Fair enough
The way your last post was written, it sounded like you were saying that there was a noticeable difference i.e. one where you can easily spot the difference.
Last edited:
-
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.
Fallout 4 to feature Nvidia Gameworks
- Thread starter JediFragger
- Start date
Fair enough
The way your last post was written, it sounded like you were saying that there was a noticeable difference i.e. one where you can easily spot the difference.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 10,758
- Location
- West End, Southampton
can you not just edit the .ini mate? thats usually the case with Bethesda games. I've seen videos and read forum of ppl playing at 1440p so its there
Why are there zero character shadows everywhere
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Forget what i said, apparently Xfires a no no as well 
When going out of range, have you tried CTRL+ALT+DEL, then ESC to get back to desktop, and then bringing F4 back up from the bottom ?
I got the out of range in GTA V when selecting 144Hz, so after id selected it and it went out of range, i pressed Enter to accept the change, then i did the CTRL+ALT+DEL, ESC, before bringing it back up from the bottom.
When going out of range, have you tried CTRL+ALT+DEL, then ESC to get back to desktop, and then bringing F4 back up from the bottom ?
I got the out of range in GTA V when selecting 144Hz, so after id selected it and it went out of range, i pressed Enter to accept the change, then i did the CTRL+ALT+DEL, ESC, before bringing it back up from the bottom.
Last edited:
You can see an example of the difference between low and ultra in these two videos:
http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-co.../fallout-4/fallout-4-god-rays-quality-low.mp4
http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-co...allout-4/fallout-4-god-rays-quality-ultra.mp4
Make you own mind up if it is worth the performance hit.
Like I said earlier, given the range of mods and the extremely long legs Bethesda games have, just be happy they are somewhat future proofing the engine with effects that even top end cards of today have difficulty running.
http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-co.../fallout-4/fallout-4-god-rays-quality-low.mp4
http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-co...allout-4/fallout-4-god-rays-quality-ultra.mp4
Make you own mind up if it is worth the performance hit.
Like I said earlier, given the range of mods and the extremely long legs Bethesda games have, just be happy they are somewhat future proofing the engine with effects that even top end cards of today have difficulty running.
Nvidia optimisation guide:
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/gu...-tweaking-guide#fallout-4-system-requirements
40 FPS 1080P on a GTX 970, from what i have seen of the very average Graphics i think that is shocking.
Being an Nvidia sponsored game it would be but with Nvidia effectively saying performance is bad doesn't fill me with confidence, makes me wonder what that video isn't telling.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 4,504
- Location
- Wales
Forget what i said, apparently Xfires a no no as well
When going out of range, have you tried CTRL+ALT+DEL, then ESC to get back to desktop, and then bringing F4 back up from the bottom ?
I got the out of range in GTA V when selecting 144Hz, so after id selected it and it went out of range, i pressed Enter to accept the change, then i did the CTRL+ALT+DEL, ESC, before bringing it back up from the bottom.
tried editing the ini file and Loads suggestion, nothing works, just keeping saying no signal
It's worth noting that the 'Ultra' preset in the launcher doesn't set god rays to ultra, only high. I guess the Nvidia benchmarks are with that turned up to ultra as well. Shows the ridiculous impact it has on performance. Again, hasn't dropped a frame for me since turning god rays down to low on a 780 (1189/6308), so a 970 should have no issues.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
tried editing the ini file and Loads suggestion, nothing works, just keeping saying no signal
Gah
That's with everything cranked up to the max.
From what I've seen, a GTX970 should be able to do 1440p/60fps with some settings turned down.
As is often the case with PC gaming, some of the most demanding settings often have the highest diminishing returns in terms of actual visible difference, so these settings people have to turn down probably wouldn't even make much of an overall difference.
I know some people have this psychological issue of needing to 'max' a game out, but seriously, some of the options developers give you aren't always worth using. Nvidia posted a very useful guide here(as they do with many of the bigger games) that shows what the settings do and the cost associated with it. In most games, it's almost always the case there's settings provided that hardly provide any sort of visual boost but cost a fair amount to use. As people have mentioned, god rays is a good example here. Turn them down to Low and you'll save big. Shadow quality also doesn't seem to be worth it. I'd stick it on Medium unless you've got performance to spare.
yep, people completely fail to understand that computational complexity is absolutely unrelated to visual quality.
Thats somewhat of a miss representation, Volumetric Fog and Hight Map Shadowing is about Visual Quality.
The next argument would be how much of a performance cost are such things? that can go on all day but IMO when Nvidia do it it seems to cost far more than others doing it.
With that i stand by my initial statement.
Last edited:
By 'unrelated' I think he just means 'doesn't perfectly correlate to'.
He quoted a post talking about Visual Quality, it correlates, it most certainly is related. i didn't say he was wrong, just misrepresenting the quote.
I should have said 'correlates 1:1'.
Just semantics. He knows what he was saying and I'm sure you do, too. You're not actually disagreeing.
Last edited: