-
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.
Wolfenstien 2 Vulkan benchmarks:
- Thread starter Muhammad.Abdelhameed
- Start date
This was at 1080P Uber Settings and 100% resolution scale. You can go up to 200% resolution scale.
It makes a nice change from other poorly optimised titles where even the fastest GPUs can't keep minimums above 60 at 1080P.
Last edited:
Is 200% from 1080p on the horizontal/vertical ie effectively 4K?
You are right RE the dev, he’s ex crytek and an absolute legend. Probably the only worth replacement for carmack!
I just can't get over how bad this game looks (especially since it is a linear FPS game), mainly the textures especially when doom looks stunning in that department, what gives.....
Everything on max except AA set to SMAA, CA and motion blur off and shadows at high.
Also to me, it looks like the contrast is messed up as in some areas, it is stupidly bright i.e. over exposed where you can't see detail and then in certain areas, it is really dark to the point you can't see any detail, I don't know if this is some "artistic" design decision or perhaps a setting is broken i.e. HDR bloom (will try turning that off later)
Particle effects are good though.
Everything on max except AA set to SMAA, CA and motion blur off and shadows at high.
Also to me, it looks like the contrast is messed up as in some areas, it is stupidly bright i.e. over exposed where you can't see detail and then in certain areas, it is really dark to the point you can't see any detail, I don't know if this is some "artistic" design decision or perhaps a setting is broken i.e. HDR bloom (will try turning that off later)
Particle effects are good though.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 2,252
- Location
- Liverpool
The thing is with the current prices you're still better off with a Ti than Vega 64 yes in wolfenstein the Ti just might be faster than it but in pretty much every other game out there it's a total tier ahead imo and you buy the card for today not tomorrow. Look at fury x vs 980 Ti the Ti is still the favourable card and the 290x and 780 Ti once all are overclocked they're still within the same performance as one another.
Come 2018 when AMD has had its 'optomisations' volts will be out
Come 2018 when AMD has had its 'optomisations' volts will be out
(Inserts foot into mouth)Surprised to see 1080 Ti still hold performance king in all resolutions.
How really very embarrassed to see what Rapid Packed Math can do to games, absolutely useless and massive waste of time. What a failure.
Look like big poor Vega for a AMD sponsored Vulkan title RTG used most advanced and very expensive newer utter useless technologies like HBM2, HBCC, Rapid Packed Math, Deferred Renderer, Primitive Binning etc that would still not able to outperformed big Pascal in 2017 and upcoming little Volta and big Volta in 2018.
1080TI AIO Vs Vega 64 AIO, similar performance at 1080P.
Vega perhaps higher overall average and min FPS, but lower maximum.
Same settings 1080P, except Async Compute is disabled for Vega and the Vega GPU is running a 120 FOV vs a 90 FOV on the 1080TI.
Vega perhaps higher overall average and min FPS, but lower maximum.
Same settings 1080P, except Async Compute is disabled for Vega and the Vega GPU is running a 120 FOV vs a 90 FOV on the 1080TI.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 8,611
- Location
- Cornwall
Hard to compare then, really need the Nvidia card to be running 120 fov too. I can understand Async stuff being off on both, although doesn't then give a true representation of what AMD's framerates are if having it on improves them. Be nice if Nvidia could sort the driver out so a comparison could be made with the setting on for both too.1080TI AIO Vs Vega 64 AIO, similar performance at 1080P.
Vega perhaps higher overall average and min FPS, but lower maximum.
Same settings 1080P, except Async Compute is disabled for Vega and the Vega GPU is running a 120 FOV vs a 90 FOV on the 1080TI.
That said, I've been told on here many times that you can't compare the Vega 64 with the 1080Ti so it makes all this pointless.
Even in motion, the game looks crap imo.
The textures are just bland/low res looking and overall, it just looks washed out.
Wish sweetfx worked with vulkan as this could really transform the game as was the case with dishonoured.
I agree with this.
I thought Doom looked poor tbh, bland low res textures. But I was comparing it to games that a 1080ti struggles to run e.g. ghost recon wild lands and hunter call of the wild.
Wow......... just got to new york and graphics have got even worse and FPS have plummeted....
Seriously, I am baffled by how people find this game to be graphically good :/
Also, noticing the same old problem that was in previous wolfenstein games, texture pop in..... Will need to have a look for the fix for this like previous games, iirc, it required creating a new folder and having the texture data load in that or something along those lines.
Having a look on steam and other forums, seems this game is buggy as **** though so I may just do what I do with every PC game on release, put it on hold until the game has been patched a few months down the line and working as it should have from day 1. Don't know why I am so surprised, it is just another one to add to the never ending list of buggy releases for PC on release day.
Surprised you thought that about doom, still has some of the best textures today imo and I also have ghost recon wildlands etc.
Although saying that, iirc, was/is there not a big issue with nvidia in doom where textures aren't being loaded properly and iirc, quite a few other graphical effects were/are missing on nvidia?
Seriously, I am baffled by how people find this game to be graphically good :/
Also, noticing the same old problem that was in previous wolfenstein games, texture pop in..... Will need to have a look for the fix for this like previous games, iirc, it required creating a new folder and having the texture data load in that or something along those lines.
Having a look on steam and other forums, seems this game is buggy as **** though so I may just do what I do with every PC game on release, put it on hold until the game has been patched a few months down the line and working as it should have from day 1. Don't know why I am so surprised, it is just another one to add to the never ending list of buggy releases for PC on release day.
Surprised you thought that about doom, still has some of the best textures today imo and I also have ghost recon wildlands etc.
Although saying that, iirc, was/is there not a big issue with nvidia in doom where textures aren't being loaded properly and iirc, quite a few other graphical effects were/are missing on nvidia?
Any idea what settings to drop to free up some memory (aside from texture quality) and get FPS back without impacting IQ too much?
Unfortunately tweaktown etc. haven't got a good graphics guide up.