Massive performance decrease compared to beta 1?

[ellennarto]

RTX 3080, Ryzen 5600X, 32gb ram

First beta was fine with 40-60fps, 2nd beta I get 20fps max, no matter the settings. Like, tweaking settings does absolutely nothing, except turning off DLSS which further decreases fps to 10. Am I doing something completely wrong?

[NeoX]

No changes in my experience. Maybe you only feel that way because of new monster with more effects?

[Kelset]

The benchmark runs slightly better for me, but the frame drops always appear in the same areas, meaning the base and where NPCs are present, exactly the same as Dragon Dogma 2. This game has identical issues.

I have a MSI3070ti, 32gb ram, a 12 core Ryzen9 3900x at 4200hz, installed on a M1 and this runs like ♥♥♥♥, and by ♥♥♥♥ I don't mean "iT DoEsN't KeEp 120FpS at 2k!!!1!" , I mean it fails miserably to hold 60fps on high setting with no raytracing (DLSS on quality of course, because let's face it, native res isn't an option anymore in modern gaming...). I have a real average of 48fps with high settings. With medium settings it hits 60fps average (not considering the high spikes of 80fps during cinematic empty close ups tailored to fake a good result).

I wouldn't expect to see a framerate so poor at 1080p honestly.

I have the same framerate with Cyperpunk77 in 2k with pathtracing on ffs.

[NeoX]

Originally posted by Kelset:

The benchmark runs slightly better for me, but the frame drops always appear in the same areas, meaning the base and where NPCs are present, exactly the same as Dragon Dogma 2. This game has identical issues.

I have a MSI3070ti, 32gb ram, a 12 core Ryzen9 3900x at 4200hz, installed on a M1 and this runs like ♥♥♥♥, and by ♥♥♥♥ I don't mean "iT DoEsN't KeEp 120FpS at 2k!!!1!" , I mean it fails miserably to hold 60fps on high setting with no raytracing (DLSS on quality of course, because let's face it, native res isn't an option anymore in modern gaming...).

I wouldn't expect to see a framerate so poor at 1080p honestly.

2 little things that may be the reason for that on your end:

1. Your CPU does have enough cores to handle all the threads, but Zen 2 has quite the singlecore power disadvantage compared to Zen 3.
2. Could it be that your 8GB of VRAM can also bottleneck in some scenes for you? Have seen quite some reports about that around here.

Your System is close to equal in power when it comes to the PS5. So i guess the console like settings and performance is what you have to expect because of that: 1080P , medium setting, no raytracing, 30fps (cap). I bet you can uphold these settings without an issue and enver breaking under these 30 fps (like its intended on console).

[Kelset]

Originally posted by NeoX:

Originally posted by Kelset:

The benchmark runs slightly better for me, but the frame drops always appear in the same areas, meaning the base and where NPCs are present, exactly the same as Dragon Dogma 2. This game has identical issues.

I have a MSI3070ti, 32gb ram, a 12 core Ryzen9 3900x at 4200hz, installed on a M1 and this runs like ♥♥♥♥, and by ♥♥♥♥ I don't mean "iT DoEsN't KeEp 120FpS at 2k!!!1!" , I mean it fails miserably to hold 60fps on high setting with no raytracing (DLSS on quality of course, because let's face it, native res isn't an option anymore in modern gaming...).

I wouldn't expect to see a framerate so poor at 1080p honestly.

2 little things that may be the reason for that on your end:

1. Your CPU does have enough cores to handle all the threads, but Zen 2 has quite the singlecore power disadvantage compared to Zen 3.
2. Could it be that your 8GB of VRAM can also bottleneck in some scenes for you? Have seen quite some reports about that around here.

Your System is close to equal in power when it comes to the PS5. So i guess the console like settings and performance is what you have to expect because of that: 1080P , medium setting, no raytracing, 30fps (cap). I bet you can uphold these settings without an issue and enver breaking under these 30 fps (like its intended on console).

Nah, the hardware isn't really a ps5 level, I have it, I also have some of the same games, it's not even close. The beta isn't optimized obviously, but the benchmark suffers from identical bugs. A performance like that can't be justified. It drops because of two reasons:

1-the code has issues.
2-we need new drivers also but that not always the case.

Again CP77 runs better with pathtracing on my machine at the same res and max detail (and not in the wastelands, but in Corpo Plaza)
It doesn't make sense.

[NeoX]

Originally posted by Kelset:

Originally posted by NeoX:

2 little things that may be the reason for that on your end:

1. Your CPU does have enough cores to handle all the threads, but Zen 2 has quite the singlecore power disadvantage compared to Zen 3.
2. Could it be that your 8GB of VRAM can also bottleneck in some scenes for you? Have seen quite some reports about that around here.

Your System is close to equal in power when it comes to the PS5. So i guess the console like settings and performance is what you have to expect because of that: 1080P , medium setting, no raytracing, 30fps (cap). I bet you can uphold these settings without an issue and enver breaking under these 30 fps (like its intended on console).

Nah, the hardware isn't really a ps5 level, I have it, I also have some of the same games, it's not even close. The beta isn't optimized obviously, but the benchmark suffers from identical bugs. A performance like that can't be justified. It drops because of two reasons:

1-the code has issues.
2-we need new drivers also but that not always the case.

Again CP77 runs better with pathtracing on my machine at the same res and max detail (and not in the wastelands, but in Corpo Plaza)
It doesn't make sense.

Then our experiences seem to differ. Also comparing a complete different game-engine does not truly work here. Comparing DD2 to it, would make more sense in this case.

[Kelset]

Originally posted by NeoX:

Originally posted by Kelset:

Nah, the hardware isn't really a ps5 level, I have it, I also have some of the same games, it's not even close. The beta isn't optimized obviously, but the benchmark suffers from identical bugs. A performance like that can't be justified. It drops because of two reasons:

1-the code has issues.
2-we need new drivers also but that not always the case.

Again CP77 runs better with pathtracing on my machine at the same res and max detail (and not in the wastelands, but in Corpo Plaza)
It doesn't make sense.

Then our experiences seem to differ. Also comparing a complete different game-engine does not truly work here. Comparing DD2 to it, would make more sense in this case.

Dragon's Dogma 2 runs as bad as Wilds for me, with the exception that DD2 now runs way better because they fixed couple of things it seems.
That means the game engine is either bad, or they can't optimize the games that are made on it on time, or they just don't care and ship it anyways.

The issue doesn't change:
-This game tech doesn't justify the hardware required to run it.

At least speaking of this iteration, I guess we'll see on day one, but I strongly doubt things will change that much.

It's a badly running, overfiltered washy blurred image that runs bad. That's my impression so far.

[NeoX]

Originally posted by Kelset:

Originally posted by NeoX:

Then our experiences seem to differ. Also comparing a complete different game-engine does not truly work here. Comparing DD2 to it, would make more sense in this case.

Dragon's Dogma 2 runs as bad as Wilds for me, with the exception that DD2 now runs way better because they fixed couple of things it seems.
That means the game engine is either bad, or they can't optimize the games that are made on it on time, or they just don't care and ship it anyways.

The issue doesn't change:
-This game tech doesn't justify the hardware required to run it.

At least speaking of this iteration, I guess we'll see on day one, but I strongly doubt things will change that much.

It's a badly running, overfiltered washy blurred image that runs bad. That's my impression so far.

I guess we should agree to disagree. For me the performance is logical when you keep in mind what the target development was (current gen consoles with 30fps target). When the 1st updates arrive and mostly GPU's get optimised drivers and game-profiles, it all will become less problematic for many.

[Rzarect0r]

without fsr im getting 60 ish on my 6950XT and 7800x3d, with FSR it hovers around the 80-90 range. this is at high settings 1440p with textures maxed out and AF 16x (no framegen)

[DDENN]

Originally posted by NeoX:

Originally posted by Kelset:

Dragon's Dogma 2 runs as bad as Wilds for me, with the exception that DD2 now runs way better because they fixed couple of things it seems.
That means the game engine is either bad, or they can't optimize the games that are made on it on time, or they just don't care and ship it anyways.

The issue doesn't change:
-This game tech doesn't justify the hardware required to run it.

At least speaking of this iteration, I guess we'll see on day one, but I strongly doubt things will change that much.

It's a badly running, overfiltered washy blurred image that runs bad. That's my impression so far.

I guess we should agree to disagree. For me the performance is logical when you keep in mind what the target development was (current gen consoles with 30fps target). When the 1st updates arrive and mostly GPU's get optimised drivers and game-profiles, it all will become less problematic for many.

if they uses asynchronous reprojection it would still feel smooth even with 30 fps like MH1 MH2 MHFO but they are not implemented it due to skill issue.

[Kelset]

Originally posted by NeoX:

Originally posted by Kelset:

Dragon's Dogma 2 runs as bad as Wilds for me, with the exception that DD2 now runs way better because they fixed couple of things it seems.
That means the game engine is either bad, or they can't optimize the games that are made on it on time, or they just don't care and ship it anyways.

The issue doesn't change:
-This game tech doesn't justify the hardware required to run it.

At least speaking of this iteration, I guess we'll see on day one, but I strongly doubt things will change that much.

It's a badly running, overfiltered washy blurred image that runs bad. That's my impression so far.

I guess we should agree to disagree. For me the performance is logical when you keep in mind what the target development was (current gen consoles with 30fps target). When the 1st updates arrive and mostly GPU's get optimised drivers and game-profiles, it all will become less problematic for many.

I'm not disagreeing with you ;) I'm well aware of the hardware I have, but I'm also aware of what it does with heavier titles (idk take DCS for example, it's a tiny tiny tiny bit more heavy than MH:W) or CP77 as an example, or RDR2, just to stay in the mainstream. To say that it's acceptable to aim for 30fps on current gen hardware (by current gen I mean what's the target of its development) it's a sad perspective. People can't be pushed to spend 4000$ every 2 years to be 60fps able. I could get a new pc now, it's not a budget issue, but for what? To change it again when GTA6 comes out next year? ?cause at this rate the 5000series is going to struggle then. I heave the means, that doesn't means I'm dumb to waste money in mediocre hardware that can't even run anything at native res without AI help or fake performance with frame generation.

This generation is going in the wrong direction.

[Besend]

Originally posted by Kelset:

Originally posted by NeoX:

I guess we should agree to disagree. For me the performance is logical when you keep in mind what the target development was (current gen consoles with 30fps target). When the 1st updates arrive and mostly GPU's get optimised drivers and game-profiles, it all will become less problematic for many.

I'm not disagreeing with you ;) I'm well aware of the hardware I have, but I'm also aware of what it does with heavier titles (idk take DCS for example, it's a tiny tiny tiny bit more heavy than MH:W) or CP77 as an example, or RDR2, just to stay in the mainstream. To say that it's acceptable to aim for 30fps on current gen hardware (by current gen I mean what's the target of its development) it's a sad perspective. People can't be pushed to spend 4000$ every 2 years to be 60fps able. I could get a new pc now, it's not a budget issue, but for what? To change it again when GTA6 comes out next year? ?cause at this rate the 5000series is going to struggle then. I heave the means, that doesn't means I'm dumb to waste money in mediocre hardware that can't even run anything at native res without AI help or fake performance with frame generation.

This generation is going in the wrong direction.

Look. My 3080 is not a "current gen" and i bough it used about 2 years ago. It's still able to give me 60fps without dlss or framegen on 1080p. You don't need to spend 4000$ every 2 years to run 60fps. I can lower some setting and get even more fps, it's not like i'm playing on low. Yes beta runs crappy at times, but i had a positive change in perfomance from obt 1 to obt 2. So in theory it can get even better on release day.