All of the graphics cards included in this test were run with the latest drivers installed. In Nvidia’s case that would be Driver Version 375.70 and on the AMD side, we are using Radeon Software 16.11.3. Both of these drivers were released with optimisations for Dishonored 2. Our results were obtained using FRAPS to record average and minimum frame rates. Our benchmark takes place during the first proper level of Dishonored 2 while running through the city streets of Dunwall and taking out all of the guards before the docks.
OMG. This game not only runs like crap, but it also looks like one. Geometry, texture detail, lighting... looks like ps3 port.snip
So we all should upgrade to new better gpus that amd and Nvidia didn't release just to play a poorly optimized game that looks like a ps3 port?.Its easy cry when game like this shows, but its really AMD and NV fault for not releasing new better GPUs.
What NV released from new generation?
Mainstream GP104 GTX1080(which they milk for 700USD) and heavy cutdown so called GTX1070 which is 25-30% slower than GTX1080 and not much faster than 2.5year old GTX980(only 30%).GTX1080 runs it pretty good at 1440p with 80avg fps.
From HIGH-end GP102 NV released only cutdown TITANXP for 1200USD.
AMD released only low-end polaris(its only GP106 competitor) which was low-end in pre kepler era.They still didnt release mainstream competitor(GP104) and HIGH-end competitor(GP102)
If GTX1070 was only slighly cutdown(like GTX670) it would manage this game just fine just like gtx1080.And if we have here GP102 GPUs it will run even better with +40-50% performance above GTX1080.
In old days if you have 2-3 years old GPU you was done.Today people cry for bad optimalized game with 2-3years old GPU for not running at 60fps.
Yeah it is worse optimalized game, but both NV and AMD didnt release new high-end cards.GTX1070 didnt bring anything new what we didnt already have for 2 years and GP102 is not out.Polaris is low-end and mainstream vega(GP104 competitor) and high-end vega(gp102 competitor) are not out.
I dont excuse this game, but we need see this from another angle.
OMG. This game not only runs like crap, but it also looks like one. Geometry, texture detail, lighting... looks like ps3 port.
Anyone agree with Erenhardt?
Also, it's my impression that there aren't that many games that ARENT console ports these days.
Anyone agree with Erenhardt?
Also, it's my impression that there aren't that many games that ARENT console ports these days.
All the pre GameWorks games, did not run HBAO+ on AMD, but AMD had their own version, HDAO. Then GameWorks added a version that works on both. I personally didn't even like HBAO+ in the games I saw it in, prior to that change.HBAO+ is just a shader that'll run on anything that supports DX11. It ran on AMD cards from the beginning.
All the pre GameWorks games, did not run HBAO+ on AMD, but AMD had their own version, HDAO. Then GameWorks added a version that works on both. I personally didn't even like HBAO+ in the games I saw it in, prior to that change.
Yep. Ports are pretty rare, especially if it's a multiplatform game that releases simultaneously on all platforms.
Wait, ports are rare? First I've heard this.
Sciel said:The issue actually seems to be due to task manager setting Dishonored2.exe to "Low priority", if I manually set it to High Priority, I get a big boost in FPS.
Unfortunately, it periodically resets back to low every couple of mins/load screens.
GameWorks is a library of tools. They are part of an API which is sort of a blackbox that doesn't allow the dev's to tweak. However, PhysX existed long before it. TXAA existed a couple years prior, and so did HBAO+. It wasn't until they added it to the Gameworks libraries that they added code to work with AMD. It seems very possible/likely, in part because its not advertised as such, and because AMD doesn't support HBAO+ like a GameWorks title would, that they did not get the API's from the GameWorks library, but instead used stand alone libraries for each of those items.
People often forget that HBAO+ has now been open sourced on GitHub,
A detailed look at the initial performance and an analysis of bottlenecks.
uh.... It didn't get a pass at all. I have no idea where you would get that impression from. Everywhere I saw folks holding off buying it because the performance sucked. That's what I did.Deus EX MD ran like crap at release, but I guess it got a huge pass because it wasn't a gameworks title. Weird how that always seems to be skipped over at ATF.
Deus EX MD ran like crap at release, but I guess it got a huge pass because it wasn't a gameworks title. Weird how that always seems to be skipped over at ATF.
Not only did DXMD run much better but it also looked much better. And yes people still complained about performance.
Fury X: 43.3 vs 65.8
1060: 53.8 vs 54.2
970: 45.6 vs 45.9
390: 38.6 vs 53.5
https://www.computerbase.de/2016-11...abschnitt_benchmarks_von_full_hd_bis_ultra_hd
https://www.computerbase.de/2016-08...abschnitt_benchmarks_von_full_hd_bis_ultra_hd
OMG. This game not only runs like crap, but it also looks like one. Geometry, texture detail, lighting... looks like ps3 port.
AFAIK Hbao+ never made it to github
https://github.com/NVIDIAGameWorks
https://developer.nvidia.com/gameworks-source-github
No HBAO+
https://developer.nvidia.com/shadowworksThe HBAO+ library, with binaries for Windows, Linux and OSX, as well as complete source code, is available through Github. Just click the button below and follow the instructions to sign up for access.