what we need for 4k 60 fps ¿

[Mutoit]

i have a rtx 4070 i5 13600 kf in a Gigabyte B660 gaming with 16 ddr ,
i get 45 fps for 4k with dlss .....is that normal ?

[Drxk ダーク]

do u got the rtx 4070ti or normal rtx?

[Crispy™]

Yes, completely normal.

https://youtu.be/WUPfpLQaS84?t=170

See 2:22.

[Mutoit]

Originally posted by DinoNugget:

do u got the rtx 4070ti or normal rtx?

normal one. i get 100 fps at full ray in full hd.....is cool...but...what a bout 4k :p

[skOsH♥]

This is why I went with a 2k monitor and a 7900xtx

If I turn everything on max, I'll get about 45fps. The amount of ray tracing and the introduction of path tracing makes my eyes water. It's definitely sensory overload, but I'm going to try to optimize my settings.

Obviously achieved with FSR

[Mike Hawthorne]

I'm running a Geforce 3080 and at 3440 by 1440 and with things just turned down a little bit I can get a pretty consistent 100 fps. My computer does get hot though, most games don't cause it to heat up.

[SHOKKERZ91]

Turn some graphics options down a notch or two and you get a ton of performance for almost no visual cost. Ultra settings are absurd. Keep textures on the highest option and turn some performance hogs down a notch, like screenspace reflections.

[Red Star, Blood Moon]

Originally posted by d¢:

This is why I went with a 2k monitor and a 7900xtx

If I turn everything on max, I'll get about 45fps. The amount of ray tracing and the introduction of path tracing makes my eyes water. It's definitely sensory overload, but I'm going to try to optimize my settings.

Obviously achieved with FSR

This is why I don't find a GPU upgrade worth it at all for those prices, because I'm on your resolution and I am getting like that kind of fps but without raytracing...and using a 5700XT. Even then, 41fps is playable sure, and I do get some problems with 8gb of VRAM on ultra I think, but it just fundamentally isn't worth it to me to be getting the same kind of performance I'd be getting on a midrange graphics card from 3 years ago after paying literally over a thousand dollars for it. This is why I can't take raytracing seriously still. I'm sure some scenes do look prettier but all I care about is 4k settings at native, and I do not like FSR, doubt DLSS is better, they all seem to introduce muddy textures especially when it rains with upscaling and it makes no sense to make the whole scene look like poop all in the pursuit of better reflections and still wind up with much worse framerates. Like if I got as nice a card as a 7900XTX I'd be going the full 4k144hz monitor and just try running it at native.

I'm sure just playing this game at 60fps all the time would be a great quality improvement but then again I am refusing to compromise on my graphics at native resolution and so I'm not turning them down nor am I enabling FSR, even though it does feel better at 55fps with FSR enabled. Maybe to some people raytracing really is having that effect, but frankly I find the lighting and particle effects of games like Battlefleet Gothic Armada 2 and The Division to be so good it wouldn't be worth it going from a game that runs that well all ultra to having to compromise on multiple settings in order to keep the game playable.

Originally posted by SHOKKERZ91:

Turn some graphics options down a notch or two and you get a ton of performance for almost no visual cost. Ultra settings are absurd. Keep textures on the highest option and turn some performance hogs down a notch, like screenspace reflections.

I still can't figure out what ones to do though and so I ended up just leaving them all cranked because it did so little turning them down. Like I tried turning crowd density down and different things lower with FSR off and reducing FOV but all it often amounted to was like 5fps uptick, and that's not worth it to me when I'm making it look worse. If I could figure out what setting would leave lowest visual impact and get me 50 fps I probably would do it though, because drops as low as 36fps is the absolute limit of tolerable framerate for me. It is absurd that this game is doing this on just native raster. It looks nice enough anyway, so idk, I wouldn't pay over a thousand dollars to get just this game running better or using RT especially if I had to smear everything with FSR or DLSS just to get 45fps. If I was going to upgrade this year I'd be going for Cyberpunk all ultra RT off and getting 70fps at 4k. Or at bare minimum, a rock hard 60fps 1440p with RT fully on.

[Mutoit]

Originally posted by Mike Hawthorne:

I'm running a Geforce 3080 and at 3440 by 1440 and with things just turned down a little bit I can get a pretty consistent 100 fps. My computer does get hot though, most games don't cause it to heat up.

shadows maybe ?

[Mutoit]

Originally posted by SHOKKERZ91:

Turn some graphics options down a notch or two and you get a ton of performance for almost no visual cost. Ultra settings are absurd. Keep textures on the highest option and turn some performance hogs down a notch, like screenspace reflections.

i will try, but in fact, full hd looks beauty and dlss 3 is amazing.... but thz for the tips

[Mutoit]

i love games like Assasins, u put all in max for FullHD and u can up the resolution getting something like 4k i guess, looks very beautiful and dont give that 4k problems