He is doing a service for the game because.. how else would you get playable frame rate? Lol 4090 at 1080p max settings is barely acceptable as "smooth" lol I'll be using 4070 TiSuper on 4k monitor so.. optimizations are a must.
I don’t think I have ever seen low look worse 😂 and it’s quite scary to think they apparently couldn’t get this working on the series s lol how bad must it have looked there during testing
Really can't complain when devs ( being kinda indie and delivering their first AAA ) are really thinking about those who can't afford yet the latest hardware. By that regard it's a good thing more people can play it.
@@ScottyDo3sntKnow So you´ve been gaming just for a few years. Low is supposed to be the best effort to allow lowest possible hardware to run. not "low effort "optimization
@@NerwestaIndeed, my friend has a Rx 580 and me a 5700xt, the fact that we can even run this beast is amazing, the Chinese really are upping everything and everyo
@@-T--T- ya but it caught me by surprise 😮 Like damn. The drop from medium to low is intense. It looks like one of those extreme low settings potato videos at first glance
@@chillnspace777 luckily the game it can run on a straight up potato on medium/high settings. Just glad this game turned out awesome, and is making a bunch of dumb rac!st redditors and DEI shakedown rackets seethe.
@@anasevi9456 oh for sure. Those woke cancer is mind numbing. China don't care about DEI, and they pioneered the SEG score. Game needs a high rez texture pack and hopefully epic will address the UE5 stuttering issues at some.damn.point. I will check out the game after some patches and a sale
That being said though Wukong doesn't seem that impressive compared to the resources it asks. Perhaps it's a "diminishing returns" scenario but I think a more experienced studio could have achieved a better performing game.
@@christophermullins7163 3080ti and it does NOT run good at 1440P with RT on low. I'm not spending 1200-1700$ to run this game when all other games run fine.
@@BombaJead sure.. but not 50% faster. Everyone that says optimization does not realize that you're asking for a LOT more work from the studio to get 10% maybe 20% at most performance back. The consoles are an example of the optimizations we could get on PC games if they were exceedingly optimized. We aren't far from the limit of performance. Set the upscaling one **step below and that is all the optimizations you ever get. If you have Nvidia.. you'll barely notice that change.
I would imagine it to be an easy change in the engine.ini or maybe it's hidden in GameUserSettings.ini. Usually how I turn off certain effects with UE games
PSA for DLSS: From my test in the Benchmark, DLSS does not work like the game says it does. It does not use 75% render scale. For some reason DLSS is not actually using the resolutions displayed on the slider. Instead it only uses the "Current DLSS Quality Mode" displayed under the Super Resolutions description. These use the typical DLSS resolutions. The slider does allow you to change the Quality mode, but it only uses the 5 discrete values for the different Quality modes. You can display DLSSs internal render resolution with the DLSS overlay enabled in regedit/DLSSTweaks or show it with Special Ks overlay. As far as I can tell the other upscalers use the actual slider resolutions. Aditionally, there is a display bug that sometimes changes the displayed slider value. For example if I set the slider to 89 and hit apply, then leave the menu, opening the menu up again the slider will show 88 instead. 88 will also be displayed in the benchmark result, but this is not correct. You can open the config file and see that the game is still set to 89% render resolution.
@@viking9442 I've started writing in detail on the internet, because people too quickly misunderstand or interpret something you didn't say. And especially with technical stuf, I've learned from family and friends that you have to be VERY specific in your instructions.
The low texture quality even on cinematic on certain things like the rocks and trees is interesting considering how heavy everything else is in the title.
Yeah, the game desperately needs a texture pack mod. I was shocked that maxed settings took a bit over 8 tv of vram until I noticed how bad stuff looked even on cinematic. It’s an interesting decision by the devs. I hope the good reception of the game pushes the devs to get a higher texture update out or something
@userblame632 ya, maybe they aimed for the 8gig limit since.thats the most used vram for.most? This game looks interesting, but I'm going to wait for some patches and a sale
It's a shame that RT performance is so terrible. The full RT quality in this game is staggeringly awesome, probably one of the best demos of what RT can do, especially given the typical environments in this game. Without it, and even with lumen, the game is a significant visual downgrade.
@@zxbc1its a shame RT is shove down our throats when even the best Nvidia cards struggle. It's good, but we should have options to disable it without making the game look like garbage
@@angeltzepesh1 As far as I understand, software RT isn't limited by GPU much. It's a shame the hardware RT is so heavy, but the heaviness we measure when "full RT" is off is likely due to geometric density and nanite instead of it being due to the software RT.
@@angeltzepesh1 It is not shoved down our throats. It is the future. New technologies are always extremely taxing... because they are new. Remember deferred lighting? Dynamic shadows? Tessellation? Screen Space reflections? Yeah all those things exist now and cards are dishing out 100-150 fps with no sweat... Back then just enabling dynamic shadows with chainsaw edges when it was introduced would cause a meltdown. Like people where downright disabling dynamic shadows "because it made no difference" yet dropping from barely 60-70 down to 20-30 fps. It takes time for hardware technologies to evolve and become more efficient at producing more FPS with new software technologies. Nothing is shoved down our throats. It's just evolution as it always has been.
You can disable it. Put global illumination to low. That's RT disabled. Using only raster global illumination. So yeah Will you say RT looks awful and has no difference then? Medium-very high are software based ray tracing (which is less accurate than hardware based RT that you additionally enable to replace software based).
I remember when I used Tim's optimization guide for RDR2 and it made the experience on my system so much better. These types of guides are very valuable for gamers.
Really like that they have a quite low preset that can even run on Steam deck and an Ultra High preset that even the RTX4090 struggles, intended for future hardware.
Exactly, there is always a game that stretches what`s out there; people who have come through the old pc days, like my obsession with the unreal tournament benchmark, know that tweaking is the beauty of pc. You can always give and take a little to get what you need.
For my non-40 RTX bros, remember you can enable FSR3 FG+DLSS with the DLSSG-TO-FSR3 mod on NexusMods. On my 3080Ti: HUB optimized settings for minimum of high+some cinematic 1440p 75% DLSS with FSR3 framegen mod: 120 fps locked Enjoy!
I must be stupid or something cause I can't get it to work. Any help would be appreciated. Somehow I managed to make the "DLSS" option disappear in-game, which I eventually "fixed", but no matter what I tried I couldn't get Frame generation to be put on "ON" while I have DLSS selected.
thats awsome! I have a maxp 3080 laptop and i never had issues with any game even with RT at 1440p, but this was the first game that made me regret owning a laptop lol. with just cinematic, i got 25fps 💀 can't wait to check out the FSR3 mod! But mine performs similar to 3070 desktop due to silicon lottery, So i wil be more than happy with 60 to 80fps since i have gsync ultimate monitor.
@@1benhouston1if you don't have a monitor capable of decent HDR then yeah sure. Native HDR support in games is a good improvement for say OLED monitors with genuinely great HDR performance.
@@hicks0792 I mean I had an QLED Quantom monitor for a couple years and it had great HDR performance but regardless of what game I played I could never get the perfect HDR image in-game and always turning HDR off in the in-game settings made the image more vibrant. Mind you this was 2-3 years ago so things may have improved. I have an HDR400 monitor now so nothing amazing
There is literally noone on the internet that does optimization videos even half as good as Hardware Unboxed. The attention to detail is just incredable. Keep up the excellent work!
With HUB Quality + 50% FSR I can get the benchmark to pretty consistently hit 60FPS when targetting 4K (capping the framerate) - with Frame Gen it's usually hovering at a stable 120. That's on a 7900XT. Happy enough with that. My gaming budget this month is likely going on Space Marine 2.
Thanks for the idea! I had HUB Quality, 80% FSR, with very high ray tracing and Frame Gen on with the benchmark at 1440p and I'm getting right around 120 FPS (120 Avg., 143 max, 100 low) on a 5800X3D/6900XT, which looks pretty good. The same settings without frame gen gave me 71 FPS avg., 84 max, and 55 low, which I'd be happy with.
@@twrex-136900XT with max ray tracing and getting 60fps at 1440p with no FG? LOL If you enable Very High RT in a 6900XT with 80% resolution you will tank fps to less than 30fps (even with frame gen)!
@@twrex-13 restart the game, enabling the ray-tracing requires a restart. With 6900xt you can get 60ish fps at 1440p by sacrificing some settings - shadows/foliage/hairs - but that's it. Frame gen is up to you.
@@eurocrusader1724 it's just nvidia stuff making problems again, like hairworks and physx, i don't think i've ever heard that TressFX made problems Nvidia locked-up style of their features is making problems for gamers and making radeon unviable due to it, hence enforcing monopoly of nvidia brand, lumen doesn't look bad here, personally, RT off on 19:17 looks as good as very high and maybe you can gain like 5% better visuals, nothing ground breaking
LOL if the high end AMD GPUs are struggling, intel will probably get crushed. It will probably still run decently on medium-high presets though. Just forget about Cinematic or RT 😂😂
The visual fidelity jump from Medium to Very High RT is definitely noticeable for me. Very High makes everything pop and gives a lot more depth. But yeah, on a 4090 I just play all Cinematic, Very High RT, DLSS Balanced and FG, and getting an average of 80 fps with weird stutters that dip to 70 for a second or two.
I also have a 4090 with a super Ultrawide and yea very high rt looks amazing but not worth the fps dip. I would use medium rt but that water big is still there which is very disappointing.
I'm obviously not a gamer that fit the mold that they are talking about in this video. All those "fantastic shadows" is just not for me. I repeatedly find myself looking at the Low settings and feel that yes, now I can see what happens. All the others are just a blurry murky shadows hiding the details. Sure it doesn't look as AMAZING, but when I play a game I want to see the game and not the shadows hiding everything interesting.
This. Whenever lighting was turned to low, i was like "ahh yes, now I can see what is going on". I got a4090 a year ago, but I have never used RT in a game for longer as to me it just gives a different but not better look with huge performance hits.
Thank you for presenting the percentage gain charts for both Nvidia and AMD GPUs, such that almost everybody can see the impact on his graphics card. Plus is really interesting how different GPU architectures, softwares (drivers) scale.
Incredible another studio prioritizes ray tracing 99% of players will never use over a proper HDR implementation which is much more financially accessible and dramatically improves visuals over ray tracing.
Great guide. I tried first to tweak settings myself and managed to get 60 fps average in benchmark on my RTX 3060 12GB with everything set to medim except texture quality (cinematic) and with DLSS set to 65% resolution (quality mode) at 1440p. Using the HUB Quality settings from this video fps dropped to 42 which is still playable for non comeptitive gaming and game definitely looks better. Thanks for saving me time to try the settings one by one and watch for the impact on performance.
Thanks for the guide, and in particular, testing on an AMD card as well, for the 3 of us who have one. Trying to find the setting for the shadow pop-in was maddening. That is the #1 immersion killer for me, having a shadow that wasn't present at 10 feet, suddenly show up at 3.
@@ishmamanwar6840 - Unfortunately, I don't really know. I used Daniel's guide, all the low impact settings on Cinematic, and everything else set to High. This is down from the preset for a 7800XT which was Very High for everything. So, I expect that depending on your card, if you can do at least High for everything, pop-in is largely eliminated. I was looking at 1440 with FSR set to 75% FG and Ray Tracing off. I get 69 average, 81 high, 57 low.
For those who don't want to sit through 30 minutes of geek speak I created this list. Leave me a like if it helps !! Presets : 4:42 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 113% High : 170% Medium : 210% Low : 275% View Distance Quality : 5:59 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 100% High : 101% Medium : 103% Low : 104% Anti-Aliasing Quality : 6:45 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 100% High : 101% Medium : 101% Low : 101% Post-Effects Quality : 7:08 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 100% High : 101% Medium : 101% Low : 101% Shadow Quality : 9:06 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 103% High : 128% Medium : 131% Low : 138% Texture Quality : 10:13 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 100% High : 100% Medium : 100% Low : 101% Visual Effect Quality : 11:52 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 100% High : 103% Medium : 103% Low : 103% Hair Quality : 12:27 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 104% High : 104% Medium : 107% Low : 114% Vegetation Quality : 13:33 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 103% High : 105% Medium : 108% Low : 109% Global Illumination : 15:15 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 104% High : 113% Medium : 122% Low : 132% Reflection Quality : 16:27 Cinematic : 100% Very High : 100% High : 107% Medium : 108% Low : 108% Motion Blur : 16:48 Strong : 100% Weak : 100% Off : 101%
@@blitzwing1 what do you mean given up - the support is in the engine, the 'developer' doesn't have to do much at all aside show an option to enable it. It's similar to the oversharpening, they set it to a high enough value w/o any user setting for.
You basing this of marketing bullshit? It looks very good even without HDR, in fact most of the game I play, I left HDR off.and it looks good, because I know how to calibrate my damn screen.
The “bug” with all ray tracing settings below very high causing reflection artifacts is still there on release. Even with a 4090 7800x3d the very high setting costs too much performance to use. I’m stuck either setting it to low or disabling Ray tracing all together since medium has immersion breaking artifacts that look noticeably bad anytime there are reflections in water.
At least Cinematic without RT looks great, and personally I find it looks better, and more true to life to not use the RT settings and just use the baked in RT that is tanking everyone's performance.
Not dumb at all, it’s by far the best video card ever made for gaming, and leagues ahead of everything else. It’s been the best for two years now without compromises.
Any game pushing the limits of graphical fidelity is going to make it feel that way. Alan Wake 2 was similarly challenging on hardware while also scaling really well and looking good at lower settings.
Thanks for the video! One thing I would add is a possible recommendation for "low end GPUs" to run the game in DX11 mode, as this can be another boost to performance! I have to say, with the Shadow Quality setting, I really kind of prefer the high setting over cinematic, cause it is less visually distracting. About RT in this game, other sources that tested the benchmark with different GPUs agree. To really use the RT mode in this game, you want a ~4080 up, and everything else should rather stick with the lumen mode. Which, once again, raises the question how much benefit anyone gets from having a mid range RTX GPU, as you just don't have the power to use it anyway.
One thing to notice: For motion blue setting, if you instead using frame generation your actual FPS （without those generated frames) will drop ~10-20fps and you'll experience substantial input lags because your GPU resources are allocated to generate frames.
@@Luciano-vz8hw In the video, HUB recommended using frame generation (FG) instead of motion blur. I just wanted to point out that FG can consume a significant portion of your GPU's computing power, which may cause the base frame rate, from which FG generates frames, to drop considerably (potentially to around 10-20fps). If your base frame rate without FG is above 60fps, no issue. However, it can become problematic with a lower-end GPU, especially if your base frame rate is around 45fps when FG is off. While FG might boost your final frame rate to 60fps, it would be based on a 35fps input, resulting in substantial input lag. Keep in mind that input lag is directly related to your base frame rate! Generated frames will not improve it at all. So the results is that your frames look fine, but you feel a LOT laggy when playing it. IMO it is unbearable for ACT games.
Hey hey hey. The Chapter one is very well optimized its the chapter 2 were things get hefty, so I recommend you to get to chapter 2, the settings are being affected more
22:45 I tried HUB Quality settings. On a 5700X3D + RTX 3080 12GB, getting min 45fps, avg 65fps, max 75fps . VRAM usage at 4.8GB at 1440p with DLAA, no upscaling .
@@Healcraft Bro, all RTX 3000 series cannot enable framegen unless you use FSR or TSR . So I didn't turn on frame gen. Anyhow , I don't like frame gen on FSR, too much ghosting effect during battles.
this is a cap unless you overclocked your 3080 like crazy, at 1440p high preset (which is less intensive than quality optimised) 3080 10gb gets less than 60 fps on average...
For some reason, switching from very high preset to medium does not make much of a difference. I always hover around 40 fps on my rtx 4070 super. Only disabling ray tracing gives me about 20fps extra. Not even enabling frame generation works, it just gives me black frame flickering
The RT visuals I would have to argue do not look more realistic in most situations... for example; at 19:27 that fire is WAY to bright with RT on, and is about what it should be for the time of day on just Cinematic, 19:19 I'd have to be able to look up at the sky, but it feels like the light isn't actually coming from the sun with RT turned on, where on Cinematic it does. 19:29 For the fog to be as dense as the RT modes your ability to see would be much more impacted, and Cinematic has a much more realistic fog density for the view distance, everything being darker in Cinematic makes more realistic sense, seeing as fog is effectively very low clouds, it's in general darker when there is fog cover, meanwhile with RT it looks like a normal sunny day until you see the fog. 19:38 A running river should never be that dark unless it's later in the day than the lighting shows it to be, Cinematic has a much more realistic looking river, and the lighting on the trees also feels weird with RT on, and looks a lot more natural on Cinematic. Like if you look above Wukong's head, there is that section of tree where the lighting makes a sudden right hand turn in all of the RT modes, the only way that would happen IRL is if there is another object blocking the sun from showing higher up, and it does not appear to be the case. 21:02 Here it's tricky, because that water looks more stagnant and darker, making reflections duller once again making Cinematic more realistic, but if the water was flowing more and less stagnant and thus clearer full RT would be more realistic, meaning in a way Low RT does slightly pull ahead on the reflection. BUT the lighting on low RT on the rocks directly in the top middle looks wrong and unrealistic. The sun on the rocks doesn't feel right and that sort of black void only really happens when there is a deep outcrop rocks not a small dent like that. Also those water physics... yeah... that's near immersion breaking jello physics. Now not saying those issues are exactly bad, but once you get into "this makes it look more realistic" territory, that's where my country ass has to come in and point out the visual issues, and how they aren't there at the admittedly lower RT settings of "RT Off" Cinematic where it is still using RT. Also I will still argue this game is "unoptimized" because basically every modern AAA game for the past ~5 years has been, game devs have gotten lazy. Though lets be real, when a 7800X3D + 4090 is struggling to play this game at even 144fps average at 1080p on the highest setting that is not an optimized game. The performance seen for 1080p for the 7800X3D + 4090 should be at minimum for 1440p not 1080p. The fact that set up simply does not work at 4k is another argument that the game isn't optimized. Sure hardware 1-2 generations from now will maybe be able to play it no problem, and you can lower settings to get higher FPS, but that does not make the game optimized for MODERN hardware. I'm honestly getting tired of people looking at sub 100fps values for 1080p max settings on a game and saying "yeah that's fine." The LOW END monitors for 1080p have gotten to a point where you can easily get a 165hz display for less than $100. Asking for 144fps on 1080p with the best CPU and best GPU from modern games on PC doesn't seem like a big ask to me, anything less than that should not be okay. Less than 60fps on 4k with the best CPU and best GPU should not be okay ether. We aren't playing on a console, we should not be accepting console game levels of performance. Also just want to note, you guys called Starfield "demanding" and are calling Wukong "optimized", when in general Starfield has better performance and visuals that are on par or better. I mean Starfield is still not optimized ether, but at least it's far closer to being what should be the norm, and with it's testing being done in the most demanding part of the game where Wukong's testing was done in the benchmark tool, meaning I would guess in the most demanding sections of Wukong it's going to be a lot lower than the benchmark. Long rant over now. Hope anyone who reads this has a nice day, and I'm not trying to hate on HU, I just hate the direction AAA PC games are going in, and have been for quite a long time.
The moment you said starfield has better performance and visuals, nothing about your rant mattered, the comparison is meaningless. I was already thinking, wtf is this guy talking about, complaining about a physics based rendering solution not being physically accurate? But I gave you the benefit of the doubt as there is some truth, as the best benefit of RT is dynamic, real-time rendering. Pre-rendered and traditional baking solutions is also physics based and they can be more accurate occassionally, sure, until hardware gets more powerful and more and more rays can be traced. In this case anyways, on cinematic quality, you're actually comparing two different RT solutions though and it's not pre-baked besides some SSR. So it's a pointless argument, both is RT, one is Lumen and the other is hardware-based. Who says the performance should be at a certain FPS for it to be 'optimized'? So if they just lowered the quality of the overall game, would it be optimized? "Sure hardware 1-2 generations from now will maybe be able to play it no problem, and you can lower settings to get higher FPS..." also doesn't necessarily mean it's unoptimised. Perhaps they should wait 1-2 years for consumer hardware to catch up before relasing? Would it be 'optimised' then? This is not like Crisis, which was pushing boundaries, but they also mistakenly developed the game for single core performance in mind or CP2027 which was clearly rushed with game breaking bugs. Sure, if you're talking about frame timing not FPS, that's an issue with UE5, and every UE5 game has frame timing issues.
@@LukeSciberraschannel The comparison to Starfield was not only because it's another recent game that had very rough performance, but also it's another game HU has done this sort of thing with, and because Starfield doesn't have a built in benchmark they did their tests in that game at the most demanding section they could find much like every reviewer, leading to their results being lower than general game play averages. My talking of the RT not being realistic was because that is what HU says in this video at 19:23, they say it makes the game "look more accurate and realistic" I was pointing out that it indeed does not do this in a lot of cases. I am aware the "RT Off" Cinematic mode still uses RT, first block of text after the time code block. Though I will agree I said that in a kind of clunky way. Now a game being optimized is a subjective take I will agree, but in my mind for a game to be considered "optimized" it should be able to reach 60fps with it's recommended specs at max settings. That is my subjective opinion on that, you are free to disagree, but I don't feel like that's a hard ask. The fact this game on Cinematic with a 4090 and 7800X3D can't even break into 100fps at 1080p in the benchmarking tool to me screams this is an unoptimized game. This is a GPU for 4K gaming, struggling to get to decent 1080p results and is basically unplayable at 4k. Also yeah maybe they should have lowered the settings, would it have really mattered in the grand scheme of things if they had used a lower pre-set as their max setting? Let's be real here, just the fact you can basically never turn off RT is a hit against the game being optimized. This is also a game with "recommended specs" that are from 2019 those being the i7-9700 and RTX 2060. That would imply those should be able to run the game at the very least on very high to cinematic, but based on other comments those specs MIGHT be able to handle medium at 60fps. (Someone in anther comment was posting their results from a 3600X and RTX 2060 so not quite the recommended AMD CPU of the 5500, but if cache matters a lot in this game then the 3600X is likely the better CPU, and they were sub 50fps on high.) Before you say it, yes that would mean they could have said the recommended spec was a 4080 or 7900XTX and 7800X3D or 14900K but I feel if they had done that... you'd likely be right here with me saying the game isn't optimized. Though maybe you wouldn't be, I don't know you. So I'll also generalize this a little more, a game should be able to reasonably reach 60fps max settings running at LEAST 1080p on a reasonable recommended spec. That is still subjective, but at the same time we do have "mid range" hardware that should be capable of that. The top end hardware should be for getting better performance not what you need to get acceptable performance. By the logic being used here Crysis was optimized because you could lower your settings and get the game playable on the top end hardware of it's day. I mean it was playable on a 8800GTS 900p High or even Very High if you were willing to lower your resolution to 800x600, so I guess Crysis was optimized too. I'll finish this by pointing out I never said Starfield(or Crysis) was optimized ether.
"Also those water physics... yeah... that's near immersion breaking jello physics.", the fluid dynamics/physic in the game look proper atrocious, and they are used quite liberally for all sort of cases. The real case for the lack of optimization is that lumen (& friends) don't use hardware optimizations.
Great video and super exhaustive analysis, I very happy that you guys are bringing this type of content. Game aside, oversharpening, volumetrics and foliage play their part in killing the encoder, but in general I think we can say that RUclips 4k quality went really down the shitter, my god.
Good to see what the differences with Ray Tracing enabled looked like in other areas. When I ran the benchmark (Quality: Cinematic + Ray Tracing: Very High, DX12) on my 12900k/4090 rig, Ray Tracing appeared quite subtle at best.
I did the same thing that time mentioned in the end and got damn 25fps 💀 I own a 3080 165w laptop and been so damn happy with every game I have played, recent being HFW. I even played cyberpunk with max settings and lower PT settings and still was able to get decent 60s. But this game is nothing like any of that, it is much more realistic than HFW. So understanding how each setting works is key to get best possible performance for my system. Thanks a lot tim for this wonderful optimisation video!
More controls over individual RT options ain't gonna happen. Its a nVidia sponsored game, the options are purposefully tied together to cripple AMD RT performance.
They even cripple their own hardware on purpose, nothing unexpected, they're pushing too far so that they can sell their next 5080/5090. At least I'm happy high settings in this game look great and performance is pretty scalable.
@@maynardburger Where are you living, under a rock? nVidia has a history of undermining their opponents, often times through exerting controls over AIBs and indirectly limiting dev's ability to optimize for the competition. Just do a quick google and you can see all its ill deeds. Gameworks, threatening AIBs, limiting their supply and having them put AMD solutions under a sub brand/category etc.
Makes sense. RTX 4090 at max settings with RT and DLAA gets an average of 20fps with 16fps minimums, so assuming the 6090 will be three times faster, it'll get an average of 60fps.
Hub Performance suggestion works fantastically with a 3080 10GB at 1440p, in combination with DLAA (100% DLSS AA), as you cannot turn it off at least in the benchmark demo, to avoid upscaling. Minimum in the benchmark was 59fps when I ran it earlier, with averages in the 70s, whilst still looking great. Thanks Tim!
Thanks, i originally used the default auto tune settings. Now following the guide, the game not only looked better, it also have slightly better frame rate as well.
Would be good to see the AMD based settings recommendation ... so far what I see on my RX 7900 XTX - RT is out of option for any setting presets on 4K.
Yeah I can’t find any decent 7900xtx recommended settings - right now I don’t think it’s capable of even playing 4K med without frame gen and super resolution helping out 😂😂😂😂
This is the best one so far, awesome job. I also really liked the combination of medium RT and HUB Performance optimized settings, I think that's the best bang for the buck if you are using a higher end Nvidia card.
I hate how inconsistent setting descriptions are. Sometimes you have off-low-medium-high-very high, then it's off-low-medium-very high, another time it's off-medium-high all with in the same game. It makes no sense.
Watching this in x.25 speed has shown that with the LOW settings, some foliage that is not loaded in is actually used to cover unfinished dev work. 3:58
Quite helpful actually because that's just about the "recommended specs" for the game. So it seems their "recommended spec" is for medium settings most likely. Wonder what's needed to make the minimum spec playable even on low. Does show we really need to standardize what "recommended specs" means for games, because in my mind the "recommended spec" should be able to run the game max settings minimum 60fps, these devs seem to feel it means second lowest preset.
@@Stephen__White recommended is purely what devs think should give decent experience. 1080P max settings 60 fps - is your interpretation and is not applicable to every one as it's subjective thought. Maybe they should be telling what resolution/settings and fps you should expect with those recommended requirements - something I've seen in some games as they state what are the target settings/res and fps they aim with given requirements.
@@eliadbu That's kind of the problem though, it's entirely subjective. Hence why we should have an actual standard that isn't subjective. Maybe it doesn't need to be max settings 60fps, but there should be some sort of standard, be that a standard of just telling us exactly what settings that hardware is for, or a middle ground of High settings 60fps. Though one thing it would need is something in place to make sure they aren't copping out by using frame gen or up-scaling. If the game can not natively run on the hardware, it's not powerful enough hardware. Because just like it's subjective for me to expect it to be 60fps max settings, it's also subjective on the devs part as to what players will enjoy. There is nothing wrong with having a standard for minimum and recommended specs. Even more so where it wouldn't even be that complicated. Minimum spec - Lowest possible hardware to run the game at the lowest possible settings at 30 or 60 fps Recommended Spec - Lowest possible hardware to run the game at max settings at 60 fps Or Steam would hate this but, add a third category for "Average Spec" and use that for lowest possible hardware to run the game on the middle of the road settings(in BM Wukon's case "High" as it is exactly in the middle of the pre-sets) at 60fps. All of this also having the ability to trade out 60 for 30 when a game simply is not designed to be played above 30fps, though those are very few and far between outside of console games. So for this game as an example based on HU's GPU benchmark; Minimum spec: GTX 1060 6GB / RX 580 8GB + i5-8400 / 5 1600 for 30 fps low 1080p Average spec: RTX 3070 / RX 6750 XT + i7-12700 / 5700X3D for 60 fps High 1080p Recommended Spec: RTX 4080 / RX 7900XTX + i9-14900K / 7800X3D for 60 fps Cinematic 1080p Would give consumers a far better idea of what they are getting into. Also this has been something that has been bothering me for quite a long time now. It's not specific to BM Wukong but modern games as a whole. Also sorry for the wall of text, I tend to do this when there is no one to shut me up when I get talking.
@@Stephen__White I think what have seen in some games would be the best, give 3 common resolution with preset of their choice (cinematic in UE5 AS I understood isn't meant to be used other maybe for screenshots or future hardware, and it hidden in other UE 5 games) and targeted fps and if upscaling was used or not and, maybe throw in one with rt, it's not perfect but it should give much more info to customer than current ambiguous system.
Even with a 4090, I don’t know why anyone would use the RT features. You’re taking a MASSIVE performance hit, and the visuals somehow look worse. They’re all fizzled with low ray counts. Just keep the raster and better frame rate for an action game.
Not true at all, as was pointed out in the video. Lighting is so much better even at medium with a negligeable hit on performance. If you own NVIDIA, most of the time you'll get a great experience with RT, AMD on the other hand Is well suited only for raster
if RT replaces shadows and GI...why do the HUB recommended settings for RT modes have you adjust the shadow and GI settings away from cinematic? wouldn't changing those settings do nothing?
Anyone else getting horrible frame dips ? The beginning section works great then once you start climbing the mountain I’m getting dips from 100-140 down to 8-30 FPS 14900k/4090’combo mixture of very high-cinematic and ray tracing on and off didn’t matter. Frame generation on and off didn’t matter again, seems like once the game has been on for half hour things just start to go from good to bad.
Yes this is well known, but I have it a little more smoother and less stutter then you. Allthough I have 12700K OC to 5Ghz, to match the 12900K speed, so I dont have the microcode error like on 13 and 14 gen Intel CPUs. But I did update my BIOS anyway. If you haven done that, it is strongly recommended regardless or if you feel you are getting worse and worse performance on other games, RMA your CPU quickly.
Many people don't know what a poor optimization means. Saints Row 2, Cities Skyline 2, Dark Souls prepare to die edition, metro exodus so and so on. There is a difference between a game poorly optimized or just pure demanding. They’re not the same thing. Like crysis 3 was optimized but a very demanding game. At that time the highest tier graphics card was not capable of handling it.
Dark Souls PtD Edition wasn't even really unoptimized in a performance sense, it was just the most barebones port possible. lol It ran ok for what it was actually doing, and obviously with GeDoSaTo, it scaled appropriately.
This game made me realize that my SSD was holding me back, running at full utilization all the time while gaming and with downloading too. Luckily I had an external one that’s much faster and instantly my game is running like a dream. Asus strix rog rtx 2080 oc, i7-9700k, 32g ram.
Its not sad at all, simply because in many games DLSS have actually better quality than native 4K. I use it with my 4090 also because my OLED refreshrate is 120hz max, so I use Vsync in nvidia control panel on, disable it in game. And also because it lowers the card wattage, so saving power, fan speed noise etc is a good thing. Since I dont want to go over 120fps, G-sync with v-sync gives me a constant 116fps on my OLED TV, smooth as butter. But on Wukong, we have to even use FG to achieve these results or close, this is with using full ray tracing. Of course if I turn off ray tracing we get much better performance, but my fps will never go over 116fps on my OLED TV. I dont have a monitor and I like to game on a 65" OLED TV, force HDR, fix HDR, fix black levels that are raised in this game and we are good to go. But of course this game needs alot of fixing to do and I am sure devs are working on it. Sadly no AAA game today especially using UE5 is flawless at release.
I'm not against raytracing necessarily but IMO the more realistic game lighting and graphics get, the more visually boring they become. Almost all modern game environments of similar biome lose any visual distinction. Its hard to tell which game you're looking at by the environment alone.
I think you should make this type of guides weekly. Maybe post and see if viewers like it or not. IMO this is one of the most usful information for gamers. Most of us can't afford to buy new hardware every year but optimization is always handy. Love it!
The optimization seems very bad, even though DLSS FG is on, 35/FG 70 FPS in the action scene is a disgrace, these technologies were already produced to guarantee 100 FPS, but such companies provide the performance that should be achieved with pure power with DLSS, this gaming world really needs a sanction.
Dial down the settings and/or the resolution. It does not kill you. I'm running it at 90FPS at 1440p Native on a 7900XTX with mixed settings and it looks fantastic. If you can't mentally cope with getting a new game that won't run on Ultra 4k Native, get a console.
this is some turbo nonsense you're saying. you're not supposed to use FrameGen until you reach 60 FPS without it anyway. Dial down the settings until you have a steady 60 with your 1% lows in 55's and then you'll have your pretty much fixed 110-120 fps. FrameGen doesn't work at low framerates. Your GPU is already struggling at that point. it's not magic.
Thank you so much!! With a simple RTX3070 and an I7-10700, with your exact settings for performance+RT, the game runs smoothly. Great work and great help!
Thanks Tim, I was able to boost my performance from medium 50s to high 70s with my rx 6800, and I didn’t see that much of a image downgrade with your optimised settings. Looks like this gpu is still a great 1440p beast even without fsr 😊.
Great guide as always Tim! I think TSR has much clearer and better images than FSR in this game even at 100% (native) on the slider. At 75% the image quality difference is night and day better for the TSR setting, The FPS is down however on TSR until you set the Anti-Aliasing to "Medium" where TSR has no really drop in the image quality. PS i'm using my monitor at 4K.
28:30 the reason I avoid all UE titles for now. That and the horrible CPU usage doesnt help. Stuttering is by far the worst part of games that released after 2020. The worst part is that u cant even brute force it away by lowering settings or upgrading hardware, it will be a problem for new hardware releases in the forseeable future, theres no getting past it. Horizon Forbidden West was such a breath of fresh air and shows that stutter in any world even open can not be excused when a game as detailed and large as that ran so well. Cyberpunk 2077 too (CDPR going to UE5 already had a presentation on UE5s stuttering issues saying how much of a challenge they will be to overcome for witcher, I just hope that them and Epic figure this stuttering issue out).
Yeah the fact that a lot of these AAA games use that garbage engine really sucks. I just cant stand stuttering, it makes my head hurt, i would rather play at 30fps stutter free than anything with stutters
@@angeltzepesh1 Same. Even if the game has horrible fps now at least it will be playable in the future too. I’d prefer that to stutter. Stutter is just the absolute worst. Stupid Jedi survivor and dead space have made me me check every single game for stutter issues now before buying. (As in watch technical reviews on top of normal game reviews). As for UE games I’m waiting for the day they say one hasn’t got traversal stutter lol. The finals is the only UE5 game without that issue and it’s cause it loads the whole map anyway so there is no new areas to load but cpu utilisation sucks.
Can't say for everyone, but I'm not surprised... I love games that torture even the best hardware.. that's what frame gen and upscaling is for. You know you're playing state-of-the-art game and in this case it's totally justified (minus the traversal stutters). Control ran at 20-30 fps on a 2080Ti @ 4K. Quake RTX too. RDR2 ran at 30-40 fps at native 4K. All justified.
Surprised? not at all, I don't mind running at med to high if performance is where I want it to be. and even at med - high this game still look very good.
I think the vegetation quality may indirectly affect framerates due to shadows i.e. the more vegetation there is, the more shadows it has to draw. So while by itself it may only have a 4% performance increase, when coupled with shadows at a lower quality than cinematic it should in theory lead to a larger gain vs using lower vegetation but with cinematic shadows.
I can't stand when people don't understand the poor optimization claim. People aren't saying "there is no scaling"... that's not even the complaint! People are saying what you get for the maximum settings doesn't justify the price is costs to run it. Those are two ENTIRELY different things. Why would you think saying "Yeah but you can turn it down, bro!" is an answer to the complaint in any way? Having to turn it down FURTHER is simply proving the point being made in the first place! Geez, learn some logic, people. Quit shilling for shittily optimized games lol
~90 fps on a 4090 and 7800X3D at 1080p max settings with no RT. "The game is very optimized" I honestly feel like HU and others are settling for "it's higher than 60fps it's good enough" I mean it's not even like we got to see what sort of FPS values were at play here. Based on the specs said on Cinematic with no RT we can assume they were getting around 42 fps as this was all for 1440p(though mention of DLSS is made even though they say to avoid using it later in the video), so that ~50% uplift on "HU Quality" only JUST gets them above 60fps average. Yet the game is "optimized", it can run at just above 60fps on $1347 CAD(or what seems to be around $918 USD) worth of GPU/CPU. But it's "optimized" because you can lower the settings and play it. I guess Crysis was optimized all those years ago because you could lower settings and get the game playable on quite a few GPUs.
If you think maximum settings doesn't justify the performance hit, just turn it down like normal person ? Not sure what's there to complain about here.
im glad Tim's optimization guides are back
The game is having the biggest single player launch on steam
Any play Max Payne 3 multiplayer?
He is doing a service for the game because.. how else would you get playable frame rate? Lol 4090 at 1080p max settings is barely acceptable as "smooth" lol I'll be using 4070 TiSuper on 4k monitor so.. optimizations are a must.
@@Crimsongz China just woke up
Indeed.
Please start making these optimisation videos a regular thing. Thanks for the work
True most of the time I come to this channel is bcs of this kind of videos, all my friends do the same
They kinda are.
That being said, these videos usually dont perform as well on the channel
Yes pls
when they meant low, they MEANT LOW 💀💀💀💀
I don’t think I have ever seen low look worse 😂 and it’s quite scary to think they apparently couldn’t get this working on the series s lol how bad must it have looked there during testing
It is what it means, can’t complain
Really can't complain when devs ( being kinda indie and delivering their first AAA ) are really thinking about those who can't afford yet the latest hardware.
By that regard it's a good thing more people can play it.
@@ScottyDo3sntKnow So you´ve been gaming just for a few years. Low is supposed to be the best effort to allow lowest possible hardware to run. not "low effort "optimization
@@NerwestaIndeed, my friend has a Rx 580 and me a 5700xt, the fact that we can even run this beast is amazing, the Chinese really are upping everything and everyo
Low preset straight up looks like dark souls 1 blight town 💀💀
😂 it looks rough, like a ps3 game
@@-T--T- ya but it caught me by surprise 😮
Like damn. The drop from medium to low is intense. It looks like one of those extreme low settings potato videos at first glance
@@chillnspace777 luckily the game it can run on a straight up potato on medium/high settings. Just glad this game turned out awesome, and is making a bunch of dumb rac!st redditors and DEI shakedown rackets seethe.
@@anasevi9456 oh for sure. Those woke cancer is mind numbing.
China don't care about DEI, and they pioneered the SEG score.
Game needs a high rez texture pack and hopefully epic will address the UE5 stuttering issues at some.damn.point.
I will check out the game after some patches and a sale
@@gelonyobakkopan4354 PS1 version
"We're not gonna do optimization guides anymore." (BM:Wukong breaks records) "So anyway here's our optimization guide for Black Myth: Wukong."
We've done a few prior to this ;)
@@Hardwareunboxed Thank you for your service ❤
@@Hardwareunboxed i hope you keep doing them! This kind of content is a life saver!
Appreciate ya’ll doing these guides to push some extra FPS outta the game. The Cyberpunk one was really indepth as well. 🙏 Thanks a lot!
30 mins video for this is crazy
People sometimes seem to mistake a demanding game with an un-optimised game.
So you have weaker hardware. Got it.
That being said though Wukong doesn't seem that impressive compared to the resources it asks. Perhaps it's a "diminishing returns" scenario but I think a more experienced studio could have achieved a better performing game.
@@christophermullins7163 3080ti and it does NOT run good at 1440P with RT on low. I'm not spending 1200-1700$ to run this game when all other games run fine.
@@BombaJead sure.. but not 50% faster. Everyone that says optimization does not realize that you're asking for a LOT more work from the studio to get 10% maybe 20% at most performance back. The consoles are an example of the optimizations we could get on PC games if they were exceedingly optimized. We aren't far from the limit of performance. Set the upscaling one **step below and that is all the optimizations you ever get. If you have Nvidia.. you'll barely notice that change.
@@BombaJead exactly like look at forbidden west and you will know that easily and that games does not need a 4080 super to run smooth
This game desperately needs a mod that removes the sharpening filter.
Is that why it looks all dotted like?
ReShade. Do it yourself. Use the Gaussian filter effect.
@@horseradishwithchives In other words, add a blur? I don't think sharpening + blur would cancel out perfectly.
why mod? they should have a sharpening slider in game 😕
I would imagine it to be an easy change in the engine.ini or maybe it's hidden in GameUserSettings.ini. Usually how I turn off certain effects with UE games
PSA for DLSS:
From my test in the Benchmark, DLSS does not work like the game says it does. It does not use 75% render scale.
For some reason DLSS is not actually using the resolutions displayed on the slider. Instead it only uses the "Current DLSS Quality Mode" displayed under the Super Resolutions description. These use the typical DLSS resolutions. The slider does allow you to change the Quality mode, but it only uses the 5 discrete values for the different Quality modes.
You can display DLSSs internal render resolution with the DLSS overlay enabled in regedit/DLSSTweaks or show it with Special Ks overlay.
As far as I can tell the other upscalers use the actual slider resolutions.
Aditionally, there is a display bug that sometimes changes the displayed slider value. For example if I set the slider to 89 and hit apply, then leave the menu, opening the menu up again the slider will show 88 instead. 88 will also be displayed in the benchmark result, but this is not correct. You can open the config file and see that the game is still set to 89% render resolution.
Thank you for that analysis on your experience. That really kind of helps.
Apply optimal settings for card and it will display correct values going forward. It’s really 50% at the start.
@@omgnowairly I just tried it in the bechmark again and it does not fix it.
My eyes glazed over half way through that read I think I been watching too many shorts
@@viking9442 I've started writing in detail on the internet, because people too quickly misunderstand or interpret something you didn't say.
And especially with technical stuf, I've learned from family and friends that you have to be VERY specific in your instructions.
The low texture quality even on cinematic on certain things like the rocks and trees is interesting considering how heavy everything else is in the title.
Yeah, the game desperately needs a texture pack mod. I was shocked that maxed settings took a bit over 8 tv of vram until I noticed how bad stuff looked even on cinematic. It’s an interesting decision by the devs. I hope the good reception of the game pushes the devs to get a higher texture update out or something
@userblame632 ya, maybe they aimed for the 8gig limit since.thats the most used vram for.most? This game looks interesting, but I'm going to wait for some patches and a sale
I think this is because effects can be baked in the engine, textures needs actual work to create, not only implement.
@@chillnspace777 The game is Nvidia sponsored, so keeping the VRAM under 8gb makes sense.
@@userblame632 same here... even the particle effects looked bad with 1440p dlss 75% Non Full RT
Damn, low looks like an entirely different game when you see the cutback vegetation and lighting.
It honestly looks like the version they wanted to put on ps4/xbone but then switched to strictly making it work on current gen.
1.547M Concurrent players right now! That's wild!
All the 10/10 Chinese reviews worked in marketing this to the west.
I've been really enjoying the benchmark tool 😁
It's chinese's long awaited pride title. Of course it would crushes numbers. Wait till china's night time
99% of those are Chinese so it doesn't count
Chinese audience is finally interested 😅
Just a little tidbit of info, software lumen is still a form of RT. I don't know if we can disable RT in this game while running it in DX12
It's a shame that RT performance is so terrible. The full RT quality in this game is staggeringly awesome, probably one of the best demos of what RT can do, especially given the typical environments in this game. Without it, and even with lumen, the game is a significant visual downgrade.
@@zxbc1its a shame RT is shove down our throats when even the best Nvidia cards struggle. It's good, but we should have options to disable it without making the game look like garbage
@@angeltzepesh1 As far as I understand, software RT isn't limited by GPU much. It's a shame the hardware RT is so heavy, but the heaviness we measure when "full RT" is off is likely due to geometric density and nanite instead of it being due to the software RT.
@@angeltzepesh1 It is not shoved down our throats. It is the future. New technologies are always extremely taxing... because they are new. Remember deferred lighting? Dynamic shadows? Tessellation? Screen Space reflections? Yeah all those things exist now and cards are dishing out 100-150 fps with no sweat... Back then just enabling dynamic shadows with chainsaw edges when it was introduced would cause a meltdown. Like people where downright disabling dynamic shadows "because it made no difference" yet dropping from barely 60-70 down to 20-30 fps.
It takes time for hardware technologies to evolve and become more efficient at producing more FPS with new software technologies. Nothing is shoved down our throats. It's just evolution as it always has been.
You can disable it. Put global illumination to low. That's RT disabled. Using only raster global illumination. So yeah Will you say RT looks awful and has no difference then? Medium-very high are software based ray tracing (which is less accurate than hardware based RT that you additionally enable to replace software based).
I remember when I used Tim's optimization guide for RDR2 and it made the experience on my system so much better. These types of guides are very valuable for gamers.
I would argue that examples for a mid tier and high tier system would be beneficial and what roles CPU and GPU play in performance for that title
Really like that they have a quite low preset that can even run on Steam deck and an Ultra High preset that even the RTX4090 struggles, intended for future hardware.
Exactly, there is always a game that stretches what`s out there; people who have come through the old pc days, like my obsession with the unreal tournament benchmark, know that tweaking is the beauty of pc. You can always give and take a little to get what you need.
For my non-40 RTX bros, remember you can enable FSR3 FG+DLSS with the DLSSG-TO-FSR3 mod on NexusMods.
On my 3080Ti:
HUB optimized settings for minimum of high+some cinematic
1440p 75% DLSS with FSR3 framegen mod: 120 fps locked
Enjoy!
Managed to get 70 fps with this, up from 45 on a 3090.. wonder why so much less than yours
I must be stupid or something cause I can't get it to work. Any help would be appreciated. Somehow I managed to make the "DLSS" option disappear in-game, which I eventually "fixed", but no matter what I tried I couldn't get Frame generation to be put on "ON" while I have DLSS selected.
thats awsome! I have a maxp 3080 laptop and i never had issues with any game even with RT at 1440p, but this was the first game that made me regret owning a laptop lol. with just cinematic, i got 25fps 💀
can't wait to check out the FSR3 mod! But mine performs similar to 3070 desktop due to silicon lottery, So i wil be more than happy with 60 to 80fps since i have gsync ultimate monitor.
@@silviucoler I suppose you are not on 4K, right?
@@Cloudalbert no 1440p
i wish games would let you tweek individual ray tracing settings and not just presets, all i want is shadows to get rid of the flickering
this. couldnt care about "realistic" shadows/reflections. I has to look good and that is primarily without flicker!
No hdr is insane.
seen switch ports get hdr, while this game made in ue5 which has native hdr support, in 2024, does not :(
HDR looks horrible in most games. Let’s be honest.
Gotta stick to RTX hdr then 😮💨
@@1benhouston1if you don't have a monitor capable of decent HDR then yeah sure. Native HDR support in games is a good improvement for say OLED monitors with genuinely great HDR performance.
@@hicks0792 I mean I had an QLED Quantom monitor for a couple years and it had great HDR performance but regardless of what game I played I could never get the perfect HDR image in-game and always turning HDR off in the in-game settings made the image more vibrant. Mind you this was 2-3 years ago so things may have improved. I have an HDR400 monitor now so nothing amazing
There is literally noone on the internet that does optimization videos even half as good as Hardware Unboxed. The attention to detail is just incredable. Keep up the excellent work!
With HUB Quality + 50% FSR I can get the benchmark to pretty consistently hit 60FPS when targetting 4K (capping the framerate) - with Frame Gen it's usually hovering at a stable 120. That's on a 7900XT. Happy enough with that. My gaming budget this month is likely going on Space Marine 2.
Thanks for the idea! I had HUB Quality, 80% FSR, with very high ray tracing and Frame Gen on with the benchmark at 1440p and I'm getting right around 120 FPS (120 Avg., 143 max, 100 low) on a 5800X3D/6900XT, which looks pretty good. The same settings without frame gen gave me 71 FPS avg., 84 max, and 55 low, which I'd be happy with.
@@twrex-136900XT with max ray tracing and getting 60fps at 1440p with no FG? LOL
If you enable Very High RT in a 6900XT with 80% resolution you will tank fps to less than 30fps (even with frame gen)!
@@twrex-13 restart the game, enabling the ray-tracing requires a restart. With 6900xt you can get 60ish fps at 1440p by sacrificing some settings - shadows/foliage/hairs - but that's it. Frame gen is up to you.
I'm using a RX 7900 XTX now (got it a week ago) and was looking for 4k advice. Thanks!
@@hrayz for that card you should be able to run slightly higher resolution internally for FSR to reconstruct from.
So the image quality is fundamentally broken. Sharpness is a defect, after all. 28:10
5:01 "low end gamers" is the new insult i'm going to start using lmao.
Wouldn't have thought it,but as a 7900xt owner ,I feel like one...😞
@@eurocrusader1724 it's just nvidia stuff making problems again, like hairworks and physx, i don't think i've ever heard that TressFX made problems
Nvidia locked-up style of their features is making problems for gamers and making radeon unviable due to it, hence enforcing monopoly of nvidia brand, lumen doesn't look bad here, personally, RT off on 19:17 looks as good as very high and maybe you can gain like 5% better visuals, nothing ground breaking
just a step away from saying "peasants" 🤣
Your mom's a low end gamer
@@michaelmcconnell7302 that shouldn't hurt....but it does 😂
Since you guys didn’t even cover Intel GPU I’ve done the work for you and here are the best settings:
Don’t even try
Settings: SNES Doom
LOL if the high end AMD GPUs are struggling, intel will probably get crushed. It will probably still run decently on medium-high presets though. Just forget about Cinematic or RT 😂😂
😂😂😂
The visual fidelity jump from Medium to Very High RT is definitely noticeable for me. Very High makes everything pop and gives a lot more depth. But yeah, on a 4090 I just play all Cinematic, Very High RT, DLSS Balanced and FG, and getting an average of 80 fps with weird stutters that dip to 70 for a second or two.
nice!
I also have a 4090 with a super Ultrawide and yea very high rt looks amazing but not worth the fps dip. I would use medium rt but that water big is still there which is very disappointing.
I'm obviously not a gamer that fit the mold that they are talking about in this video. All those "fantastic shadows" is just not for me. I repeatedly find myself looking at the Low settings and feel that yes, now I can see what happens. All the others are just a blurry murky shadows hiding the details. Sure it doesn't look as AMAZING, but when I play a game I want to see the game and not the shadows hiding everything interesting.
This. Whenever lighting was turned to low, i was like "ahh yes, now I can see what is going on". I got a4090 a year ago, but I have never used RT in a game for longer as to me it just gives a different but not better look with huge performance hits.
Play SNES or Switch games then. Modern games are clearly not for you 😅
Holy cope oml
Well, you do you by all means. Enjoy the game the way you like it. Should at the very least give you a decent boost in FPS.
interesting, although you are the polar opposite of me when it comes to bells and whistles, all that matters is enjoying the game!
I love Digital Foundry, but when it comes to these preset comparison videos you guys are on another level!
Thank you for presenting the percentage gain charts for both Nvidia and AMD GPUs, such that almost everybody can see the impact on his graphics card. Plus is really interesting how different GPU architectures, softwares (drivers) scale.
Incredible another studio prioritizes ray tracing 99% of players will never use over a proper HDR implementation which is much more financially accessible and dramatically improves visuals over ray tracing.
heh nope. lmfao i have both. HDR looks like shit on my monitor copared to RT. Good color quality monitors make HDR look like GARBAGE.
@@Tory-JJ Then you have a shitty monitor. On an Oled with 800+ nits it definitely makes a huge difference.
@@Tory-JJthat's a you problem bud my OLED tv looks gorgeous when playing hdr
@@jimbo121 RT/lumen > hDR
@@jimbo121 name 5 monitors that you own and the games you play hdr on. I'll take a bet and say you can't and don't
Great guide. I tried first to tweak settings myself and managed to get 60 fps average in benchmark on my RTX 3060 12GB with everything set to medim except texture quality (cinematic) and with DLSS set to 65% resolution (quality mode) at 1440p. Using the HUB Quality settings from this video fps dropped to 42 which is still playable for non comeptitive gaming and game definitely looks better. Thanks for saving me time to try the settings one by one and watch for the impact on performance.
Embrace de monke
monke
I would gladly embrace that monke.
Thanks for the guide, and in particular, testing on an AMD card as well, for the 3 of us who have one. Trying to find the setting for the shadow pop-in was maddening. That is the #1 immersion killer for me, having a shadow that wasn't present at 10 feet, suddenly show up at 3.
What was the setting that fixed it?
@@ishmamanwar6840 - Unfortunately, I don't really know. I used Daniel's guide, all the low impact settings on Cinematic, and everything else set to High. This is down from the preset for a 7800XT which was Very High for everything. So, I expect that depending on your card, if you can do at least High for everything, pop-in is largely eliminated. I was looking at 1440 with FSR set to 75% FG and Ray Tracing off. I get 69 average, 81 high, 57 low.
For those who don't want to sit through 30 minutes of geek speak I created this list. Leave me a like if it helps !!
Presets : 4:42
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 113%
High : 170%
Medium : 210%
Low : 275%
View Distance Quality : 5:59
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 100%
High : 101%
Medium : 103%
Low : 104%
Anti-Aliasing Quality : 6:45
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 100%
High : 101%
Medium : 101%
Low : 101%
Post-Effects Quality : 7:08
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 100%
High : 101%
Medium : 101%
Low : 101%
Shadow Quality : 9:06
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 103%
High : 128%
Medium : 131%
Low : 138%
Texture Quality : 10:13
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 100%
High : 100%
Medium : 100%
Low : 101%
Visual Effect Quality : 11:52
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 100%
High : 103%
Medium : 103%
Low : 103%
Hair Quality : 12:27
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 104%
High : 104%
Medium : 107%
Low : 114%
Vegetation Quality : 13:33
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 103%
High : 105%
Medium : 108%
Low : 109%
Global Illumination : 15:15
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 104%
High : 113%
Medium : 122%
Low : 132%
Reflection Quality : 16:27
Cinematic : 100%
Very High : 100%
High : 107%
Medium : 108%
Low : 108%
Motion Blur : 16:48
Strong : 100%
Weak : 100%
Off : 101%
It helps
Thank you for listing them!
No way it doesn't have hdr 😮
AUTO HDR is not bad but yeah its not like fully supported HDR game.
@@PvtRinzleryeah ill take AutoHDR over SDR anyday.
@@blitzwing1 what do you mean given up - the support is in the engine, the 'developer' doesn't have to do much at all aside show an option to enable it. It's similar to the oversharpening, they set it to a high enough value w/o any user setting for.
You basing this of marketing bullshit? It looks very good even without HDR, in fact most of the game I play, I left HDR off.and it looks good, because I know how to calibrate my damn screen.
@@zZiL341yRj736 that's a very elaborate way of announcing that you don't have true HDR-capable hardware.
The “bug” with all ray tracing settings below very high causing reflection artifacts is still there on release. Even with a 4090 7800x3d the very high setting costs too much performance to use. I’m stuck either setting it to low or disabling Ray tracing all together since medium has immersion breaking artifacts that look noticeably bad anytime there are reflections in water.
At least Cinematic without RT looks great, and personally I find it looks better, and more true to life to not use the RT settings and just use the baked in RT that is tanking everyone's performance.
One of the rare moments I really really love the fact I was dumb enough to buy a 4090 😅
4k 120fps avg everything maxed out dlss performance 👌
@@madvillaintv5072 Really? 4K, Full RT in Cinema? That's not what I though at all. Impressive.
4090 and ur here for optimaizing weird
Not dumb at all, it’s by far the best video card ever made for gaming, and leagues ahead of everything else. It’s been the best for two years now without compromises.
@@MRGA419 nothing wrong with squeezing out a few more frames with minimal impact to picture quality
My 4070ti feels like a lower mid-range card on this game..
it is kinda go big or go home
Any game pushing the limits of graphical fidelity is going to make it feel that way. Alan Wake 2 was similarly challenging on hardware while also scaling really well and looking good at lower settings.
@@TheWarmestFuzzy It also doesnt stutter every 5 seconds like a UE5 game which helps.
@@stealthhunter6998 don't forget UE4! We're on legacy stuttering now.
@@TheWarmestFuzzy Trust me I havent forgotten the abomination that is Jedi Survivor.
Thanks for the video! One thing I would add is a possible recommendation for "low end GPUs" to run the game in DX11 mode, as this can be another boost to performance!
I have to say, with the Shadow Quality setting, I really kind of prefer the high setting over cinematic, cause it is less visually distracting.
About RT in this game, other sources that tested the benchmark with different GPUs agree. To really use the RT mode in this game, you want a ~4080 up, and everything else should rather stick with the lumen mode. Which, once again, raises the question how much benefit anyone gets from having a mid range RTX GPU, as you just don't have the power to use it anyway.
I’m getting 60fps with the HUB RT settings on my 4070ti super
One thing to notice:
For motion blue setting, if you instead using frame generation your actual FPS （without those generated frames) will drop ~10-20fps and you'll experience substantial input lags because your GPU resources are allocated to generate frames.
expand, please, didnt get it
@@Luciano-vz8hw In the video, HUB recommended using frame generation (FG) instead of motion blur. I just wanted to point out that FG can consume a significant portion of your GPU's computing power, which may cause the base frame rate, from which FG generates frames, to drop considerably (potentially to around 10-20fps). If your base frame rate without FG is above 60fps, no issue. However, it can become problematic with a lower-end GPU, especially if your base frame rate is around 45fps when FG is off. While FG might boost your final frame rate to 60fps, it would be based on a 35fps input, resulting in substantial input lag. Keep in mind that input lag is directly related to your base frame rate! Generated frames will not improve it at all. So the results is that your frames look fine, but you feel a LOT laggy when playing it. IMO it is unbearable for ACT games.
Damn, thank you very much. It helped my RTX 3070 a lot and the game looked beautiful in the HUB quality presset.
What you do
This is how you do a Optimization guide!
Another great video it was these types of videos that got me into this channel and I've really missed them. Hope you make more moving forward.
Hey hey hey. The Chapter one is very well optimized its the chapter 2 were things get hefty, so I recommend you to get to chapter 2, the settings are being affected more
Let's not forget this game also came with Denuvo. Unreal Engine 5 full RT shader + Denuvo = deadly combo for wasting your thermal paste
It has denuvo?! I didn't know that. That's disappointing. I will wait for a sale and patches then
22:45 I tried HUB Quality settings. On a 5700X3D + RTX 3080 12GB, getting min 45fps, avg 65fps, max 75fps . VRAM usage at 4.8GB at 1440p with DLAA, no upscaling .
framgen?
@@Healcraft Bro, all RTX 3000 series cannot enable framegen unless you use FSR or TSR . So I didn't turn on frame gen. Anyhow , I don't like frame gen on FSR, too much ghosting effect during battles.
@@fleurdewin7958what is FSR
@@fleurdewin7958 oh ok I didn't know about that I can't select dlss :)
this is a cap unless you overclocked your 3080 like crazy, at 1440p high preset (which is less intensive than quality optimised) 3080 10gb gets less than 60 fps on average...
It took me quite a while to figure out what the hell a ray traced "core stick" is.
This is ones of those games you buy on a steam sale in 4 5 years with better hardware.
For some reason, switching from very high preset to medium does not make much of a difference. I always hover around 40 fps on my rtx 4070 super. Only disabling ray tracing gives me about 20fps extra. Not even enabling frame generation works, it just gives me black frame flickering
The RT visuals I would have to argue do not look more realistic in most situations... for example;
at 19:27 that fire is WAY to bright with RT on, and is about what it should be for the time of day on just Cinematic,
19:19 I'd have to be able to look up at the sky, but it feels like the light isn't actually coming from the sun with RT turned on, where on Cinematic it does.
19:29 For the fog to be as dense as the RT modes your ability to see would be much more impacted, and Cinematic has a much more realistic fog density for the view distance, everything being darker in Cinematic makes more realistic sense, seeing as fog is effectively very low clouds, it's in general darker when there is fog cover, meanwhile with RT it looks like a normal sunny day until you see the fog.
19:38 A running river should never be that dark unless it's later in the day than the lighting shows it to be, Cinematic has a much more realistic looking river, and the lighting on the trees also feels weird with RT on, and looks a lot more natural on Cinematic. Like if you look above Wukong's head, there is that section of tree where the lighting makes a sudden right hand turn in all of the RT modes, the only way that would happen IRL is if there is another object blocking the sun from showing higher up, and it does not appear to be the case.
21:02 Here it's tricky, because that water looks more stagnant and darker, making reflections duller once again making Cinematic more realistic, but if the water was flowing more and less stagnant and thus clearer full RT would be more realistic, meaning in a way Low RT does slightly pull ahead on the reflection. BUT the lighting on low RT on the rocks directly in the top middle looks wrong and unrealistic. The sun on the rocks doesn't feel right and that sort of black void only really happens when there is a deep outcrop rocks not a small dent like that. Also those water physics... yeah... that's near immersion breaking jello physics.
Now not saying those issues are exactly bad, but once you get into "this makes it look more realistic" territory, that's where my country ass has to come in and point out the visual issues, and how they aren't there at the admittedly lower RT settings of "RT Off" Cinematic where it is still using RT.
Also I will still argue this game is "unoptimized" because basically every modern AAA game for the past ~5 years has been, game devs have gotten lazy. Though lets be real, when a 7800X3D + 4090 is struggling to play this game at even 144fps average at 1080p on the highest setting that is not an optimized game. The performance seen for 1080p for the 7800X3D + 4090 should be at minimum for 1440p not 1080p. The fact that set up simply does not work at 4k is another argument that the game isn't optimized. Sure hardware 1-2 generations from now will maybe be able to play it no problem, and you can lower settings to get higher FPS, but that does not make the game optimized for MODERN hardware. I'm honestly getting tired of people looking at sub 100fps values for 1080p max settings on a game and saying "yeah that's fine." The LOW END monitors for 1080p have gotten to a point where you can easily get a 165hz display for less than $100. Asking for 144fps on 1080p with the best CPU and best GPU from modern games on PC doesn't seem like a big ask to me, anything less than that should not be okay. Less than 60fps on 4k with the best CPU and best GPU should not be okay ether. We aren't playing on a console, we should not be accepting console game levels of performance.
Also just want to note, you guys called Starfield "demanding" and are calling Wukong "optimized", when in general Starfield has better performance and visuals that are on par or better. I mean Starfield is still not optimized ether, but at least it's far closer to being what should be the norm, and with it's testing being done in the most demanding part of the game where Wukong's testing was done in the benchmark tool, meaning I would guess in the most demanding sections of Wukong it's going to be a lot lower than the benchmark.
Long rant over now. Hope anyone who reads this has a nice day, and I'm not trying to hate on HU, I just hate the direction AAA PC games are going in, and have been for quite a long time.
The moment you said starfield has better performance and visuals, nothing about your rant mattered, the comparison is meaningless. I was already thinking, wtf is this guy talking about, complaining about a physics based rendering solution not being physically accurate? But I gave you the benefit of the doubt as there is some truth, as the best benefit of RT is dynamic, real-time rendering. Pre-rendered and traditional baking solutions is also physics based and they can be more accurate occassionally, sure, until hardware gets more powerful and more and more rays can be traced. In this case anyways, on cinematic quality, you're actually comparing two different RT solutions though and it's not pre-baked besides some SSR. So it's a pointless argument, both is RT, one is Lumen and the other is hardware-based. Who says the performance should be at a certain FPS for it to be 'optimized'? So if they just lowered the quality of the overall game, would it be optimized? "Sure hardware 1-2 generations from now will maybe be able to play it no problem, and you can lower settings to get higher FPS..." also doesn't necessarily mean it's unoptimised. Perhaps they should wait 1-2 years for consumer hardware to catch up before relasing? Would it be 'optimised' then? This is not like Crisis, which was pushing boundaries, but they also mistakenly developed the game for single core performance in mind or CP2027 which was clearly rushed with game breaking bugs. Sure, if you're talking about frame timing not FPS, that's an issue with UE5, and every UE5 game has frame timing issues.
😂
@@LukeSciberraschannel The comparison to Starfield was not only because it's another recent game that had very rough performance, but also it's another game HU has done this sort of thing with, and because Starfield doesn't have a built in benchmark they did their tests in that game at the most demanding section they could find much like every reviewer, leading to their results being lower than general game play averages. My talking of the RT not being realistic was because that is what HU says in this video at 19:23, they say it makes the game "look more accurate and realistic" I was pointing out that it indeed does not do this in a lot of cases. I am aware the "RT Off" Cinematic mode still uses RT, first block of text after the time code block. Though I will agree I said that in a kind of clunky way.
Now a game being optimized is a subjective take I will agree, but in my mind for a game to be considered "optimized" it should be able to reach 60fps with it's recommended specs at max settings. That is my subjective opinion on that, you are free to disagree, but I don't feel like that's a hard ask. The fact this game on Cinematic with a 4090 and 7800X3D can't even break into 100fps at 1080p in the benchmarking tool to me screams this is an unoptimized game. This is a GPU for 4K gaming, struggling to get to decent 1080p results and is basically unplayable at 4k.
Also yeah maybe they should have lowered the settings, would it have really mattered in the grand scheme of things if they had used a lower pre-set as their max setting? Let's be real here, just the fact you can basically never turn off RT is a hit against the game being optimized. This is also a game with "recommended specs" that are from 2019 those being the i7-9700 and RTX 2060. That would imply those should be able to run the game at the very least on very high to cinematic, but based on other comments those specs MIGHT be able to handle medium at 60fps. (Someone in anther comment was posting their results from a 3600X and RTX 2060 so not quite the recommended AMD CPU of the 5500, but if cache matters a lot in this game then the 3600X is likely the better CPU, and they were sub 50fps on high.)
Before you say it, yes that would mean they could have said the recommended spec was a 4080 or 7900XTX and 7800X3D or 14900K but I feel if they had done that... you'd likely be right here with me saying the game isn't optimized. Though maybe you wouldn't be, I don't know you.
So I'll also generalize this a little more, a game should be able to reasonably reach 60fps max settings running at LEAST 1080p on a reasonable recommended spec. That is still subjective, but at the same time we do have "mid range" hardware that should be capable of that. The top end hardware should be for getting better performance not what you need to get acceptable performance. By the logic being used here Crysis was optimized because you could lower your settings and get the game playable on the top end hardware of it's day. I mean it was playable on a 8800GTS 900p High or even Very High if you were willing to lower your resolution to 800x600, so I guess Crysis was optimized too.
I'll finish this by pointing out I never said Starfield(or Crysis) was optimized ether.
"Also those water physics... yeah... that's near immersion breaking jello physics.", the fluid dynamics/physic in the game look proper atrocious, and they are used quite liberally for all sort of cases. The real case for the lack of optimization is that lumen (& friends) don't use hardware optimizations.
I’ve tried a few different optimization guides. This is easily the most accurate. Nice job Tim!
imagine the performance if the game wasn't infested with denuvo.
Great video and super exhaustive analysis, I very happy that you guys are bringing this type of content. Game aside, oversharpening, volumetrics and foliage play their part in killing the encoder, but in general I think we can say that RUclips 4k quality went really down the shitter, my god.
I'll wait for removal of Denuvo thanks
not gonna happen
I’ve checked out many videos, but none of them boosted the performance on my 4070ti like this video, thank you!!!
Hardware Unboxed, This video is a winner!
Good to see what the differences with Ray Tracing enabled looked like in other areas. When I ran the benchmark (Quality: Cinematic + Ray Tracing: Very High, DX12) on my 12900k/4090 rig, Ray Tracing appeared quite subtle at best.
Having UE stutter struggle is insane too. Tired of UE stutter. If it’s not game science’s fault then epic needs to fix their crap!
For real
If u get stutter in this game, very likely due to Denuvo protection.
@@fleurdewin7958 it has denuvo that explains it then. Ya I will wait
@@fleurdewin7958 It's the engine. Traversal stutter is common in UE4 and UE5 games regardless of denuvo.
Awesome work Tim.
Seems like medium rt still have low res reflections...
i have a 7900xtx and ray tracing is literally unplayable lol, stick to nvidia if you want to use ray tracing
I spit my beer out over "Potato quality settings"! 25:10
He said it at the beginning of the video as well.
all matter of fact like too :)
I did the same thing that time mentioned in the end and got damn 25fps 💀
I own a 3080 165w laptop and been so damn happy with every game I have played, recent being HFW. I even played cyberpunk with max settings and lower PT settings and still was able to get decent 60s. But this game is nothing like any of that, it is much more realistic than HFW. So understanding how each setting works is key to get best possible performance for my system. Thanks a lot tim for this wonderful optimisation video!
More controls over individual RT options ain't gonna happen. Its a nVidia sponsored game, the options are purposefully tied together to cripple AMD RT performance.
They even cripple their own hardware on purpose, nothing unexpected, they're pushing too far so that they can sell their next 5080/5090. At least I'm happy high settings in this game look great and performance is pretty scalable.
Thank you! Im not the only one who noticed this. But at least lumin and regular raster still look good.
AMD fans never spoil a chance to act like a victim. lol Nvidia isn't controlling what the devs can do with their game, ffs.
@@maynardburger AMD fans are always more loud on YT comment section, let them be my dude
@@maynardburger Where are you living, under a rock? nVidia has a history of undermining their opponents, often times through exerting controls over AIBs and indirectly limiting dev's ability to optimize for the competition. Just do a quick google and you can see all its ill deeds. Gameworks, threatening AIBs, limiting their supply and having them put AMD solutions under a sub brand/category etc.
I appreciate these detailed optimization guides. Knowing what settings to change is awesome
27:30 rtx 6090😂 5090 is not even released and we are talking about 6090
Makes sense. RTX 4090 at max settings with RT and DLAA gets an average of 20fps with 16fps minimums, so assuming the 6090 will be three times faster, it'll get an average of 60fps.
Hub Performance suggestion works fantastically with a 3080 10GB at 1440p, in combination with DLAA (100% DLSS AA), as you cannot turn it off at least in the benchmark demo, to avoid upscaling.
Minimum in the benchmark was 59fps when I ran it earlier, with averages in the 70s, whilst still looking great.
Thanks Tim!
Hi Low-End Gamers 😁
Thanks, i originally used the default auto tune settings. Now following the guide, the game not only looked better, it also have slightly better frame rate as well.
These are incredibly useful. I've seen people with better hardware get worse benchmarks because they didn't tweak settings that really mattered!
Would be good to see the AMD based settings recommendation ... so far what I see on my RX 7900 XTX - RT is out of option for any setting presets on 4K.
Yeah I can’t find any decent 7900xtx recommended settings - right now I don’t think it’s capable of even playing 4K med without frame gen and super resolution helping out 😂😂😂😂
This is the best one so far, awesome job. I also really liked the combination of medium RT and HUB Performance optimized settings, I think that's the best bang for the buck if you are using a higher end Nvidia card.
I hate how inconsistent setting descriptions are.
Sometimes you have off-low-medium-high-very high, then it's off-low-medium-very high, another time it's off-medium-high all with in the same game. It makes no sense.
Watching this in x.25 speed has shown that with the LOW settings, some foliage that is not loaded in is actually used to cover unfinished dev work. 3:58
thank you for the tips. I will change my settings tonight after work
My 2060 and 3600x ran
37fps average on cinematic 1080p no RT
46fps average on high 1080p no RT
Hope this is helpful for someone
Quite helpful actually because that's just about the "recommended specs" for the game. So it seems their "recommended spec" is for medium settings most likely. Wonder what's needed to make the minimum spec playable even on low.
Does show we really need to standardize what "recommended specs" means for games, because in my mind the "recommended spec" should be able to run the game max settings minimum 60fps, these devs seem to feel it means second lowest preset.
@@Stephen__White recommended is purely what devs think should give decent experience. 1080P max settings 60 fps - is your interpretation and is not applicable to every one as it's subjective thought. Maybe they should be telling what resolution/settings and fps you should expect with those recommended requirements - something I've seen in some games as they state what are the target settings/res and fps they aim with given requirements.
@@eliadbu That's kind of the problem though, it's entirely subjective. Hence why we should have an actual standard that isn't subjective. Maybe it doesn't need to be max settings 60fps, but there should be some sort of standard, be that a standard of just telling us exactly what settings that hardware is for, or a middle ground of High settings 60fps. Though one thing it would need is something in place to make sure they aren't copping out by using frame gen or up-scaling. If the game can not natively run on the hardware, it's not powerful enough hardware.
Because just like it's subjective for me to expect it to be 60fps max settings, it's also subjective on the devs part as to what players will enjoy. There is nothing wrong with having a standard for minimum and recommended specs. Even more so where it wouldn't even be that complicated.
Minimum spec - Lowest possible hardware to run the game at the lowest possible settings at 30 or 60 fps
Recommended Spec - Lowest possible hardware to run the game at max settings at 60 fps
Or Steam would hate this but, add a third category for "Average Spec" and use that for lowest possible hardware to run the game on the middle of the road settings(in BM Wukon's case "High" as it is exactly in the middle of the pre-sets) at 60fps. All of this also having the ability to trade out 60 for 30 when a game simply is not designed to be played above 30fps, though those are very few and far between outside of console games.
So for this game as an example based on HU's GPU benchmark;
Minimum spec: GTX 1060 6GB / RX 580 8GB + i5-8400 / 5 1600 for 30 fps low 1080p
Average spec: RTX 3070 / RX 6750 XT + i7-12700 / 5700X3D for 60 fps High 1080p
Recommended Spec: RTX 4080 / RX 7900XTX + i9-14900K / 7800X3D for 60 fps Cinematic 1080p
Would give consumers a far better idea of what they are getting into. Also this has been something that has been bothering me for quite a long time now. It's not specific to BM Wukong but modern games as a whole.
Also sorry for the wall of text, I tend to do this when there is no one to shut me up when I get talking.
@@Stephen__White I think what have seen in some games would be the best, give 3 common resolution with preset of their choice (cinematic in UE5 AS I understood isn't meant to be used other maybe for screenshots or future hardware, and it hidden in other UE 5 games) and targeted fps and if upscaling was used or not and, maybe throw in one with rt, it's not perfect but it should give much more info to customer than current ambiguous system.
Please keep doing these guides, at least for big releases. We really appreciate the effort that goes into these!
Even with a 4090, I don’t know why anyone would use the RT features. You’re taking a MASSIVE performance hit, and the visuals somehow look worse.
They’re all fizzled with low ray counts. Just keep the raster and better frame rate for an action game.
Not true at all, as was pointed out in the video. Lighting is so much better even at medium with a negligeable hit on performance. If you own NVIDIA, most of the time you'll get a great experience with RT, AMD on the other hand Is well suited only for raster
Because it looks a million times better?
This person clearly didn’t watch the video and just came here to insert their (factually wrong) opinion and baited a bunch of people.
@@Dany-uw9hfdo you have a 4090?i do, and this game looks like a low quality rt Shimmering mess, ue5 is complete garbage, unoptimized cpu bound mess
@@fvallo nice trolling kiddo
if RT replaces shadows and GI...why do the HUB recommended settings for RT modes have you adjust the shadow and GI settings away from cinematic? wouldn't changing those settings do nothing?
Loving this game. It’s actually really hard.
Is it similar to devil may cry, Bayonetta?
I agree
Anyone else getting horrible frame dips ? The beginning section works great then once you start climbing the mountain I’m getting dips from 100-140 down to 8-30 FPS 14900k/4090’combo mixture of very high-cinematic and ray tracing on and off didn’t matter. Frame generation on and off didn’t matter again, seems like once the game has been on for half hour things just start to go from good to bad.
Yes this is well known, but I have it a little more smoother and less stutter then you. Allthough I have 12700K OC to 5Ghz, to match the 12900K speed, so I dont have the microcode error like on 13 and 14 gen Intel CPUs. But I did update my BIOS anyway. If you haven done that, it is strongly recommended regardless or if you feel you are getting worse and worse performance on other games, RMA your CPU quickly.
It's traversal stutter. It's a hallmark of UE at this point.
Many people don't know what a poor optimization means. Saints Row 2, Cities Skyline 2, Dark Souls prepare to die edition, metro exodus so and so on. There is a difference between a game poorly optimized or just pure demanding. They’re not the same thing. Like crysis 3 was optimized but a very demanding game. At that time the highest tier graphics card was not capable of handling it.
Dark Souls PtD Edition wasn't even really unoptimized in a performance sense, it was just the most barebones port possible. lol It ran ok for what it was actually doing, and obviously with GeDoSaTo, it scaled appropriately.
There are games that look much better than wukong at high settings while running 3x better.
@@leonardomatheus1888Which ones?
This game made me realize that my SSD was holding me back, running at full utilization all the time while gaming and with downloading too. Luckily I had an external one that’s much faster and instantly my game is running like a dream. Asus strix rog rtx 2080 oc, i7-9700k, 32g ram.
Its sad that you need to use DLSS for a $1600 RTX4090
Its not sad at all, simply because in many games DLSS have actually better quality than native 4K. I use it with my 4090 also because my OLED refreshrate is 120hz max, so I use Vsync in nvidia control panel on, disable it in game. And also because it lowers the card wattage, so saving power, fan speed noise etc is a good thing. Since I dont want to go over 120fps, G-sync with v-sync gives me a constant 116fps on my OLED TV, smooth as butter. But on Wukong, we have to even use FG to achieve these results or close, this is with using full ray tracing. Of course if I turn off ray tracing we get much better performance, but my fps will never go over 116fps on my OLED TV. I dont have a monitor and I like to game on a 65" OLED TV, force HDR, fix HDR, fix black levels that are raised in this game and we are good to go. But of course this game needs alot of fixing to do and I am sure devs are working on it. Sadly no AAA game today especially using UE5 is flawless at release.
RUclips compression is so bad. Would uploading 4k video in 8k help?
I'm not against raytracing necessarily but IMO the more realistic game lighting and graphics get, the more visually boring they become. Almost all modern game environments of similar biome lose any visual distinction. Its hard to tell which game you're looking at by the environment alone.
I think you should make this type of guides weekly. Maybe post and see if viewers like it or not. IMO this is one of the most usful information for gamers. Most of us can't afford to buy new hardware every year but optimization is always handy. Love it!
The optimization seems very bad, even though DLSS FG is on, 35/FG 70 FPS in the action scene is a disgrace, these technologies were already produced to guarantee 100 FPS, but such companies provide the performance that should be achieved with pure power with DLSS, this gaming world really needs a sanction.
Dial down the settings and/or the resolution. It does not kill you. I'm running it at 90FPS at 1440p Native on a 7900XTX with mixed settings and it looks fantastic. If you can't mentally cope with getting a new game that won't run on Ultra 4k Native, get a console.
this is some turbo nonsense you're saying. you're not supposed to use FrameGen until you reach 60 FPS without it anyway. Dial down the settings until you have a steady 60 with your 1% lows in 55's and then you'll have your pretty much fixed 110-120 fps. FrameGen doesn't work at low framerates. Your GPU is already struggling at that point. it's not magic.
Thank you so much!! With a simple RTX3070 and an I7-10700, with your exact settings for performance+RT, the game runs smoothly. Great work and great help!
Here's our game with the latest Unreal 5 technology, also have some PS4 level textures and no HDR support.
Thanks Tim, I was able to boost my performance from medium 50s to high 70s with my rx 6800, and I didn’t see that much of a image downgrade with your optimised settings. Looks like this gpu is still a great 1440p beast even without fsr 😊.
People asking for actual next-gen game and UE5, now that it's here they said it's unoptimized. OH BROTHER!!!
Great guide as always Tim! I think TSR has much clearer and better images than FSR in this game even at 100% (native) on the slider. At 75% the image quality difference is night and day better for the TSR setting, The FPS is down however on TSR until you set the Anti-Aliasing to "Medium" where TSR has no really drop in the image quality. PS i'm using my monitor at 4K.
28:30 the reason I avoid all UE titles for now. That and the horrible CPU usage doesnt help. Stuttering is by far the worst part of games that released after 2020. The worst part is that u cant even brute force it away by lowering settings or upgrading hardware, it will be a problem for new hardware releases in the forseeable future, theres no getting past it.
Horizon Forbidden West was such a breath of fresh air and shows that stutter in any world even open can not be excused when a game as detailed and large as that ran so well. Cyberpunk 2077 too (CDPR going to UE5 already had a presentation on UE5s stuttering issues saying how much of a challenge they will be to overcome for witcher, I just hope that them and Epic figure this stuttering issue out).
Yeah the fact that a lot of these AAA games use that garbage engine really sucks. I just cant stand stuttering, it makes my head hurt, i would rather play at 30fps stutter free than anything with stutters
@@angeltzepesh1 Same. Even if the game has horrible fps now at least it will be playable in the future too. I’d prefer that to stutter. Stutter is just the absolute worst. Stupid Jedi survivor and dead space have made me me check every single game for stutter issues now before buying. (As in watch technical reviews on top of normal game reviews). As for UE games I’m waiting for the day they say one hasn’t got traversal stutter lol. The finals is the only UE5 game without that issue and it’s cause it loads the whole map anyway so there is no new areas to load but cpu utilisation sucks.
Tried Days Gone on PC? UE4 game, fantastic graphics and performance. Don't think I experienced any issues in many hours of game play.
@@TheHalo14aus but thats UE4, afaik only UE5 is plagued by stutters
@@stealthhunter6998 thankfully none of them i really wanted to play(except for the Dead Space remake), but im scared for the future Witcher game
I'm always grateful you do these guides on difficult to run games.
4090 owners surprised they spent $2K to run a game at medium/high.
But but why can't my 4090 run 100 FPS ultra?! That's racist!
Can't say for everyone, but I'm not surprised... I love games that torture even the best hardware.. that's what frame gen and upscaling is for. You know you're playing state-of-the-art game and in this case it's totally justified (minus the traversal stutters). Control ran at 20-30 fps on a 2080Ti @ 4K. Quake RTX too. RDR2 ran at 30-40 fps at native 4K. All justified.
Surprised? not at all, I don't mind running at med to high if performance is where I want it to be. and even at med - high this game still look very good.
The constant jabs thrown at the low settings had me howling throughout this video 😂
Glad they didn't bow down to Sweet Baby Inc's bullshit
Developer worth to support I guess.
Game Science laughed in Monke at gaming journalists (activists). Huge win for actual gamers, a big eff U to the "modern audience".
I think the vegetation quality may indirectly affect framerates due to shadows i.e. the more vegetation there is, the more shadows it has to draw. So while by itself it may only have a 4% performance increase, when coupled with shadows at a lower quality than cinematic it should in theory lead to a larger gain vs using lower vegetation but with cinematic shadows.
I can't stand when people don't understand the poor optimization claim. People aren't saying "there is no scaling"... that's not even the complaint! People are saying what you get for the maximum settings doesn't justify the price is costs to run it. Those are two ENTIRELY different things. Why would you think saying "Yeah but you can turn it down, bro!" is an answer to the complaint in any way? Having to turn it down FURTHER is simply proving the point being made in the first place!
Geez, learn some logic, people. Quit shilling for shittily optimized games lol
~90 fps on a 4090 and 7800X3D at 1080p max settings with no RT. "The game is very optimized"
I honestly feel like HU and others are settling for "it's higher than 60fps it's good enough" I mean it's not even like we got to see what sort of FPS values were at play here. Based on the specs said on Cinematic with no RT we can assume they were getting around 42 fps as this was all for 1440p(though mention of DLSS is made even though they say to avoid using it later in the video), so that ~50% uplift on "HU Quality" only JUST gets them above 60fps average. Yet the game is "optimized", it can run at just above 60fps on $1347 CAD(or what seems to be around $918 USD) worth of GPU/CPU.
But it's "optimized" because you can lower the settings and play it. I guess Crysis was optimized all those years ago because you could lower settings and get the game playable on quite a few GPUs.
If you think maximum settings doesn't justify the performance hit, just turn it down like normal person ? Not sure what's there to complain about here.
@@SM-mt8pz If you're not sure, then it means you aren't thinking.
What surprised me the most is the low vram requirements. If all games were like this 4070ti would be the greatest card of the generation 😂
4070ti Super is
cinematic
very high
high
medium
AWFUL
Got it.
This is straight up so helpful, quality content