does the benchmarking tool accurately portray the ingame performance?

[Alastor's Alibi]

Considering buying it. I have a 4060. I should be able to run it I think but the reviews are concerning

[Madao]

not at all. not even a bit.

My rig is below minmum specs but I ran the benchmark tool cuz I was curious and got "Good" as result.
There's no universe where my ♥♥♥♥♥♥ PC should get a "Good" for the benchmark for this game, yet it did.

[Latiodile]

no, benchmark said i'd get 70-80fps, i get barely 60 at the same settings on my 3080

[Oni-Lyrics]

No its prerendered it doesn't really show anything.

[Alastor's Alibi]

dang thats so stupid. Why even put it out then

[Louis Cypher]

that tool is just marketing gaslighting.
Try it first with family sharing if possible

[Danzaiver]

Absolutely not, I was getting 80-100fps in the benchmark but with released game I'm in the 50-60s territory, even when using lower graphics settings (since benchmark included the HD textures by default, main game has them as separate DLC)

[Madao]

Originally posted by Alastor's Alibi:

dang thats so stupid. Why even put it out then

it's borderline scamming. it's giving rigs that can't run the game at 20fps a projection of 60 to 90 fps

[L:D]

Originally posted by Alastor's Alibi:

dang thats so stupid. Why even put it out then

To deceive people into buying the game and make people stop complaining about ♥♥♥♥ ass optimization. It worked for them tho, too bad they can't hide it in the full game.

[Rayvencraft]

It would be advisable to get a eye dr apt before buying

[AmaiAmai]

No. Performance on release is much much "different" and that's if you can get the game running.

I'm not joking, the game may not run at all for you due to permissions and security settings on your PC. Though you can find the problem, you may be unlucky.

Then once you get it started, you have to do the old "compile shaders" nonsense that every game with bad optimisation has you do and avoid crashing.

THEN, after doing that...you have to NOT bluescreen when you actually play the game.

Then, if you get past that, you have to clap and be relieved...but ... you might just have to burn your eyeballs out with flicker.

And if, if you get past that point...then you can enjoy the ugliest textures and graphics you may have seen in your life. I mean, you would be like "I've seen PS1 games look better"

Then when you are running it with so much CPU and GPU wasted you will be like "who authorised this? This is trash"

And then join the ranks of the people complaining on this forum

[Yuni Akiko]

Here's my theory. The benchmark and the beta ran the game with the high texture resolutions DLC. I have a friend who used both and got a result of bad in the benchmark. Game releases, he doesnt download the high resolution pack and it runs perfectly, and he's running on a laptop.

[fob]

honestly if your specs are not top notch, i recommend playing with FSR Max Quality + Frame Gen and playing in private online sessions, this way you dont lag that much in populated zones, this will make your experience good for the time they don't release patches to fix the performance

[Smug Kot]

No, the game will run like complete garbage and the benchmark will tell you to buy it.

[ccdc]

I have 4060 w/ R5 3600.
High Settings, DLSS, NO FG - 50 FPS

[jakolantern]

3060ti and medium on most thing and high on some running flawlessly at 11 hours still no crashes but many people with 4060s and higher arent able to play the game so idk if you would be able to it is completely worth it if you can though