Yeah, I'm playing with a pad for that reason.
I'm using a Titan Xp + i9-7900x right now
It's very GPU bound on my system. CPU scaling is great - all 20 threads see lots of action.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Final Fantasy XV Windows Edition PC performance thread
- Thread starter Ishiro
- Start date
I'm using a Titan Xp + i9-7900x right now
It's very GPU bound on my system. CPU scaling is great - all 20 threads see lots of action.
Can we get the particle bug on AMD Systems in the Known Issues section? PCGH made a video on that and I still can't figure out a possible fix. Seems like a driver related issue.
The TAA is very blurry. On consoles I was surprised to pixel count XOX at 1728p and Pro at 1800cp because it doesn't look it. Same deal here. If you disable all filtering and AA options, though, you'll get sharp pixels but loads of shimmering. It's a soft game otherwise.
The camera motion blur and dof is very bad.
In fact, I really wish there was a way to fully disable the motion blur. It makes above 60fps not look that clear in motion.
Tried all the usual tricks including RTSS and forcing Vsync in Nvidia properties.
Definately. I can do some shots when I'm home later. But it has no fps hit at all and looks better.
I have a 2k screen as well, playing at 150% res is pretty sharp but you have to put screen filtering on low. Voila, vaseline look is gone. I also disabled motion blur.
Yeah really wish we could disable DoF separate from the other screen filters as even injecting lunasharpen doesn't help much for distant geometry. It's almost as bad as the DoF they used in FFXII:ZA.
So, I did a quick performance analysis of the different settings. The baseline is 1440p (100%) with everything turned up as high as possible on my 1080/R1700/144hz g-sync display. This gives me 45fps. Then I took every interesting setting down a notch from the baseline and measured the cost individually. Here we go:
all to the max: 45
LOD: +2 fps
TRAM: +1 fps
Geomapping: 0
Lighting: +2 fps
Shadows: +2 fps
Motion Blur: +1 fps
Ambient Occlusion: 0 fps
Anti Aliasing: +3 fps
Filtering: 0 fps
VXAO: +9 fps
Turf: 0 fps (in town) / +6 fps (countryside)
Shadowlibs: +3 fps
I didn't bother testing the settings below the second highest.
What do we learn?
VXAO looks great but is expensive.
Going from TAA to FXAA gains more than expected, but the game looks terrible with everything but TAA - not an option.
You might want to trade Shadowlibs for the highest shadow settings, I have to test this with screenshots.
AO, Filtering and Geomapping are basically free.
For now, my personal settings will be everything at max, except for VXAO, Turf and Shadowlibs. This nets me 57 fps, so the math checks out.
A few comparison shots:
all to the max: 45
LOD: +2 fps
TRAM: +1 fps
Geomapping: 0
Lighting: +2 fps
Shadows: +2 fps
Motion Blur: +1 fps
Ambient Occlusion: 0 fps
Anti Aliasing: +3 fps
Filtering: 0 fps
VXAO: +9 fps
Turf: 0 fps (in town) / +6 fps (countryside)
Shadowlibs: +3 fps
I didn't bother testing the settings below the second highest.
What do we learn?
VXAO looks great but is expensive.
Going from TAA to FXAA gains more than expected, but the game looks terrible with everything but TAA - not an option.
You might want to trade Shadowlibs for the highest shadow settings, I have to test this with screenshots.
AO, Filtering and Geomapping are basically free.
For now, my personal settings will be everything at max, except for VXAO, Turf and Shadowlibs. This nets me 57 fps, so the math checks out.
A few comparison shots:
VXAO off:
VXAO on:
Turf off:
Turf on:
VXAO off:
VXAO on:
VXAO on:
Turf off:
Turf on:
VXAO off:
VXAO on:
Last edited:
Looks same as in console version, no?
nvidia promised big differences on cats, but no one shared a screenshot yet
Hairworks on cats
DEMO 2018
GDC 2017
FINAL VERSION? Please share screenshots cats
Seems strange that AO has no performance impact and shadows/lighting don't have much either. Are you restarting the game in-between settings change?
No. They do actually change the image ever so slightly, but you really have to hunt for any difference. The settings work without restarting. The difference betweeen the highest and lowest variant is probably way more significant, but wants to play on the lowest setting?
So, I did a quick performance analysis of the different settings. The baseline is 1440p (100%) with everything turned upp as high as possible on my 1080/R1700/144hz g-sync display. This gives me 45fps. Then I took every interesting setting down a notch from the baseline and measured the cost individually. Here we go:
all to the max: 45
LOD: +2 fps
TRAM: +1 fps
Geomapping: 0
Lighting: +2 fps
Shadows: +2 fps
Motion Blur: +1 fps
Ambient Occlusion: 0 fps
Anti Aliasing: +3 fps
Filtering: 0 fps
VXAO: +9 fps
Turf: 0 fps (in town) / +6 fps (countryside)
Shadowlibs: +3 fps
I didn't bother testing the settings below the second highest.
What do we learn?
VXAO looks great but is expensive.
Going from TAA to FXAA gains more than expected, but the game looks terrible with everything but TAA - not an option.
You might want to trade Shadowlibs for the highest shadow settings, I have to test this with screenshots.
AO, Filtering and Geomapping are basically free.
For now, my personal settings will be everything at max, except VXAO, Turf and Shadowlibs. This nets me 57 fps, so the math checks out.
A few comparison shots:
VXAO off:
VXAO on:
Turf off:
Turf on:
VXAO off:
VXAO on:
best post in this thread, thank you very. much for the afford.
I have shadows and lighting in high and can't see a difference.
Maybe the settings aren't working correctly then? Seems silly to have a selection of settings which have no visual or fps difference especially when shadows are usually a fps killer in open world games.
So I decide to get it. £35 is okay. Absolutely huge 100GB and that's before I get the 4K textures. I got decent performance and IQ from the demo. With a little bit of tweaking should be able to get something a tad better in the full game (I hardly tweaked the demo at all). But dang, no way this fits on my SSD (unless I un-install Forza 7 which I'm still playing).
Glad you like it.
Those are the classics and shouldn't net you any additional performance unless something is wonky with your setup to begin with. Leaving this settings on default is perfectly fine for the vast majority of games out there.
These should be set in the global settings as it improves performance/frametimes in almost every game so yeah try it out.
Another comparison, Shadows highest Shadowlibs off vs. Shadows high Shadowlibs on. The former is 2-3 fps faster.
The main difference can be seen on the mountains in the background and on our hero. From my understanding, Shadowlibs do only apply on the self shadowing parts of a character, nowhere else. Look at the dog tags.
The main difference can be seen on the mountains in the background and on our hero. From my understanding, Shadowlibs do only apply on the self shadowing parts of a character, nowhere else. Look at the dog tags.
Shadows highest, Shadowlibs off
Shadows high, Shadowlibs on
Shadows high, Shadowlibs on
I disabled both to see how it looks and seeing Noctis' hair was enough for me to turn on the TAA again, but I think I'll keep the filtering at low.
I think I'll keep the motion blur on since I'm playing @30 fps with gamepad, lowering the screen filtering seems to fix the issue for me.
Any setting to reduce hair/grass shimmering other than downsampling? Usually TAA in other games gives an aliasing-free and shimmering-free image so the blur is an okay trade-off but in this game it doesn't, at least for those elements.
Also going by the pics above VXAO and AO are independent and you can enable/disable both or either? So would it be best to just enable VXAO and disable regular AO rather than use both at once? Seems like overkill in theory?
Also going by the pics above VXAO and AO are independent and you can enable/disable both or either? So would it be best to just enable VXAO and disable regular AO rather than use both at once? Seems like overkill in theory?
What's with the weird square around the truck door's sticker in the first pic?Another comparison, Shadows highest Shadowlibs off vs. Shadows high Shadowlibs on. The former is 2-3 fps faster.
The main difference can be seen on the mountains in the background and on our hero. From my understanding, Shadowlibs do only apply on the self shadowing parts of a character, nowhere else. Look at the dog tags.
Shadows highest, Shadowlibs off
Shadows high, Shadowlibs on
I don't know what to think about performance. Still in the demo for me but... i can run Battlefield1 and Star Wars Battlefront 2 maxed out @1440p - 60FPS locked with a GTX 980.
First time i was "holy shit the port is so good, the game is so much beautiful on PC than consoles, holy shit the turf effect is so good", but performance wise i'm still tweaking here and there to have 60FPS but i'm average ~45fps @1080p
First time i was "holy shit the port is so good, the game is so much beautiful on PC than consoles, holy shit the turf effect is so good", but performance wise i'm still tweaking here and there to have 60FPS but i'm average ~45fps @1080p
Why does turf on has less foliage than off.So, I did a quick performance analysis of the different settings. The baseline is 1440p (100%) with everything turned up as high as possible on my 1080/R1700/144hz g-sync display. This gives me 45fps. Then I took every interesting setting down a notch from the baseline and measured the cost individually. Here we go:
all to the max: 45
LOD: +2 fps
TRAM: +1 fps
Geomapping: 0
Lighting: +2 fps
Shadows: +2 fps
Motion Blur: +1 fps
Ambient Occlusion: 0 fps
Anti Aliasing: +3 fps
Filtering: 0 fps
VXAO: +9 fps
Turf: 0 fps (in town) / +6 fps (countryside)
Shadowlibs: +3 fps
I didn't bother testing the settings below the second highest.
What do we learn?
VXAO looks great but is expensive.
Going from TAA to FXAA gains more than expected, but the game looks terrible with everything but TAA - not an option.
You might want to trade Shadowlibs for the highest shadow settings, I have to test this with screenshots.
AO, Filtering and Geomapping are basically free.
For now, my personal settings will be everything at max, except for VXAO, Turf and Shadowlibs. This nets me 57 fps, so the math checks out.
A few comparison shots:
VXAO off:
VXAO on:
Turf off:
Turf on:
VXAO off:
VXAO on:
I can answer another question. VXAO does NOT replace AO.
Comparison:
Comparison:
VXAO on / AO off
VXAO on / AO high
VXAO on / AO high
Good, catch, I have no idea.
It doesn't, what looks like light brown mass is actually real turf, looks better in motion. Also, Turf adds interaction with foliage (trampling down individual paths in high grass and stuff like that).
My game keeps crashing.
When I played the demo it crashed after a few minutes playing, the time was totally random, not matter what I was doing, it could be one minute after loading, just after loading or after 15 minutes. What is funny is that I downloaded the origin version when it leaked so that I could test it and went the whole chapter 1 without any issues.
Today I started playing the steam version...actually, not even that. As soon as the game finished loading it crashed. Anyone having the same issue? How's the leaked origin version plays so fine and the steam version (even the demo) crashs so often? This is bumming me out, I think I might refund if I can't get it to work.
When I played the demo it crashed after a few minutes playing, the time was totally random, not matter what I was doing, it could be one minute after loading, just after loading or after 15 minutes. What is funny is that I downloaded the origin version when it leaked so that I could test it and went the whole chapter 1 without any issues.
Today I started playing the steam version...actually, not even that. As soon as the game finished loading it crashed. Anyone having the same issue? How's the leaked origin version plays so fine and the steam version (even the demo) crashs so often? This is bumming me out, I think I might refund if I can't get it to work.
I know, but it has strangely helped me in a few Ubisoft titles ( Assassin creeds/WD2) when enabling it, it has helped smooth out the game, reducing stutters , but increased input lag.
You can refer to copelandmaster's useful posts below. They show the difference on AO and VXAO.
According toOachkatzlschwoaf's post, it seems that AO does not cost any fps, but it seems to have a different result on my rig. I will test it later tonight.
It's a bit weird because HBAO+ should be a part of VXAO by default since VXAO is world space and doesn't work too well with small details (without a huge performance hit anyway). If it's not in this game then yeah, you should enable SSAO as well since it will provide better contact shadowing for smaller intersections, in addition to VXAO's large scale shadowing.
So initially I wanted to hit 1440p but I decided to drop it down to 1080 just so I could throw on the extra bells and whistles (GTX 1070 here). Jesus this game is gorgeous. I really need to get an SSD to slide it over to though. These load times are killer.
Yeah would be nice to see the difference between the settings where smaller details could be noticed like inside a building with lots of boxes/models.
1080Ti and gonna have to look into that, never had much to do with reshade before this.
I feel dumb whenever someone posts comparison screenshots, because no matter how hard I look, I fail to notice the differences most of the times. Would be nice to mention the differences you find in your posts if possible. That dog tag difference Oachkatzlschwoaf mentioned was really helpful for example.
Everybody is all about 4k, vxao, nvidia turf works and I'm just sitting here thinking: The game looks awesome, even without Gameworks and sub 4k. It's a huge step up over the console version, especially tessellation, light effects, improved draw distance and texture quality helps to improve the graphical fidelity. Maybe not a groundbreaking "next gen" lead, but add 60 fps and the hugly improved loading times to it and you get a significant update, imo.
Performance wise: I'm not able to use any kind of gamework features at 1440p on my 7700k/1080 setup if I want to play at 60fps, but running at ultra non gamework settings is possible. That said: I'm still in chapter 2... we'll see how later, more impressive areas perform.
IQ wise 1440p --> 1080p looks better then whatever resolution PS4PRo is using to downsample to 1080p. 1440p on a native 1440p display looks awesome too, now my 1440p HDR display needs to arrive and I'm happy.
Performance wise: I'm not able to use any kind of gamework features at 1440p on my 7700k/1080 setup if I want to play at 60fps, but running at ultra non gamework settings is possible. That said: I'm still in chapter 2... we'll see how later, more impressive areas perform.
IQ wise 1440p --> 1080p looks better then whatever resolution PS4PRo is using to downsample to 1080p. 1440p on a native 1440p display looks awesome too, now my 1440p HDR display needs to arrive and I'm happy.
The draw distance (and by that I mean the draw distance for everything, including obviously standard geometry but also foliage and shadows) really stood out for me in the demo.
It's the best I've seen in any open world game of this fidelity.
And I also agree that the tesselation is also impactful in some scenes.
I have practically the same setup with a GTX 960 2gb card. I'm surprised at how well this game runs really.
