My MHW Benchmark using below requirement PC

[Shrek192]

Here are my results from Lowest to High settings playing at 1080p. Needed Frame Generation to be playable. I noticed that the benchmark shows a lot of cut scenes which help padded the average FPS results and in medium settings while roaming, it can dipped down to 49 fps and I don't know how much more it will drop in fps for actual fight. I didn't get the chance to enable Frame Generation during beta testing. I think for me around 60 fps is playable. What do you guys think? Maybe it is time to upgrade my PC :D

Lowest settings without Frame Gen - 45.57 fps
Lowest settings with Frame Gen - 81.18 fps
Medium settings with Frame Gen - 66.94 fps
High settings with Frame Gen - 51.74 fps

My PC Specs:
CPU : Intel i3-10100 (below minimum requirement)
GPU : NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 with GPU Driver Version 566.14
RAM : 16gb DDR4

While roaming in MHW Benchmark: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3433406518

For my results in MHW Benchmark : https://steamcommunity.com/id/Shrek192/screenshots/

[JudgeTy]

PS5 pro gonna slap that.
Do you have a ps5/ps5 pro, 4k tv, and friends with ps5s, I'd recommend easily that route.

Prob too hard to upgrade your GPU at this point. 4080 super, 5080, 5090, no idea on team reds offerings. CPU on this one really doesn't matter.

Is this at 1440p, 1080p? 4k?

If that's 1080p, again ps5 pro gonna slap that for 4k.

I have a 4080 super, and I'm getting 70+ fps at 4k on ultra settings.
Frame gen 110 fps.

I wouldn't want to play on medium with frame gen at 1080p, but if your friends are getting the game on pc, that's the sacrifice you are gonna have to make.

[Doge]

You need around 45-60 base Fps with no framegen to be playable.

[Kashra Fall]

Originally posted by Doge:

You need around 45-60 base Fps with no framegen to be playable.

Lol, you really don't. Console is going to get 30 and under and only the setting of "Balanced." which is 55% of the screen resolution, is going to get 40 and under on console. The game isn't a FPS, you don't need high FPS for it to be playable.

[JudgeTy]

Originally posted by Kashra Fall:

Originally posted by Doge:

You need around 45-60 base Fps with no framegen to be playable.

Lol, you really don't. Console is going to get 30 and under and only the setting of "Balanced." which is 55% of the screen resolution, is going to get 40 and under on console. The game isn't a FPS, you don't need high FPS for it to be playable.

Uh no... its 60+ fps on the pro with image quality...

https://gamewith.net/monster-hunter-wilds/48388

[Moonwitch]

Originally posted by Kashra Fall:

Originally posted by Doge:

You need around 45-60 base Fps with no framegen to be playable.

Lol, you really don't. Console is going to get 30 and under and only the setting of "Balanced." which is 55% of the screen resolution, is going to get 40 and under on console. The game isn't a FPS, you don't need high FPS for it to be playable.

Having your game be a minimum of 60 fps isn't strictly exclusive to only FPS, you do know that right? It's called standards and this isn't 2011 where 30 fps was considered the "norm".

Imagine purchasing the best CPU and GPU, so the 9800X3D and 5090, to play MH Wilds at 30 fps. Get off your high horse Kashra, thanks.

[Kashra Fall]

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Originally posted by Kashra Fall:

Lol, you really don't. Console is going to get 30 and under and only the setting of "Balanced." which is 55% of the screen resolution, is going to get 40 and under on console. The game isn't a FPS, you don't need high FPS for it to be playable.

Having your game be a minimum of 60 fps isn't strictly exclusive to only FPS, you do know that right? It's called standards and this isn't 2011 where 30 fps was considered the "norm".

Imagine purchasing the best CPU and GPU, so the 9800X3D and 5090, to play MH Wilds at 30 fps. Get off your high horse Kashra, thanks.

It's almost like I said "Console." Right? The OP is shooting for 60 FPS and got 51 on high with their setup. What high horse am I riding, exactly?

[Dr. Raven]

30 fps is totally playable, but man that is gonna be a rough experience for ya as you get to end-game content. I'm surprised you got that high of FPS despite the being below specs.

[Kashra Fall]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY6QxXQnI-I&ab_channel=XiphosGaming

So I found this fun little video (Yes I know there is performance difference between launch and beta.) But I mean, you see it here. The guy tried to run PS5 pro and honestly, that looks like low-med and still loses frames, as expected for trying to go for FPS. The console does not have the hardware to run a stable 60 FPS no matter what Sony is trying to feed you.

And here is the resolution test, aka going for highest visual fidelity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4EYoRnsKqQ&ab_channel=XiphosGaming

[Moonwitch]

Originally posted by Kashra Fall:

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Having your game be a minimum of 60 fps isn't strictly exclusive to only FPS, you do know that right? It's called standards and this isn't 2011 where 30 fps was considered the "norm".

Imagine purchasing the best CPU and GPU, so the 9800X3D and 5090, to play MH Wilds at 30 fps. Get off your high horse Kashra, thanks.

It's almost like I said "Console." Right? The OP is shooting for 60 FPS and got 51 on high with their setup. What high horse am I riding, exactly?

No one here is talking about console sweetheart, read the room. You weird MH fans will do anything to avoid being wrong lol. And you tell us what high horse since you seem to be so blissfully ignorant.

[Inuakurei]

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Originally posted by Kashra Fall:

It's almost like I said "Console." Right? The OP is shooting for 60 FPS and got 51 on high with their setup. What high horse am I riding, exactly?

No one here is talking about console sweetheart, read the room. You weird MH fans will do anything to avoid being wrong lol. And you tell us what high horse since you seem to be so blissfully ignorant.

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Imagine purchasing the best CPU and GPU, so the 9800X3D and 5090, to play MH Wilds at 30 fps. Get off your high horse Kashra, thanks.

Bold of you to accuse someone else of being wrong, when you're wrong.

https://imgur.com/a/n3kVKSY

[Moonwitch]

Originally posted by Inuakurei:

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

No one here is talking about console sweetheart, read the room. You weird MH fans will do anything to avoid being wrong lol. And you tell us what high horse since you seem to be so blissfully ignorant.

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Imagine purchasing the best CPU and GPU, so the 9800X3D and 5090, to play MH Wilds at 30 fps. Get off your high horse Kashra, thanks.

Bold of you to accuse someone else of being wrong, when you're wrong.

https://imgur.com/a/n3kVKSY

Wow, 4080 Super and can't even break 100 fps. So because everyone knows the benchmark is padding the average fps with cutscenes>gameplay>cutscenes. Mind telling us your actual fps during the gameplay segment?

[Inuakurei]

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Originally posted by Inuakurei:

Bold of you to accuse someone else of being wrong, when you're wrong.

https://imgur.com/a/n3kVKSY

Wow, 4080 Super and can't even break 100 fps. So because everyone knows the benchmark is padding the average fps with cutscenes>gameplay>cutscenes. Mind telling us your actual fps during the gameplay segment?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

Moving the goalposts is an informal fallacy in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded. That is, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt. The problem with changing the rules of the game is that the meaning of the result is changed, too

[Moonwitch]

Originally posted by Inuakurei:

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Wow, 4080 Super and can't even break 100 fps. So because everyone knows the benchmark is padding the average fps with cutscenes>gameplay>cutscenes. Mind telling us your actual fps during the gameplay segment?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

Yes thank you for posting the definition of what you're doing. Very astute.

So are you embarrassed to share that information or what? My R7 7700 and 3060 Ti gets a solid 60fps during the cutscene but drops to ~38 fps during the plains at 1440p DLSS balanced. Yes my gpu is the limiting factor here, all I care about is getting 60fps until I upgrade to something better like the RX 7900 XTX.

Now, your turn.

[JudgeTy]

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Originally posted by Inuakurei:

Bold of you to accuse someone else of being wrong, when you're wrong.

https://imgur.com/a/n3kVKSY

Wow, 4080 Super and can't even break 100 fps. So because everyone knows the benchmark is padding the average fps with cutscenes>gameplay>cutscenes. Mind telling us your actual fps during the gameplay segment?

I'm playing the game at 4k... at 1080p 1440p EASILY beats 100 fps.

[Moonwitch]

Originally posted by JudgeTy:

Originally posted by Moonwitch:

Wow, 4080 Super and can't even break 100 fps. So because everyone knows the benchmark is padding the average fps with cutscenes>gameplay>cutscenes. Mind telling us your actual fps during the gameplay segment?

I'm playing the game at 4k... at 1080p 1440p EASILY beats 100 fps.

Yep, and my 3060 Ti easily beats 110 fps at 1440p. :)