the series but still not up to the quality we’re seeing in some contemporaries, such as Advanced Warfare. Still, everything from the characters to the gorgeous vistas looks great. Better still, unlike the last game, there’s tons of variety"
http://www.forbes.co...reat-wide-open/
Dragon Age: Inquisition – PC Low vs. Ultra Graphics Comparison
Dragon Age: Inquisition – PC Low vs. Ultra Graphics Comparison
Looks good.
High should be pretty much a good balance for most users.
Dragon Age: Inquisition – PC Low vs. Ultra Graphics Comparison
I'm guessing the Ultra preset depicted in this video has MSAA disabled, like BF4 Ultra setting, so if you enable deferred anti aliasing (2xMSAA or 4xMSAA) it will look even better (unfortunately while bringing many PCs to their knees).
Low settings actually doesn't look half bad. Probably not gonna fuss over my settings too much if I have to tweak them, I imagine I'll be able to get something between High and Ultra working.
I'm guessing the Ultra preset depicted in this video has MSAA disabled, like BF4 Ultra setting, so if you enable deferred anti aliasing (2xMSAA or 4xMSAA) it will look even better (unfortunately while bringing many PCs to their knees).
Regardless, this just convinced me that I may want to hold off on my new PC after all. Since they have stated the PS4 version is similar to a PC on high and I can barely tell the difference between ultra and low on the PC, I'd rather just spend $60 on the PS4 version and hold onto my PC a little longer hopefully until the next Nvidia card comes out or until the Witcher 3. What I REALLY want to see now to bring this to a close is a comparison of the game at different resolutions 1080P 30FPS like the PS4, 1440P with the ROG Swift Gsync @ 144hz, and any 4K monitor at 60Hz whether with or without Gsync. I'm starting to believe the differences are not worth the cost for games yet unless you only play FPS games on the Rog Swift. Maybe there is a noticeable enough difference between 1080P and 1440P @ 144hz but for 4K at 60hz I don't think its worth it, including the strain on the current cards or the incompatibility with games (text, menu's, lack of SLI support with certain games, etc).
I'm surprised with how good Inquisition looks even on low settings, and that the difference between ultra and low is not big. Just a small improvement in most cases. And the only games I will compare DA:I to is ME and earlier DA games, and even on low it looks better than the old games.
Low settings actually doesn't look half bad. Probably not gonna fuss over my settings too much if I have to tweak them, I imagine I'll be able to get something between High and Ultra working.
If there's a separate setting for hair, set that fucker to ultra. The Low setting hair looks like plastic figurines.