Red Dead Redemption II PC performance thread

Rubmifer

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,599
Now I'm getting this bug when opening the menu



Anyone know what to do? (Couldn't take a screenshot because when using geforce to take a screenshot it actually reverses for a second and it looks fine, only to turn back like this after a second)
 

DonMigs85

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
2,388
I'm looking forward to seeing comparison images for different settings. I can't right now tell the difference between high and ultra shadows, or high/ultra global illumination.
They're really just there for future GPUs, but the differences are pretty marginal. Heck, the console versions still look really great.
 

Kadath

Member
Oct 25, 2017
342
If you told me these came from the PS3 era I would believe it:






Also, why there are scanlines in the water?

 

Duxxy3

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,762
USA
Looks pretty broken. Can't even open the game. Cool, I'll go play something else. Nice launch Rockstar.
 

TSM

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,420
I'd imagine that the first place to get a comprehensive performance guide up online is going to get a lot of traffic.
 

Pwnz

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,907
Places
Now I'm getting this bug when opening the menu



Anyone know what to do? (Couldn't take a screenshot because when using geforce to take a screenshot it actually reverses for a second and it looks fine, only to turn back like this after a second)
Yup, I get the same thing. I keep unpausing and pausing until it renders 90% with a bit missing from the bottom.
 

dsk1210

Member
Oct 25, 2017
702
Edinburgh UK
I think a lot of people have hugely underestimated how taxing this game is and it seems like high and ultra are properly high settings unlike other games.

Even though I am playing at 1080p on a 1080 ti, it looks stunning and very consistent, I keep spinning the camera around to check out the lighting.
 

Mecha Meister

Self-requested ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,103
Welp, I managed to get the game to launch on a laptop. It has a Ryzen 3550H and a GTX 1650.

My Ryzen 5 3600 and GTX 1080 Ti are crying right now.
 

bic

Member
Oct 28, 2017
163
On a GTX 980, i7 3770, I got 26 min, 71 max, and 53 average fps on the benchmark with Balanced graphics settings.
 

TheRed

Member
Oct 31, 2017
785
Still no fix for those who cannot launch the game? I saw the most recent support article about deleting local profile and that did nothing. I've done everything I can do except reinstall windows which I will not do.
BIOS update and uninstalling game launcher and deleting the folders relating to it and reinstalling finally did the trick for me. Though it's not foolproof, sometimes I still get the crash, but it is working and I just played for an hour.
 

Rubmifer

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,599
And I don't know why, but I feel like there's a problem with my textures as well. Arthur's clothing looks way less detailed than they should....

 

KefkaPalazzo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
796
Launched the game once - ran a benchmark. Wouldn't let me do another after some adjustments. Reset. Now it won't launch. Don't seem to be the only one. Tried all of the suggested fixes from Rockstar. No go...really Rockstar?
 

Isee

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,867
It's definitely caused by enabling NVIDIA Sharpening on the global profile.
It's possible that NVIDIA Sharpening behaves differently depending on whether or not you have a Turing GPU (I don't) and the problem seemed to get progressively worse over time rather than always being there.
I have a 2080ti and so does my brother. We both have image sharpening enabled in the Nvidia control panel.
He has the launcher artifacts, I don't.
Both windows 1909, both fresh installations, both on the newest Nvidia drivers.
 

dreamfall

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,724
Waiting for the double dip on the Steam release, but it definitely feels like the optimizations and settings Rockstar implemented here were looking to set the standard for the future. Haven’t gotten around to upgrading my rig, mostly because it seems like a lot of new tech is close on the horizon. But I may just plug in a 2080 and mix highs/mediums at 1440p for a sublime experience.

If a 2080Ti can’t fully max this out right now, it’s an exciting prospect for how the game will scale on a future tech. I’m also worried about the CPU scalability, hopefully benchmarks start rolling for that too.
 

Kadath

Member
Oct 25, 2017
342
ROFL! Well, these aren't even Skyrim assets, I guess the game right now is just too buggy to be taken seriously for comparisons:

 

Pwnz

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,907
Places
Launched the game once - ran a benchmark. Wouldn't let me do another after some adjustments. Reset. Now it won't launch. Don't seem to be the only one. Tried all of the suggested fixes from Rockstar. No go...really Rockstar?
1 benchmark per sale, sorry sir.

Same thing happened to me, I assumed a setting bricked it, but maybe it is a bug in the benchmark.
 

ANDS

Member
Jun 25, 2019
188
I feel like for people with modest rigs, like myself, 60FPS without heavily sacrificing graphical quality is just a pipe dream. If you're fine with a locked 30FPS and 1440P with a mix of medium and high settings the game looks quite a bit better than the PS4 Pro.
And I don't know why, but I feel like there's a problem with my textures as well. Arthur's clothing looks way less detailed than they should....

Even on consoles I always felt that starting outfit was a bit lacking in detail.
 

dgrdsv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,567
Msk / SPb, Russia
What am I looking at there? Pascal handles async compute just fine and considering that Turing isn't showing much improvement over Pascal in async compute performance this shouldn't affect anything here.
Most of issues with D3D12/VK performance are due to improper resource management by the engine, not some heavily marketed features like async compute.
Also of interest: 5700-non-XT being on 2070 Super level. Hardly because of anything related to async compute, don't you think?
 

disgraciau

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,132
Ibiza, Balearic Islands, Spain
I fixed the Rockstar Launcher error.... I had to update my BIOS AsRock drivers to latest version (6.00)... unbelievable.


So... I'm a crazy fool who maxes the fuck out of everything. Which taxative options, MSAA aside, should I lower for steady 30 FPS at 4K or less?

RTX 2070.
 

horkrux

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,262
Ahh the usual "ultra runs like ass, must be badly optimized" schtick
How dare a game not run at 4K/60 fully maxed
 

dgrdsv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,567
Msk / SPb, Russia
Async compute is part of the reason.
Highly unlikely. Pascal should handle modern console async compute just fine.

Basically when you see AMD GPUs do well in a game you should expect Turing to pull ahead of Pascal as it usually has the same cause.
This is the first game of this year where Turing pulls ahead of Pascal considerably while it's been a dozen or so where AMD's GPUs are relatively ahead of NV competition, Turing included. Same cause, eh?

This thread is a good example of why so many devs don't try to futureproof their games. Runs badly at max settings = unoptimized piece of shit.
Kinda but not really. This thread is a good example of why it's generally a bad idea to "future proof" your game by cranking up LODs to eleven instead of adding stuff which wasn't present on consoles in the first place. This way you'll just get abysmal performance with minimal visual benefits over consoles. The power of rasterization so to say.
 

jayvo

Member
Oct 27, 2017
244
Ahh the usual "ultra runs like ass, must be badly optimized" schtick
How dare a game not run at 4K/60 fully maxed
Yeah, my thoughts as well.

For the first time in a long time I had to dial back a couple settings to get it to run slightly above 60 fps. But man is this game gorgeous and runs good on my system. i7 / 2080 Super. Also running Gsync as well, so maybe that's helping a little.
 

mordecaii83

Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
1,556
I think TAA and MSAA are causing leaves and some plants to become blobs, I noticed with no AA or with FXAA the tree leaves looked much smaller and more defined, same with plants on the ground. Also the leaves/plants seem to react more to wind with MSAA/TAA turned off.
 

mORTEN

Banned
Dec 3, 2018
128
Patch for the rockstar launcher just downloaded and installed. Let’s see what it does.
 

exodus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,334
I think TAA and MSAA are causing leaves and some plants to become blobs, I noticed with no AA or with FXAA the tree leaves looked much smaller and more defined, same with plants on the ground. Also the leaves/plants seem to react more to wind with MSAA/TAA turned off.
This game really begs to be supersampled. I’ve settled on 1.5 of 1080 because so much more detail comes out.
 

Triscuitable

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,417
Look at those 1080Ti results....

The king is dead.
If it’s being smoked by cards it regularly outpaces in benchmarks, something’s wrong with the game, not the card. Even still, the RTX 2070 and such have long since outpaced the 1080 Ti; it’s a juggernaut, but it’s a juggernaut coming on three years of age.
 

PHOENIXZERO

Member
Oct 29, 2017
6,004
Wow, low textures are some sub-last gen quality shit...

The Vulkan implementation needs some smoothing out, didn't have any of those hanging issues with DX12 but it's also a good bit lower on the average but at least it isn't going into decimals in several spots especially when lighting and shadows come more into play during that last test.

Everything on the lowest/off settings except resolution still at 1080p. My poor old 2500K is OC'd to 4.5GHz, 1070 to 2.1GHz.
Code:
Frames Per Second (Higher is better) Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 0.184772, 127.606361, 95.082809
Pass 1, 0.169378, 129.784164, 105.445435
Pass 2, 47.444408, 160.341202, 125.000259
Pass 3, 0.169513, 84.738586, 63.820137
Pass 4, 0.170693, 120.035049, 83.078873

Time in milliseconds(ms). (Lower is better). Min, Max, Avg
Test 0, 7.836600, 5412.067383, 10.517148
Test 1, 7.705100, 5903.952148, 9.483578
Test 2, 6.236700, 21.077299, 7.999983
Test 3, 11.801000, 5899.250488, 15.669036
Test 4, 8.330900, 5858.462402, 12.036755

Frames under 16ms (for 60fps):
Test 0: 1962/2070 frames (94.78%)
Test 1: 2409/2434 frames (98.97%)
Test 2: 2965/2975 frames (99.66%)
Test 3: 1161/1431 frames (81.13%)
Test 4: 8753/9881 frames (88.58%)

Frames under 33ms (for 30fps):
Test 0: 2001/2070 frames (96.67%)
Test 1: 2414/2434 frames (99.18%)
Test 2: 2975/2975 frames (100.00%)
Test 3: 1372/1431 frames (95.88%)
Test 4: 9581/9881 frames (96.96%)

Percentiles in ms for pass 0
50%,    10.00
75%,    10.00
80%,    10.00
85%,    10.00
90%,    11.00
91%,    11.00
92%,    11.00
93%,    13.00
94%,    14.00
95%,    16.00
96%,    19.00
97%,    34.00
98%,    39.00
99%,    49.00

Percentiles in ms for pass 1
50%,    9.00
75%,    9.00
80%,    9.00
85%,    9.00
90%,    10.00
91%,    10.00
92%,    10.00
93%,    10.00
94%,    10.00
95%,    10.00
96%,    10.00
97%,    10.00
98%,    11.00
99%,    15.00

Percentiles in ms for pass 2
50%,    7.00
75%,    8.00
80%,    8.00
85%,    8.00
90%,    8.00
91%,    8.00
92%,    8.00
93%,    8.00
94%,    8.00
95%,    8.00
96%,    8.00
97%,    9.00
98%,    9.00
99%,    11.00

Percentiles in ms for pass 3
50%,    14.00
75%,    15.00
80%,    15.00
85%,    16.00
90%,    17.00
91%,    18.00
92%,    19.00
93%,    20.00
94%,    22.00
95%,    27.00
96%,    33.00
97%,    40.00
98%,    46.00
99%,    53.00

Percentiles in ms for pass 4
50%,    11.00
75%,    13.00
80%,    14.00
85%,    15.00
90%,    16.00
91%,    17.00
92%,    17.00
93%,    18.00
94%,    19.00
95%,    21.00
96%,    25.00
97%,    33.00
98%,    43.00
99%,    60.00

=== SYSTEM ===
CPU:        Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2500K CPU @ 3.30GHz
    Physical Cores: 4
    Logical Cores: 4

GPU: GeForce GTX 1070    API: VULKAN    VRAM: 8282112 MB

System RAM: 16735556 MB


=== SETTINGS ===

Code:
Frames Per Second (Higher is better) Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 22.417503, 143.857986, 85.642326
Pass 1, 43.771721, 143.531738, 89.683670
Pass 2, 49.815929, 143.408249, 97.877007
Pass 3, 14.145071, 74.696541, 56.030781
Pass 4, 26.175201, 94.387711, 70.120163

Time in milliseconds(ms). (Lower is better). Min, Max, Avg
Test 0, 6.951300, 44.608002, 11.676470
Test 1, 6.967100, 22.845800, 11.150302
Test 2, 6.973100, 20.073900, 10.216905
Test 3, 13.387501, 70.696007, 17.847332
Test 4, 10.594600, 38.204098, 14.261233

Frames under 16ms (for 60fps):
Test 0: 2004/2034 frames (98.53%)
Test 1: 2123/2137 frames (99.34%)
Test 2: 2326/2333 frames (99.70%)
Test 3: 4/1331 frames (0.30%)
Test 4: 6723/8903 frames (75.51%)

Frames under 33ms (for 30fps):
Test 0: 2033/2034 frames (99.95%)
Test 1: 2137/2137 frames (100.00%)
Test 2: 2333/2333 frames (100.00%)
Test 3: 1327/1331 frames (99.70%)
Test 4: 8900/8903 frames (99.97%)

Percentiles in ms for pass 0
50%,    11.00
75%,    12.00
80%,    12.00
85%,    12.00
90%,    12.00
91%,    12.00
92%,    12.00
93%,    13.00
94%,    13.00
95%,    13.00
96%,    13.00
97%,    14.00
98%,    14.00
99%,    16.00

Percentiles in ms for pass 1
50%,    11.00
75%,    11.00
80%,    11.00
85%,    11.00
90%,    11.00
91%,    11.00
92%,    12.00
93%,    12.00
94%,    12.00
95%,    12.00
96%,    12.00
97%,    12.00
98%,    13.00
99%,    14.00

Percentiles in ms for pass 2
50%,    10.00
75%,    10.00
80%,    10.00
85%,    10.00
90%,    11.00
91%,    11.00
92%,    11.00
93%,    11.00
94%,    11.00
95%,    11.00
96%,    11.00
97%,    11.00
98%,    11.00
99%,    13.00

Percentiles in ms for pass 3
50%,    17.00
75%,    18.00
80%,    18.00
85%,    18.00
90%,    19.00
91%,    19.00
92%,    19.00
93%,    19.00
94%,    19.00
95%,    19.00
96%,    20.00
97%,    20.00
98%,    21.00
99%,    22.00

Percentiles in ms for pass 4
50%,    13.00
75%,    15.00
80%,    16.00
85%,    17.00
90%,    19.00
91%,    19.00
92%,    19.00
93%,    20.00
94%,    21.00
95%,    21.00
96%,    22.00
97%,    22.00
98%,    23.00
99%,    25.00

=== SYSTEM ===
CPU:        Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2500K CPU @ 3.30GHz
    Physical Cores: 4
    Logical Cores: 4

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070    API: DX12    VRAM: 8282112 MB

System RAM: 16735556 MB


=== SETTINGS ===

Now gotta decide how I want to balance it out, whether I want to go back to the settings I was tweaking to get at least 60FPS most of the time or just cap at 30 and turn stuff up more. The launcher was just updated so I wonder what they did there, is it fixing the crash issue for those of you who have been experiencing it?
 

Pennyfish

Member
May 17, 2018
1,566
Dumb
What am I looking at there? Pascal handles async compute just fine and considering that Turing isn't showing much improvement over Pascal in async compute performance this shouldn't affect anything here.
Most of issues with D3D12/VK performance are due to improper resource management by the engine, not some heavily marketed features like async compute.
Also of interest: 5700-non-XT being on 2070 Super level. Hardly because of anything related to async compute, don't you think?

edit: everything before turing did async partially in software. Turing does it in hardware. It's like 3.5+.5 vs 4. They can say its the same because it is in most cases.
The way Nvidia does async pre turing is a resource management issue. Rockstar could fix around it like everybody else does, but AMD has had an advantage here.
I'm not denying this port might be bad, but this game doesn't have a dx11 render so I expect AMD to get their "secret sauce" boost.
 
Last edited: