Are you saying that other game engines are better because they use more vram?
fps is lower only because of GrassDistanceScale= and FoliageDistanceScale=. Those are the FPS killed settings. Grass and vegetation at very high distance.
---------- Updated at 08:13 PM ----------
Only if they use that Vram to load high detail textures at longer distance. If they have the same distance like in TW3, of a few meters in front of the character then no, they are not better.
Yes, as someone put it, it's not a question of size but how you use it. And I think this forum should be rated M also.
Well last night I was reinstalling the whole game and installed a patch by patch to see a comparison of the LOD. With every patch that came along the LOD is getting worse and worse and more popins ... because I do not have nor I will have any other crappy 3rd party software for taking a single simple retarded screenshot I didn't made any. But it is a fact for me (don't care if you believe me) WITH ALL THOSE VISUAL and PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENTS, CD red project is just downgrading the streaming LOD distance and now with this horrible 1.06 patch everything is POPING even the low texture level of detail grass.
CD red do you even optimize ? !? ??! ?!? ?! cuz what we are seeing since the first trailer, since the release is CONSTANT downgrade .. sorry but we are no fool console players ...
CD red do you even optimize ? !? ??! ?!? ?! cuz what we are seeing since the first trailer, since the release is CONSTANT downgrade .. sorry but we are no fool console players ...
Last edited:
I used this config along with increasing CascadeShadowmapSize to 8192 which by itself takes away -20 fps.
LOL mate. 8192? Those are shadows settings right? Shadows at 8192x8192?
Yep, and Nvidia made a guide about it too.
http://international.download.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-cascadeshadowdmapsize-config-file-tweak-interactive-comparison-1-8192-vs-3072.html
The tweaks I used make it a bit closer to the Sword of Destiny trailer and fixes the LOD pop-in but at a significant performance cost.
Last edited:
CD red being like :
- oh you have 16 gb of ram and 4gb of vram, sure lets make our game optimization to use only 1.6 GB of vram .. sure we call that optimization ..
CD red .. you are failing to deliver this time .. faaaaaaaaaaaaaaling !
- oh you have 16 gb of ram and 4gb of vram, sure lets make our game optimization to use only 1.6 GB of vram .. sure we call that optimization ..
CD red .. you are failing to deliver this time .. faaaaaaaaaaaaaaling !
Threads like this sure do start arguments fast... but I'll try to clear a few things up.
1. Just because Witcher uses up to 5GB RAM does not mean PC users were not sold up the river, consoles have 8GB of memory to spare now remember so memory this gen shouldn't become a problem as even when you factor in memory requirements of the software on each console the software is very basic and stripped down so I doubt it requires more than 1GB or so of that 8GB memory.
2. Static mesh pop-in is without question awful, you can fix a lot of things in Witcher with XML and user.settings changes but CDPR are going to have to do something about static mesh loading distance thats hard coded most likely because of consoles, why else would CDPR hard code it other than for parity across platforms so console gamers don't bitch and moan? On a similar note I'm still waiting for my particle count and density options on the PC version, CDPR.
3. Again on a similar note, you can increase such things as the draw distance of trees and bushes quite considerably without it having much of a impact on FPS. The 3 things that really bog Witcher down are nvidia hairworks, grass draw distance, and some may see sharp FPS drops out on the water if water is set to "ultra" where just like with hairworks when water is set to ultra tessellation is set to 64x. Visually the water looks identical even when tessellation is manually edited all the way down to 8x, but for hairworks I'd say bare minimum tessellation level you want is 16x, with 32x looking nice, 64x is again overkill.
4. Finally (I don't think I've missed anything), Witcher is probably as well optimised as it can be... for consoles and parity. Developers \ PR, whoever it is, needs to get out of this ridiculous "one size fits all" mentality, the reality is things do not work that way. Fortunately with the steam refund thing now in play hopefully this is something that will encourage the death of this stupid mentality. Consoles are the weaker platforms, console gamers just have to learn to accept that. I say this as a owner of not only a PC but a PS4 as well so my opinion is very much a honest neutral one.
1. Just because Witcher uses up to 5GB RAM does not mean PC users were not sold up the river, consoles have 8GB of memory to spare now remember so memory this gen shouldn't become a problem as even when you factor in memory requirements of the software on each console the software is very basic and stripped down so I doubt it requires more than 1GB or so of that 8GB memory.
2. Static mesh pop-in is without question awful, you can fix a lot of things in Witcher with XML and user.settings changes but CDPR are going to have to do something about static mesh loading distance thats hard coded most likely because of consoles, why else would CDPR hard code it other than for parity across platforms so console gamers don't bitch and moan? On a similar note I'm still waiting for my particle count and density options on the PC version, CDPR.
3. Again on a similar note, you can increase such things as the draw distance of trees and bushes quite considerably without it having much of a impact on FPS. The 3 things that really bog Witcher down are nvidia hairworks, grass draw distance, and some may see sharp FPS drops out on the water if water is set to "ultra" where just like with hairworks when water is set to ultra tessellation is set to 64x. Visually the water looks identical even when tessellation is manually edited all the way down to 8x, but for hairworks I'd say bare minimum tessellation level you want is 16x, with 32x looking nice, 64x is again overkill.
4. Finally (I don't think I've missed anything), Witcher is probably as well optimised as it can be... for consoles and parity. Developers \ PR, whoever it is, needs to get out of this ridiculous "one size fits all" mentality, the reality is things do not work that way. Fortunately with the steam refund thing now in play hopefully this is something that will encourage the death of this stupid mentality. Consoles are the weaker platforms, console gamers just have to learn to accept that. I say this as a owner of not only a PC but a PS4 as well so my opinion is very much a honest neutral one.
Yeah, don't ever expect the LOD to be fixed. PC is no longer CDPR focus, and its glaringly obvious. Cut back graphics overall, the huge delays (likely due to the consoles needing tons of focus to get it running since this gen consoles are far weaker than everyone expected them to be), and now PC players have to wait for consoles to finish their certification from Sony and MS. CDPR was my fav PC dev. Now their just a good dev, but I won't be expecting anything that would possibly make the consoles "look bad" anymore.
Launch user here with some more patch history...
Up to 1.03 had epic LOD distance.. but it was too much for my 780ti even, i had to run it at high to get happy fps.
1.04 they nerfed it, but i was able to bump the setting to ultra and quite happy with the results.
I'm running 1.04 strongly because 1.05 added nasty stuttering, but i heard it got nerfed even further in 1.05/1.06. Figured all those pc users with lower end graphics were putting in support requests or asking for refunds. Its only a setting after all. In short, if you want LOD back you need patch 1.03 or 1.04. If you're a fiend and must have the maximum 1.03. Expect crushed fps.
Up to 1.03 had epic LOD distance.. but it was too much for my 780ti even, i had to run it at high to get happy fps.
1.04 they nerfed it, but i was able to bump the setting to ultra and quite happy with the results.
I'm running 1.04 strongly because 1.05 added nasty stuttering, but i heard it got nerfed even further in 1.05/1.06. Figured all those pc users with lower end graphics were putting in support requests or asking for refunds. Its only a setting after all. In short, if you want LOD back you need patch 1.03 or 1.04. If you're a fiend and must have the maximum 1.03. Expect crushed fps.