Monster Hunter Wilds

Monster Hunter Wilds

View Stats:
110 fps max settings w ray tracing[5070ti]
5070 ti
9800x3d

3440x1440 resolution

anyone getting better?
Last edited by Antvietnam; Feb 26 @ 6:49am
< >
Showing 1-15 of 19 comments
Spectra9 Feb 26 @ 6:53am 
With ultra + FG?
Palicai Feb 26 @ 6:53am 
Thats with FG, for sure.
Antvietnam Feb 26 @ 7:04am 
Originally posted by Spectra9:
With ultra + FG?

Yes, why would I run without FG?
Seiren Feb 26 @ 7:09am 
Originally posted by Antvietnam:
Yes, why would I run without FG?

For much better image quality in motion. If you're willing to sacrifice that or can't notice the difference, then there is no issue. Have fun. Doesn't really matter what others think if you find it acceptable.

Game really needs DLSS4 to clean up TAA and stability in motion though. I haven't run the benchmark in a while, but think it didn't even have a sharpening setting which is kind of a must even with later versions of DLSS3.
Last edited by Seiren; Feb 26 @ 7:10am
Originally posted by Seiren:
Originally posted by Antvietnam:
Yes, why would I run without FG?

For much better image quality in motion. If you're willing to sacrifice that or can't notice the difference, then there is no issue. Have fun. Doesn't really matter what other think if you find it acceptable.

Game really needs DLSS4 to clean up TAA and stability in motion though. I haven't run the benchmark in a while, but think it didn't even have a sharpening setting which is kind of a must even with later versions of DLSS3.

The game is 1/10 optimization tho
Seiren Feb 26 @ 7:16am 
Originally posted by Antvietnam:
The game is 1/10 optimization tho

I'm not arguing against that or your choice to use FG. Just saying why someone would want to run most games without FG. 2x FG isn't bad in a lot of games with DLSS4 if the base framerate is at least 60 FPS though. The issues compound at lower frame rates and higher frame insertion setings like 3x and 4x, however.

I fully agree that the optimization is unacceptable.
Originally posted by Seiren:
Originally posted by Antvietnam:
The game is 1/10 optimization tho

I'm not arguing against that or your choice to use FG. Just saying why someone would want to run most games without FG. 2x FG isn't bad in a lot of games with DLSS4 if the base framerate is at least 60 FPS though. The issues compound at lower frame rates and higher frame insertion setings like 3x and 4x, however.

I fully agree that the optimization is unacceptable.

On other games I’m getting 130+ ultra with RT.. 3440p

It’s really bad
I've spent time tweaking settings for my setup, but I think I have an interesting comparison with hardware two generations older and running the same resolution. With a 5800x3D, 6800XT, and 3440x1440, I get a final average of 108 FPS on Ultra + High Ray Tracing and Frame Gen. I would hope your lows would be better, though. In the plains sweeping shot my lowest framerate was 77, (ie. ~38-39 real fps).

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3434670284
Shenkay Feb 26 @ 8:25am 
Any FPS with FG its just garbage. That are false frame and during combat sucks the image quality drop Horrible
Originally posted by Shenkay:
Any FPS with FG its just garbage. That are false frame and during combat sucks the image quality drop Horrible
you dont even own a 50 series how would you know? it looks amazing to me, coming from a 4070t super
Originally posted by Antvietnam:
Originally posted by 7thRenegade:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3434715595
RT on or off?
off
Aldroen Feb 26 @ 9:38am 
Honestly the way benchmark measures stuff is pretty bad. They really should have done separate CPU, GPU and MIX benchmark and give you value for each and average it out.

One person can have a top of the lines GPU with crap CPU and get higher score than someone with way better CPU and mid range GPU even though that person might have way more stable frame rates.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 19 comments
Per page: 1530 50

Date Posted: Feb 26 @ 6:48am
Posts: 19