• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Black Myth Wukong - Benchmark tool

Cob said:
Soooooo 5700X3D and 6700XT gets less than 30fps on Cinematic settings -

uaRiz8d.png


Enabling the 'recommended' settings gets me a nice 60 fps. Switching on FMF2 gets me 112fps, so that'll be the way to go.

iWVtaei.png
Click to expand...

No need for FMF2 as the game has Frame Generation which should be better. You don't have it enabled in your benchmarks. FMF2 is for games that don't have FG support.
 
hyperseven said:
store.steampowered.com

Black Myth: Wukong Benchmark Tool on Steam

The "Black Myth: Wukong Benchmark Tool" is a PC benchmark application specifically developed for "Black Myth: Wukong". It evaluates your hardware performance and system compatibility through the real-time rendering of an in-game sequence.
store.steampowered.com store.steampowered.com
Click to expand...

Do i need the game to run this or is it stand alone?
 
Did a run at 2560x1440 just to see the image quality on this 32" QD-OLED and actually, just like I've seen in other games, this display's scaler is excellent quality, Could not spot any sharpness issues, just clean crisp pixels rendered nicely as if it was on a 27" 1440p display. Bodes well for future if next gen games can't qute hit the 100fps target for whatever reason knowing that 1440p is possible whether at that time I'm on ultrawide 4K or 16:9 32" still, at least these QD panels display lower resolutions in games nicely.

nAZ1y9e.png


Although saying that, the performance difference isn't THAT big given going from 1440p output to (bearing in mind the relative internal render res difference between DLSS Quality at 75% for 1440P and DLSS Performance at 50% for 4K:

JyE8hmF.jpeg


Edit* Just realised that 75% of 2560x1440 is actually 1920x1080, so both runs are internally rendering at 1080p to then process the output for either 1440 of 4K, so whatever overhead is involved differentiates the two results. Interesting.
 
Last edited:
Did same settings as MRK first post, no idea what dlss version, never changed it. No idea why the screenshot is so small either lol.
Edit: oh ffs forgot the ray tracing :D
Edit2: Weird, it's enabled in settings but shows it's off on the benchmark? Oh I see, need to restart for it to take effect.

 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: TNA
That's actually quite a large gap considering we have the same GPU, is your 4090 undervolted or OCd? This might explain why mine is quite abit higher using the same settings with the only difference being you have on paper the faster and newer CPU, though as we know from other games, the CPU at these settings does not really make that much difference when everything is GPU bound.
 
Oh yeah good shout. I'll check after I've let the ray tracing one finish, but I can already see it's quite a lot lower than yours. Weird at the vRAM usage too, why is mine higher at same res?

Actually Afterburner shows I had +100 on core and 200 on memory. I recently disabled EXPO on my ram but not sure if that makes a huge difference. Only one way to find out. Happy to test whatever if told what settings to change :D


upload images online

I'm just going to run it now using the profile I have set up which is 80% power and + 100 on core.

Seems default GPU is 2775 / 10501
CPU all auto in bios.
RAM was on auto.

Settings / Change from first run / run aboveAverageMax / MinLow 5thTotal VRAM
GPU 100% PL - +100/200 (Core/Mem) NO RAYTRACING114117 / 1051099.8
GPU 80% - +2865 / 1050196114 / 798511.9
GPU 115% - +2865 / 1070197114 / 738611.8
GPU 100% - 2775 / 10501 EXPO enabled95113 / 818410.5
GPU 100% - 2865 / 10701 EXPO enabled96115 / 818510.6
GPU 100% - 2865 / 10701 EXPO enabled NVIDIA driver update 560.81 (from 70)93114 / 798310
GPU 100% - 2865 / 10701 EXPO enabled - CPU All Core Negative -1595113 / 828510.2
" " Updated NVIDIA .dll to latest versions96116 / 828610.5
"" Closed all background apps99118 / 84889.2
"" Set 'prefer max performance' on NVCP power setting99117 / 85889.2
"" RAYTRACING OFF122138 / 371117.6
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mrk
Noxia said:
Oh yeah good shout. I'll check after I've let the ray tracing one finish, but I can already see it's quite a lot lower than yours. Weird at the vRAM usage too, why is mine higher at same res?

Actually Afterburner shows I had +100 on core and 200 on memory. I recently disabled EXPO on my ram but not sure if that makes a huge difference. Only one way to find out. Happy to test whatever if told what settings to change :D


upload images online

I'm just going to run it now using the profile I have set up which is 80% power and + 100 on core.

Settings / Change from first runAverageMax / MinLow 5thTotal VRAM
GPU 100% PL - +100/200 (Core/Mem)114117 / 1051099.8
GPU 80% PL - +100 / 096114 / 798511.9
Click to expand...
Mine is locked to 2730 vcore at 975mV, the VRAM is at +1100. I should do a run with the card at standard and see what the difference is to then determine if the GPU clocks made this big a difference between our setups or if Intel 12th gen still actually is up there for this level of gaming, at leats on UE5 anyway.
 
Will download to set how it runs on my 7900gre although going to get it on ps5 as it's a game my wife will enjoy playing. Might even wait for the pro.
 
mrk said:
Mine is locked to 2730 vcore at 975mV, the VRAM is at +1100. I should do a run with the card at standard and see what the difference is to then determine if the GPU clocks made this big a difference between our setups or if Intel 12th gen still actually is up there for this level of gaming, at leats on UE5 anyway.
Click to expand...

I've updated it a bit but similar results really outside of the drop to 80% PL, no thermal throttling. Guess the cool thing is the performance on 80% power limit compared to max.
Shall I update those dll files to see if it changes things.

Edit: Oh different driver version too, I'll update.
 
Last edited:
mrk said:
Mine is locked to 2730 vcore at 975mV, the VRAM is at +1100. I should do a run with the card at standard and see what the difference is to then determine if the GPU clocks made this big a difference between our setups or if Intel 12th gen still actually is up there for this level of gaming, at leats on UE5 anyway.
Click to expand...

Right so with the 4090 at stock:

XxfYNy5.jpg


Basically exactly the same lmao, so looks like the 12700KF/K is better at UE5 than a 7800X3D :o

Edit&* For reference, I haven't closed anything down, both Firefox windows are open in the BG, multiple media tabs (20+) and all BG apps remain open too. I just load games and play so no "game mode" or any other tweaking Windows.
 
Last edited:
mrk said:
Right so with the 4090 at stock:



Basically exactly the same lmao, so looks like the 12700KF/K is better at UE5 than a 7800X3D
Click to expand...

I thought the 7800X3D was only better in niche titles that made use of the vwotsit, like Factorio, some MMO's etc. I'll change a bit in bios and see what happens.

And yes same. I've left discord and all those other gubbins open. I'm not a competitive benchmarker lol. Doubt it would make much difference anyway
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom