Far Cry 6 GPU performance not bad at all but is severely bottlenecked by CPU

[gpuerrilla]

Doubting myself now! Too much wine and school in the morning...

Bill, I thought you lived in scrumpy land? Been meaning to have a whiskey for a while myself..

 

[Bill Turnip]

Scrumpy is a bit northern for me, we'll get our cider in old gallon jugs from the man by the bridge, thank you very much!

Wifey enjoys her whiskey, too much of a real drink for me. Used to like it, but a misspent youth and one terrible evening and I can't even smell it anymore without coming over all peculiar.

 

[TNA]

This. I am currently 10% through the game after playing some this evening. Its been good, no crashes and no stutters. I cant see any issue with my VRAM @TNA

Having bought off MM last year Valhalla near same time, you have to expect a few patches to rid strange bugs and the performance catches up. Valhalla crashed on me quite a lot and for a while the telemetry to sync the saves etc seemed to be glitchy. I still played on and enjoyed completing it, and will do same with farcry.

Well I guess after a year it has finally for the first time paid off to have all that extra VRAM as this is clearly a triple a must play game offering an experience like never before

 

[LtMatt]

i read the same topic from start to finish, i've also observed lots of people who swears that they do not even use texture pack, yet suffer from the same fate

i guess ray tracing is a no no for some gpus at this point. maybe 3080 gets away at 1440p-1660p with no hd textuer pack, but it seems like game over for 3060ti 3070 3070ti and stuff. SPECifically i see some 3060ti user saying their texture became fine after they disabled rt, but they did not even use hd texture pack to begin with. so no textuer pack + rt itself seems too heavy on 8 gb for now, but i dont remember their resolution, might have to check again

sad, since they're more than capable...even a rtx 2070 probably handles this game and its ray tracing like a champ at 1440p. but probably will observe weird texture downgrades evenwithout hd texture pack. it seems like ray tracing in some games can be reeally heavy on vram itself. and add that extra hd texture pack sauce... it becomes messary

then again, all it does is minor improvements in shadows and some reflection stuff. not a big loss at least, a reprimand

Lot of people bitching about when all they have to literally do is lower some settings, God forbid most of the users being smart enough to actually even try to use graphic settings efficiently according to their hardware instead of maxing everything and then moaning about it when their GPU can't handle it.
It's called "future proofing" your games, it's literally the whole point of gaming on pc, to be able to tailor and tinker gaming software according to your level of hardware, your 3080 can't max it? Turn off that OPTIONAL HD pack, boom, problem solved, mindblowing I know.
I think many users here should be gaming on console instead so they wouldn't cry when they can't just max their games.
Would love to see plenty of folks from around here trying to game on of when Quake 3 or Crysis came out, can't imagine the level of crying and moaning.

PS-sorry for the long rant guys, I will be good and shush.

There's also plenty of people falling below the requirements, in seems like this applies to most people based on this Ubisoft article which you/Bill found to both your credit. Recommended configurations for higher resolutions in Far Cry 6 | Ubisoft Help

Please note that the minimum requirement for running the HD Texture Pack for Far Cry 6 is 16GB of VRAM. If you download and run the HD Texture Pack with lower VRAM capabilities, you will encounter performance issues while playing.

That's pretty clear and no wonder why 4-10GB cards are having issues, some seeing it on the 3080 TI too. 6700 XT as well I bet since that has 12GB, however that card probably doesn't quite have the grunt to run 4K60 at Ultra quality with RT and HD Textures and keep playable FPS so less of an issue there.

It does make me laugh when it's trying to be brushed off as a bug by some with certain agendas when the requirements are there for all to see. They know who they are, and it's funny to see them running around like a madman trying to do damage control and find links to support their incorrect interpretations. These people just can't grasp that true 4K HD Textures (actual 4K HD Textures are not that common in games today) and RT effects cost VRAM. Yes that's right, enabling RT will spike VRAM usage too.

I suppose this needs to be said again for those in the back or their fingers in their ears. It's an optional download to improve quality for people who meet the minimum requirements for video memory, basically the highest end graphics cards currently available. If this was forced on and included in the base game I could understand it. No one is forced to download the texture pack, just like no one is forced to use Ray Tracing. Oh how I've seen this argument pushed in other threads by a few, well guess what? It applies here too. If i wanted to play a game that had RT effects that pushed FPS much down below 60, it'd just get disabled or FSR would be used (if available) since RT generally adds very little anyway in most games so far.

To be fair, the game doesn’t look as good as it should even if you can render everything.

I’m using the HD texture pack with everything on max, RT included, but 1440p, which is well within VRAM budget and it still looks average. Only strange texture I’ve seen is the speedometer in the car, which looks like pixel art; this only happens in the car, not the tank, plane, boat or helicopter. Probably a bug.

Have there been any issues with texture downscaling while within spec?

That's subjective and your opinion which is fine.

It looks good to me at 4K max settings with HDR, great in fact. But then again, I meet the requirements for the optional texture pack, RT and 4K max settings so there are no texture issues for me. Textures will be better at 4K which is the resolution where you would see most benefit, unsurprisingly.

I will agree that the roads don't look as good as they did in Far Cry 5, so hoping that gets fixed in a future patch. And I'm sure graphics could be improved in certain areas, but I can say that about every game I play tbh. There are some gameplay elements which are worse than 5 too, but that's not related to graphics. There are also many things graphically that are better than 5, and that is the general consensus by most tech sites that have done in-depth testing comparing settings, texture packs etc. Digital Foundry are not included in that since it is known they are compromised, they didn't even cover FSR in the technical breakdown for example which was mind blowing when you think about it as FSR works wonderfully well in this title and is one of the best implementations to date in my opinion. Everyone else covered it.

The important part, the game is stable with no crashes. It's not like the fire dumpster that is Cyberpunk. The problem is you have people trying to run settings in the game when they don't meet the requirements, then blaming said game when all their textures look low quality and claiming it as a bug.

 

[_Cereal_]

Spot on, people trying to brute force the game on max settings because they simply feel entitled to.
Yes the game has plenty of problems that hopefully Ubisoft will patch at some point (AH) but i am sure plenty of these issues are caused by users simply not being able to read the game requirements, 3090, 6800 xt and 6900 XT seem to be the only way to go right now for anyone wanting to max this game for now,there is nothing wrong with that, graphical settings literally exist for anyone below those specs. People would be surprised by realising how much settings they can lower without barely losing any visual fidelity.

 

[LtMatt]

Somebody asked for 6800 XT footage from Far Cry 6. Was it @Bill Turnip or @dualsense1673?

Whoever it was, here it is. 4K quality on YouTube should be up before long.

Far Cry 6 Benchmark - 6800 XT Performance | 1440P + Ultra Settings + Ray Tracing + CAS

Far Cry 6 Benchmark - 6800 XT Performance | 2160P + Ultra Settings + Ray Tracing + CAS

 

[TNA]

There's also plenty of people falling below the requirements, in seems like this applies to most people based on this Ubisoft article which you/Bill found to both your credit. Recommended configurations for higher resolutions in Far Cry 6 | Ubisoft Help



That's pretty clear and no wonder why 4-10GB cards are having issues, some seeing it on the 3080 TI too. 6700 XT as well I bet since that has 12GB, however that card probably doesn't quite have the grunt to run 4K60 at Ultra quality with RT and HD Textures and keep playable FPS so less of an issue there.

It does make me laugh when it's trying to be brushed off as a bug by some with certain agendas when the requirements are there for all to see. They know who they are, and it's funny to see them running around like a madman trying to do damage control and find links to support their incorrect interpretations. These people just can't grasp that true 4K HD Textures (actual 4K HD Textures are not that common in games today) and RT effects cost VRAM. Yes that's right, enabling RT will spike VRAM usage too.

I suppose this needs to be said again for those in the back or their fingers in their ears. It's an optional download to improve quality for people who meet the minimum requirements for video memory, basically the highest end graphics cards currently available. If this was forced on and included in the base game I could understand it. No one is forced to download the texture pack, just like no one is forced to use Ray Tracing. Oh how I've seen this argument pushed in other threads by a few, well guess what? It applies here too. If i wanted to play a game that had RT effects that pushed FPS much down below 60, it'd just get disabled or FSR would be used (if available) since RT generally adds very little anyway in most games so far.


That's subjective and your opinion which is fine.

It looks good to me at 4K max settings with HDR, great in fact. But then again, I meet the requirements for the optional texture pack, RT and 4K max settings so there are no texture issues for me. Textures will be better at 4K which is the resolution where you would see most benefit, unsurprisingly.

I will agree that the roads don't look as good as they did in Far Cry 5, so hoping that gets fixed in a future patch. And I'm sure graphics could be improved in certain areas, but I can say that about every game I play tbh. There are some gameplay elements which are worse than 5 too, but that's not related to graphics. There are also many things graphically that are better than 5, and that is the general consensus by most tech sites that have done in-depth testing comparing settings, texture packs etc. Digital Foundry are not included in that since it is known they are compromised, they didn't even cover FSR in the technical breakdown for example which was mind blowing when you think about it as FSR works wonderfully well in this title and is one of the best implementations to date in my opinion. Everyone else covered it.

The important part, the game is stable with no crashes. It's not like the fire dumpster that is Cyberpunk. The problem is you have people trying to run settings in the game when they don't meet the requirements, then blaming said game when all their textures look low quality and claiming it as a bug.

Lol Matt, you are doing the same though man. You are making it sound like the game has no issues when even Grim who has 24GB vram has had issues. I am sure there would be plenty others too. Comes off like the pot calling the kettle black. Also only person I can see here that fits the profile you describe is Nexus, he is the only one posting links from what I recall

I am just enjoying watching people defend their agendas as you call it, without even realising they are doing so

 

[Shaz12]

There's also plenty of people falling below the requirements, in seems like this applies to most people based on this Ubisoft article which you/Bill found to both your credit. Recommended configurations for higher resolutions in Far Cry 6 | Ubisoft Help



That's pretty clear and no wonder why 4-10GB cards are having issues, some seeing it on the 3080 TI too. 6700 XT as well I bet since that has 12GB, however that card probably doesn't quite have the grunt to run 4K60 at Ultra quality with RT and HD Textures and keep playable FPS so less of an issue there.

It does make me laugh when it's trying to be brushed off as a bug by some with certain agendas when the requirements are there for all to see. They know who they are, and it's funny to see them running around like a madman trying to do damage control and find links to support their incorrect interpretations. These people just can't grasp that true 4K HD Textures (actual 4K HD Textures are not that common in games today) and RT effects cost VRAM. Yes that's right, enabling RT will spike VRAM usage too.

I suppose this needs to be said again for those in the back or their fingers in their ears. It's an optional download to improve quality for people who meet the minimum requirements for video memory, basically the highest end graphics cards currently available. If this was forced on and included in the base game I could understand it. No one is forced to download the texture pack, just like no one is forced to use Ray Tracing. Oh how I've seen this argument pushed in other threads by a few, well guess what? It applies here too. If i wanted to play a game that had RT effects that pushed FPS much down below 60, it'd just get disabled or FSR would be used (if available) since RT generally adds very little anyway in most games so far.


That's subjective and your opinion which is fine.

It looks good to me at 4K max settings with HDR, great in fact. But then again, I meet the requirements for the optional texture pack, RT and 4K max settings so there are no texture issues for me. Textures will be better at 4K which is the resolution where you would see most benefit, unsurprisingly.

I will agree that the roads don't look as good as they did in Far Cry 5, so hoping that gets fixed in a future patch. And I'm sure graphics could be improved in certain areas, but I can say that about every game I play tbh. There are some gameplay elements which are worse than 5 too, but that's not related to graphics. There are also many things graphically that are better than 5, and that is the general consensus by most tech sites that have done in-depth testing comparing settings, texture packs etc. Digital Foundry are not included in that since it is known they are compromised, they didn't even cover FSR in the technical breakdown for example which was mind blowing when you think about it as FSR works wonderfully well in this title and is one of the best implementations to date in my opinion. Everyone else covered it.

The important part, the game is stable with no crashes. It's not like the fire dumpster that is Cyberpunk. The problem is you have people trying to run settings in the game when they don't meet the requirements, then blaming said game when all their textures look low quality and claiming it as a bug.

It’s not that clear though. The system requirements state 16GB of VRAM but their customer support and Ubisoft Connect state it’s 12GB.

 

[LtMatt]

It’s not that clear though. The system requirements state 16GB of VRAM but their customer support and Ubisoft Connect state it’s 12GB.

It is clear because that is an official requirements kb from Ubisoft. What they need to do is update Ubisoft connect to point towards that kb before you can download and install the texture pack.

The former is correct as lowering a setting or two fixes the issue for the majority of people that fall below the 16GB minimum requirement.

There will always be corner cases, as people run the game with browser windows open, multiple displays, and likely have dirty systems with a million background applications running and then wonder why they encounter issues.

 

[gpuerrilla]

It does make me laugh when it's trying to be brushed off as a bug by some with certain agendas when the requirements are there for all to see. They know who they are, and it's funny to see them running around like a madman trying to do damage control and find links to support their incorrect interpretations. These people just can't grasp that true 4K HD Textures (actual 4K HD Textures are not that common in games today) and RT effects cost VRAM. Yes that's right, enabling RT will spike VRAM usage too.

On this I remember all them months ago but as usual the 'evidence' was not there so it was dismissed. Also not many are gaming on 4k (even though Jensen was championing the flagship at the time). I recall resizeable bar being an interesting addition and wondered if this would have either helped in such a situation or proved nvidia had this issue.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Well I guess after a year it has finally for the first time paid off to have all that extra VRAM as this is clearly a triple a must play game offering an experience like never before

Well I have had to wait nearly a year!!! Come on! <don't forget the "mugs edition" insults>

Joke aside, there has not been any games to push this discussion so more or less hibernated it as people want evidence in their debates. As you say though, PC users can simply mess with a couple of settings and issue goes away, so its not a big deal - its to move the discussion beyond same old same old and be adults instead of slinging mud!

 

[TNA]

Well I have had to wait nearly a year!!! Come on! <don't forget the "mugs edition" insults>

Joke aside, there has not been any games to push this discussion so more or less hibernated it as people want evidence in their debates. As you say though, PC users can simply mess with a couple of settings and issue goes away, so its not a big deal - its to move the discussion beyond same old same old and be adults instead of slinging mud!

Agreed

 

[LtMatt]

Well I have had to wait nearly a year!!! Come on! <don't forget the "mugs edition" insults>

Joke aside, there has not been any games to push this discussion so more or less hibernated it as people want evidence in their debates. As you say though, PC users can simply mess with a couple of settings and issue goes away, so its not a big deal - its to move the discussion beyond same old same old and be adults instead of slinging mud!

Agree. That was a daft comment (mugs edition). Same could apply to the 6900 XT if it applies to the 3090.

Yes, that would be nice in an ideal world wouldn't it.

On this I remember all them months ago but as usual the 'evidence' was not there so it was dismissed. Also not many are gaming on 4k (even though Jensen was championing the flagship at the time). I recall resizeable bar being an interesting addition and wondered if this would have either helped in such a situation or proved nvidia had this issue.

Fair, but no one properly tested Godfall which is the only other game I know of that has similar requirements. Referencing some end user on YouTube who is not even running maximum settings does not count as proof. Just as me saying it does not count as proof. Other users have mentioned other games like Resident Evil and Horizon whatever its called but the latter was a bug and the former just had slightly lower FPS on certain cards AFAIK, perhaps VRAM related don't know.

It did not help that the texture pack for Godfall was added after the game launched when most technical analysis was already done. The game was not well received so no one went back to properly test it, not that I can blame them. It is what it is but this would have surfaced sooner had that testing been done.

At least Far Cry launched with it available so it was picked up by some of the more thorough tech outlets this time around.

 

[gpuerrilla]

32m20s:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E98hC9e__Xs

..but gamers wanted more! They want every generation to be more realistic and higher framerate at the same time... to all my Pascal gamer friends, it is safe to upgrade now!

 

[Bill Turnip]

@LtMatt thanks for the 6800xt footage, I'll have a look after work on a decent screen. I think that'll be a fairer comparison to the 3080, and probably a relatively even performer, depending on HD pack usage.

In the meantime I'm going to agonise about whether the most important thing 16gb vram or improved Ray tracing for the next big game due out.

Football Manager 2021

 

[LtMatt]

@LtMatt thanks for the 6800xt footage, I'll have a look after work on a decent screen. I think that'll be a fairer comparison to the 3080, and probably a relatively even performer, depending on HD pack usage.

In the meantime I'm going to agonise about whether the most important thing 16gb vram or improved Ray tracing for the next big game due out.

Football Manager 2021

Well whichever you go for, at times you'll be turning down some settings.

I am excited for FM2021, thankfully that can run on a pineapple.

I put almost 1700 hours into FM2020.

 

[varkanoid]

It is clear because that is an official requirements kb from Ubisoft. What they need to do is update Ubisoft connect to point towards that kb before you can download and install the texture pack.

The former is correct as lowering a setting or two fixes the issue for the majority of people that fall below the 16GB minimum requirement.

There will always be corner cases, as people run the game with browser windows open, multiple displays, and likely have dirty systems with a million background applications running and then wonder why they encounter issues.

For me the biggest issue that is causing this VRAM debate is the in game settings menu. If I turn everything on it estimates my VRAM usage as just over 6gb. People will see this and think my 8gb card should be fine then run the game and see issues. During the benchmark my OSD shows 11gb VRAM usage. Its like the estimated figure doesnt take into account you have the HD textures installed.

You can see why people are getting upset regardless of what the minimum requirements say (which people dont tend to check) but if they see it staring at them in the menu ingame they will get annoyed. Not everone understands VRAM usage.

 

[LtMatt]

For me the biggest issue that is causing this VRAM debate is the in game settings menu. If I turn everything on it estimates my VRAM usage as just over 6gb. People will see this and think my 8gb card should be fine then run the game and see issues. During the benchmark my OSD shows 11gb VRAM usage. Its like the estimated figure doesnt take into account you have the HD textures installed.

You can see why people are getting upset regardless of what the minimum requirements say (which people dont tend to check) but if they see it staring at them in the menu ingame they will get annoyed. Not everone understands VRAM usage.

Fair comment, the in-game estimated VRAM is wrong as it does not factor in the HD Texture Pack.

The base game is fine with 6GB-8GB as indicated by the in-game estimation, that covers most GPUs. However, it does not take into account the extra requirements for 4K textures and maybe that is part of the problem.

Resident Evil 2/3 do the same btw, their in-game video memory usage estimates are way off also.

 

[TNA]

That was a daft comment (mugs edition).

Agreed. That was Richdog. Was too funny as after coming out with that line and using it repeatedly, what did he eventually do? Went and bought a 3090 himself

I think after doing that he just disappeared as not seen him around in a while.

 

[LtMatt]

Agreed. That was Richdog. Was too funny as after coming out with that line and using it repeatedly, what did he eventually do? Went and bought a 3090 himself

Yes, that was pretty funny tbf.