PC specs and benchmarks DISCUSSION

+

No wonder almost all developers hate catering to PC. They can't win.

They lower visuals for more performance "fuuuckaan downgrade sellouts, etc, etc". They then improve, and fix visuals, to increase the graphical quality, and re-introduce some other aspects missing form preview builds. What do they get? "duuur crappy console ports, shiity performance derpa derpa"

Uber ignorance is bliss, I guess.

Disclaimer: (No personal offense intended. It's just ridiculous lol)

Offtopic: Please don't judge everybody based on a few rotten apples. You'll always have people complaining no matter what happens, however I believe there would be less people complaining if the "downgrade" didn't happen.

Ontopic: I believe as well that something is wrong with these benchmarks, since I've read a couple days ago in a german acticle that the R9 290x could run the game with everything on the highest settings (except hairworks) on 1080p with some minor dips now and then. Yet this benchmark shows that it runs only at 40/44 fps (on both versions). So either this benchmark is wrong, or the other article was wrong.
 
Hey guys - All of those concerned with Very High and ULTRA settings...

If you have a 970 that 'could' do Ultra before - that setting is NOW Very High. Look at this article. I believe with the recent patch and the bump up of graphics they have added a HIGHER graphics setting, which is ULTRA (yes they had this before, but ... read this)

The visual difference between the preview version and our review version at least equal to an additional level of detail, so as of "very high" to "Ultra".

I know they aren't actually saying that this is the case, but I guarantee this is what happened. They had to push the requirements up for ULTRA to get closer to the 2014 gameplay. This game SHOULD on all account be EXTREMELY demanding at ULTRA settings .. It should take a very very HIGH end PC to run Ultra. That's why it's ultra. :D
 
if this really is true i just figured that my 860m(same as 570 by firestrike) would do fine on high

View attachment 14382

nuts, i think the benchmark might be wrong as everyone says . just looked up at the line up and compared it with the bencies.

hmmm i thought the 285 was worse than the 280x by a bit
 

Attachments

  • lineup-full.png
    lineup-full.png
    42.9 KB · Views: 42
Last edited:
View attachment 14381 Whoa.....

Smh.... I will still play and enjoy the game. Just not as much. What I don't get is that stuff that everyone is complaining about was present and implemented but for some reason was removed.... Why? Makes no sense. If they wanted parity, then just make the advanced stuff optional.

That's what I hope they will change soon. If the assets from PS4 remain, no matter how much eye-candy they add, it will never look as good as promised.
 
My imagination has people running around in mass hysteria mode atm lol.



(Granted. I may need some sleep)

--------------------------

Offtopic: Please don't judge everybody based on a few rotten apples. You'll always have people complaining no matter what happens, however I believe there would be less people complaining if the "downgrade" didn't happen.

Yeah, I know. I've been a PC gamer, a looong time. I'm unfortunately well used of that sort of thing.

Ontopic: I believe as well that something is wrong with these benchmarks, since I've read a couple days ago in a german acticle that the R9 290x could run the game with everything on the highest settings (except hairworks) on 1080p with some minor dips now and then. Yet this benchmark shows that it runs only at 40/44 fps (on both versions). So either this benchmark is wrong, or the other article was wrong.

Probably should wait for further benches. Those are a bit off looking, to me. But, I've mentioned previously about the graphical bugs on the previous builds may have been skewing performance (more fps than norm) because graphical features were glitching out and not enabling correctly(guesswork).
 
Last edited:
View attachment 14381 Whoa.....

Smh.... I will still play and enjoy the game. Just not as much. What I don't get is that stuff that everyone is complaining about was present and implemented but for some reason was removed.... Why? Makes no sense. If they wanted parity, then just make the advanced stuff optional.

Although i understand what you mean (the original represents a repaired/reinforced corner) this is what the medieval walls of my hometown look like:
http://imgur.com/a/SEnsc
 




1080p resolution.

Is this a joke or what? lol Mind you, it's not HBAO+ so after the recent patch performance hit is even larger + nvidia pubic hair tech is disabled.

Nvidia totally crippled Kepler GPUs, even the classic titan.
 
heh.... more realistic I guess... Yeah... that's why this change might have been made. True story. The game is starting to look good. We still have those xml files.... xml files......... but it looks like only for titan x players or sli configs :)
 
That card only has a really small OC apparently. According to the graph it is running at 1306 MHz. My MSI GTX 970 boosts to 1380 MHz without any additional OC, and you can usually get over 1400 MHz on them.

You should be able to push your MSI 970 pretty easily to 1500mhz, I have mine running stable with +220/+540 with +15v via MSI afterburner
 
Soo... a GTX 770 is equivalent to the PS4 GPU? :S

No, the "new" ultra rendering settings are higher than the preview builds, as they were originally higher than the ps4 version nonetheless.

quote from http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-Witcher-3-PC-237266/Specials/Grafikkarten-Benchmarks-1159196/ :
" After we started a new game to have any problems to go with older savegames from the way fiehlen us almost immediately a significantly improved level of detail with much less disturbing eye-catching pop-up and a more pleasing appearance to, above all, thanks now better shading and illumination of the vegetation. A slight blur effect is now in some weather conditions over the horizon, the shadows are crisper. In addition, the marine display now shows thanks to tessellation obviously dynamic, it now responds to Geralt Witcher characters and other influences. A direct comparison with the same savegame and at the same time of day and weather conditions also obviously falls on different color grading. The image of the Review version seems less colorful. The visual difference between the preview version and our review version at least equal to an additional level of detail, so as of "very high" to "Ultra". ".
 
so.. now Ultra is very high, and new ultra is crushing performances? Well, let's hope the SLI profiles will be good enough for those that can enjoy it. I may rethink upgrading for the Ultra + tweaks after all ;)
 
You should be able to push your MSI 970 pretty easily to 1500mhz, I have mine running stable with +220/+540 with +15v via MSI afterburner
+220/+540 ? Whoa you're a beast man ! I was at +150/+500 and was experiencing some artifacts on my screen with +87 mV (if I remember correctly).
Did I do anything wrong ?
 
Top Bottom