[PCGH.de] Fallout 4 Benchmark

[happy medium]

For you 2gb card holders.......

"As an aside, we can say that even ultra level textures still fit comfortably within a 2GB framebuffer at 1080p. VRAM utilisation isn't a problem for Fallout 4."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-fallout-4-performance-analysis

 

[tviceman]

Maybe you didn't watch the full video I linked and what was said about AMDs day1 performance in this game or maybe you just jumped to a conclusion based on the hardware in my sig. (thats ok , it happens all the time on this forum, no big deal )

The point is that I agree with you. :thumbsup:

I was using your post to argue with someone else and prove my point. Unfortunately there is no proving a point with people who cry wolf and refuse to see things at face value. I might as well just argue with my 5 month old baby; it'll be just as (un)productive.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Simple Graphics + Lighting = Wrecks your system
Crysis 3 = Wrecks your system....

I'm going to make a game of pong, throw in Gameworks, have it run 30 FPS on a Fury X, but 60 FPS on a 980Ti, and hear people say how AMD just couldn't get drivers ready for my game of pong...
Not that my game of pong shouldn't take a 980Ti to hit 60 FPS.....

With an engine this old and graphics that aren't cutting edge and not a huge congestion of NPCs, there's no excuse for the performance we see. There are better looking games with more going on that run much better on the hardware in question. Especially bad showing on consoles. Again there are better looking games on consoles with more going on that run better than Fallout 4 does right now.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Wow, 7 pages of whining about performance and gameworks, but the game runs better on an i3 and a 750Ti than on either console. Unbelievable.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Wow, 7 pages of whining about performance and gameworks, but the game runs better on an i3 and a 750Ti than on either console. Unbelievable.

It's still unacceptably low performance for a game that looks like this one does. Especially on something like a 390.

 

[maddogmcgee]

For you 2gb card holders.......

"As an aside, we can say that even ultra level textures still fit comfortably within a 2GB framebuffer at 1080p. VRAM utilisation isn't a problem for Fallout 4."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-fallout-4-performance-analysis

This is an Nvidia account you keep posting from, right? (current 970 owner here )

 

[PhonakV30]

well , If you think it's AMD's Fault , why not to exploit Async Compute to Blame NVIDIA? at 2017 or 2018 , FuryX would be at least 50% faster than 980Ti, I'm Sure AMD's AC would be much better than Nvidia one, even Volta or pascal won't be able to match AMD in term of AC's Performance.

 

[3DVagabond]

well , If you think it's AMD's Fault , why not to exploit Async Compute to Blame NVIDIA? at 2017 or 2018 , FuryX would be at least 50% faster than 980Ti, I'm Sure AMD's AC would be much better than Nvidia one, even Volta or pascal won't be able to match AMD in term of AC's Performance.

No current nVidia cards can even do AC. Who knows if Pascal will or if they'll come up with their magic drivers by then to address it.

 

[stuff_me_good]

Its likely not AMD or Nvidia but that old arse engine from 2006 that was rejigged in 2011 for Skyrim and re-rejigged in 2015 for Fallout 4. There is only so much you can bolt on and maintain performance.

Really sad to hear this. Also what is the point having different graphics level in the game when there is no proper visual difference? Just to sell better hw? Isn't this kinda the illuminati thin foil hat stuff from corporations?

Don't remember having this issue in old gaming. Ultra was ultra and low was low. Or maybe bad developer are bad and good ones are good.

Going to vote with my wallet and let it rot on the self. Have other games to play.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I agree, the game doesn't push the boundaries with graphics but could you imagine the outcry if it did? People with high end cards would be getting sub 60 fps on ultra @ 1440p and blaming Bethesda/GW/NVIDIA/Jesus/Ronald McDonald etc. for it or forming conspiracy theories about NV stockholders..oh wait they already are.

Ugh, it's sad but so much this.

 

[showb1z]

Why is anyone tying conclusions to a Bethesda game on day 1? Even without the GW effect, they're simply incompetent. Remember the x87/SSE thing with Skyrim.
I'll take another look by the time GOTY edition comes out and the mod community has fixed most of their junk.

 

[stuff_me_good]

I agree, the game doesn't push the boundaries with graphics but could you imagine the outcry if it did? People with high end cards would be getting sub 60 fps on ultra @ 1440p and blaming Bethesda/GW/NVIDIA/Jesus/Ronald McDonald etc. for it or forming conspiracy theories about NV stockholders..oh wait they already are.

Oh boy, could you be more childish? While RS has done the research, googled tons of quotes and charts and give us really good points on what is wrong with the gaming industry right now. You just dodge all those subjects/questions [redacted] while yourself have 0(read: zero) informative value in your post most of the time in this forum.

There is nothing wrong in competition, all companies trying to improve products on architecture level, quality control, features like different types AA, g-sync, eyefinity etc, and by advertising better. But the style nvidia has done it this past 5 years with bribing the developer to use setting that cripple competition(mostly unnecessary level of tesselation) is just sickening stuff. And some people even think this is ok, is even more sickening.

Profanity isn't allowed in the technical forums.
-- stahlhart

 

[ocre]

I was excited when i realized today was the day......It didnt even occur to me until i seen this thread. But when i clicked on it.......

Geez, another bash nvidia and anything they do thread.

That is typical. Oh well, off to buy the game now

 

[3DVagabond]

Oh boy, could you be more childish? While RS has done the research, googled tons of quotes and charts and give us really good points on what is wrong with the gaming industry right now. You just dodge all those subjects/questions [redacted] while yourself have 0(read: zero) informative value in your post most of the time in this forum.

There is nothing wrong in competition, all companies trying to improve products on architecture level, quality control, features like different types AA, g-sync, eyefinity etc, and by advertising better. But the style nvidia has done it this past 5 years with bribing the developer to use setting that cripple competition(mostly unnecessary level of tesselation) is just sickening stuff. And some people even think this is ok, is even more sickening.

I suggest the ignore option. You'll get reported and infractions. That's the way the trolling game is played here.

 

[littleg]

The thing is I could maybe see some gamers defending this type of practice if they were getting some benefit from it but they're not. These silly effects are doing nothing for the image quality of the game and hurting performance even on NV hardware.

Cheerleading because even though they tanked your performance they tanked the other guys more? Wat.

When a game truly pushes the boundaries and brings new and exciting effects we all appreciate it and can get behind it as gamers even if it brings the best of the best GPUs to its knees. That is improving our gaming experience and giving us something worth upgrading for.

When a game shits on your GPU just because it's either badly coded or deliberately crippling it hurts us all and does nothing to advance the state of the art.

 

[5150Joker]

The thing is I could maybe see some gamers defending this type of practice if they were getting some benefit from it but they're not. These silly effects are doing nothing for the image quality of the game and hurting performance even on NV hardware.

Cheerleading because even though they tanked your performance they tanked the other guys more? Wat.

When a game truly pushes the boundaries and brings new and exciting effects we all appreciate it and can get behind it as gamers even if it brings the best of the best GPUs to its knees. That is improving our gaming experience and giving us something worth upgrading for.

When a game shits on your GPU just because it's either badly coded or deliberately crippling it hurts us all and does nothing to advance the state of the art.

I'd agree with that assessment if it was a fixed function that couldn't be disabled by a slider. However, that's not the case so this argument doesn't hold water. Bethesda could have done a lot better with graphical fidelity, I agree with that consensus as I don't find the graphics impressive either, but lets get real here about the faux outrage, its way over the top relative to the ease of lowering a few visual fx.

 

[amenx]

Pretty sure we'll see a lot of mods improving graphics, textures, performance and gameplay down the road.

http://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/

 

[boozzer]

This is probably going to be the first Fallout game I actually play through.

Gotta represent my home town

When is the DX12 patch coming out, AMD needs some help. Woof.

it is a game works game, not dx12, more like a miraculous performance patch around 3 months time.

good thing I always wait 1+ years for any games by bethesda looking at the graphics and how badly it runs, where does bethesda spent all the money it earns?

 

[amenx]

I wonder if the graphics are only sub-par in certain areas yet look much better in others? Striking inconsistencies if you ask me... I mean this looks good.

 

[PhonakV30]

Image quality is absurd with such performance.with this image quality , i should be able to run on weak graphic card but it won't happen.

 

[Erenhardt]

I wonder if the graphics are only sub-par in certain areas yet look much better in others? Striking inconsistencies if you ask me... I mean this looks good.

By 2012 standards...

Looks like console version. Even from that far you can see how blurry the textures are.

 

[boozzer]

I wonder if the graphics are only sub-par in certain areas yet look much better in others? Striking inconsistencies if you ask me... I mean this looks good.

but look at it! do you seriously think gamers spend 750$ on a top end gpu for that?

 

[ShintaiDK]

over 100k people are playing it on steam right now, holy cow!!!

290K now.

99,922 have gtx970's.

Has anyone here actually played the game?

Yes, of course. What do you want to know?

 

[amenx]

but look at it! do you seriously think gamers spend 750$ on a top end gpu for that?

Sorry. I'm not a follow the sheep person where when 10 people say something therefore I must stick to a commonly held line. Granted FO4 may indeed have some crappy graphics in certain places, but the image I posted imo is not one of them. I suspect some of the responses to the image are 'sheeple responses' (if they actually clicked on the image to expand it). Reminds of Crysis 2, another also terribly inconsistent game, where it looked like crap in some areas but great in others.

 

[showb1z]

The people who're saying it's incredibly easy to fix by just turning down the setting are right.
But the issue goes way beyond this game. If Nvidia keeps pushing their performance destroying junk into more and more games (next game maybe it won't be an easy fix), eventually it's going to screw us all over.
Hardware companies shouldn't be able to dictate how well a game runs, the conflict of interest is beyond obvious. It's bad for everyone, whatever "team" you identify yourself with for some irrational reason.