DynamiteCop 2,085 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Just now, Carlos Vela said: Nice Nice lol? That's horrible, this game seems to be a 2007 Crysis instance. i.e. buy it on a console because the PC trade-off clearly isn't worth it. They even said the Xbox One X is running the game at high which given the resolution I'm not seeing any scaled PC benefits here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 Just now, DynamiteCop! said: Nice lol? That's horrible, this game seems to be a 2007 Crysis instance. i.e. buy it on a console because the PC trade-off clearly isn't worth it. They even said the Xbox One X is running the game at high which given the resolution I'm not seeing any scaled PC benefits here. It's not horrible. You're dumb as fuck breh.. stop trying to skew things so that it looks bad Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sergio Perez SP11 173 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Just now, DynamiteCop! said: Nice lol? That's horrible, this game seems to be a 2007 Crysis instance. i.e. buy it on a console because the PC trade-off clearly isn't worth it. They even said the Xbox One X is running the game at high which given the resolution I'm not seeing any scaled PC benefits here. I don’t mind 30 FPS at all if it’s locked Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,085 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Remij_ said: It's not horrible. You're dumb as fuck breh.. stop trying to skew things so that it looks bad What am I skewing lol? The numbers are there, I'm not making shit up. The only card that seems to be able to somewhat handle this game to show PC benefit is a $1,200 GPU, and even that is skimming the line. It looks bad because it is bad, this is 2007 Crysis all over again. I mean you have Carlos talking about 30 FPS as if that's acceptable for a PC... Give me a break man... I've never played a PC game at 30 FPS in my life and I sure as shit wouldn't start now. That's why consoles exist, that's their benefit. Edited February 16, 2019 by DynamiteCop! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JonDnD 2,608 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 I kinda want to see it with 4k and her (surprise hdr is broken on PC ) but would much rather 60fps Looks like 2060 can do 60fps ultra or extreme at 60 with rtx off Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said: What am I skewing lol? The numbers are there, I'm not making shit up. The only card that seems to be able to somewhat handle this game to show PC benefit is a $1,200 GPU, and even that is skimming the line. It looks bad because it is bad, this is 2007 Crysis all over again. No... those settings are ABOVE ULTRA. You're being completely disingenuous with how the performance of the card stacks up in settings that it was designed for. And AGAIN... those numbers are from the in game benchmark... which is absolutely more taxing than anything encountered in the game.. and most certainly so during normal gameplay. Also... Joker Productions This is still using the same benchmark tool.. In your pics he used EXTREME and avg fps was 37fps at 1080p... but here's ULTRA settings at the same res... 55fps avg WITH Nvidia hairworks and PhysX enabled... Give me a fucking break dude... and again.. this benchmark tool is much more demanding than anything in the actual game. It's a stress test. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,085 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Jon2B said: I kinda want to see it with 4k and her (surprise hdr is broken on PC ) but would much rather 60fps Looks like 2060 can do 60fps ultra or extreme at 60 with rtx off Even at Ultra the 2060 at 1080p can't average 60, which even worse means its lows are not doubt into the 40's. Unless you've got a gsync display then good luck. Edited February 16, 2019 by DynamiteCop! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 3 minutes ago, Jon2B said: I kinda want to see it with 4k and her (surprise hdr is broken on PC ) but would much rather 60fps Looks like 2060 can do 60fps ultra or extreme at 60 with rtx off It's not... it's perfectly fine. It's only broken with DLSS. John from DF corrected himself after he said that. This is the full package on PC. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 Just now, DynamiteCop! said: Even at Ultra the 2060 at 1080p can't average 60, which even worse means its lows are not doubt into the 40's. In that taxing canned benchmark... Did you WATCH the benchmark and see why it's taxing? The whole premise of your argument is flawed right from the very beginning. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JonDnD 2,608 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Where is the 40 percent gain from dlss Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,085 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 2 minutes ago, Remij_ said: In that taxing canned benchmark... Did you WATCH the benchmark and see why it's taxing? The whole premise of your argument is flawed right from the very beginning. Dude shut up, stop trying to glorify this nonsense. That's from 4A directly, High settings at 1080p with a 2060 to get 60 FPS. The Xbox One X is running High settings at 4x the resolution with half the framerate. The benefit is not there. Wow, 60 FPS to run the game at the same settings as a console at 1/4 the resolution... Fuck off out of here lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 Look at that... 2060 4K Ultra, 26fps with hairworks and physx. Xbox One X runs at mostly high settings with other effects disabled. Again.. this is a extremely taxing benchmark that isn't representative of anything you see in the game. (I'm gonna beat that into your head eventually) Digital Foundry Quote Xbox One X is the pick of the crop, delivering native 4K visuals, and broadly speaking, looking similar PC version running at high settings with HairWorks, PhysX, DXR and tessellation disabled. The performance gain going from Ultra to high is huge.. Turn those settings off and the 2060 performs better than the X1X. Just give it up... I'll kill you on every point. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 6 minutes ago, Jon2B said: Where is the 40 percent gain from dlss Nvidia released a news update that it's working on improving the quality of DLSS in Metro and BF5. They said they mostly only focused on 4K DLSS, and the 1440p and 1080p modes weren't trained as much... for what that's worth anyway. lmao Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,085 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Remij_ said: Look at that... 2060 4K Ultra, 26fps with hairworks and physx. Xbox One X runs at mostly high settings with other effects disabled. Digital Foundry The performance gain going from Ultra to high is huge.. Turn those settings off and the 2060 performs better than the X1X. Just give it up... I'll kill you on every point. Nice try at lying retard, they cordoned off a specific section which include those things. The regular benchmarks do not. There's no hairworks. Before we begin a note. Metro: Exodus has NVIDIA written all over and into it. Our generic benchmark sessions have been toned down to create an equal and fair playing file for both NVIDIA and AMD. NVIDIA Gameworks is built into the engine as Metro Exodus supports DX-R (Raytracing) as well as offering support for DLSS and Hairworks. We'll look at performance with these disabled and enabled on the current RTX cards as well of course. Ultra Settings / RTX off / DLSS off / Hairworks Off / Advanced Physics on By the way - for those that wonder if NVIDIA is performing some weird trickery with Advanced Physics. Enabling it shows close to NIL of a difference in performance. Ergo, we opted that feature to be enabled. You're not making much of a proposition for the 2060 here, and again 26 IS THE AVERAGE which again means its going to have lows pronounced below that... This game is not in acceptable state unless you have a $1,200 GPU... Edited February 16, 2019 by DynamiteCop! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said: Nice try at lying retard, they cordoned off a specific section which include those things. The regular benchmarks do not. Before we begin a note. Metro: Exodus has NVIDIA written all over and into it. Our generic benchmark sessions have been toned down to create an equal and fair playing file for both NVIDIA and AMD. NVIDIA Gameworks is built into the engine as Metro Exodus supports DX-R (Raytracing) as well as offering support for DLSS and Hairworks. We'll look at performance with these disabled and enabled on the current RTX cards as well of course. Ultra Settings / RTX off / DLSS off / Hairworks Off / Advanced Physics on From DSOGaming Before continuing, we want to make it crystal clear that we did not use the built-in benchmark tool. As we’ve already said, Metro Exodus’ benchmark is more like a stress test and does not represent the in-game performance. Moreover, we decided to use DX12 instead of DX11 as there wasn’t any significant difference between these two APIs. the benchmark isn't representative of in game performance, it's a lot more taxing that in game performance. It goes on and on... Another thing I'd LOVE to add is that you're trying to talk shit to a person who actually owns the game on PC and can veritably testify to that being the case. Saying I'm lying.. lmao you stupid fuck Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,085 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Remij_ said: From DSOGaming Before continuing, we want to make it crystal clear that we did not use the built-in benchmark tool. As we’ve already said, Metro Exodus’ benchmark is more like a stress test and does not represent the in-game performance. Moreover, we decided to use DX12 instead of DX11 as there wasn’t any significant difference between these two APIs. the benchmark isn't representative of in game performance, it's a lot more taxing that in game performance. It goes on and on... Another thing I'd LOVE to add is that you're trying to talk shit to a person who actually owns the game on PC and can veritably testify to that being the case. Saying I'm lying.. lmao you stupid fuck I could buy this game right now if I felt so inclined, but I'm not going to, and if I do it's sure as hell not going to be on PC. You're trying to rationalize 2007 Crysis operational standards here, that shit is garbage. It's going to be two hardware generations until regular hardware falls into the bounds of acceptable performance. "You can run this at high settings at 1080p to maybe get a stable 60 FPS depending on your CPU." Really? Edited February 16, 2019 by DynamiteCop! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 Just now, DynamiteCop! said: I could buy this game right now if I felt so inclined, but I'm not going to, and if I do it's sure as hell not going to be on PC. You're trying to rationalize 2007 Crysis operational standards here, that shit is garbage. It's going to be two hardware generations until regular hardware falls into the bounds of acceptable performance. I don't give a shit what you can and can't do.. I'm not telling you that as a diss... I'm telling you that I have it, and know what the performance profile is like during gameplay and that benchmark... I'm trying to be honest with what those scores you posted represent. You are NOT. And I find it REALLY hilarious that you were the one that was pining for the days that a Crysis-like game would come and push the hardware... now it's here and you're like "omg this is just terrible" Like dude... maybe turn the settings down to Ultra or high? Xbox is even a good deal lower than that... So don't fucking tell me that I'm lying and shit. I'm setting the record straight. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 7 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said: "You can run this at high settings at 1080p to maybe get a stable 60 FPS depending on your CPU." Really? You can run it better than consoles, and better fidelity Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,085 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 1 minute ago, Remij_ said: I don't give a shit what you can and can't do.. I'm not telling you that as a diss... I'm telling you that I have it, and know what the performance profile is like during gameplay and that benchmark... I'm trying to be honest with what those scores you posted represent. You are NOT. And I find it REALLY hilarious that you were the one that was pining for the days that a Crysis-like game would come and push the hardware... now it's here and you're like "omg this is just terrible" Like dude... maybe turn the settings down to Ultra or high? Xbox is even a good deal lower than that... So don't fucking tell me that I'm lying and shit. I'm setting the record straight. Yeah this is great, I love this shit, but what I don't love is you giving false hopes of some luxury PC experience to a new guy who doesn't know any better. He's running a stock CPU, he's running a stock 2060, who knows what in the hell his CPU even is... Those benches are being done with a $530 Core i9 9900K... You're selling a pipe dream to a guy with an all around middling system with benchmarks done on dramatically better hardware. Even worse is he's running at 1080p so the CPU is more important than anything, and it's whatever he has versus a 9900k.... Come the fuck on dude... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remij 4,670 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Share Posted February 16, 2019 Just now, DynamiteCop! said: Yeah this is great, I love this shit, but what I don't love is you giving false hopes of some luxury PC experience to a new guy who doesn't know any better. He's running a stock CPU, he's running a stock 2060, who knows what in the hell his CPU even is... Those benches are being done with a $530 Core i9 9900K... You're selling a pipe dream to a guy with an all around middling system with benchmarks done on dramatically better hardware. Even worse is he's running at 1080p so the CPU is more important than anything, and it's whatever he has versus a 9900k.... Come the fuck on dude... I didn't say anything to him. I responded to YOU.. and posted benches that actually reflect reality. He's running an 8700.... You're clueless. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.