What's the point of comparing a DLSS game to a non-DLSS game?

[Veninblazer]

Let's say, with Cyberpunk 2077. With DLSS, let's say Performance in this case, a card gets 80 FPS. But in Metro Exodus, that same card gets 90-100 FPS natively without DLSS, for instance. Even with the render resolution being far below native, Cyberpunk still can't even match Metro Exodus performance while not looking THAT much better.

 

Surely, there must be some kind of optimization issue, but no, you need to upgrade and you're just poor for one game. Suuuuure.

[Quackers101]

Just do the lowspec way

 

[DefenestratorIV]

It can be much more complicated than just GPU power. I haven't run it yet, but seeing how dense the population and detail in Cyberpunk is, I can imagine it's a pretty CPU hungry game. By the looks it also seems far more graphically intensive than, say, Metro Exodus.

[Veninblazer]

Just now, Quackers101 said:

Just do the lowspec way

 

i respect the effort LSG made but that is so disrespectful to the art design that i'd rather just run it with better hardware. at least with my modded configs and 70-100% dynamic res I can maintain 60 ok-ish on my 1060 6GB and still stay true to the art design.

[Veninblazer]

Just now, DefenestratorIV said:

It can be much more complicated than just GPU power. I haven't run it yet, but seeing how dense the population and detail in Cyberpunk is, I can imagine it's a pretty CPU hungry game. By the looks it also seems far more graphically intensive than, say, Metro Exodus.

Oh yeah. My Ryzen 5 3600 gets hit hard, on all 12 threads, can't even turn up the crowd density because the framerate drops are too bad.

[Quackers101]

Yes it does a lot of graphical nonsense which can look better or worse depending on the scene and settings.

Like some of the visuals in that game is a bit overblown.

[Veninblazer]

1 minute ago, Quackers101 said:

Yes it does a lot of graphical nonsense which can look better or worse depending on the scene and settings.

Like some of the visuals in that game is a bit overblown.

Yeah and honestly, I have at least a dozen games that look and run better on my specific set of hardware. To get a solid 60 while getting the visuals true to next-gen glory you're gonna need a 3090...straight up, and even then it's not guaranteed.

[Morrie Sells Wigs]

18 hours ago, Veninblazer said:

Yeah and honestly, I have at least a dozen games that look and run better on my specific set of hardware. To get a solid 60 while getting the visuals true to next-gen glory you're gonna need a 3090...straight up, and even then it's not guaranteed.

Why not play the base Xbox One version instead?

 

I've heard it has a buttery smooth 12 fps, all delivered in glorious 680p.

 

 

[Veninblazer]

3 minutes ago, Maury Sells Wigs said:

Why not play the base Xbox One version instead?

 

I've heard it has a buttery smooth 12 fps, all delivered in glorious 680p.

 

 

The fact that 60 is basically impossible on a lot of hardware if you truly want next-gen quality (which, im sorry, but for this game, that means raytracing), is kind of a mega oof

[Morrie Sells Wigs]

Just now, Veninblazer said:

The fact that 60 is basically impossible on a lot of hardware if you truly want next-gen quality (which, im sorry, but for this game, that means raytracing), is kind of a mega oof

I know. 

 

I suspect it'll be a good few years before most parts will be cheap enough and available enough to allow even a small minority of people to run this game how it is meant to be run.

 

I'm interested to see how the proper current gen ps5 and series X/S versions run when they are released next year sometime. 

 

Let's hope it is 4k 60 - or at least let's hope there are multiple options to adjust resolution vs frame rate to attain 60 fps somehow if it isn't the default option. 

[LOST TALE]

On 12/26/2020 at 1:05 AM, Quackers101 said:

Just do the lowspec way

 

ultra low 240fps 4k master race

[tikker]

17 hours ago, Veninblazer said:

The fact that 60 is basically impossible on a lot of hardware if you truly want next-gen quality (which, im sorry, but for this game, that means raytracing), is kind of a mega oof

I don't think this is an oof at all. One should not expect to be able to attain next-gen quality without the latest and greatest hardware.

 

In my opinion it was about time we got a "second coming of Crysis". No PC could run that game maxed out when it released. Issues with the game aside, I think it's good that stuff comes out that cannot be run at max settings with current gen hardware. We need stuff that shows off so that it (hopefully) gives incentive to manufacturers to innovate or push the hardware like the big jump we now saw with the RTX 3000 series.

 

As for DLSS vs non-DLSS I like it when they show numbers with and without it to put things in persepective.

[Veninblazer]

11 minutes ago, tikker said:

I don't think this is an oof at all. One should not expect to be able to attain next-gen quality without the latest and greatest hardware.

 

In my opinion it was about time we got a "second coming of Crysis". No PC could run that game maxed out when it released. Issues with the game aside, I think it's good that stuff comes out that cannot be run at max settings with current gen hardware. We need stuff that shows off so that it (hopefully) gives incentive to manufacturers to innovate or push the hardware like the big jump we now saw with the RTX 3000 series.

 

As for DLSS vs non-DLSS I like it when they show numbers with and without it to put things in persepective.

its an oof especially for budget guys who don't really have $500+ to spend on a video card and so have to deal with worse visuals and worse performance because the game doesnt really scale down very well.

[tikker]

8 minutes ago, Veninblazer said:

its an oof especially for budget guys who don't really have $500+ to spend on a video card and so have to deal with worse visuals and worse performance because the game doesnt really scale down very well.

Still not an oof. I didn't mean to say that the game should look and run like crap even on the lowest settings. Of course ideally developers should have a proper range of settings for you to tailor to your hardware and CP2077 on the lowest settings doesn't look the greatest I'm not denying that. I do stand by that if you don't have the highest end hardware that you'll have to accept lesser looks, lower performance and lower settings as much as it may not be what you want.

[Veninblazer]

10 minutes ago, tikker said:

Still not an oof. I didn't mean to say that the game should look and run like crap even on the lowest settings. Of course ideally developers should have a proper range of settings for you to tailor to your hardware and CP2077 on the lowest settings doesn't look the greatest I'm not denying that. I do stand by that if you don't have the highest end hardware that you'll have to accept lesser looks, lower performance and lower settings as much as it may not be what you want.

i think the fact that i can get high+ in 2018-2019 titles and they end up looking better than 2077 at low speaks for itself but I digress

[tikker]

11 minutes ago, Veninblazer said:

i think the fact that i can get high+ in 2018-2019 titles and they end up looking better than 2077 at low speaks for itself but I digress

Cyberpunk can use some fixes, I think the internet is unanimous about that What you mention is another pet peeve I have where in my experience the difference between high, very high and ultra, for example, is just 4k textures and to much AA and what not slapped on it and no substantial difference.

[Quackers101]

snip

[UhreForFan]

Even thought it is not completely off, I don't think it fair to compare the two games.

Cyberpunk is a fully fledged open world sandbox RPG.

Metro Exodus is linear open world (if that makes sense) with some RPG elements. 

 

I love both but for me its really easy to see why Cyberpunk do not look that much better. There is simply a whole lot more going on in cyberpunk. Metro even if it is an open world is far more "scripted". It is very similar to the original Crysis, that you can say has open world like maps. Nobody would say that Crysis was open world and while Metro Exodus is more open than Crysis. Just make Crysis maps somewhat bigger and and 2-3 secondary objectives to them and you would have Metro Exodus structure wise. 

 

That´s just my thoughts though