ComputerBase tested at 1080p High with MSAA 2x, which already disproves your claim.
Also:
Yes, of course, FPS dropping drom 80 to 48 on a 1060, 75 to 43 on a 470, 103 to 42 on a Fury X, GTX1080 not holding 60 FPS locked at 1080p with only 2xMSAA are ALL perfectly normal signs of great late 2016 PC port/optimization. No SLI/CF to boot. Awesome!
MetaCritic PC reviews are coming out highlighting major stuttering issues with this title at 1080p, even on way overpowered hardware:
"I have a 1080 msi gaming x, 16 go ram, i7 3770k @ 4.2 and the game sutter a lot, the framerate in ultra is between 35/60 with msaa 4. If i change msa to 2 i have the same result... "
Yes, of course, Titan XP running better at 4K than 1060 runs at 1080p is also perfectly normal behaviour. ~ 2X faster GPU runs the game better with 4X the pixels. That's next generation PC optimization!
"After some testing, the site managed to get the game running at locked 60fps on 4K using a Titan X and an overclocked i7 6700K. Dropping the resolution to 1080p, using the same settings but with a GTX 1060, results in worse results. The game appears to run better at 4K than it does at 1080p, bearing in mind each GPU’s capabilities.
When swapping the Titan X [Pascal] back into the setup, and keeping the resolution to 1080p with added 4x MSAA, the performance misses the 60fps lock constantly."
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.vg2...ing-is-a-challenge-for-most-systems-report/am
It's perfectly normal to need a 6700K overclocked system with a GTX970 running 60 FPS but at quality presets BELOW Xbox One S's - you know that console with a garbage Jaguar and HD7790 GPU spec:
"Outside of dropping AA altogether, Digital Foundry also lowered a couple of settings such as shadow quality, reflections, windshield reflections, and others. It’s a bit of a downgrade from the Xbox One preset"
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.vg2...g-is-a-challenge-for-most-systems-report/amp/
I guess MS is desperately trying to create value in their consoles since there is no way a PC with an HD7790 and AMD FX 4300 will run the game at 1080p locked 30 fps.
Are you seriously ignoring with a straight face that something is clearly wrong when R9 290X moves from 24 FPS on VHQ to 69 FPS HQ?! Are you seriously suggesting Computerbase's testing showing RX480 with 29 lost frame vs. R9 390 with 598 (!) lost frames is normal?
After already seeing every single Windows store DX12 title deliver shoddy launch performance that requires patches and various NV/AMD drivers to fix, it makes sense to wait for more optimizations from the developer and AMD/NV before drawing final conclusions about 4GB VRAM or geometry bottlenecks.