PCgameshardware.de posted the first PC benchmarks for DAI. (keep in mind that the drivers aren't fully optimised yet)
Update: Bioware already provided a small patch which resolved the mentioned problems with AMD's Mantle API.
1080p, max details, 4xMSAA (Radeon R9 290X)
avg. FPS 56.3/55.6 (new/old)
min. FPS 53/52
VRAM usage ~2.6GB/~4.1GB
Update: Bioware already provided a small patch which resolved the mentioned problems with AMD's Mantle API.
1080p, max details, 4xMSAA (Radeon R9 290X)
avg. FPS 56.3/55.6 (new/old)
min. FPS 53/52
VRAM usage ~2.6GB/~4.1GB
Glad to see they fixed the absurdly high VRAM usage bug pretty quickly.
Will a gtx 780 run this game fine or should i upgrade to 980?
By Friday of next week, Nvidia will surely have an updated driver specifically for DA:I.
Has Multi-Frame AA support been officially announced yet? Or will the new driver automatically bring that to the game?
Idc if it is setup up for AMD. I won't have a problem with an I7 4790 with 16 g of Ram and 3 way SLi Gigabyte 970 Gaming cards, using an Asus Roq Swift Gaming monitor on 1440p..
so according to neogaf posters the game performs poorly because of the new drm it uses (denuvo)
Ah crap, I hope that isn't true. Lords of the Fallen was awful because of this.
so according to neogaf posters the game performs poorly because of the new drm it uses (denuvo)
so according to neogaf posters the game performs poorly because of the new drm it uses (denuvo)
Stop spreading misinformation. I'm on that thread in neogaf, and that's NOT what is being said.
Denuvo might be used, but there is no evidence that this is why it's performing a bit lower than expected. No day 1 patch yet and no optimized drivers released yet is probably the actual reason.
Hell, look at the Xbone preview. Animation bugs, shadow bugs, pop-in like there's no tomorrow, aliasing, and frame-rate drops. Is that Denuvo too?
Finally, the issues with Lord of the Fallen are probably NOT DRM related. This is a narrative that pirates want you to believe. The game CRASHES on PS4 and runs pooly on consoles too. Again, is it the DRM? Obviously not. This is engine code not DRM.
Stop spreading misinformation. I'm on that thread in neogaf, and that's NOT what is being said.
Denuvo might be used, but there is no evidence that this is why it's performing a bit lower than expected. No day 1 patch yet and no optimized drivers released yet is probably the actual reason.
Hell, look at the Xbone preview. Animation bugs, shadow bugs, pop-in like there's no tomorrow, aliasing, and frame-rate drops. Is that Denuvo too?
Finally, the issues with Lord of the Fallen are probably NOT DRM related. This is a narrative that pirates want you to believe. The game CRASHES on PS4 and runs pooly on consoles too. Again, is it the DRM? Obviously not. This is engine code not DRM.
Bull. Lords of the Fallen ran like crap for me and my system should have ran it at stable framerates easily. Either it was the DRM or it was horribly optimized, console performance has nothing to do with it. Denuvo forces extra CPU cycles that are completely unnecessary.
Bull. Lords of the Fallen ran like crap for me and my system should have ran it at stable framerates easily. Either it was the DRM or it was horribly optimized, console performance has nothing to do with it. Denuvo forces extra CPU cycles that are completely unnecessary.
???
Just because a game performs poorly doesn't automatically mean the DRM is responsible. OF COURSE the console performance is relevant.
It shows that the engine is poorly optimized, or at least it certainly favors that outlook until more evidence shows otherwise. If it ran flawlessly on consoles and it ran like a dog on PC I'd say, ok, stil not 100% true - it could just be a bad port, but atleast I'd think there's a possibility DRM is screwing with something.
Why don't we wait and see how the game performs AFTER the day one patch, AFTER the optimized driver form Nvidia and AMd that are coming out within the next few days, and THEN we can start talking about gloom and doom?
???
Just because a game performs poorly doesn't automatically mean the DRM is responsible. OF COURSE the console performance is relevant.
It shows that the engine is poorly optimized, or at least it certainly favors that outlook until more evidence shows otherwise. If it ran flawlessly on consoles and it ran like a dog on PC I'd say, ok, stil not 100% true - it could just be a bad port, but atleast I'd think there's a possibility DRM is screwing with something.
Why don't we wait and see how the game performs AFTER the day one patch, AFTER the optimized driver form Nvidia and AMd that are coming out within the next few days, and THEN we can start talking about gloom and doom?
It's not relevant because we can see that LOTF utilizes both CPU and GPU on PC at high levels yet still performs badly, and consoles are no where near PC specs. Poor optimization isn't an ethereal unknown, it's something we can see and measure. All signs point that its problems stem from the horrible DRM, from the same idiots who made Securom.
I don't know how you can possibly say it's a 'pirate's narrative' when it's something we have known for weeks without any ambiguity.
Those framerates are a joke, BF4 performs and looks significantly better.
Gotta say that I'm a bit disappoint but bleh... it's Bioware.
Why do benchmarks always turn on MSAA? Who seriously uses that AA method in deferred engines anymore?
FB3 uses forward+ rendering iirc.
Internal resolutions above 100% don't work, not even per console command.
Wait, it's gonna have a command console?
Wait, it's gonna have a command console?
I don't see why it shouldn't have one, BF4 had console commands after all.
Pity that you can't downsample within the game. I have no clue why Bioware took that out.
so according to neogaf posters the game performs poorly because of the new drm it uses (denuvo)
Pure speculation. FIFA 15 uses the same DRM and has no performance problems. Until last week, nobody even knew the game uses a new (apparently really hard to crack) DRM-system.
The simple fact that the Mantle-API give you a considerable performance boost proves the speculation wrong. There is just a large CPU-overhead when you use DirectX 11.
It's not relevant because we can see that LOTF utilizes both CPU and GPU on PC at high levels yet still performs badly, and consoles are no where near PC specs. Poor optimization isn't an ethereal unknown, it's something we can see and measure. All signs point that its problems stem from the horrible DRM, from the same idiots who made Securom.
I don't know how you can possibly say it's a 'pirate's narrative' when it's something we have known for weeks without any ambiguity.
LOTF is an NVIDIA GameWorks Library title and games with such distinctions have had shaky performance at best. The very closed code nature of the GameWork Library makes it difficult for developers to properly optimize their games (only under certain licensing condition they are able to see the code) and doubly so for optimizing to work with AMD hardware (even under those circumstances, the developer are not allowed to share that code with AMD).
I would not be so quick to specifically blame the DRM on that game's performance issues - especially if you are running AMD hardware. DRM could very well have some effect but it being a GameWorks title make everything about its optimization suspect, IMO.
Denuvo rootkits in my dragon age, well, fuckity f*ck, f*ck. Let's hope someone at Bioware wakes up from the drunken orgy that followed the announcement of pre-order numbers and fixes that.
Pure speculation. FIFA 15 uses the same DRM and has no performance problems. Until last week, nobody even knew the game uses a new (apparently really hard to crack) DRM-system.
The simple fact that the Mantle-API give you a considerable performance boost proves the speculation wrong. There is just a large CPU-overhead when you use DirectX 11.
Mantle rocks.
Nvidia is known for their shady tricks all the time.
Found another benchmark. Similar but fewer cards tested so it's not much different than the bench already posted. This one has high and medium settings tested but only for the 290x.
http://www.ddworld.c...malizaci-2.html
Found another benchmark. Similar but fewer cards tested so it's not much different than the bench already posted. This one has high and medium settings tested but only for the 290x.
Site is broken? I can access the page on Google cache but the images don't show up.
Here's another German benchmark I found. Only tests the R9 290X but it shows the FPS at each graphics settings.
1080p, Sapphire Radeon R9 290X Tri-X, Core i7-3770K, 16 GByte DDR3, Windows 8.1.1 x64, Catalyst 14.11.1 Beta (HQ)
According to them the CPU will be the main limiting factor, and the tactical camera on PC is useless (which is shared by many German reviews I've read).
It works for me. I'll just post the images then.
I like how MSAA just destroys framerate in any game. And TXAA burns the remains.
Retour en haut