Performance after patch

[AMABATUKAM]

Is it better now? I wanna know before I buy.

[Warlander]

No one can say how your system will handle it, im running a 3090 and its been flawless for me at ultra settings, nor have i encountered any bugs, your experience may be different.

[Ruhel™]

I have a 3070 Laptop GPU (Helios 300) and have seen some improvements. No more stuttering or BSOD. BUT cant launch the game anymore the next day. SO reinstalling fresh.

[RawrKitteh]

I've been crashing every 30 minutes since the patch, but performance is alright.

[Waltzingbear]

I haven't noticed any FPS improvements in a few of the areas that suffer the most. If there was an improvement in that area, it is not noticeable to me. Also the game didn't seem to change anything about having no pre-compilations of shaders (which mostly only affects you the FIRST time a new effect/enemy appears.) As for performance bugs/crashes—I never had any.

If your computer can run it, the game is playable, but you'll need to drop some settings to low. It's just that it feels like the game should have 50%+ FPS than what it has and the shader compilation is a real problem.

I thought about refunding my first 2 hours of play, but I'm glad I kept playing. I think the game is worth it if you can still maintain a general playable FPS. (They should still get more negative reviews for the bad perfs' though...)

[daniel_dx]

It's all over the place depending on your rig, but better than before. Mine is R5-5600G, RX 6600 and 16GB RAM. FSR was tanking the performance with poor visuals and everything on low, but Intel's upscaler is keeping +60FPS with dips into 40 when things load or get too busy, but I can go on medium now, which is something.

It's kinda of a Elden Ring situation: the game sure is fun, but performance is on the side of trashy.

[樂色]

For me it just didn't work. I mean the performance raised, getting more fps sure, but the game crashes even more now. lul

[Setorrs The Lollygagger]

Originally posted by AMABATUKAM:

Is it better now? I wanna know before I buy.

Checked yesterday (4090, 7950x3d no dlss on 1440p sorry no 4k) and the answer is there is no change compared to launch ( still have massive drops from 110+ fps to around 40-50 fps in some zones). Might want to wait for a bigger performance patch since this one mostly nerfed items or did some random things.

[D. Flame]

Very little change, but I did get "less" stutters in Sci-Fi world. Still had stutters, but just less of them.

[7senoTV]

4090 i9 13th , same problem issue crash the only option for me to be able to play the game is make the game run on windows 8 with all settings low and dlss

[樂色]

Originally posted by 7senoTV:

4090 i9 13th , same problem issue crash the only option for me to be able to play the game is make the game run on windows 8 with all settings low and dlss

bruh, same here. thought they'd patched it, but it only gets worse.

[Mister Wiggles]

Im using a 3070 with a Ryzen 5600x. Went from dips to 40 fps @1440p to 60 being the lowest i've seen since the patch. Its been a big improvement for me but still room for it to get better.

You can play the game, just don't play more than 2 hours so you can request a refund if its not running to great for you. 2 hours is plenty of time to see if you will suffer from performance issues.

[AMABATUKAM]

It seems to run fine on mine. Tried it, thanks everyone.

[ZooL]

Originally posted by Waltzingbear:

it feels like the game should have 50%+ FPS than what it has

i think this is a horrible misconception by most people on these forums. Should the game run a bit better? yes, for sure. but if you expect 50%+ increase you are not realizing how advanced some of the graphical features are. the game uses both nanite and virtual shadow maps. two very demanding features of the unreal 5 engine. if you look at the amount of geometric detail in the game, you must realize how demanding that is to render. just because it does not have photo realistic textures does not mean the graphics are not very well done and gpu heavy.

[bagonzago]

Yeah yeah the game is so stunning, sure.

[4accenter]

Originally posted by ZooL:

Originally posted by Waltzingbear:

it feels like the game should have 50%+ FPS than what it has

i think this is a horrible misconception by most people on these forums. Should the game run a bit better? yes, for sure. but if you expect 50%+ increase you are not realizing how advanced some of the graphical features are. the game uses both nanite and virtual shadow maps. two very demanding features of the unreal 5 engine. if you look at the amount of geometric detail in the game, you must realize how demanding that is to render. just because it does not have photo realistic textures does not mean the graphics are not very well done and gpu heavy.

Don't come here with facts. These are all programmers because they installed a mod in Minecraft. They know better. All the time.
I'm also annoyed, which always has to be. As you said, the game is far from perfect, but the developers are certainly not all idiots. A certain culture of respect for art and the freedom in it and a certain tolerance for mistakes. Anyone can return it within 2 hours.
everyone can and should express their opinion, but not as if they had developed the game or had shares in the company. Sometimes in someone else's work you have to live with things that don't suit you.

For me it´s running very well with Dlss (quality at 73C/80-90% or medium with 63C/ 40-70%, everytime 60fps@1440p) and a ADM 3700x and a 3070RTX and 32GB RAM.
Never crashed after 50 hours.