@@stealthhunter6998 I'm guessing they just didn't affect performance much, like the Effect settings that was shown just before the optimised settings part. So just put 'em at ultra I suppose.
@@stealthhunter6998 They didn't have much effect on performance or visual quality, but honestly I'd lean towards setting them lower since this game seems to be an insane CPU hog. Also Ambient Occlusion's optimized setting is High
These guys are where they are because they consistently put out quality content, maintain absolute professionalism, and even better they go into the details and ACTUALLY GET to the root of more technical problems that other channels will just say, “Oh it’s bad optimization and uhh we can’t provide a solution or a reason.” Digital Foundry is my favorite technical gaming channel.
The content is high-quality I will agree… May be a bit TOO high-quality…. Over the past year I’ve been watching this channel I have come away with the distinct impression that DF is not disclosing paid product advertisements. For a channel so supposedly heavily focused on technology, they make some really, really, REALLY head-scratching choices when it comes to their test bench in pretty much every single performance review I’ve ever seen. It doesn’t take away from the quality of the content, and obviously I’m still here, but I am 100% fed up with deception being literally everywhere I look. With this channel, on the one hand these guys are obviously super intelligent and understand things about the technology that I clearly do not - BUT on the other hand, The parts this channel uses, and the manner in which it compares them with other parts during performance analysis vids, is something I would expect from either a straight-up shill channel, or a channel run by people who only vaguely understand the technology they are working with - but I have a hard time believing this to be the case. Just consume with caution I guess is my point lol
> Absolute Professionalism -> Continuously Shill for Nvidia, Intel and Playstation. And sponsorships are everywhere. Sponsorships != Objective opinions. Professionalism thrown out the window. (Its why GamersNexus lose sponsorships because they are TOO honest)
It's still valuable info that helps the developers fix what's wrong with the game, not a lot of people have the knowledge and resources to go in-depth like Alex does. Sucks that it's not very helpful to us end users, but it's still a win for us.
The service that Alex provides with these videos can’t be appreciated enough. These are things some PC gamers obsess about (myself included), but don’t have the patience, tools, know how to actually do it. PC game developers need to hire this guy and create a Battaglia setting for all games.
Yeah I agree! I got a PS5 for TV gaming,but noting beats gaming on a PC , even though I got a Laptop with i7 9th gen and RTX 2060 6GB and using Alex optimized settings makes the game look good and running smooth aswell!
Optimized Settings; Clouds: High Geometry Quality: High (medium same FPS) Shadows: High Ambient Occlusion: High Reflections: High Lighting: High Ground Cover Detail: High Terrain: Ultra (on modern GPU) Textures: 8Gb VRAM use Ultra, any less (like 6gb) use High or lower. Depth of Field (which is only in cutscenes): Medium Effects: Use Ultra on modern GPU Volumetric Fog: High Anistropic Filtering: 16x or Ultra or whatever it is. Async Compute: On (Pascal or older may not see a performance change.) Use Dynamic Resolution (minimum frame rate option) and set to your monitors refresh rate. He also mentioned that you need a beefy CPU for this game with optimized settings, a 10900k or better. Also Nvidia GPUs are performing notability worse currently.
Even before watching this, I was getting 100+ indoors but once it hit the world I was still 80-90s fps with an 8700k. So I wouldn’t say you need a super beefy cpu. Came here to fix why it feels so choppy
@@Deimos1223 I have a 8700k and a rtx 2080 standar edition playing on 1440 p getting anywhere from 38fps to 55fps once I got to the open area.. it’s bad man
I honestly think that for the performance the game shows, it should look a lot better than it does currently. I also think the settings don't really scale a lot, on my pc I had a really hard time trying to find differences from medium to ultra other than the massive hit on performance, which seems unjustified because of that.
Agreed. Not bashing the way the game looks at all, but it doesn't look NEARLY as good as it should for how it performs. I'm very worried about the impending performance hit when they implement ray tracing, but frankly given how the game looks now I don't think adding Ray Tracing would improve the look of the game any significant way.
@@livelaurent and somehow, someway, you find your comment to be any better than any other? you do realize people are free to have opinions right? even so, mentioning that the difference between medium and ultra is minimal (which I noticed too on my own machine) and saying that it SEEMS unjustified is not wrong or bad in any way. you just have some unspoken mental complex at play here maybe?
@@somebodyelse522 LOL who told you my comment was "better"? This is not a war. Also nice that you noticed a lot of things. You sound cool too. Mr Unjustified! Just cause you have no clue what is going on with something someone else (that know better than you), does not make it unjustified.
@@willx27 raytracing could change the look dramatically if implemented correctly. If implemented to the level of Metro Exodus, it would look completely on another level. At least I hope they implement RTX global illumination and not just raytraced reflections, those wouldn't improve the overall look that much since the reflections are already handled really well
343: We are building the pc version of the game from the ground up, optimised for pc players. Also 343: framestutters, broken framerate limiters icw dynamic resolution and insanely high cpu strain. Nice.
Its a joke like I only got a pc for this game tried to say it would run on a 970 I git a 1650 with amd r 5600g thought I had all set now in pissed off like wtf
@@symol30872 not really for me. Even with high fps, it still feels choppy. The only solution I've been able to put up with is locking min and max to 72fps. My card can get me at least 120, but at 72, while not as smooth as I'd like, it's at least not choppy/stuttery.
In my experience without optimised drivers (modded ones with optimisations offer an insane improvement), of all my cards only the R9 Fury was able to manage playable frame rates, my thoughts were down to how memory intensive the game can be as it seemed like the HBM is what kept that card fighting to give a playable framerate.
@@moasto02 does sound an awful lot like a memory style optimisation issue. Makes me wonder if it’s down to the Xbox One (and One S) having high speed ESRAM, and the others using GDDR for system RAM, which is insanely fast (albeit required a lot of optimisation for).
Hey man i have an r9 fury and the game is unplayable for me with the amd drivers. What did you use? Also i had recently watched a couple of your videos, good stuff! Please help i really wanna play this game!
I wonder if this transitions to system RAM as well. The multiplayer runs pretty well on my i7 4770k and 6700XT but I get stutters at the start of my first match after launch every single time and first load takes a long time as well. It would make sense if my DDR3 RAM was the main culprit as my CPU seems to sit well under 100% all of the time.I also moved it from a fast(ish) HDD to an SSD and saw almost no difference in initial load.
Until i downloaded the optional December Adrenaline driver (21.12.1), Halo was not using my GPU beyond 110 Watts (210W normal). Definitely recommend any AMD users to check out the optional driver as it helped loads for me.
@@muchacamara What trouble? Updating drivers takes one click and checking the gpu performance a combination of two keys. Its not like he has to go get fire wood smh
@@TerraWareBro, It was 2 clicks actually. (I had to click show Recommended+ Optional in Adrenaline before clicking update)....I think I almost pulled my back muscles doing it.
@@Greez1337 Just seen a few other comments from @Black Storm, he's clearly a troll or an anti xbox corporate marketing drone. I'm on 21.12.1 my self and am getting around 97% GPU usage with around 250W power draw at around 200 fps on a 5900X/6800 XT build. The performance has increased tremendously on this game since it launched. Especially Forza Horizon 5. I never had the previous Halo Infinite drivers install so can't really compare but it's what I'm seeing.
There seems to be a theme with recent releases, buggy on release and fixed in a couple months, seems like they should really just delay games until they're ready. I'm with Alex, I won't play this until it's received patches.
They push out games like paychecks. I would honestly like to see a game that devs treat like a portrait, or sculpture, or any piece of real art. Something gets messed up, they fix it, or start all over if they can't. Being able to download patches wasn't really a good feature for consumers, it was a feature for game companies to push games out faster.
It's annoying that stuttering is still such a common problem among new PC releases. Out of all the visual defects, it's probably the one I'm most sensitive to 😫 The frequent jitteryness of uneven frame-pacing wrecks immersion, especially when using a mouse and keyboard. That said, these issues wouldn't be highlighted if it wasn't for the likes of DF. Thanks for another quality analysis!
Easily fixed, just don't use the in game framerate limiter which is a silly idea anyway. I set a frame rate limiter globally in the Nvidia control panel that applies to all games, you never have to worry about in-game settings.
@@Carlisho One of the issues in this case is that neither Freesync or G-Sync actually work to resolve the stutter. External frame limiters are the only option, which then rules out using the game's excellent dynamic resolution setting.
Man I wish PC games would just launch in a great state sometimes. Too many these days launch with major issues to do with CPU or GPU utilization. I guess it really is too much to ask that they take the extra time to make sure their game can scale properly on appropriate hardware. Sick of developers treating the PC community like second class consumers.
@@omarcomming722 yeah maybe, but these aren't major issues for them to fix. Even the frametime issues randomly disappear for me (well I haven't figured out why yet) so it's clearly something that's fixable. Maybe I'll revise my estimate to a month though. 😁
They had 6 years bro 6 it should work on older gpus I'm at a point with mp that I'm hitting 1080p at 85+ fps but its odd tbh aa is busted and async causes your gane to crash I set lowest fps to 75 and max to 165 so it works to a point but still will crash on you vsync off definitely I just hope it's campaign will run 🏃♂️
"I imagine patches will remedy this all soon enough." Bro, have you played the master chief collection? The animation bug is the same one as the one in the collection, among other issues. No. Expect it to be messed up for quite some time, but the battle pass and micro transactions will surely be in tip-top shape!
I've always been a huge fan of consoles for the convenience they offer, but recently I got a new PC because my old laptop was dying and I was really struggling with using some software I needed for school and I have really been enjoying being able to play all the games available on gamepass. As I said, never have been much of a PC gamer so these videos are super helpful and I can tell a lot of work goes into making them, thank you Alex!
I haven't seen any different between the lowest and highest FOV settings. Running a 3440x1440 on a 3090. FPS varies by map depending on size and activity going on. But adjusting it mid match doesn't make any dramatic difference. Nor in training mode with bots off. I don't have campaign to test but given multiplayer results I imagine it wont effect anytihng.
@@ShikuTeshi campaign is pretty demanding in open world I get 60-80s on ultrawide resolution too maxed out indoors jumps up to 100s this game needs DLSS. With their optimized settings makes like maybe 5-10% difference not much
@@xXxALeXFuTexBaLxXx yeah I have a 5900x and 3070.. I’m watching this video cause I’m confused how my Xbox does 120fps at 4k and I can’t even hit 120 at 1440p on my pc lol.. I do have a super ultrawide but I also tried not playing full screen.
This game needs some optimization on PC, but I've managed to get it playable quite well for the time being. I'm guessing it'll improve after a few patches.
Dude its honestly really bad haha. The fact i have to lower so much and even use the minimum framerate slider on some maps to get it as smooth as i want. R7 3700x and gtx 1080
It's not that simple of a thing to solve. You can use 64 bit precision but you lose performance. Check out cloud imperium games work on star citizen, due to the size of the world they have to use 64 bit precision
I’ve noticed a similar thing happening in the PS5 versions of Spider-Man 2018 and Miles Morales when the camera is very close to a character, so it may be a problem with using certain rendering methods on the newer consoles as I’ve personally never seen or noticed float precision issues in the PS4 version of Spider-Man (or any other game on PS4/Xbox One for that matter).
Nope get your wallet out for more mtx yay monetization yay 😄 bet you its a gash pile of mtx fuck this company like the 600mb update last week for that god awful event
I still dont have much hope for it. Some of the issues that they mentioned here have been confirmed that r fix is in the works like the facial animations at 30FPS will be coming POST launch so yeah. I literally dont excpect a single actual issue to be fixed other than game crashes.
@@Zarcaster seeing halo being used and abused this way really gets me salty bity pissed off I remember bungi o those good old day and this ain't it chife
For £450 new xbox series x gives u a unbelievable gaming experience and extras, U cant go wrong. Maybe not as powerful then a £1500 graphics card……..lol but its very close and for a fraction of the cost.
@@riceeater79 but series x is more clear and crisp, the fact is series x delivers high settings on pc equivalent which is recommended on the review as visually its almost the same as ultra settings on pc and beats ultra settings on frame rate. The series x is a steal at £450.
Hey Alex, great analysis. I have an RTX 3080Ti and I saw good gains(10% at least) by manually enabling Resizable Bar through NVIDIA inspector. That may explain the big difference between the RX5700 and RTX2600 if AMD has it enabled by default. I would like to see you test Rebar enabled across various titles, that would be a good video analysis.
@@formulaic78 Yes, unless you have a system that's new enough that it can with the bios. You also have to enable it within the bios. Resizeable bar = On/Auto
@@retrofraction How can you cut support of something that wasn't finalized when maxwell 2 was already out and pascal being in tape-out stage at that time? Turing and ampere on the other hand play pretty nicely with async compute.
u guys should add more types of optimized settings, yours always tend to be on the "almost ultra" side of optimized settings, wich is great, but I'd like to see an "almost lowest", where you are trying to squeeze as much performancec as possible from weaker hardware while having as little graphical loss as possible, also a mid range setting would be good lol I get it that its a lot of work to get optimized settings, but still, would be nice to have
It would be nice to have, but they give you all the information you need to do that yourself. I have a 3080 but I always optimize because I'm very sensible to frame drops. Specially in multiplayer games. So I mean, it would be nice, but the information is all there.
They should really consider the mainstream hardware side of things… a reference point of a 16 gb gaming pc with 1650t super/rx 580 and a ryzen 5 would be great place to begin.
I think the answer here is to use optimized settings and drs, and if that isn't enough, then you will need to use the visual aids to reduce what your willing to.
There's less point in that just because the weaker the hardware the closer you get to just 'everything low/off' esports settings. Which is thankfully how I'm still getting consistent 60+ fps in multiplayer on an RX580/3600 setup. The only golden bullet setting is putting minimum frame rate to 60.
@@romulino kinda but not really, the performance difference between settings on a modern gpu doesnt always (most of the time it doesnt) translate to older gpus (1060, 1050ti, 980, rx570), so what he mentioned wouldnt really apply to those gpus, so no, its not all the information, tesselation for example is way heavier on older gpus, he mentioned it, but didnt give any numbers. it would be nice to also mentioned an older gpu to see how they stack up. he went down to a 5700 and a 2060 super, but that is still pretty high end.
IEEE754 floating points lose precision at their extremes. This means that as the EXPONENT gets larger (numbers to left of decimal), the FRACTION precision will decrease (numbers to right of decimal). This loss of precision manifests as 'gaps' between values (eg. successive values may look something like: 0.001, 0.003, 0.005). That there is "warbling" in certain parts of the map may imply that the floats used to render the character model are in WORLD space coordinates, and at those locations, the character is at a point sufficiently far from the map section ORIGIN point (0,0,0), thus each vertex is losing positional precision. In other words: the open-world map is likely stored in a set of sections and objects within it, relative to its origin point, and when the warbling starts, the master-chief model is likely far from the center of that section! Aside: I wouldn't be surprised if they were using 16bit "half" floats for the performance benefits of doing so.
At $60 for the campaign, their main PC audience will be Game Pass Ultimate subscribers and no windows store game features DLSS. The only thing you can hope for is FSR coming and VRS getting a PC implementation as well. On the levels inside ships/forerunner buildings, DLSS would probably extreemely well with Halos style, but sadly it's not gonna happen. Edit: Maybe in a year or so this game will be updated with Microsoft's own AI upscaling solution though.
@@hhhfdsfs Thank you, I learned something now. Even installed the game to try it out myself. Still hard to believe that a Microsoft first party title like Halo will use DLSS, but great to know that it has nothing to do with the windows store and how apps are handled there mor a general stance Microsoft has taken against DLSS titles on their store.
im still hopefull that with more optimizations i will be able to run it on my XPS 15 9750 (i7 1050ti). Cuz rn with everything on low and the lowest res possible, it still struggles to get consistent 30fps without throttling
@@nicekeyboardalan6972 everything is overheating, specially the gpu, since dell decided 74Celcius was a good throtling temperature, when the CPU easily goes beyond 80Celcius at times. And since they share heat pipes.... well y'all know.
Here are my notes: (1) my rig: AMD Ryzen 7 5800x (8-core / 16-thread, undervolted & tweaked to work properly), RTX 3070 Ti (8GB VRAM slight overclocked variant from TUF Gaming), TUF Gaming mobo, 32 GB RAM, 3 SSDs and my old decent HDD. Since I have a 1080p60 halfway-decent monitor (the LG 27MP35 IPS) and a great 1080p HDTV (Sony Bravia from 2016 or so), and an okay 2017 4K HDR TV from LG that my family hogs, I'm limited to 1080p60 regimes of gameplay. This is fine, considering viewing distance and screen sizes, and it allows me to push the game and not worry about major fluctuations at absurdly high framerates -- I can now run many games at several hundred fps maxed out at 1080p (but this maxes out the power draw) and any game 1440p and 60-120 fps (with no sweat on the CPU/GPU's back even w/o optimised settings). Still, when I run games w/ maxed settings at 1080p60, there's little overhead on the GPU (temperature or power draw) and even less on the CPU. This means my electric bill isn't going to kill me either. Side note: The game launches but doesn't recognize that campaign and multiplayer are installed when using Win10 storage settings to move the game pass version of the game to my NVMe gaming SSD; looks like I have to completely uninstall and re-download the game again bc even using the Game Pass app and the game's in-game file management options is NOT working... actually, uninstall didn't work either, bc last time I did that it just moved back to my HDD, where it worked properly. LMAO. (2) VSYNC: internal (in-game) vsync option doesn't seem necessary if using Async Compute on a *card that supports it* and enabling the in-game maximum frame limiter properly (a frame cap that matches the monitor's refresh rate), bc I don't see anymore screen tearing at all whilst using it... however, there are 1 or 2 new AMD RX gpus that had issues with Async at the game's launch. I do not use external software for v-sync or frame limiting. Probably never will. And yes, I play "competitively" as well. (3) VRAM notes: few of the options have much of a VRAM hit; the ones at the bottom (stuff like terrain cover, flock quality, wind effects) have a negligible effect on VRAM usage and CPU/GPU utilization -- may as well max these out. Anti-aliasing and texture filtering have an extremely small fps & VRAM payoff when lowering these settings, so I also maxed these out. Geometry Detail & Texture size are the two biggest VRAM hits (and the only significant ones). If setting both to ultra, you will likely go over the "ideal limit" of ~6.35 GB for the 8GB VRAM gpu. However, I detected no instability issues when playing campaign and multiplayer for over an hour last night. (I'm currently running the game at about 7.05 GB out of the 7.85 GB max). I also REALLY can't tell a major difference between "High" Geometry and "Ultra" for near-distance and far-distance objects (LOD). You may want to set it to High, as per Alex's recommendations... however, when I benchmarked the game to run above 60fps at 1080p, I could not discern differences between the average framerate, so I currently set both to Ultra anyway. (4) The HD texture pack is only necessary for UHD resolutions; uninstall it, as it gives the Steam version some problems. The fucked up part is that when you install this game, especially on Game Pass app, and don't select the HD pack, it INSTALLS ANYWAY. (5) Legendary difficulty is not as frustrating as older Halo games (but still frustrating when solo'ing). It is quite doable -- in fact, Hard is a bit too easy w/ your preferred input device (for me, it is m+kb but I am also used to Halo w/ Xbox controller). I recommend ALWAYS traveling with a small squad of well-equipped marines, as they will make short work of Banished squads if you're also kitted out properly and take advantage of their positioning.
Thank you for the review as always. I am loving the 4v4 multiplayer but after watching this and remarking the issues you have raised, I think I will be waiting until a patch is executed. Halo needs to be smooth.
April here. SP got one minor patch. Still huge performance problems. No DLSS or FSR 2.0 announed. Really disappointing. Defintley my last Halo Game on PC for full price.
Haha funny see thats that elite attitude 🤣 I can't afford that shit right now see I work for a living I don't have mummy and daddy's bank cards fucking high end stuff like that costs so much now and yet folk keep banging on and on about it I should have just got a new xbox instead I wasted 1700 on a Rigg to find out I'm going to struggle to hit 60 fps wow fuck 343 and fuck windows
@@jamesmcferran7813 Mate. Calm down. I work for a living too. Life is expensive and it sucks yeah. But what are you trying to achieve. I feel like you responded to the wrong comment even lmao.
Love how even-handed this is. Alex and John both have laid out some pretty glaring issues while still commenting that "It's super fun to play." Here's hoping 343 gets on this stuff quickly. The animation issue especially is baffling to me, given what we saw in the 2020 demo. Great work as always, Alex!
I might be wrong but I assume Alex is not at all impressed by the game's visuals, but delivers this message in a professional/kind way to not anger the many Halo fans?
Use an external frame limiter like the global one found in the Nvidia control panel fixes the issue, this is always better anyway as it applies to ALL games, no messing around "per game".
@@Battleneter He literally says this breaks the dynamic rez. You should preface your comment with this so you're not leading people into using the two in conjunction and completely destroying the image quality. EDIT: Sorry, I think I assumed you were using external vsync. With external framerate limiter with no vsync, you'd presumably have a better time, sans a little screen tearing here and there, depending on your fps
I wonder if the devs were attempting to mirror the BlurBuster’s low-lag V-Sync guide where you cap just a hair beneath refresh to reduce input latency (you’re basically filling the back buffer “just in time” as I understand it). The trade off being if you cap too low you’ll get these periodic stutters. On Guru3D and BlurBuster’s the recommendation is 1) to use a very precise limiter like RTSS and 2) to use an exact monitor refresh rate tester first then do something like “true refresh” -0.01 fps. Cap too low you’ll get stuttering like this, cap too high you’ll lose some of the latency reduction. Usually when games force their in-game limiters ON with V-Sync they can to precisely 60 (or perhaps to 59.94). If a display is 59.94 let’s say then there’s no concern of having these frame stutters where the back buffer wasn’t filled in time but you still get some latency reduction over not capping fps at all or over capping to something like 61. This sort of thing is very interesting to test out on your own using RTSS and forcing VSync via the driver for example.
This is a great technique btw. But... Doesn't the precise value change depending on the exact display? So if the Devs did this some people are going to get stutters and others would be okay. It doesn't make sense to me that they would risk inducing stutter for some/probably most of their users in order to reduce input lag.
@@brewski535 yes - you would need to use an online v-sync tester to measure your precise refresh rate. It might be 59.935 for example. Most games that auto cap in-engine will set the limit to 60 as I understand it so you still get some input lag reduction over not capping at all. Especially because “good” in engine limiters can reduce input delay further over external ones (see BattleNonSense tests on YT - Overwatch and BFV have such in engine limiters). What the devs probably should’ve done is set the limit to something more reasonable - so, an actual 60 instead of 59.8 or whatever they’ve done here. Then beyond that they should’ve given the user manually control or when built in a hz tester. It’s very weird that so many games don’t give users control over the in engine limiter and multiple decimal places of precision can be very useful for this sort of thing.
@@BlindBison An in-game frame rate limiter accurate at a decimal level is a great idea! Especially in these fast-paced games. In this game the internal limiter is definitely broken for me. To remove all stutter I'm currently not using any vsync or limiter and instead relying on gsync whilst keeping the frame rate below my monitor's maximum to avoid tearing. I tried vsync on (externally) but the lag is unbearable if you reach the monitor's max refresh rate. I'd rather live with the occasional tearing in the quiet areas than take the massive input lag hit. One thing I haven't tested myself much are external frame rate limiters in this game. I know Alex found RTSS to still have issues... On an unrelated note I do wonder if dynamic resolution is bad for input lag? I guess it has to be if it uses the in game vsync. 🤔
@@brewski535 RTSS gives you like 4 decimals of precision out of the box iirc. It would be great if in engine limiters did the same but it’s notable most in engine limiters lack the precise accuracy of RTSS (though “some” can achieve a greater latency reduction vs even the best external limiters). If you’re using G-Sync you could enable V-Sync in the NVCP to enable the frame time compensation module for Halo’s profile. Usually the setup for Gsync is Vsync on + framerate cap a couple frames beneath monitor refresh to ensure you stay in the Gsync window and avoid Vsync level input delay + Gsync ON of course. There are BlurBuster’s articles on this too. Halo infinite has no true fullscreen mode sadly so you’d also want to make sure Gsync is ON for windowed and full screen modes. If I were you I’d try G-Sync ON for windowed + full screen + v-sync on in the control panel + Nvidia’s driver fps limiter set 2-4 frames beneath monitor refresh (if RTSS has issues there’s the Nvidia driver one which is also quite good just lacks decimal precision). You can avoid the Gsync ceiling and get no tearing. Should have pretty decent input delay. I’d look up the blur buster’s Gsync setup guide personally. Alternatively enabling ULLM in the NVCP in conjunction with Gsync ON will auto fps cap and reduce latency further by reducing the prerender queue. However this can have an impact on cpu bound performance
The work you did in enabling DRS for your PC version and analyzing the reflection patterns to determine the Series X equivalent setting for reflections is absolutely insane. Just so nerds like us can benefit. But also to hold these developers accountable. You guys are the absolute best in journalism, bravo.
Has anyone else run into the issue where once you hit the open world part of the game the fps falls through the floor? I was running the perfectly fine in the multiplayer and on the first few levels but now the frame rate is too abysmal
@@tuckermayatt2705 I am at the minimum recomdations. PVP work just fine and the first 2 levels of the campaign did aswell. But as soon as I get to the actual surface, I drop to 9fps!!!
I play on a 75hz 1080p monitor at ultra settings and sometimes my game drops to 60fps in heavy areas and fights, but most of time is 75fps, I have a RX 6800 with Ryzen 5 5600X
PC gamers: “The game is unoptimized you guys.” Fanboys: “NOOOO ITS THE BETA ITLL GET BETTER SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP” Digital Foundry: “At release the performance isn’t great on PC.” When will people stop gaslighting for companies? It’s so cringe
yeah, I criticized the downgrade of image quality on the starting cinematic and a ton of people were telling me I was dumb lmao, yesterday Jhon confirmed there was a downgrade from what was shown on E3 trailers... There will allways be fanboys no matter what
It would likely have been more playable and have less of these issues at the cost of the looks. Odds are that all the changes they made to next gen this up are why these issues exist today. Until campaign co-op is launched this thing is still in full development(as far as I am concerned) so I'm just taking the wait and see approach.
It really is , it's on paper specs show it to be about on par with a 2080ti/ 3070. The 5700xt was about 25-30% slower than a 2080ti with 40 cu and the same clocks as a series x . The series x has 30% more cores than the 5700xt and it's the newer rDNA 2 architecture which gives a bit more ipc. The cores alone allow it to Match the 30% divide and a 2080ti / 3070 for 500! Is crazy good value
@@vandammage1747 didn't perform cause its an exception i.e halo infinite, cause nvidia gpu's are performing below average(bad optimization), but similar amd GPU is killing XBX..
That CPU performance seems highly odd does it not? Considering the series X has something like a downclocked Ryzen 3700x and has a 120 fps mode (granted it doesn't come close to maintaining that, but still)
@@nomenomeha30anosatras33 ha that would be nice! But no, it's an 8 core 16 thread chip and is clocked around 3.6 GHz all core with SMT on IIRC? You're right that it's actually Zen 2 architecture, not Zen+. But still, it's half the cores of a 3950x and also clocked much much lower
What are you talking about? The X/ 5 CPU’s are entirely different architecturally than the 2000 series. The X was around 100 in most scenes, the 3600 was about 5-10% worse, the 10900k was in the 120-140 range, so 20-30% faster. That puts the console where it should slot in. And the 2070S was capable of locking 60 with drs at 4k Xbox settings. With no RT thats exactly where I would expect it to be.
@@chuckmayhem1991 was wrong to say 2700, should have said 3700x (XSX is Zen 2 based). Regardless, 15% worse than console using a higher clocked CPU is surprising unless the game is actually using all 8 cores, which would put the 15% discrepancy down to the 2 less cores on a 3600
It would be more like a downclocked 3700X, as the Series X CPU is Zen 2 generation, running at 3.6GHz w/SMT with 16 threads, or 3.8GHz w/o SMT with 8 threads (most games are using this faster clocked mode, I would guess Halo Infinite is too). A 2700 is Zen+ generation, so a gen too old, though to be honest an apples-to-apples comparison is hard as the memory interface on XSX is different from that on PC hardware, also they do not have the I/O chiplet running at half the memory frequency like PC does. So yeah, you are absolutely right that the CPU performance is odd - these games coming out recently that have been developed primarily for the next-gen consoles seem to be hammering the CPU in their PC ports. Which doesn't make sense as a mid-range chip from the same architecture/generation like a Ryzen 3600 should be able to at least equal the console chips! (Whilst it is lower core-count it has multithreading/SMT running at a higher clock - mine can maintain ~4GHz over 12 threads, which should be able to match 8 threads at 3.8GHz. Is it a memory thing?) 🤷♂ Maybe it's just a case of the PC versions not getting the love, as usual, and being released with optimisation left on the table?
I have my framerate targeted at 144, and the suttering is awful in the heavier areas in campaign. Going to try unlocking the framerate and hope that fixes it
Anyone else sort of underwhelmed with the graphics on explosions and smoke effects from grenades/rockets? The color is nice, but the effect is over so quickly and no lasting smoke. Sort of sad
It bums me out that my RTX 3090 can’t play this as well as my $500 Series X. My PC costs over $4,000. This just goes to show devs will always prioritize console over PC.
My RX580 is still doing work, getting me 60+ average FPS in multiplayer. Campaign I may play on my Series S however, unless I can find a 3060ti or 3070 at only slightly extortionate prices.
I'd like you to do a comparison on some games between xbox series x/s, ps5, top. Spec pc and then the average pc spec according to steam. The pc performance is always above what the majority of pc players will see.
Yeah but how many of these low end systems only play games like csgo or rainbow 6? There is a big chunk of gamers who only play easy to run f2p games on pc and that inflates the statistic.
Right now I'm playing MP on my Legion y540 and it's running pretty hot as it is. I don't think it's gonna do the campaign justice. My primary console is the PS5 but I think I'm gonna buy a Series S in the near future just for Infinite, Halo 5 and also to enjoy that sweet back-compat with performance boost on 360 - Xbox One games.
@@zakparamir755 Yeah but considering I'll keep playing cross-platform games on the PS5 for trophies, getting a Series X would not be a necessity. I also don't want to pay 500$ again and worse lose my mind tracking stocks. I think it's a good compromise. I'll still be testing the game tomorrow on PC since I have a week and a half left with my game pass ultimate code I got when I bought a series controller.
I thought I was going crazy with how bad this game felt while playing. I doubt these issues will be patched on day of release. I’ll definitely be holding off on buying the campaign until they get their act together.
Wow when the settings do nothing for framerate essentially other than low settngs u know this game is poorly optimised. it might as well have been statically set to the xbox settings.
Was this done with AMD's new drivers that came out yesterday? There was a special Halo Infinite version beforehand, but yesterday I got new drivers that increased FPS even more, but it plays a lot smoother now. I have always experienced better frame times with AMD vs. Nvidia. Usually at the cost of having a lower FPS though.
Thanks for putting up these settings before launch. I was having some performance issues in the multiplayer and want to have the best experience I can in the campaign, you do awesome work.
I kept wondering why the animations on character mouths and other facial movements felt like they were constantly stuttering, or at least they appeared to animate slower than the camera movements. As far as I know from playing last night of this comment posting, its still hasn't been fixed for PC at least.
Yeah I've been seeing similar issues, changed to your recommended settings and I can still only get 122~130 fps in 1440p on my 3080ti, definitely not as optimized as it could be. It also didn't see my gpu and I had to change a file so it would, fun! Edit: Restarting the game after applying the settings, and now I'm hovering around 122-150; for some reason like DF mentioned the main menu lags very hard compared to in-game.
@Maverick For sure that's not bad at all, but considering my specs I should be hitting 144 without any problems. A steady frame rate helps playability in a major way, but I have been having fun! For comparison, Doom Eternal (a game impressively optimized for pc) I can run at 1440p with raytracing on + all settings on Ultra Nightmare with a pretty consistent 200~ fps. Below are the specs I've been testing with, maybe with the day 1 patch the frame rate will be better? CPU: AMD RYZEN 9 5950X 3.40 GHz (4.90 GHz Max Boost), 16-Core 32-Thread GPU: GeForce RTX 3080TI 12GB Motherboard: ASUS TUF X570 Gaming Plus WIFI ATX Motherboard RAM: G.Skill TridentZ RGB 32GB DDR4 3200MHz (2x16GB) SSD: 1TB Gigabyte AORUS Gen4 M.2 NVMe SSD CPU Cooler: RGB AIO 240MM Liquid Cooler PSU: 850W 80 Plus Gold Fully Modular Operating System: Windows 10 Home 64-bit
@@MisanthropeMurphy I'm with you on your words here. Dooms optimizations are God tier. Makes every other game that doesn't look as good and somewhat similar in gameplay trash. I'm suspecting it's because most devs are relying on dlss and other tricks to raise the fps for them so they don't have to waste time on optimizing. It's annoying as hell. I'm here to say.. optimize like doom.. THEN add the tricks on top with an on/off button. Doom has a purchase from me with any game under the name if it's optimized like that from now on. You'd think a 3080(my card) would be able to do at least 144fps on most of the multiplayer maps in H:I. They barely can.(10850K 5ghz)
@@terabitdefiance8022 100% agree! Doom Eternal actually looks better than Halo Infinite graphically and has about double, if not triple the performance! 343 Industries are like rich amateurs who were handed one of the biggest FPS games of all time to develop without the necessary grit experience of more competent devs like ID Software. It’s like 🤦♂️.
This channel be helping all of us PC players adjust our graphics accordingly to get the MOST performance with negligible quality loss! Bravo, this channel is AMAZING. Thank you for all the hard work it must take doing these videos.
Here are my optimized settings: Everything on Low because the TXAA on this game makes it looks like shit when you are moving no matter the settings, so might get as much fps as you can. Seriously, it has ABSURD GHOSTING on 1080p. If anyone finds a way to disable it please let me know.
I was looking for a Taa injector 😂Well now srirously yes the game suffers from that a bit, but a friend told me that Alex suggested to set sharpening to 20 and it helps a lot, I don't notice it anymore
Dude I have a medium range PC that should be running this game fine (It ran more strenuous games easily) but when I came into the open world with med-high settings I got 10-30 fps... I am basically forced to use low because of the optimization...
I'm on the Xbox series X and I'm kind of disappointed we don't get games at 4K 60fps like is it the hardware that can't handle it because Microsoft made it seem like 4K 120 was one thing but 4K 60 I was really hoping to see a lot more from next-gen video games and the way their graphics and performance were but most games can only play 4K 30 FPS and then at that point it's just too slow so like we're kind of at this one spot that you know I think a lot of us gamers really should start speaking up to Microsoft you know we had the Xbox One X that was supposed to be 4K 60 and then they only had the Xbox series X now 4K 60 4K 120 but yet we're not really seeing it and then when they do try to hit those goals the textures are so then but I'm playing Halo Infinity right now and I don't think it looks like in next-gen game it still looks like kind of in a way you'd be playing on the Xbox One X still with some slight you know texture improvements there and there but I don't know maybe it's me what do you guys think
Xbox (and Sony) oversold the power of the new systems in my opinion. Disclosure: I have both an Xbox Series X and an admittedly powerful PC (RTX 3090 GPU). That's basically the top-of-the-line GPU as of the time I'm typing this. If I'm running Ultra settings at full non-upscaled 4K (2160p resolution) on my PC, I'm getting about 75 fps. However, in the options, I render the game at about 60% of 2160p and the game upscales it to 4K (albeit with some noticeable quality loss, but it's not horrible at all) so I can get 140 fps. My monitor supports 4K/144hz. Game developers see new tech and adjust new titles to push graphical boundaries. For example, my PC will easily hit 4K/140 fps on BFV, but it's about *half that* on BF 2042. Similar performance difference between Forza Horizon 4 and 5. Microsoft said it's planning to release tiers of consoles in the future, somewhat like GPUs are released now and more frequently than consoles have been released historically. You aren't wrong to be disappointed in the Xbox Series X for *current generation games.* Microsoft and Sony sold the 4K 120 rhetoric, but it didn't disclose that was for older, less demanding titles -- assuming the developers would even provide the updates and optimization.
@@rpospeedwagon Ya they kind of left that part out lol. Still a mid-gen Xbox Series X if done right could hit these numbers but it would bring the cost of the system of my quite a bit but then again it could be considered a top and premium system like a impc and only like you mentioned. I have a RTX 3060 TI and I love 4K Gaming but my card dose not. I can hit 4K 60 if I lower my settings to high on most games.
So, with everything in mind about the vsync and frame time issues, what's the best current setting for those with a GSync screen? Is it Vsync ON in-game, force vsync to "use 3D application setting" via Nvidia control panel, what should I set minimum/maximum Frame rate in game? I have 120hz monitor? I find if I set minimum to anything other than 120 it feels choppy/stutter/not smooth.
Wonder what is causing the poor performance on top tier hardware. I'm a bit concerned about gsync not working well enough due to rounding errors and really wonder... How do studios test their games. There must've been some monster bugs for them to address if this kind of performance made it to the final build. Anyway, game looks great even if it has poor performance. I'm having a peek day one.
This game is running rough for me at 1440p, mostly low settings on a 2080 and i7 8700k. I'm now beginning to wonder if the original, "clean" art style of the game shown back in 2020 was done for performance reasons.
Series S and X are pretty amazing consoles for the price in regards to capability. This especially true in the current market for overpriced and scarce PC parts. Its really hard to recommend anyone new to get into PC gaming currently unless money isn't a factor.
Except for the fact that on PC you get the entire Xbox ecosystem, more and more of the playstation ecosystem, you can emulate the best switch games. All with dual monitors, mods, higher settings and framerates. The X has to dip below 1080p for its “120” mode that never touches 120. Its not like the game runs really well on anything.
I think that's a bit of a broad statement. I would say don't get into PC gaming if you like playing console games at higher frame rates and resolutions (typically what puts PC ahead by a lot but not currently) but the GPU market doesn't negate all the existing benefits of PC gaming. Not everyone wants to play only console multiplatforms. There's still the biggest library of possible games from emulators to indies to game pass to some sony ex-exclusives as well as older triple A games which could run on a potato. Not everyone needs to play games at 4K 120fps to enjoy it, there's still many more benefits to buying an older GPU and experiencing the PC platform generally if you haven't ever than buying the current gen consoles that are still lacking in games that you could literally just play on an xbox one x or ps4. People overrate how much performance matters, as someone that has every platform except a PS5 and Xbox Series (yet) I'd still say the best platforms for the cost/benefit is PC then Switch then PS4. Unless your only goal is to play as few games at as high resolutions as possible, then sure get a Series X I guess? Some day it'll get an exclusive or two hopefully.
@@AnImperfectSoul it's a gamepass machine and it's a great option for people with a small budget. Many gamers, especially kids, only play roblox, minecraft, and fortnite with occasional gamepass games. It has a zen 2 8 core cpu and is capable of raytracing. It has an nvme hard drive and it's gpu is comparable to a 1650. Many people only have a 1080p TV. People like you are toxic for the sake of being toxic. I have one for my daughter and it's an excellent little console. You could not build a comparable pc for anywhere close to 299. Even if you try to argue that you can, its bs. I build pc's as a side business and I know the current state of hardware. I literally have 4 custom built pc's in my home.
Well performance isn't nearly as bad as I feared after playing the multiplayer beta but definitely still not where it should be. I bet the nVidia performance deficit is due to the game's CPU bottleneck given nVidia's known issues with higher CPU utilization by the drivers.
It could also be that they used the Xbox Series X as their target for performance and look and since the console was optimized with an AMD GPU in mind on consoles, it just transfers better to AMD on PC.
@@dingle2987 That's possible and it's certainly a common claim but I've never seen any real evidence of that occurring in other games. I do know for a fact that the game engine has significant CPU optimization issues, which have improved quite a bit since the first flight but which are still present in this release build.
@@retrofraction In AMD-sponsored titles sure, I'm just saying there's no link between the consoles running AMD GPUs and this performance differential, which is something people have been claiming since last gen released back in 2013.
@@vandammage1747 720p is a CPU bottlemeck on all games. Even 1080p on the majority of games hits a CPU bottleneck with a higher tier GPU. 1440p 120 fps is possible on the campagin..add about 30 fps for the multiplayer as its less demanding.
@@MrEditsCinema yet a $499 console with a bundled controller manages 120fps at 1080-1440p. Go figure Also did you not watch the video? Rtx3090 couldn't hold a stable 120fps at 720p and here you are talking about 1440p lol.
Finally someone speaking up about the poor PC performance on Halo Infinite. I got sick and tired of these shills and fanboys defending the PC version so much.
For those in a hurry:
17:01 for the optimised settings
But please watch the whole video, which is great, as this supports DF!
There's some settings missing from this list that r in the game. What about those?
@@stealthhunter6998 I'm guessing they just didn't affect performance much, like the Effect settings that was shown just before the optimised settings part. So just put 'em at ultra I suppose.
@@stealthhunter6998 They didn't have much effect on performance or visual quality, but honestly I'd lean towards setting them lower since this game seems to be an insane CPU hog.
Also Ambient Occlusion's optimized setting is High
@@kameronrogers4000 Yeah ambient occlusion is the one I was mainly looking at since that’s taxing on a lot of games.
TY, I'll go back and watch the full after I've played the first few missions myself.
These guys are where they are because they consistently put out quality content, maintain absolute professionalism, and even better they go into the details and ACTUALLY GET to the root of more technical problems that other channels will just say, “Oh it’s bad optimization and uhh we can’t provide a solution or a reason.” Digital Foundry is my favorite technical gaming channel.
Check out NXGamer! He goes a bit deeper into games and covers some things that DF missed.
@@Ha-ue9kg Ha, the inevitable competition. They couldn’t last for long without an equal adversary to contend with!
The content is high-quality I will agree… May be a bit TOO high-quality….
Over the past year I’ve been watching this channel I have come away with the distinct impression that DF is not disclosing paid product advertisements. For a channel so supposedly heavily focused on technology, they make some really, really, REALLY head-scratching choices when it comes to their test bench in pretty much every single performance review I’ve ever seen.
It doesn’t take away from the quality of the content, and obviously I’m still here, but I am 100% fed up with deception being literally everywhere I look. With this channel, on the one hand these guys are obviously super intelligent and understand things about the technology that I clearly do not - BUT on the other hand, The parts this channel uses, and the manner in which it compares them with other parts during performance analysis vids, is something I would expect from either a straight-up shill channel, or a channel run by people who only vaguely understand the technology they are working with - but I have a hard time believing this to be the case.
Just consume with caution I guess is my point lol
> Absolute Professionalism -> Continuously Shill for Nvidia, Intel and Playstation. And sponsorships are everywhere. Sponsorships != Objective opinions. Professionalism thrown out the window. (Its why GamersNexus lose sponsorships because they are TOO honest)
so the conclusion is
RTX 2070 super is 2x faster than weakbox series X
@ 3:26
😭🤣😭🤣
"Even on a Gsync or Free Stink display"
Wooooo! 😂 Alex that's amazing, already made my weekend
Alex hitting us with the Halo Reach opening music. The soundtrack to that game was something else.
"Winter Contingency" really is a great track!
I still think Halo ODST had the best and most atmospheric soundtrack of the series imo.
@@Wogle but cant beat "a walk in the woods" :p
@@DubElementMusic Ahh yes, the definitive Halo ambient music track. Classic.
Chills everytime...
Welcome to Reach.
Tremonius: "You were no threat, spartan."
Alex: "I will be when I don't have frame spikes."
Yeah the frame spikes are a bummer so far XD. Fun still, but can't wait for it to be slightly more stable.
Day one optimizations seem like a waste of Alex’s time. Nothing releases in a finished state anymore.
Day One is tomorrow, not today
It's still valuable info that helps the developers fix what's wrong with the game, not a lot of people have the knowledge and resources to go in-depth like Alex does. Sucks that it's not very helpful to us end users, but it's still a win for us.
Yep I got a asus rog strix 3090 and a amd ryzen threadripper 3990x but you watch it run like shit
And to think they had an extra year to work on this....
@@MINUANOGAMING they shouldn't need the public to be the beta testers they have people for that
I'd like to see an updated 2022 version. There's been changes made to the settings and optimization of the engine since this has been published.
I second this... 2023 even :)
The service that Alex provides with these videos can’t be appreciated enough. These are things some PC gamers obsess about (myself included), but don’t have the patience, tools, know how to actually do it.
PC game developers need to hire this guy and create a Battaglia setting for all games.
Yeah I agree! I got a PS5 for TV gaming,but noting beats gaming on a PC , even though I got a Laptop with i7 9th gen and RTX 2060 6GB and using Alex optimized settings makes the game look good and running smooth aswell!
@@TALZY4PRISON Yes, but not with a 500 $ hardware.
Optimized Settings;
Clouds: High
Geometry Quality: High (medium same FPS)
Shadows: High
Ambient Occlusion: High
Reflections: High
Lighting: High
Ground Cover Detail: High
Terrain: Ultra (on modern GPU)
Textures: 8Gb VRAM use Ultra, any less (like 6gb) use High or lower.
Depth of Field (which is only in cutscenes): Medium
Effects: Use Ultra on modern GPU
Volumetric Fog: High
Anistropic Filtering: 16x or Ultra or whatever it is.
Async Compute: On (Pascal or older may not see a performance change.)
Use Dynamic Resolution (minimum frame rate option) and set to your monitors refresh rate.
He also mentioned that you need a beefy CPU for this game with optimized settings, a 10900k or better. Also Nvidia GPUs are performing notability worse currently.
Thanks. My 1080 is having a stroke.
Bears mentioning that he said something better than 10900k for 120fps, not 60fps.
@@DroneCorpse yea lol
Even before watching this, I was getting 100+ indoors but once it hit the world I was still 80-90s fps with an 8700k. So I wouldn’t say you need a super beefy cpu. Came here to fix why it feels so choppy
@@Deimos1223 I have a 8700k and a rtx 2080 standar edition playing on 1440 p getting anywhere from 38fps to 55fps once I got to the open area.. it’s bad man
I honestly think that for the performance the game shows, it should look a lot better than it does currently. I also think the settings don't really scale a lot, on my pc I had a really hard time trying to find differences from medium to ultra other than the massive hit on performance, which seems unjustified because of that.
Agreed. Not bashing the way the game looks at all, but it doesn't look NEARLY as good as it should for how it performs. I'm very worried about the impending performance hit when they implement ray tracing, but frankly given how the game looks now I don't think adding Ray Tracing would improve the look of the game any significant way.
"Ouuuiuiinnn Ouuuiinnnnn Ouuiiiin"
@@livelaurent and somehow, someway, you find your comment to be any better than any other? you do realize people are free to have opinions right? even so, mentioning that the difference between medium and ultra is minimal (which I noticed too on my own machine) and saying that it SEEMS unjustified is not wrong or bad in any way. you just have some unspoken mental complex at play here maybe?
@@somebodyelse522 LOL who told you my comment was "better"? This is not a war. Also nice that you noticed a lot of things. You sound cool too. Mr Unjustified! Just cause you have no clue what is going on with something someone else (that know better than you), does not make it unjustified.
@@willx27 raytracing could change the look dramatically if implemented correctly. If implemented to the level of Metro Exodus, it would look completely on another level. At least I hope they implement RTX global illumination and not just raytraced reflections, those wouldn't improve the overall look that much since the reflections are already handled really well
343: We are building the pc version of the game from the ground up, optimised for pc players.
Also 343: framestutters, broken framerate limiters icw dynamic resolution and insanely high cpu strain.
Nice.
Yeah, my i7/RTX3080 Ti cannot keep framerates above 60 fps in MP.
Its a joke like I only got a pc for this game tried to say it would run on a 970 I git a 1650 with amd r 5600g thought I had all set now in pissed off like wtf
@@Balasca At 4k??
And 30fps animations everywhere like a 2010 Japanese PC port.
@@Balasca Which Driver? with latest driver at 4K with a 5600x and 3080 i'm getting 65-85 in MP
I really thought that the new engine would be made with E-sports in mind, so the performance issues are really unexpected
I mean this is 343 we are taking about here. Can’t expect too much from them
@@mitchellp7739
Apparently not.
It runs extremely well in Multiplayer
@@symol30872 not really for me. Even with high fps, it still feels choppy. The only solution I've been able to put up with is locking min and max to 72fps. My card can get me at least 120, but at 72, while not as smooth as I'd like, it's at least not choppy/stuttery.
@@symol30872 it does not run "Extremely" well
In my experience without optimised drivers (modded ones with optimisations offer an insane improvement), of all my cards only the R9 Fury was able to manage playable frame rates, my thoughts were down to how memory intensive the game can be as it seemed like the HBM is what kept that card fighting to give a playable framerate.
i love your channel
I'm able to get smooth play on a 2060 at 1440p, 60fps with all settings turned up except texture on low. I think your right.
@@moasto02 does sound an awful lot like a memory style optimisation issue.
Makes me wonder if it’s down to the Xbox One (and One S) having high speed ESRAM, and the others using GDDR for system RAM, which is insanely fast (albeit required a lot of optimisation for).
Hey man i have an r9 fury and the game is unplayable for me with the amd drivers. What did you use? Also i had recently watched a couple of your videos, good stuff! Please help i really wanna play this game!
I wonder if this transitions to system RAM as well. The multiplayer runs pretty well on my i7 4770k and 6700XT but I get stutters at the start of my first match after launch every single time and first load takes a long time as well. It would make sense if my DDR3 RAM was the main culprit as my CPU seems to sit well under 100% all of the time.I also moved it from a fast(ish) HDD to an SSD and saw almost no difference in initial load.
Incredible how far these reviews will go. I don’t even own a (gaming) PC and still enjoy them every bit as much
Alex's Optimised Settings at 17:13
Well done to DF and Alex for what must have been a huge undertaking in making this video. Looking forward to play this in PC Gamepass
Multiplayer is free on Steam also for those looking strictly for that!
@Lov Mir Take your meds dude or seek help. Peace
@@alexsilva28 This guy is on every pc video spouting this nonsense. Trying to convince himself of whatever he's saying.
@Lov Mir Please shut up.
@Lov Mir :O
Until i downloaded the optional December Adrenaline driver (21.12.1), Halo was not using my GPU beyond 110 Watts (210W normal). Definitely recommend any AMD users to check out the optional driver as it helped loads for me.
You have to go through all that trouble? 😅😅
@@muchacamara What trouble? Updating drivers takes one click and checking the gpu performance a combination of two keys. Its not like he has to go get fire wood smh
@@TerraWareBro, It was 2 clicks actually. (I had to click show Recommended+ Optional in Adrenaline before clicking update)....I think I almost pulled my back muscles doing it.
@@Greez1337 Just seen a few other comments from @Black Storm, he's clearly a troll or an anti xbox corporate marketing drone. I'm on 21.12.1 my self and am getting around 97% GPU usage with around 250W power draw at around 200 fps on a 5900X/6800 XT build.
The performance has increased tremendously on this game since it launched. Especially Forza Horizon 5. I never had the previous Halo Infinite drivers install so can't really compare but it's what I'm seeing.
@@TerraWare 😆😆😆😆😆
There seems to be a theme with recent releases, buggy on release and fixed in a couple months, seems like they should really just delay games until they're ready. I'm with Alex, I won't play this until it's received patches.
They push out games like paychecks. I would honestly like to see a game that devs treat like a portrait, or sculpture, or any piece of real art. Something gets messed up, they fix it, or start all over if they can't. Being able to download patches wasn't really a good feature for consumers, it was a feature for game companies to push games out faster.
Even more so on game pass the past 4 and a half years.
They already delayed the game a year dude.
This game doesn't nearly look good enough for the performance cost, really disappointing.
The game doesn't even look good on max settings. Kinda disappointed but it's a fun game so can be forgiven.
A different anti-aliasing option + some post processing effects would go along way for this game visually.
Given it was crunched the optimization is practically non existent
@@TheMrProboscis literally how? It looks great
@heftymagic4814 the open world looks pretty terrible at a distance with the lack of shadows.
It's annoying that stuttering is still such a common problem among new PC releases. Out of all the visual defects, it's probably the one I'm most sensitive to 😫 The frequent jitteryness of uneven frame-pacing wrecks immersion, especially when using a mouse and keyboard.
That said, these issues wouldn't be highlighted if it wasn't for the likes of DF. Thanks for another quality analysis!
Right? I always almost end up using external v-sync. It just seems like a basic feature people shouldn't have to mess with.
Easily fixed, just don't use the in game framerate limiter which is a silly idea anyway. I set a frame rate limiter globally in the Nvidia control panel that applies to all games, you never have to worry about in-game settings.
how stupid do I feel not realizing I've been playing with jutter every 4 seconds
These days i just let the frame rate do what it wants as long as its stays above 60, freesync is a blessing.
@@Carlisho One of the issues in this case is that neither Freesync or G-Sync actually work to resolve the stutter. External frame limiters are the only option, which then rules out using the game's excellent dynamic resolution setting.
Man I wish PC games would just launch in a great state sometimes. Too many these days launch with major issues to do with CPU or GPU utilization. I guess it really is too much to ask that they take the extra time to make sure their game can scale properly on appropriate hardware. Sick of developers treating the PC community like second class consumers.
Definitely worth waiting a couple of weeks until some patches come out on PC.
Couple of weeks is very optimistic
@@omarcomming722 yeah maybe, but these aren't major issues for them to fix. Even the frametime issues randomly disappear for me (well I haven't figured out why yet) so it's clearly something that's fixable.
Maybe I'll revise my estimate to a month though. 😁
@@omarcomming722
Yeah I'll give it 6 months or so before I grab it.
They had 6 years bro 6 it should work on older gpus I'm at a point with mp that I'm hitting 1080p at 85+ fps but its odd tbh aa is busted and async causes your gane to crash I set lowest fps to 75 and max to 165 so it works to a point but still will crash on you vsync off definitely I just hope it's campaign will run 🏃♂️
@@wing0zero Waiting for the sale or not a fan of gamepass?
DF's Best settings / Performance analysis videos are always the best on the internet, Thanks again!
"I imagine patches will remedy this all soon enough."
Bro, have you played the master chief collection? The animation bug is the same one as the one in the collection, among other issues. No. Expect it to be messed up for quite some time, but the battle pass and micro transactions will surely be in tip-top shape!
O they are dam that pass is so fresh so original so organic makes you want just chuck your wallet off their heads right....RIGHT
💯💯
Seriously it took 6-7 years to fix simple framerate issues in mcc CE campaign.
I've always been a huge fan of consoles for the convenience they offer, but recently I got a new PC because my old laptop was dying and I was really struggling with using some software I needed for school and I have really been enjoying being able to play all the games available on gamepass. As I said, never have been much of a PC gamer so these videos are super helpful and I can tell a lot of work goes into making them, thank you Alex!
I was hoping for a section on ultrawide monitors, I'm curious how much the FOV increase will impact this open world game.
I got a 3080 10700k I’m gonna max this shit out then slowly implement these optimized settings if I need higher frame rate
I haven't seen any different between the lowest and highest FOV settings. Running a 3440x1440 on a 3090. FPS varies by map depending on size and activity going on. But adjusting it mid match doesn't make any dramatic difference. Nor in training mode with bots off.
I don't have campaign to test but given multiplayer results I imagine it wont effect anytihng.
@@ShikuTeshi campaign is pretty demanding in open world I get 60-80s on ultrawide resolution too maxed out indoors jumps up to 100s this game needs DLSS. With their optimized settings makes like maybe 5-10% difference not much
@@ShikuTeshi solid 100s in multiplayer tho
@@xXxALeXFuTexBaLxXx yeah I have a 5900x and 3070.. I’m watching this video cause I’m confused how my Xbox does 120fps at 4k and I can’t even hit 120 at 1440p on my pc lol.. I do have a super ultrawide but I also tried not playing full screen.
This game needs some optimization on PC, but I've managed to get it playable quite well for the time being. I'm guessing it'll improve after a few patches.
Dude its honestly really bad haha. The fact i have to lower so much and even use the minimum framerate slider on some maps to get it as smooth as i want. R7 3700x and gtx 1080
I presume your talking about the multiplayer hey?
idk if I have a good pc I am running a 3060 and I have 144 frames not sure if I am lucky
@@andremostert8630 i am yeah
@@bobbob-cd9yl do you have the minimum framerate slider on? If thats off the performance tanks so bad
This 32bit float precission problem is the biggest bummer for me. Like: how could this be overlooked?
This topic is talked about by god of war devs for god of war 3 I think or god of war 2.
It's not that simple of a thing to solve. You can use 64 bit precision but you lose performance. Check out cloud imperium games work on star citizen, due to the size of the world they have to use 64 bit precision
Indeed but its AA is the culprit just ew jagged and shimmers at high my head hurts with this settings
I’ve noticed a similar thing happening in the PS5 versions of Spider-Man 2018 and Miles Morales when the camera is very close to a character, so it may be a problem with using certain rendering methods on the newer consoles as I’ve personally never seen or noticed float precision issues in the PS4 version of Spider-Man (or any other game on PS4/Xbox One for that matter).
I guess many things are a time and resource issue, if time is running out, the more subtle things will get pushed further back
There's supposed to be a "stability patch" on December 8th (tomorrow) that is confirmed by 343. Hope that this includes optimization
Nope get your wallet out for more mtx yay monetization yay 😄 bet you its a gash pile of mtx fuck this company like the 600mb update last week for that god awful event
@@jamesmcferran7813 What's wrong with you maam
I still dont have much hope for it. Some of the issues that they mentioned here have been confirmed that r fix is in the works like the facial animations at 30FPS will be coming POST launch so yeah. I literally dont excpect a single actual issue to be fixed other than game crashes.
@@Zarcaster seeing halo being used and abused this way really gets me salty bity pissed off I remember bungi o those good old day and this ain't it chife
Please seek therapy. You need it.
For £450 new xbox series x gives u a unbelievable gaming experience and extras, U cant go wrong. Maybe not as powerful then a £1500 graphics card……..lol but its very close and for a fraction of the cost.
You're right unfortunately. This is undeniably the case now.
Or even better a PS5 that actually shows the overhead to put out graphically impressive games at 60fps @1440p and STILL including Raytracing
@@riceeater79 but series x is more clear and crisp, the fact is series x delivers high settings on pc equivalent which is recommended on the review as visually its almost the same as ultra settings on pc and beats ultra settings on frame rate. The series x is a steal at £450.
Hey Alex, great analysis. I have an RTX 3080Ti and I saw good gains(10% at least) by manually enabling Resizable Bar through NVIDIA inspector. That may explain the big difference between the RX5700 and RTX2600 if AMD has it enabled by default.
I would like to see you test Rebar enabled across various titles, that would be a good video analysis.
It could also be that Asynchronous computing… you know the stuff that they cut hardware support for…
@@retrofraction Where did you get the notion of that false fact? There's an appreciable gain for enabling it on my 3080Ti.
To enable that do you need to update MOBO?
@@formulaic78 Yes, unless you have a system that's new enough that it can with the bios. You also have to enable it within the bios. Resizeable bar = On/Auto
@@retrofraction How can you cut support of something that wasn't finalized when maxwell 2 was already out and pascal being in tape-out stage at that time? Turing and ampere on the other hand play pretty nicely with async compute.
That Halo Reach soundtrack in the intro was just so nostalgic!
17:21 for optimized settings
u guys should add more types of optimized settings, yours always tend to be on the "almost ultra" side of optimized settings, wich is great, but I'd like to see an "almost lowest", where you are trying to squeeze as much performancec as possible from weaker hardware while having as little graphical loss as possible, also a mid range setting would be good lol
I get it that its a lot of work to get optimized settings, but still, would be nice to have
It would be nice to have, but they give you all the information you need to do that yourself. I have a 3080 but I always optimize because I'm very sensible to frame drops. Specially in multiplayer games. So I mean, it would be nice, but the information is all there.
They should really consider the mainstream hardware side of things… a reference point of a 16 gb gaming pc with 1650t super/rx 580 and a ryzen 5 would be great place to begin.
I think the answer here is to use optimized settings and drs, and if that isn't enough, then you will need to use the visual aids to reduce what your willing to.
There's less point in that just because the weaker the hardware the closer you get to just 'everything low/off' esports settings.
Which is thankfully how I'm still getting consistent 60+ fps in multiplayer on an RX580/3600 setup.
The only golden bullet setting is putting minimum frame rate to 60.
@@romulino kinda but not really, the performance difference between settings on a modern gpu doesnt always (most of the time it doesnt) translate to older gpus (1060, 1050ti, 980, rx570), so what he mentioned wouldnt really apply to those gpus, so no, its not all the information, tesselation for example is way heavier on older gpus, he mentioned it, but didnt give any numbers. it would be nice to also mentioned an older gpu to see how they stack up. he went down to a 5700 and a 2060 super, but that is still pretty high end.
IEEE754 floating points lose precision at their extremes. This means that as the EXPONENT gets larger (numbers to left of decimal), the FRACTION precision will decrease (numbers to right of decimal). This loss of precision manifests as 'gaps' between values (eg. successive values may look something like: 0.001, 0.003, 0.005). That there is "warbling" in certain parts of the map may imply that the floats used to render the character model are in WORLD space coordinates, and at those locations, the character is at a point sufficiently far from the map section ORIGIN point (0,0,0), thus each vertex is losing positional precision.
In other words: the open-world map is likely stored in a set of sections and objects within it, relative to its origin point, and when the warbling starts, the master-chief model is likely far from the center of that section!
Aside: I wouldn't be surprised if they were using 16bit "half" floats for the performance benefits of doing so.
yeah John already explained all of that in the Console Review, that's why I assume he did not go into it very much.
@@hockeylad2727 I watched that video. He didn't.
The PC port also needs FSR/DLSS. For a competitive multiplayer game, this is a must have these days!
At $60 for the campaign, their main PC audience will be Game Pass Ultimate subscribers and no windows store game features DLSS. The only thing you can hope for is FSR coming and VRS getting a PC implementation as well. On the levels inside ships/forerunner buildings, DLSS would probably extreemely well with Halos style, but sadly it's not gonna happen. Edit: Maybe in a year or so this game will be updated with Microsoft's own AI upscaling solution though.
@@renereiche um hellblade is a gamepass game and has dlss.
@@hhhfdsfs Thank you, I learned something now. Even installed the game to try it out myself. Still hard to believe that a Microsoft first party title like Halo will use DLSS, but great to know that it has nothing to do with the windows store and how apps are handled there mor a general stance Microsoft has taken against DLSS titles on their store.
im still hopefull that with more optimizations i will be able to run it on my XPS 15 9750 (i7 1050ti). Cuz rn with everything on low and the lowest res possible, it still struggles to get consistent 30fps without throttling
Sounds like something is overheating repaste the CPU bro
@@nicekeyboardalan6972 everything is overheating, specially the gpu, since dell decided 74Celcius was a good throtling temperature, when the CPU easily goes beyond 80Celcius at times. And since they share heat pipes.... well y'all know.
Here are my notes:
(1) my rig: AMD Ryzen 7 5800x (8-core / 16-thread, undervolted & tweaked to work properly), RTX 3070 Ti (8GB VRAM slight overclocked variant from TUF Gaming), TUF Gaming mobo, 32 GB RAM, 3 SSDs and my old decent HDD.
Since I have a 1080p60 halfway-decent monitor (the LG 27MP35 IPS) and a great 1080p HDTV (Sony Bravia from 2016 or so), and an okay 2017 4K HDR TV from LG that my family hogs, I'm limited to 1080p60 regimes of gameplay. This is fine, considering viewing distance and screen sizes, and it allows me to push the game and not worry about major fluctuations at absurdly high framerates -- I can now run many games at several hundred fps maxed out at 1080p (but this maxes out the power draw) and any game 1440p and 60-120 fps (with no sweat on the CPU/GPU's back even w/o optimised settings). Still, when I run games w/ maxed settings at 1080p60, there's little overhead on the GPU (temperature or power draw) and even less on the CPU. This means my electric bill isn't going to kill me either.
Side note: The game launches but doesn't recognize that campaign and multiplayer are installed when using Win10 storage settings to move the game pass version of the game to my NVMe gaming SSD; looks like I have to completely uninstall and re-download the game again bc even using the Game Pass app and the game's in-game file management options is NOT working... actually, uninstall didn't work either, bc last time I did that it just moved back to my HDD, where it worked properly. LMAO.
(2) VSYNC: internal (in-game) vsync option doesn't seem necessary if using Async Compute on a *card that supports it* and enabling the in-game maximum frame limiter properly (a frame cap that matches the monitor's refresh rate), bc I don't see anymore screen tearing at all whilst using it... however, there are 1 or 2 new AMD RX gpus that had issues with Async at the game's launch.
I do not use external software for v-sync or frame limiting. Probably never will. And yes, I play "competitively" as well.
(3) VRAM notes: few of the options have much of a VRAM hit; the ones at the bottom (stuff like terrain cover, flock quality, wind effects) have a negligible effect on VRAM usage and CPU/GPU utilization -- may as well max these out. Anti-aliasing and texture filtering have an extremely small fps & VRAM payoff when lowering these settings, so I also maxed these out.
Geometry Detail & Texture size are the two biggest VRAM hits (and the only significant ones). If setting both to ultra, you will likely go over the "ideal limit" of ~6.35 GB for the 8GB VRAM gpu. However, I detected no instability issues when playing campaign and multiplayer for over an hour last night. (I'm currently running the game at about 7.05 GB out of the 7.85 GB max). I also REALLY can't tell a major difference between "High" Geometry and "Ultra" for near-distance and far-distance objects (LOD). You may want to set it to High, as per Alex's recommendations... however, when I benchmarked the game to run above 60fps at 1080p, I could not discern differences between the average framerate, so I currently set both to Ultra anyway.
(4) The HD texture pack is only necessary for UHD resolutions; uninstall it, as it gives the Steam version some problems. The fucked up part is that when you install this game, especially on Game Pass app, and don't select the HD pack, it INSTALLS ANYWAY.
(5) Legendary difficulty is not as frustrating as older Halo games (but still frustrating when solo'ing). It is quite doable -- in fact, Hard is a bit too easy w/ your preferred input device (for me, it is m+kb but I am also used to Halo w/ Xbox controller). I recommend ALWAYS traveling with a small squad of well-equipped marines, as they will make short work of Banished squads if you're also kitted out properly and take advantage of their positioning.
Still haven't noticed the microstutter attributed to frame limiting & internal vsync. Guess I got lucky!
Thank you for the review as always. I am loving the 4v4 multiplayer but after watching this and remarking the issues you have raised, I think I will be waiting until a patch is executed. Halo needs to be smooth.
Oh god why did you have to point out that piece wiggling on the gun, now I can't unsee it! lol
We are in February 2022 and 343 still hasn't rolled a single patch to fix any of the problems shown in the video.
April here. SP got one minor patch. Still huge performance problems. No DLSS or FSR 2.0 announed. Really disappointing. Defintley my last Halo Game on PC for full price.
The Series S is literally 1080p on both quality and performance mode.. I hope you guys addresses that
It’s a Series S after all
Just started the video and gonna call it - Alex is gonna talk about how he wants Ray Tracing added in 🔥
Ez money
He actually barely talks abt RTX here
@@leonthesleepy I feel betrayed
Haha funny see thats that elite attitude 🤣 I can't afford that shit right now see I work for a living I don't have mummy and daddy's bank cards fucking high end stuff like that costs so much now and yet folk keep banging on and on about it I should have just got a new xbox instead I wasted 1700 on a Rigg to find out I'm going to struggle to hit 60 fps wow fuck 343 and fuck windows
@@jamesmcferran7813 Mate. Calm down. I work for a living too. Life is expensive and it sucks yeah. But what are you trying to achieve. I feel like you responded to the wrong comment even lmao.
Love how even-handed this is. Alex and John both have laid out some pretty glaring issues while still commenting that "It's super fun to play."
Here's hoping 343 gets on this stuff quickly. The animation issue especially is baffling to me, given what we saw in the 2020 demo. Great work as always, Alex!
I might be wrong but I assume Alex is not at all impressed by the game's visuals, but delivers this message in a professional/kind way to not anger the many Halo fans?
Because it is fun to play. But that only makes the performance issues worse, since you can't enjoy the game as it should be.
that precision issue looks like quake 2 with its lack of skeletal structures on the player and enemies.
Hearing Reach intro brings back the feels
Man the stuttering mess from the framerate limiter is a deal-breaker. Gonna wait till that's fixed.
Use an external frame limiter like the global one found in the Nvidia control panel fixes the issue, this is always better anyway as it applies to ALL games, no messing around "per game".
@@Battleneter He literally says this breaks the dynamic rez. You should preface your comment with this so you're not leading people into using the two in conjunction and completely destroying the image quality. EDIT: Sorry, I think I assumed you were using external vsync. With external framerate limiter with no vsync, you'd presumably have a better time, sans a little screen tearing here and there, depending on your fps
It seems that there are a lot of new graphical settings. Maybe a part 2 of this video ?
I wonder if the devs were attempting to mirror the BlurBuster’s low-lag V-Sync guide where you cap just a hair beneath refresh to reduce input latency (you’re basically filling the back buffer “just in time” as I understand it). The trade off being if you cap too low you’ll get these periodic stutters.
On Guru3D and BlurBuster’s the recommendation is 1) to use a very precise limiter like RTSS and 2) to use an exact monitor refresh rate tester first then do something like “true refresh” -0.01 fps. Cap too low you’ll get stuttering like this, cap too high you’ll lose some of the latency reduction.
Usually when games force their in-game limiters ON with V-Sync they can to precisely 60 (or perhaps to 59.94). If a display is 59.94 let’s say then there’s no concern of having these frame stutters where the back buffer wasn’t filled in time but you still get some latency reduction over not capping fps at all or over capping to something like 61.
This sort of thing is very interesting to test out on your own using RTSS and forcing VSync via the driver for example.
This is a great technique btw. But...
Doesn't the precise value change depending on the exact display? So if the Devs did this some people are going to get stutters and others would be okay. It doesn't make sense to me that they would risk inducing stutter for some/probably most of their users in order to reduce input lag.
@@brewski535 yes - you would need to use an online v-sync tester to measure your precise refresh rate. It might be 59.935 for example. Most games that auto cap in-engine will set the limit to 60 as I understand it so you still get some input lag reduction over not capping at all. Especially because “good” in engine limiters can reduce input delay further over external ones (see BattleNonSense tests on YT - Overwatch and BFV have such in engine limiters).
What the devs probably should’ve done is set the limit to something more reasonable - so, an actual 60 instead of 59.8 or whatever they’ve done here. Then beyond that they should’ve given the user manually control or when built in a hz tester. It’s very weird that so many games don’t give users control over the in engine limiter and multiple decimal places of precision can be very useful for this sort of thing.
@@BlindBison An in-game frame rate limiter accurate at a decimal level is a great idea! Especially in these fast-paced games.
In this game the internal limiter is definitely broken for me. To remove all stutter I'm currently not using any vsync or limiter and instead relying on gsync whilst keeping the frame rate below my monitor's maximum to avoid tearing.
I tried vsync on (externally) but the lag is unbearable if you reach the monitor's max refresh rate.
I'd rather live with the occasional tearing in the quiet areas than take the massive input lag hit.
One thing I haven't tested myself much are external frame rate limiters in this game. I know Alex found RTSS to still have issues...
On an unrelated note I do wonder if dynamic resolution is bad for input lag? I guess it has to be if it uses the in game vsync. 🤔
@@brewski535 RTSS gives you like 4 decimals of precision out of the box iirc. It would be great if in engine limiters did the same but it’s notable most in engine limiters lack the precise accuracy of RTSS (though “some” can achieve a greater latency reduction vs even the best external limiters).
If you’re using G-Sync you could enable V-Sync in the NVCP to enable the frame time compensation module for Halo’s profile. Usually the setup for Gsync is Vsync on + framerate cap a couple frames beneath monitor refresh to ensure you stay in the Gsync window and avoid Vsync level input delay + Gsync ON of course. There are BlurBuster’s articles on this too. Halo infinite has no true fullscreen mode sadly so you’d also want to make sure Gsync is ON for windowed and full screen modes.
If I were you I’d try G-Sync ON for windowed + full screen + v-sync on in the control panel + Nvidia’s driver fps limiter set 2-4 frames beneath monitor refresh (if RTSS has issues there’s the Nvidia driver one which is also quite good just lacks decimal precision). You can avoid the Gsync ceiling and get no tearing. Should have pretty decent input delay. I’d look up the blur buster’s Gsync setup guide personally.
Alternatively enabling ULLM in the NVCP in conjunction with Gsync ON will auto fps cap and reduce latency further by reducing the prerender queue. However this can have an impact on cpu bound performance
My OCD loves your OCD. Really thorough
Wow, the performance of the PC version while using the optimized settings really should be better.
The work you did in enabling DRS for your PC version and analyzing the reflection patterns to determine the Series X equivalent setting for reflections is absolutely insane. Just so nerds like us can benefit. But also to hold these developers accountable. You guys are the absolute best in journalism, bravo.
Once again a perfect in-depth review requiring strenuous hours of game-time and editing. Superbly done.
They didn't fix the "no legs" bug when you put your FOV higher than default. There are so many things that need fixing.
Has anyone else run into the issue where once you hit the open world part of the game the fps falls through the floor? I was running the perfectly fine in the multiplayer and on the first few levels but now the frame rate is too abysmal
yeah it is literally unplayable for me and I am not even at the minimum recommendations. this game needs some optimization
@@tuckermayatt2705 I am at the minimum recomdations. PVP work just fine and the first 2 levels of the campaign did aswell. But as soon as I get to the actual surface, I drop to 9fps!!!
I play on a 75hz 1080p monitor at ultra settings and sometimes my game drops to 60fps in heavy areas and fights, but most of time is 75fps, I have a RX 6800 with Ryzen 5 5600X
@@GaigeTheMechromance1 that's not good at all.
THANK YOU FOR ADDING CHAPTERS!
Digital Foundry: Optimsed Halo infinite PC settings
Also digital Foundry: You basically crank everything up to eleven BUT only turn off Motion Blur :)
Well yeah most people have high end hardware so it makes sense
Most people don’t … most have quite mediocre stuff … and laptops
@@greenmonkey220 Nah, everyone in the these comments on these videos have 3080s
Oh yeah you are right , digital foundry viewers are probably more than likely to own high end stuff
@@VerticalStrafes they probably would if 3080s didn’t cost us affording medical insurance
PC gamers: “The game is unoptimized you guys.”
Fanboys: “NOOOO ITS THE BETA ITLL GET BETTER SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP”
Digital Foundry: “At release the performance isn’t great on PC.”
When will people stop gaslighting for companies? It’s so cringe
The performance (at least on AMD) with optimized drivers is significantly better than the Beta in the summer.
yeah, I criticized the downgrade of image quality on the starting cinematic and a ton of people were telling me I was dumb lmao, yesterday Jhon confirmed there was a downgrade from what was shown on E3 trailers... There will allways be fanboys no matter what
But the game is not out yet, it will be tomorrow
Imagine what state the game would have been in if they had launched last year.
It would likely have been more playable and have less of these issues at the cost of the looks. Odds are that all the changes they made to next gen this up are why these issues exist today.
Until campaign co-op is launched this thing is still in full development(as far as I am concerned) so I'm just taking the wait and see approach.
@@vaguedreams Same here as well even though I have Game Pass. At least until the fix the animation issue.
Series x is a MONSTER of a console for the price
It really is , it's on paper specs show it to be about on par with a 2080ti/ 3070. The 5700xt was about 25-30% slower than a 2080ti with 40 cu and the same clocks as a series x . The series x has 30% more cores than the 5700xt and it's the newer rDNA 2 architecture which gives a bit more ipc. The cores alone allow it to Match the 30% divide and a 2080ti / 3070 for 500! Is crazy good value
@@earnistse4899 "it's on paper specs show it to be about on par with a 2080ti/ 3070" lol no, even alex compared it to 2070 super..
@@niks660097 yet the 2070super didn't perform better than XSX and doesn't have enough vram for 4K with ultra textures like XSX.
@@vandammage1747 XSX is Medium Settings and Dynamic 4K. a 2070 Super is more powerful than XSX. Lol Ultra Textures. You wont get much for only $500 🤣
@@vandammage1747 didn't perform cause its an exception i.e halo infinite, cause nvidia gpu's are performing below average(bad optimization), but similar amd GPU is killing XBX..
That CPU performance seems highly odd does it not? Considering the series X has something like a downclocked Ryzen 3700x and has a 120 fps mode (granted it doesn't come close to maintaining that, but still)
The Xbox Series X cpu is equivalent to a Ryzen 3950X.
@@nomenomeha30anosatras33 ha that would be nice! But no, it's an 8 core 16 thread chip and is clocked around 3.6 GHz all core with SMT on IIRC? You're right that it's actually Zen 2 architecture, not Zen+. But still, it's half the cores of a 3950x and also clocked much much lower
What are you talking about? The X/ 5 CPU’s are entirely different architecturally than the 2000 series. The X was around 100 in most scenes, the 3600 was about 5-10% worse, the 10900k was in the 120-140 range, so 20-30% faster. That puts the console where it should slot in.
And the 2070S was capable of locking 60 with drs at 4k Xbox settings. With no RT thats exactly where I would expect it to be.
@@chuckmayhem1991 was wrong to say 2700, should have said 3700x (XSX is Zen 2 based). Regardless, 15% worse than console using a higher clocked CPU is surprising unless the game is actually using all 8 cores, which would put the 15% discrepancy down to the 2 less cores on a 3600
It would be more like a downclocked 3700X, as the Series X CPU is Zen 2 generation, running at 3.6GHz w/SMT with 16 threads, or 3.8GHz w/o SMT with 8 threads (most games are using this faster clocked mode, I would guess Halo Infinite is too).
A 2700 is Zen+ generation, so a gen too old, though to be honest an apples-to-apples comparison is hard as the memory interface on XSX is different from that on PC hardware, also they do not have the I/O chiplet running at half the memory frequency like PC does.
So yeah, you are absolutely right that the CPU performance is odd - these games coming out recently that have been developed primarily for the next-gen consoles seem to be hammering the CPU in their PC ports. Which doesn't make sense as a mid-range chip from the same architecture/generation like a Ryzen 3600 should be able to at least equal the console chips! (Whilst it is lower core-count it has multithreading/SMT running at a higher clock - mine can maintain ~4GHz over 12 threads, which should be able to match 8 threads at 3.8GHz. Is it a memory thing?) 🤷♂
Maybe it's just a case of the PC versions not getting the love, as usual, and being released with optimisation left on the table?
Game: improper frame timing with vsync
Digital foundry: I can't believe you've done this
I have my framerate targeted at 144, and the suttering is awful in the heavier areas in campaign. Going to try unlocking the framerate and hope that fixes it
Anyone else sort of underwhelmed with the graphics on explosions and smoke effects from grenades/rockets? The color is nice, but the effect is over so quickly and no lasting smoke. Sort of sad
Great video breakdown!
Psst 343, we still need an option to turn off the awful TAA
Yes 1000% I hate the TAA
A god dang dedicated full screen mode I sorely needed as well.
It bums me out that my RTX 3090 can’t play this as well as my $500 Series X. My PC costs over $4,000. This just goes to show devs will always prioritize console over PC.
this is just the beginning
My RX580 is still doing work, getting me 60+ average FPS in multiplayer. Campaign I may play on my Series S however, unless I can find a 3060ti or 3070 at only slightly extortionate prices.
I'd like you to do a comparison on some games between xbox series x/s, ps5, top. Spec pc and then the average pc spec according to steam.
The pc performance is always above what the majority of pc players will see.
Yeah but how many of these low end systems only play games like csgo or rainbow 6? There is a big chunk of gamers who only play easy to run f2p games on pc and that inflates the statistic.
@@ChrisBa303 Name some F2P games like CSGO and r6. I have been hooked on IronSight lately, what I consider the best F2P FPS out right now.
💯 I am sure the majority of the hardware is much different than flagship GPUs
so the conclusion is
RTX 2070 super is 2x faster than weakbox series X
Does anyone else get stuttering in cutscenes at 60+FPS even when in-game gameplay is smooth?
Right now I'm playing MP on my Legion y540 and it's running pretty hot as it is. I don't think it's gonna do the campaign justice. My primary console is the PS5 but I think I'm gonna buy a Series S in the near future just for Infinite, Halo 5 and also to enjoy that sweet back-compat with performance boost on 360 - Xbox One games.
Series s performance is very poor with infinite dynamic 1080p 60fps or fixed 1080p 30fps
But developers told they are going to patch it.
@@zakparamir755 series s is a locked 60 In multiplayer , that's how I'm playing since my PS5 is secondary console
@@zakparamir755 Yeah but considering I'll keep playing cross-platform games on the PS5 for trophies, getting a Series X would not be a necessity. I also don't want to pay 500$ again and worse lose my mind tracking stocks.
I think it's a good compromise.
I'll still be testing the game tomorrow on PC since I have a week and a half left with my game pass ultimate code I got when I bought a series controller.
Series Shame can barely run this thing. 😆😆😆🤦🤦
@@muchacamara Jealousy ain't a good look bud...
Alex and DF doing the Lord's work.
I thought I was going crazy with how bad this game felt while playing. I doubt these issues will be patched on day of release. I’ll definitely be holding off on buying the campaign until they get their act together.
Yea its really rough, it's sad when the console versions perform better
Wow when the settings do nothing for framerate essentially other than low settngs u know this game is poorly optimised. it might as well have been statically set to the xbox settings.
Was this done with AMD's new drivers that came out yesterday? There was a special Halo Infinite version beforehand, but yesterday I got new drivers that increased FPS even more, but it plays a lot smoother now. I have always experienced better frame times with AMD vs. Nvidia. Usually at the cost of having a lower FPS though.
it is the latest AMD driver yeah!
@@DigitalFoundry thank you for responding. Top notch video as usual!
Definitely will try the optimized settings on my 3060 and see how it does. Thank you Alex! Looking forward to this on pc and the xsx.
Woah, how do you even discover fps limiter rounding error....??? DF is def best in the biz
Please do a follow-up on the multiplayer mentioning the awful need to disable the hires textures dlc to make it playable
Thanks for putting up these settings before launch. I was having some performance issues in the multiplayer and want to have the best experience I can in the campaign, you do awesome work.
I kept wondering why the animations on character mouths and other facial movements felt like they were constantly stuttering, or at least they appeared to animate slower than the camera movements. As far as I know from playing last night of this comment posting, its still hasn't been fixed for PC at least.
Yeah I've been seeing similar issues, changed to your recommended settings and I can still only get 122~130 fps in 1440p on my 3080ti, definitely not as optimized as it could be. It also didn't see my gpu and I had to change a file so it would, fun!
Edit: Restarting the game after applying the settings, and now I'm hovering around 122-150; for some reason like DF mentioned the main menu lags very hard compared to in-game.
@Maverick For sure that's not bad at all, but considering my specs I should be hitting 144 without any problems. A steady frame rate helps playability in a major way, but I have been having fun! For comparison, Doom Eternal (a game impressively optimized for pc) I can run at 1440p with raytracing on + all settings on Ultra Nightmare with a pretty consistent 200~ fps. Below are the specs I've been testing with, maybe with the day 1 patch the frame rate will be better?
CPU: AMD RYZEN 9 5950X 3.40 GHz (4.90 GHz Max Boost), 16-Core 32-Thread
GPU: GeForce RTX 3080TI 12GB
Motherboard: ASUS TUF X570 Gaming Plus WIFI ATX Motherboard
RAM: G.Skill TridentZ RGB 32GB DDR4 3200MHz (2x16GB)
SSD: 1TB Gigabyte AORUS Gen4 M.2 NVMe SSD
CPU Cooler: RGB AIO 240MM Liquid Cooler
PSU: 850W 80 Plus Gold Fully Modular
Operating System: Windows 10 Home 64-bit
@@MisanthropeMurphy I'm with you on your words here. Dooms optimizations are God tier. Makes every other game that doesn't look as good and somewhat similar in gameplay trash. I'm suspecting it's because most devs are relying on dlss and other tricks to raise the fps for them so they don't have to waste time on optimizing. It's annoying as hell. I'm here to say.. optimize like doom.. THEN add the tricks on top with an on/off button. Doom has a purchase from me with any game under the name if it's optimized like that from now on. You'd think a 3080(my card) would be able to do at least 144fps on most of the multiplayer maps in H:I. They barely can.(10850K 5ghz)
At max settings on my 1080 TI at 1440p I never get stutters at the main menu. 🤔
@@terabitdefiance8022 100% agree! Doom Eternal actually looks better than Halo Infinite graphically and has about double, if not triple the performance! 343 Industries are like rich amateurs who were handed one of the biggest FPS games of all time to develop without the necessary grit experience of more competent devs like ID Software. It’s like 🤦♂️.
This channel be helping all of us PC players adjust our graphics accordingly to get the MOST performance with negligible quality loss! Bravo, this channel is AMAZING. Thank you for all the hard work it must take doing these videos.
Here are my optimized settings: Everything on Low because the TXAA on this game makes it looks like shit when you are moving no matter the settings, so might get as much fps as you can.
Seriously, it has ABSURD GHOSTING on 1080p. If anyone finds a way to disable it please let me know.
I was looking for a Taa injector 😂Well now srirously yes the game suffers from that a bit, but a friend told me that Alex suggested to set sharpening to 20 and it helps a lot, I don't notice it anymore
Well your first problem is playing at 1080p in 2021
@@HubstepCamaro you mean 1080p like the lowest Series X gets under load on performance mode?
@@HubstepCamaro it still looks pretty good to me, i just dont zoom in 200% lol.
Dude I have a medium range PC that should be running this game fine (It ran more strenuous games easily) but when I came into the open world with med-high settings I got 10-30 fps... I am basically forced to use low because of the optimization...
You guys are the fucking best! Thank you so much for the time and effort you put on these reviews.
3:26 Where do I get one of these "freestink" displays? lol
6 minutes in and we are still on the start screen… This is going to be good!
I'm on the Xbox series X and I'm kind of disappointed we don't get games at 4K 60fps like is it the hardware that can't handle it because Microsoft made it seem like 4K 120 was one thing but 4K 60 I was really hoping to see a lot more from next-gen video games and the way their graphics and performance were but most games can only play 4K 30 FPS and then at that point it's just too slow so like we're kind of at this one spot that you know I think a lot of us gamers really should start speaking up to Microsoft you know we had the Xbox One X that was supposed to be 4K 60 and then they only had the Xbox series X now 4K 60 4K 120 but yet we're not really seeing it and then when they do try to hit those goals the textures are so then but I'm playing Halo Infinity right now and I don't think it looks like in next-gen game it still looks like kind of in a way you'd be playing on the Xbox One X still with some slight you know texture improvements there and there but I don't know maybe it's me what do you guys think
Xbox (and Sony) oversold the power of the new systems in my opinion. Disclosure: I have both an Xbox Series X and an admittedly powerful PC (RTX 3090 GPU). That's basically the top-of-the-line GPU as of the time I'm typing this. If I'm running Ultra settings at full non-upscaled 4K (2160p resolution) on my PC, I'm getting about 75 fps. However, in the options, I render the game at about 60% of 2160p and the game upscales it to 4K (albeit with some noticeable quality loss, but it's not horrible at all) so I can get 140 fps. My monitor supports 4K/144hz.
Game developers see new tech and adjust new titles to push graphical boundaries. For example, my PC will easily hit 4K/140 fps on BFV, but it's about *half that* on BF 2042. Similar performance difference between Forza Horizon 4 and 5. Microsoft said it's planning to release tiers of consoles in the future, somewhat like GPUs are released now and more frequently than consoles have been released historically. You aren't wrong to be disappointed in the Xbox Series X for *current generation games.* Microsoft and Sony sold the 4K 120 rhetoric, but it didn't disclose that was for older, less demanding titles -- assuming the developers would even provide the updates and optimization.
@@rpospeedwagon Ya they kind of left that part out lol. Still a mid-gen Xbox Series X if done right could hit these numbers but it would bring the cost of the system of my quite a bit but then again it could be considered a top and premium system like a impc and only like you mentioned. I have a RTX 3060 TI and I love 4K Gaming but my card dose not. I can hit 4K 60 if I lower my settings to high on most games.
So, with everything in mind about the vsync and frame time issues, what's the best current setting for those with a GSync screen? Is it Vsync ON in-game, force vsync to "use 3D application setting" via Nvidia control panel, what should I set minimum/maximum Frame rate in game? I have 120hz monitor? I find if I set minimum to anything other than 120 it feels choppy/stutter/not smooth.
Wonder what is causing the poor performance on top tier hardware. I'm a bit concerned about gsync not working well enough due to rounding errors and really wonder... How do studios test their games. There must've been some monster bugs for them to address if this kind of performance made it to the final build. Anyway, game looks great even if it has poor performance. I'm having a peek day one.
Probably cuz they prioritized the xbox series x version it seems poorly optimized on pc
Can you male an analysis of what that grappling hook wire is made of seeing how Chief weighs 1000LBS?!
Game seems great, and for that I'm going to wait awhile to experience it once the patches take care of a lot of these issues.
Wait, so you're going to wait??? Xbox gets a game and you're going to literally keep on waiting????? Wait forever.
@@andrewsqual bruh, i play on pc lmao. this ain’t a dis. 😂
@@ropetiedtothetrigger His a Sony fanboy have seen on many sites.
@@andrewsqual I know right like Horizon Zero Dawn 2 delays.
This game is running rough for me at 1440p, mostly low settings on a 2080 and i7 8700k. I'm now beginning to wonder if the original, "clean" art style of the game shown back in 2020 was done for performance reasons.
Series X is doing a great job.
Exactly. Wonder how the 400% zoom looks like on a 500 $ pc.
so the conclusion is
RTX 2070 super is 2x faster than weakbox series X
@@saputrasaputra3347 your farther is weak.
The work you guys do for these videos is immense and incredible!
Series S and X are pretty amazing consoles for the price in regards to capability. This especially true in the current market for overpriced and scarce PC parts. Its really hard to recommend anyone new to get into PC gaming currently unless money isn't a factor.
Except for the fact that on PC you get the entire Xbox ecosystem, more and more of the playstation ecosystem, you can emulate the best switch games. All with dual monitors, mods, higher settings and framerates.
The X has to dip below 1080p for its “120” mode that never touches 120. Its not like the game runs really well on anything.
I think that's a bit of a broad statement. I would say don't get into PC gaming if you like playing console games at higher frame rates and resolutions (typically what puts PC ahead by a lot but not currently) but the GPU market doesn't negate all the existing benefits of PC gaming. Not everyone wants to play only console multiplatforms. There's still the biggest library of possible games from emulators to indies to game pass to some sony ex-exclusives as well as older triple A games which could run on a potato.
Not everyone needs to play games at 4K 120fps to enjoy it, there's still many more benefits to buying an older GPU and experiencing the PC platform generally if you haven't ever than buying the current gen consoles that are still lacking in games that you could literally just play on an xbox one x or ps4.
People overrate how much performance matters, as someone that has every platform except a PS5 and Xbox Series (yet) I'd still say the best platforms for the cost/benefit is PC then Switch then PS4.
Unless your only goal is to play as few games at as high resolutions as possible, then sure get a Series X I guess? Some day it'll get an exclusive or two hopefully.
The series S is trash. Oh look, it gets good performance in last gen games. Current gen it hits below 720p in demanding games. What a joke
@@AnImperfectSoul it's a gamepass machine and it's a great option for people with a small budget. Many gamers, especially kids, only play roblox, minecraft, and fortnite with occasional gamepass games. It has a zen 2 8 core cpu and is capable of raytracing. It has an nvme hard drive and it's gpu is comparable to a 1650. Many people only have a 1080p TV. People like you are toxic for the sake of being toxic. I have one for my daughter and it's an excellent little console. You could not build a comparable pc for anywhere close to 299. Even if you try to argue that you can, its bs. I build pc's as a side business and I know the current state of hardware. I literally have 4 custom built pc's in my home.
@@AnImperfectSoul
It’s not really for us that can differentiate these resolutions, it’s for people that want a cheap way in to next gen
Your channel is unparalleled, nobody does it better
Well performance isn't nearly as bad as I feared after playing the multiplayer beta but definitely still not where it should be. I bet the nVidia performance deficit is due to the game's CPU bottleneck given nVidia's known issues with higher CPU utilization by the drivers.
It could also be that they used the Xbox Series X as their target for performance and look and since the console was optimized with an AMD GPU in mind on consoles, it just transfers better to AMD on PC.
@@dingle2987 That's possible and it's certainly a common claim but I've never seen any real evidence of that occurring in other games. I do know for a fact that the game engine has significant CPU optimization issues, which have improved quite a bit since the first flight but which are still present in this release build.
And being amd title
@@nimbulan2020 I see it all the time in bench tests. All AMD optimized titles get at 10-20% uplift.
@@retrofraction In AMD-sponsored titles sure, I'm just saying there's no link between the consoles running AMD GPUs and this performance differential, which is something people have been claiming since last gen released back in 2013.
Finally DF use chapters in their videos!
Consoles=No headache
Consoles = zero customization
@@MrEditsCinema pc = 720p55-120fps on rtx3090 with customizations on lol
Very true.
@@vandammage1747 720p is a CPU bottlemeck on all games. Even 1080p on the majority of games hits a CPU bottleneck with a higher tier GPU. 1440p 120 fps is possible on the campagin..add about 30 fps for the multiplayer as its less demanding.
@@MrEditsCinema yet a $499 console with a bundled controller manages 120fps at 1080-1440p. Go figure
Also did you not watch the video? Rtx3090 couldn't hold a stable 120fps at 720p and here you are talking about 1440p lol.
Finally someone speaking up about the poor PC performance on Halo Infinite. I got sick and tired of these shills and fanboys defending the PC version so much.