One thing I forgot to mention, this game supports FSR Frame Generation as well. It seems like it is FSR 3 Frame Generation, and not FSR 3.1, as it is tied to using FSR upscaling.
I already have this game on my PS5, had a good time! Plan on getting a 4070 Ti super later this year, so ill probably pick this game up at a discount later lol, thx for showing it off!
Thanks for stopping by. The 4070 Ti Super is a great performing GPU. It might be a bit pricey, but what GPU from Nvidia this gen isnt? Pretty sure you'll enjoy it when you get it!
Well, im playing at 1440p with a rtx 3070 and getting over 100 fps on 90% of areas. I'm currently using the mod to enable frame gen on older rtx series. And it works a lot better than you might think. But if i disable frame gen, then it goes to 70 fps on most areas, and sometimes it dips to 50 on crowded cities. The only problem is the ghosting that frame gen is famous for. But i got used to it. Really good game, i recommend for FF enjoyers.
It is interesting to see that most demanding recent games do not really need that much VRAM. About a year ago, when a few VRAM hogs released (TLoU, Ratchet and Horizon 2) people were burying their 8GB cards and even tried to bury 12GB models. But it looks like that period ended. We are back to games that do not need more than 8GB at 1080p. While 12GB is fine even for 4K res. Looks like raw GPU power becomes a more important thing again. At least, until the next gen consoles release (probably in 3 years).
VRAM is largely heavily taxed if you start using assets that eat up a lot of space like high res textures or if you use ray tracing. The VRAM needs go down if those 2 aren't part of your gameplay.
@@XieRH1988 True. But still, VRAM usage is somewhat exaggerated in Nixxes ports. BM Wukong with path tracing is using far less VRAM than Horizon FW, for example, despite the fact that Horizon does not include any RT effects at all. Also in Banishers GoNE texture quality is higher than in Ghost of Tsushima, but the latter still uses more VRAM. So we should not forget so-called "optimization". Some devs do a much better work than others in this regard.
Yeah, Nixxes ports are notorious for their high VRAM usage. I think the issue is it's ported from PS, which has shared memory and some code might be carried across with regards to VRAM. I remember when TLOU for PC launched it automatically reserved 20% if your VRAM, no matter the amount of VRAM you had, and it was found that it's because it does a similar thing on consoles. It was fixed not long after.
Thank you for this review! Very thorough. I wanted to hold out for the 50 series to come out, but I'm still on a GTX 1080, and while it technically fits FF16's minimum requirements it just chugs too hard to be playable for me. I game at 1440p and this card seems like the sweet spot 🙂
Thank you! Yeah, unfortunately the game is very GPU heavy so a 1080 will have a bit of a hard time, unless you use FSR upscaling and FSR Frame Generation. It does introduce additional input latency and visuals are affected though. I'm curious to see what the 50 series brings. Hopefully we can get a 5070 that's on par with a 4080, but pricing remains the biggest question.
Great video man, and yea it definitely looks to be performing far more consistently than the demo was, even on its latest patch. Debating on whether I should buy the game again, given I already beat the game and its DLCs when they launched back on PS5
I'm not looking for a new game, but i'm always a bit hesitant to buy something like FF 16. I've never played an FF game so would i know what was going on? Good video.
Thank you! Yeah, I am actually with you. I have never played a Final Fantasy game before, until a few months ago when I tried FF7 Remake, and I found it wasnt for me. This actually looks quite cool, but I will have to read up on some lore!
Okay, that's good to hear. How are the combat mechanics compared to FF7 Remake? I havent gotten very far yet, still deciding whether I should refund or not.
@@Mostly_Positive_Reviewsvery different combat style. Remake is a hybrid of real time and turn based combat. 16 is a straight up action game. With some rpg mechanics. Keep playing 16. It is amazing.
The game on PS5 brought it to its knees down to 720p ans chugging frames puts it in a bit of perspective I will say there is more going on underneath the hood that meets the eye
Yeah, there has to be something I am not aware of. I tried to find out if it uses some kind of ray tracing but I believe it doesnt. It can definitely look good at times for sure, and it performs much better than the demo for me, which is a definite win!
There are some really good lighting and techniques for hair and eyes etc like some stuff is seriously top notch Sauare was really ambitious I just don't think they have the back end technical chops to bring that kind of ambition home and I really think they were very overly ambitious with the PlayStation version
Maybe it is worth to tune DLSS a little bit in this game via DLSS Tweaks. Changing presets (C, D, E, etc.) and resolution scale may help. I personally prefer to use 76% value, which at 1440p equals to 1080p. This way the image looks identical to native 1440p DLAA IMO, but games still usually perform 15-20% better. In this case it should get 4070 Ti Super to ~75-80 fps. With FG it should provide 130-140 fps.
I kinda disagree but totally see your point it does some stuff really well lots of stuff really bad and then Squares own either incompetence, lack of ambition or etc. To drive the technical performance better be it on console or PC
I wouldn't recommend using Frame Generation unless you have no other way of achieving a playable framerate. It adds latency and destroys visual clarity. DLSS should be more than enough to run this game at a comfortable framerate with this GPU.
@@NexGenTek There's significant artifacting during motion with Frame Gen enabled that is VERY noticeable. You're getting a more fluid image at a HUGE visual quality cost.
@@NexGenTek Do you understand how absurd you sound by claiming that AI-generating half of your frames doesn't affect visual quality in any significant way? Artifacting and general loss in visual clarity is an inescapable trade-off of the Frame Gen technology. You're either blind, or lying. There is no alternative.
@@verde5738 Frame Generation has come a long way from when it was introduced. This isn’t the motion interpolation you have on your tv. There are no artifacts actually there’s really no game with frame Gen at the moment now that has artifacts during motion. Do I need to show you a video. Digital foundry has covered this numerous times. If you’re to incompetent to understand that’s not my problem. I’m playing on a 4090 i9 14900K 4K120 basically locked with Frame Gen mixed with DLSS Quality. It’s outstanding and I don’t mind posting a video to prove you’re wrong!
It's a 4070ti super. It's better than a 4070 ti which was supposed to be a 4080 class product. Yeah, there are better cards, but it' still very poweful.
@@walter274 Yeah, the 4070 Ti Super is on average around 40% faster than the regular 4070, and it kills most games at 1440p. That said, it's so funny to hear someone else say the 4070 is mid-range, because that's exactly what I said in a previous video and people were livid haha! I actually said a 3080 is considered mid-range today because it is on par with a 4070, and a 4070 falls right in the middle of the range, hence mid-range.
@@Mostly_Positive_Reviews I have a 3080 12gb, i consider it a mid range card. That said i wouldn't fault somone for saying it's a high end card since the most common video card on the steam hardware survey is a 3060. I'm happy with the balance i strike between graphics and frame rate with it.
@@Mostly_Positive_ReviewsI have a 3080. It’s definitely a midrange card by today’s standards. But it and the 4070 are still very capable cards. I played the demo for 16. Didn’t notice much in the way of poor performance. But then again, I first played 16 on ps5 in graphics mode.
One thing I forgot to mention, this game supports FSR Frame Generation as well. It seems like it is FSR 3 Frame Generation, and not FSR 3.1, as it is tied to using FSR upscaling.
This part of the game shows no performance issues.
Try "Lostwing" or another open area. I can barely surpass 45fps with an RTX 4070 super of my own.
The PS5 dropped to 720p in combat in performance mode that puts it a bit in perspective
What settings?
I guess AMD gpu's work better here, 1440p max settings with FG on 100 fps locked. I have to say I did use the ultrawide fix.
@@kraithaywireI'm playing at 1440p, mid/high settings, DLSS on quality.
I already have this game on my PS5, had a good time! Plan on getting a 4070 Ti super later this year, so ill probably pick this game up at a discount later lol, thx for showing it off!
Thanks for stopping by. The 4070 Ti Super is a great performing GPU. It might be a bit pricey, but what GPU from Nvidia this gen isnt? Pretty sure you'll enjoy it when you get it!
Well, im playing at 1440p with a rtx 3070 and getting over 100 fps on 90% of areas. I'm currently using the mod to enable frame gen on older rtx series. And it works a lot better than you might think. But if i disable frame gen, then it goes to 70 fps on most areas, and sometimes it dips to 50 on crowded cities. The only problem is the ghosting that frame gen is famous for. But i got used to it. Really good game, i recommend for FF enjoyers.
It is interesting to see that most demanding recent games do not really need that much VRAM.
About a year ago, when a few VRAM hogs released (TLoU, Ratchet and Horizon 2) people were burying their 8GB cards and even tried to bury 12GB models.
But it looks like that period ended. We are back to games that do not need more than 8GB at 1080p. While 12GB is fine even for 4K res.
Looks like raw GPU power becomes a more important thing again. At least, until the next gen consoles release (probably in 3 years).
VRAM is largely heavily taxed if you start using assets that eat up a lot of space like high res textures or if you use ray tracing. The VRAM needs go down if those 2 aren't part of your gameplay.
@@XieRH1988 True. But still, VRAM usage is somewhat exaggerated in Nixxes ports.
BM Wukong with path tracing is using far less VRAM than Horizon FW, for example, despite the fact that Horizon does not include any RT effects at all.
Also in Banishers GoNE texture quality is higher than in Ghost of Tsushima, but the latter still uses more VRAM.
So we should not forget so-called "optimization". Some devs do a much better work than others in this regard.
Yeah, Nixxes ports are notorious for their high VRAM usage. I think the issue is it's ported from PS, which has shared memory and some code might be carried across with regards to VRAM. I remember when TLOU for PC launched it automatically reserved 20% if your VRAM, no matter the amount of VRAM you had, and it was found that it's because it does a similar thing on consoles. It was fixed not long after.
Thank you for this review! Very thorough. I wanted to hold out for the 50 series to come out, but I'm still on a GTX 1080, and while it technically fits FF16's minimum requirements it just chugs too hard to be playable for me. I game at 1440p and this card seems like the sweet spot 🙂
Thank you! Yeah, unfortunately the game is very GPU heavy so a 1080 will have a bit of a hard time, unless you use FSR upscaling and FSR Frame Generation. It does introduce additional input latency and visuals are affected though.
I'm curious to see what the 50 series brings. Hopefully we can get a 5070 that's on par with a 4080, but pricing remains the biggest question.
Great video man, and yea it definitely looks to be performing far more consistently than the demo was, even on its latest patch. Debating on whether I should buy the game again, given I already beat the game and its DLCs when they launched back on PS5
Thank you! Yeah, I was pleasantly surprised for sure. I had very little hope of it performing well, based on the demo, but here we are!
I'm not looking for a new game, but i'm always a bit hesitant to buy something like FF 16. I've never played an FF game so would i know what was going on? Good video.
Thank you! Yeah, I am actually with you. I have never played a Final Fantasy game before, until a few months ago when I tried FF7 Remake, and I found it wasnt for me. This actually looks quite cool, but I will have to read up on some lore!
As a long time FF fan. 16 is the perfect point to jump in. You do not have to have played any other FF to play 16.
Okay, that's good to hear. How are the combat mechanics compared to FF7 Remake? I havent gotten very far yet, still deciding whether I should refund or not.
@@Mostly_Positive_Reviewsvery different combat style. Remake is a hybrid of real time and turn based combat. 16 is a straight up action game. With some rpg mechanics. Keep playing 16. It is amazing.
FF games can be played in any order bc each entry has a different cast of characters and in some cases even a completely different lore
The game on PS5 brought it to its knees down to 720p ans chugging frames puts it in a bit of perspective I will say there is more going on underneath the hood that meets the eye
Yeah, there has to be something I am not aware of. I tried to find out if it uses some kind of ray tracing but I believe it doesnt. It can definitely look good at times for sure, and it performs much better than the demo for me, which is a definite win!
There are some really good lighting and techniques for hair and eyes etc like some stuff is seriously top notch Sauare was really ambitious I just don't think they have the back end technical chops to bring that kind of ambition home and I really think they were very overly ambitious with the PlayStation version
Yeah, you can see that it has the potential to look really good, and some aspects of it does for sure.
Lol even 4070ti super still struggle 60fps at 1440p, and DLSS in here is way too blurry.
Yeah, it's so annoying to have to rely on upscaling to get a decent experience.
it looks even blurry on DLAA.
Maybe it is worth to tune DLSS a little bit in this game via DLSS Tweaks. Changing presets (C, D, E, etc.) and resolution scale may help.
I personally prefer to use 76% value, which at 1440p equals to 1080p. This way the image looks identical to native 1440p DLAA IMO, but games still usually perform 15-20% better. In this case it should get 4070 Ti Super to ~75-80 fps. With FG it should provide 130-140 fps.
Guess the game favors AMD. My 6900 XT runs better than this. I've tried the demo only, though.
Yeah, other comparisons seems to show that the 4070 ti super is ~5 to 10% below a RX 7900 GRE, which should be somewhat close to your card
their luminous engine is azz, its like bethesda engine
I kinda disagree but totally see your point it does some stuff really well lots of stuff really bad and then Squares own either incompetence, lack of ambition or etc. To drive the technical performance better be it on console or PC
I wouldn't recommend using Frame Generation unless you have no other way of achieving a playable framerate. It adds latency and destroys visual clarity. DLSS should be more than enough to run this game at a comfortable framerate with this GPU.
It looks amazing with it on and with NVIDIA low latency on its not a problem at all
@@NexGenTek There's significant artifacting during motion with Frame Gen enabled that is VERY noticeable. You're getting a more fluid image at a HUGE visual quality cost.
@@verde5738 There’s not a sparkle of an artifact in fact it looks squeaky clean what monitor are you using and what type of pc?
@@NexGenTek Do you understand how absurd you sound by claiming that AI-generating half of your frames doesn't affect visual quality in any significant way?
Artifacting and general loss in visual clarity is an inescapable trade-off of the Frame Gen technology.
You're either blind, or lying. There is no alternative.
@@verde5738 Frame Generation has come a long way from when it was introduced. This isn’t the motion interpolation you have on your tv. There are no artifacts actually there’s really no game with frame Gen at the moment now that has artifacts during motion. Do I need to show you a video.
Digital foundry has covered this numerous times. If you’re to incompetent to understand that’s not my problem. I’m playing on a 4090 i9 14900K 4K120 basically locked with Frame Gen mixed with DLSS Quality. It’s outstanding and I don’t mind posting a video to prove you’re wrong!
A 4070 is mid range. Dont be suprised if it struggles on modern games
It's a 4070ti super. It's better than a 4070 ti which was supposed to be a 4080 class product. Yeah, there are better cards, but it' still very poweful.
@@walter274 Yeah, the 4070 Ti Super is on average around 40% faster than the regular 4070, and it kills most games at 1440p.
That said, it's so funny to hear someone else say the 4070 is mid-range, because that's exactly what I said in a previous video and people were livid haha! I actually said a 3080 is considered mid-range today because it is on par with a 4070, and a 4070 falls right in the middle of the range, hence mid-range.
@@Mostly_Positive_Reviews I have a 3080 12gb, i consider it a mid range card. That said i wouldn't fault somone for saying it's a high end card since the most common video card on the steam hardware survey is a 3060. I'm happy with the balance i strike between graphics and frame rate with it.
@@Mostly_Positive_ReviewsI have a 3080. It’s definitely a midrange card by today’s standards. But it and the 4070 are still very capable cards. I played the demo for 16. Didn’t notice much in the way of poor performance. But then again, I first played 16 on ps5 in graphics mode.
nice ragebait