PC specs and benchmarks DISCUSSION

[Slammey]

Good evening everyone!!I first would like to say that this game runs amazingly good on my rig. Here are the settings I used and a few modification in the Nvidia CP before trying out the game.Specs :CPU - Intel I7 5930K @ 4.5 GhzGPU - Strix GTX 970 @ 1536 MhzMemory - 16 Gigs DDR4 @ 2800 MhzScreen - Asus 27 inch 120 HtzOS - Windows 7 UltimateNvidia CP settings re-rendered frames set to 1Single GPU performance ( does not apply to sli in my case )MFAA ONVSYNC ONAF 16XIn game settings : 1080PEverything on ULTRA except Foliage Density Distance to HIGH with HairWorks ONAA - OFFBLOOM - ONMOTION BLUR - OFFVSYNC - OFFSHARPENING - OFFVIGNETTE - OFFCA - OFFI believe everything else in Post processing is ONWith these settings, no INI tweaks yet... I get an average of 50-60 FPS. Highest goes 70-75. Lowest dips around 40-45. That's playing. Some cut scenes locked at 28-30 and others in game cut scenes 40-60. I do not have any stuttering or lag so far. I have been playing around that small village after killing the ghouls.Scrrenshots :Sorry about the odd layout of the post. It does not show at all how I wrote it...Enjoying the game for sure. Will test out more later. Gotta Work damn!

 

[Kyubix22]

What kills de frame rate is Hairworks and Foliage lvl of detail on ultra. Also shadows have a big impact and HBAO+ less. The rest it's not a big difference between some options and others. People have to low the foliage detail to high and same with shadows. Hairworks off. And the game its fine.

 

[AndrewLB]

i remember buying a 9500gt my first gpu 6yr ago

Here is the first graphics card I ever purchased...

Diamond Stealth SE. 2mb vram. Upgradable to 4mb!!! I got it so I could play DOOM.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/DiamondStealthSE.png

 

[player1fanatic]

Laptop user here.
Dell Inspiron 15R SE Core i5-3210M. 2.5GHz
6GM RAM
7730M Radeon

I need to "congratulate" CD Project Red for creating first game that is not by definition playable on this laptop. With low details and 1280x768 resolution I get around 20-22fps. What is surprising it that on same resolution and ultra, minus hairworks, game works at 10fps. That is IMHO, very low performance difference between high and low detail settings (only x2). I'm really disappointed in that regard. This was all tested only in starting tower area (inside and balcony). Have no idea how performance would be later in the game.

I will attempt playing on these settings:
Postprocess: default Low preset
Graphics: customized Medium preset
*low foliage view distance
*low shadows
*ultra textures

With these settings I did not see any difference compared to true Low preset in performance.

 

[uthvag]

to all those with laptops , try posting it here.Thanks!
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/36763-Witcher-3-Performance-on-mobile-GPUs?p=1673398#post1673398

anyway a summary

Benchmarks

Alienware 14
GTX 765 - high medium @ 1366x768 - 30fps

CyberpowerPC fangbook hx7
GTX 980m-ultra -no hairworks foliage medium shadows medium @ 1920x1080 60fps

MSI GT60 0NE
GTX 680m- post processing ultra , high @ 1080p 30fps ( rough naked eye estimation )

i5 2520m/GT 555m - low @ 720p 10-15fps
-low with ini tweaks(unspecified) @ 1024 -20 - 25fps

i5 2520m/gt 620 m - low @ 720p(unconfirmed) 13-24 fps

lenovo y50-70
GTX 860m - high/medium ssao /AA(+ 2xMSAA) on @ 1080p - 30 fps @ 900p- 35-40 fps (Source: youtube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD7M3oOpNi8

Acer Aspire V15 Nitro - Black Edition
GTX 860m - high medium @ 1366x768p(?) 20- 30+ fps(with hairworks?) (resolution unspecified)

MSI GS 60 Ghost Pro
GTX 970m - ultra/no hairworks/medium shadows/high foliage @108 0p 45-55 fps

Alienware 17
GTX 880m- ultra/no hairworks/high foliage/high shadows @ 900p capped to 30 fps

i5 3210m / GTX 640m @ low - 18 fps (resolution unspecified)

i5 2410m/ radeon 6650m @ low ~ 30 fps (resolution unspecified)

 

[TheokolesOfRome]

Yep, 3440X1440 with LG34UC97, But I've over clocked the GPU though, +112 power limits +140 core clock and +405 Memory clock, my CPU is i5 4670k btw

I'm going to tweak the graphic for higher LOD and shadow quality and turn down the hairwork for the creatures, honestly, during combat I can't focus on the hair effect at all. So I'd rather have better LOD and shadow etc

That's a sweet clock! And I think you're absolutely right to disable/reduce hairwork. For what it does it is very punishing. You lose anywhere from 10-25% of your framerate for that one option.

Well I've since realised, like an idiot, that with the new driver installed it disabled SLI so I had to enable it again. Now I'm getting 45-50fps with everything enabled including hairworks. With it off I get 53-62 fps. If I overclock (+ 110 PWR + 180 clock + 500 Mem on both gpus) I get 59 - 71 fps, but then I get artifacting so I need to look at that.

 

[The_Blog]

I made it run with around 20 fps in 480x300 custom resolution. If we can actually enlarge the text by a patch later it will be surprisingly a pleasant experience for me too since I can completely eradicate all the hud as well which means I will be seeing more despite the resolution XD.

Spoiler

If you manage to beat the game this way, then all the cookies are yours ^^

 

[GuyNwah]

Laptop user here.
Dell Inspiron 15R SE Core i5-3210M. 2.5GHz
6GM RAM
7730M Radeon

I need to "congratulate" CD Project Red for creating first game that is not by definition playable on this laptop. With low details and 1280x768 resolution I get around 20-22fps. What is surprising it that on same resolution and ultra, minus hairworks, game works at 10fps. That is IMHO, very low performance difference between high and low detail settings (only x2). I'm really disappointed in that regard. This was all tested only in starting tower area (inside and balcony). Have no idea how performance would be later in the game.

I will attempt playing on these settings:
Postprocess: default Low preset
Graphics: customized Medium preset
*low foliage view distance
*low shadows
*ultra textures

With these settings I did not see any difference compared to true Low preset in performance.

Your system is not close to the minimum requirements, which have been published for a long time; it is a fortunate thing that it is playable at all.

To others who are reading, the GPU minimum requirement should be taken seriously. The actual playable minimum is not too far below the stated requirement (desktop GTX 660 or HD 7870). Many thanks and kudos to @uthvag for assembling a list of mobile GPUs.

 

[player1fanatic]

Indeed. W3 had very high minimum system requirements.

Most of other games have min requirements that are not really accurate, thus I never had problem with any other game up til this point. If I took those requirements seriously before I would not be playing anything that was out in last 2 years.

Last demanding game I played was DA: Inquisition, which run fluently over 30fps on 1366x768 medium.


Personally, I dislike how little love developers give to laptop gaming market, when creating minimum sys. requirements, or low detail settings for that matter.

It's a growing market, and multimedia laptops with some gaming capabilities (not to be confused with "gaming" laptops) are most common.

---------- Updated at 06:30 AM ----------

One more thing:
I loved resolution scaling setting in DA:I. It was really a great way to scale a performance on low end hardware. And also a great way to keep 2D UI interface at high crisp resolution, while scaling down just 3d rendering.

Pity that more games, including Witcher, do not have that.

 

[Mr.White.427]

Can anyone comment on an AMD cpu tho? preferably the recommended FX-8350? I'm worried about it being 3 years old, and the fact that the game seems to be more geared towards intel hardware

 

[LouisCell]

That's a sweet clock! And I think you're absolutely right to disable/reduce hairwork. For what it does it is very punishing. You lose anywhere from 10-25% of your framerate for that one option.

Well I've since realised, like an idiot, that with the new driver installed it disabled SLI so I had to enable it again. Now I'm getting 45-50fps with everything enabled including hairworks. With it off I get 53-62 fps. If I overclock (+ 110 PWR + 180 clock + 500 Mem on both gpus) I get 59 - 71 fps, but then I get artifacting so I need to look at that.

LOL I was thinking the same, that you might have forgotten to turn on the SLI. I thin nvidia should at least give people a notification about this everytime we upgrade the driver.

 

[triggerhippy24]

So is hairworks just a gimmick or will it make a difference?

I have a 970

I leave it on despite the lower fps since I'm obsessed with Geralt's scruffy beard growth but I have a 980. Honestly, in your shoes I would leave it off since it looks good enough.

---------- Updated at 10:31 PM ----------

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)

Very well said. Couldn't agree with you more.

It's not a secret that us pc gamers are the most demanding game consumers. We need to work on becoming more aware of the challenges of game development from a design and marketing point of view. After all, they are here to make money! It's selfish to expect a company to just make a game for us and not consoles. I have faith the mods will expand our enjoyment and that's why I consider mod support the most important thing in a pc version of a game.