is the game better optimized?

[PhantomSoldier]

i uninstalled it like 2 months ago, i shouldnt get drops with my specs i have the settings around high and extra but the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ cities kill my fps for some reason.i average 90 fps till i hit the cities.

i5-7600k@4.5
12 gigs of ddr4@2300mhz
gtx 1070FTW
windows 10 64 bit

also this is the only game my pc struggles with so i know its the optimization.

[The Father]

Originally posted by CLOUT PhantomSoldier:

its going to ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ KILL ME if farcry 5 has denuvo and ruins the game, ive got a beefy rig but i thought the same thing about this game and it made my pc its ♥♥♥♥♥.

bad news, FC5 will be the same, from system requirements you can assume the game is definitely using dual DRMs like this game, im holding off on buying FC5, i hope i'd be wrong in that but its ubisoft and for them this kind of protection is a success story, so we will know for sure when its released.

[PhantomSoldier]

man that really sucks, im pretty sure ill be passing on it to.

[Rain]

Same issue here. Though not where one would think my PC should be mostly stressed. I get CPU overload in some random mountain areas, there is like zero action going on.
Maybe there is an reason, but it is a strange place, and my PC is more then cool with this semi good looking game, in terms of graphics, npc and so forth.

[meep_meep]

Originally posted by Goilveig:

I haven't seen any evidence it's CPU bound. While CPU bound games can make your CPU reach 100%, non-CPU-bound games can, too. You can't tell if a game is CPU bound just based on CPU utilization, a game is CPU bound if the GPU needs to wait on the CPU to draw more frames, or if input is unresponsive due to processing. If the game is using CPU to simulate a lot of NPC actions, but the GPU is not waiting on the results of those updates to draw its frames, then you're not actually CPU bound even if you're at peak CPU utilization.

On my PC anyway, any performance hiccups are entirely I/O related - which honestly isn't too surprising as the game is installed on my oldest and slowest hard drive. Apart from loading stutter sometimes, the game is smooth and responsive.

The reality with this game that nobody really wants to acknowledge is that it pushes *everything* hard, not just GPU/CPU.

As you noted, it pushes the I/O hard because of streaming assets, so you need an SSD to completely avoid I/O-related bottlenecks. I also tried it for a while on a 5400RPM hard drive and had occasional, regular stuttering. (Also in Mass Effect Andromeda and Dragon Age Inquisition.)

It also pushes memory bandwidth hard, *even on Intel platforms*. You need DDR4-3000 or better to get the most out of this game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3ou5RVAROw

The game also sees performance improvements with both increased single-core performance (hence 6c/12t Intel outperforms 6c/12t Ryzen) and core count scaling to AT LEAST 12 real cores, hence 8700K outperforms 7700K and Threadripper outperforms Ryzen 7.

The GPU obviously matters because it's a video game lol.

People can say this game is "poorly optimized" but if we're going to be more strict about the definition of that word, I would argue this is actually one of the most well-optimized games on PC right now. If you think it's more demanding than the visuals really warrant, that may be true, but that's not the same thing as optimization. What I mean is, I don't remember ever seeing a game that takes advantage of your system in such a complete way. Fast storage? It takes advantage of it with improved asset streaming. Fast RAM? It takes advantage and gives you better performance. More cores and clocks? Better performance. The game actually maxes out your PC. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.

I wish that Ubisoft had maybe included some options to reduce the CPU load for those with lower-end CPUs, like a "reduce background characters" option, but that's not the end of the world.

[4Klassic]

Originally posted by Bad Player:

Originally posted by Goilveig:

I haven't seen any evidence it's CPU bound. While CPU bound games can make your CPU reach 100%, non-CPU-bound games can, too. You can't tell if a game is CPU bound just based on CPU utilization, a game is CPU bound if the GPU needs to wait on the CPU to draw more frames, or if input is unresponsive due to processing. If the game is using CPU to simulate a lot of NPC actions, but the GPU is not waiting on the results of those updates to draw its frames, then you're not actually CPU bound even if you're at peak CPU utilization.

On my PC anyway, any performance hiccups are entirely I/O related - which honestly isn't too surprising as the game is installed on my oldest and slowest hard drive. Apart from loading stutter sometimes, the game is smooth and responsive.

The reality with this game that nobody really wants to acknowledge is that it pushes *everything* hard, not just GPU/CPU.

As you noted, it pushes the I/O hard because of streaming assets, so you need an SSD to completely avoid I/O-related bottlenecks. I also tried it for a while on a 5400RPM hard drive and had occasional, regular stuttering. (Also in Mass Effect Andromeda and Dragon Age Inquisition.)

It also pushes memory bandwidth hard, *even on Intel platforms*. You need DDR4-3000 or better to get the most out of this game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3ou5RVAROw

The game also sees performance improvements with both increased single-core performance (hence 6c/12t Intel outperforms 6c/12t Ryzen) and core count scaling to AT LEAST 12 real cores, hence 8700K outperforms 7700K and Threadripper outperforms Ryzen 7.

The GPU obviously matters because it's a video game lol.

People can say this game is "poorly optimized" but if we're going to be more strict about the definition of that word, I would argue this is actually one of the most well-optimized games on PC right now. If you think it's more demanding than the visuals really warrant, that may be true, but that's not the same thing as optimization. What I mean is, I don't remember ever seeing a game that takes advantage of your system in such a complete way. Fast storage? It takes advantage of it with improved asset streaming. Fast RAM? It takes advantage and gives you better performance. More cores and clocks? Better performance. The game actually maxes out your PC. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.

I wish that Ubisoft had maybe included some options to reduce the CPU load for those with lower-end CPUs, like a "reduce background characters" option, but that's not the end of the world.

Reducing shadows and level of details do help a lot with the CPU, since shadows are rendered not so far away and level of details prevents certain Mehses to be rendered so far away, this greatly improves CPU optimization.
Now, if people will continue to play with unlocked framerate, obviously the game will take it all to 100%.
And yes, the engine is super well optimized, related to use resources, altough it still uses too much.
At some point I don't think the game graphics are thaatt goooodd, but the distance, and the ammount of objects, cloth physics and simulation of the world going on, it's insane, so the CPU Usage is clearly justified in here IMO.

If ubisoft had downgraded the graphics people would be complaining, ubisoft didn't downgraded, people complain it's too heavy..
LOL

[meep_meep]

Yeah, that's why I locked at 50 fps and turned the resolution scale up to 160%.

[The Father]

Originally posted by Bad Player:

Originally posted by Goilveig:

I haven't seen any evidence it's CPU bound. While CPU bound games can make your CPU reach 100%, non-CPU-bound games can, too. You can't tell if a game is CPU bound just based on CPU utilization, a game is CPU bound if the GPU needs to wait on the CPU to draw more frames, or if input is unresponsive due to processing. If the game is using CPU to simulate a lot of NPC actions, but the GPU is not waiting on the results of those updates to draw its frames, then you're not actually CPU bound even if you're at peak CPU utilization.

On my PC anyway, any performance hiccups are entirely I/O related - which honestly isn't too surprising as the game is installed on my oldest and slowest hard drive. Apart from loading stutter sometimes, the game is smooth and responsive.

The reality with this game that nobody really wants to acknowledge is that it pushes *everything* hard, not just GPU/CPU.

As you noted, it pushes the I/O hard because of streaming assets, so you need an SSD to completely avoid I/O-related bottlenecks. I also tried it for a while on a 5400RPM hard drive and had occasional, regular stuttering. (Also in Mass Effect Andromeda and Dragon Age Inquisition.)

It also pushes memory bandwidth hard, *even on Intel platforms*. You need DDR4-3000 or better to get the most out of this game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3ou5RVAROw

The game also sees performance improvements with both increased single-core performance (hence 6c/12t Intel outperforms 6c/12t Ryzen) and core count scaling to AT LEAST 12 real cores, hence 8700K outperforms 7700K and Threadripper outperforms Ryzen 7.

The GPU obviously matters because it's a video game lol.

People can say this game is "poorly optimized" but if we're going to be more strict about the definition of that word, I would argue this is actually one of the most well-optimized games on PC right now. If you think it's more demanding than the visuals really warrant, that may be true, but that's not the same thing as optimization. What I mean is, I don't remember ever seeing a game that takes advantage of your system in such a complete way. Fast storage? It takes advantage of it with improved asset streaming. Fast RAM? It takes advantage and gives you better performance. More cores and clocks? Better performance. The game actually maxes out your PC. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.

I wish that Ubisoft had maybe included some options to reduce the CPU load for those with lower-end CPUs, like a "reduce background characters" option, but that's not the end of the world.

the reality is you dont understand that there is nothing in this game that requires this amount of power, we can understand if the game is something beyond imagination, but there have been alot of games with better textures, more crowded and tons of stuff to do more than this game and yet it doesnt need more than 50%-60% of CPU.

Even AC:Unity which was created by Ubisoft themselves doesnt require this much of power although it hasbetter textures, shadows, lighting, interiors,........ and above all that it draws tons of NPCs on screen.

if you run AC:Unity on same hardware that you are running AC:Origins on, you would get better results in Unity.

you say textures streaming and it stresses the hardware and people fail to realize that, just answer this question, what kind of a game that needs 60%-70% of 8 threads CPU @4.5 Ghz while just on main menu, we still havent got into the game to justify the streaming and other stuff you said?!?!

and speaking of textures streaming and decompression, Doom and other games use the same technique and it even have better draw distance and you cannot notice a hitch unlike this game that has poppings everywhere and you can notice the low resolution textures until it loads the high resolution ones!

the fact that this game tanks CPU even without doing anything and before loading anything points the finger towards DRMs, this is the first time in history we have a game that has 4 layers of DRMs for steam / 3 layers for UPlay version.

VMProtect wrapping Denuvo is the problem, Denuvo by itself is a resource hog, but since 8 threads CPU is very powerful, it can handle it pretty well. on the other hand, VMProtect is known to degrade performance and eat CPU resources, but again 8 threads CPU is more than enough to handle it gracefully and this is what we have seen in AC:syndicate.

but when both DRMs are running at the same time, CPU gets tanked as 8 threads is no longer enough to handle both running at the same time and this is the first time a publisher goes thus far, Ubisoft is known for their anti-consumer practices with DRMs, but yet they never learn fromt their previous mistakes.

8 threads cpu is still very powerful, its just this year we started to witness more cores and threads coming to main stream with reasonable prices after Ryzen, no game at the current time should require this amount of CPU power.

now, i'm sure Ubisoft will not remove VMProtect nor Denuvo because they will shoot themselves in the foot as it will be crystal clear that multi layer DRMs is the reason behind poor performance.

[meep_meep]

If you stand on the mountains near the center of the map the game renders the boats on Lake Mareotis. I challenge you to find me ONE GAME that renders objects at such a great distance.

[The Father]

Originally posted by Bad Player:

If you stand on the mountains near the center of the map the game renders the boats on Lake Mareotis. I challenge you to find me ONE GAME that renders objects at such a great distance.

yah sure at very low resolution and this should be tanking the GPU not CPU, so your point??

while on the other hand, you see poppings all around whenever you get close, so we got stuff rendered at a very long distance with very low resolution but yet the more important stuff that should be rendered without poppings infront you with high res textures are not.

[meep_meep]

No, a high draw distance impacts CPU performance significantly, because it has to calculate the position for and prerender more objects.

Grass and stuff popping in is a problem, yeah, but that doesn't change the fact that the draw distance for dynamic objects like boats is just staggering in this game.

[4Klassic]

Originally posted by Abook:

Originally posted by Bad Player:

If you stand on the mountains near the center of the map the game renders the boats on Lake Mareotis. I challenge you to find me ONE GAME that renders objects at such a great distance.

yah sure at very low resolution and this should be tanking the GPU not CPU, so your point??

while on the other hand, you see poppings all around whenever you get close, so we got stuff rendered at a very long distance with very low resolution but yet the more important stuff that should be rendered without poppings infront you with high res textures are not.

Wrong..
DrawCalls is a CPU Task.
You also forget the ammount of cloth physics running inside the villages.
VMProtect might have an impact on the CPU, but wouldn't go above 1% of usage.
Android did ran on virtual machines all it's life and it's far from slow even on ♥♥♥♥♥♥ SOCs

But there were multiple games that used Denuvo before and was removed, and I've failed to notice any difference.
well there was one, Rime, which after the update ran so much better, they removed the denuvo, but the patch was 1.1gb, so certainly it was much more than that.

Also the aggressive texture streaming is happening because for some reason ubisoft decided to not be agressive on vram usage, the game don't use that much vram, so less vram used, more streaming.
Altough I suspect the VMProtect have an impact on the streaming textures, altough on the CPU Load I think all those draw calls and cloth physics are justified.

I would love Ubisoft to remove both DRMs just for comparation, but, we all know that is not going to happen.

[PhantomSoldier]

Originally posted by Abook:

Originally posted by Bad Player:

The reality with this game that nobody really wants to acknowledge is that it pushes *everything* hard, not just GPU/CPU.

As you noted, it pushes the I/O hard because of streaming assets, so you need an SSD to completely avoid I/O-related bottlenecks. I also tried it for a while on a 5400RPM hard drive and had occasional, regular stuttering. (Also in Mass Effect Andromeda and Dragon Age Inquisition.)

It also pushes memory bandwidth hard, *even on Intel platforms*. You need DDR4-3000 or better to get the most out of this game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3ou5RVAROw

The game also sees performance improvements with both increased single-core performance (hence 6c/12t Intel outperforms 6c/12t Ryzen) and core count scaling to AT LEAST 12 real cores, hence 8700K outperforms 7700K and Threadripper outperforms Ryzen 7.

The GPU obviously matters because it's a video game lol.

People can say this game is "poorly optimized" but if we're going to be more strict about the definition of that word, I would argue this is actually one of the most well-optimized games on PC right now. If you think it's more demanding than the visuals really warrant, that may be true, but that's not the same thing as optimization. What I mean is, I don't remember ever seeing a game that takes advantage of your system in such a complete way. Fast storage? It takes advantage of it with improved asset streaming. Fast RAM? It takes advantage and gives you better performance. More cores and clocks? Better performance. The game actually maxes out your PC. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.

I wish that Ubisoft had maybe included some options to reduce the CPU load for those with lower-end CPUs, like a "reduce background characters" option, but that's not the end of the world.

the reality is you dont understand that there is nothing in this game that requires this amount of power, we can understand if the game is something beyond imagination, but there have been alot of games with better textures, more crowded and tons of stuff to do more than this game and yet it doesnt need more than 50%-60% of CPU.

Even AC:Unity which was created by Ubisoft themselves doesnt require this much of power although it hasbetter textures, shadows, lighting, interiors,........ and above all that it draws tons of NPCs on screen.

if you run AC:Unity on same hardware that you are running AC:Origins on, you would get better results in Unity.

you say textures streaming and it stresses the hardware and people fail to realize that, just answer this question, what kind of a game that needs 60%-70% of 8 threads CPU @4.5 Ghz while just on main menu, we still havent got into the game to justify the streaming and other stuff you said?!?!

and speaking of textures streaming and decompression, Doom and other games use the same technique and it even have better draw distance and you cannot notice a hitch unlike this game that has poppings everywhere and you can notice the low resolution textures until it loads the high resolution ones!

the fact that this game tanks CPU even without doing anything and before loading anything points the finger towards DRMs, this is the first time in history we have a game that has 4 layers of DRMs for steam / 3 layers for UPlay version.

VMProtect wrapping Denuvo is the problem, Denuvo by itself is a resource hog, but since 8 threads CPU is very powerful, it can handle it pretty well. on the other hand, VMProtect is known to degrade performance and eat CPU resources, but again 8 threads CPU is more than enough to handle it gracefully and this is what we have seen in AC:syndicate.

but when both DRMs are running at the same time, CPU gets tanked as 8 threads is no longer enough to handle both running at the same time and this is the first time a publisher goes thus far, Ubisoft is known for their anti-consumer practices with DRMs, but yet they never learn fromt their previous mistakes.

8 threads cpu is still very powerful, its just this year we started to witness more cores and threads coming to main stream with reasonable prices after Ryzen, no game at the current time should require this amount of CPU power.

now, i'm sure Ubisoft will not remove VMProtect nor Denuvo because they will shoot themselves in the foot as it will be crystal clear that multi layer DRMs is the reason behind poor performance.

+1

[ArcLight]

Only one who doesn't have problems with the game.. even when I would record gameplay?

CPU: Ryzen 7 17k
RAM: 16Gb They are x2 8GB
GPU: RX480
Hardrive: 1 TB
resolution 1080p and I think I have the graphics on high or max.

[shadowwolf1980]

If anything runs worse i use to get 8 to 16 fps and now i ran just now 4 fps. fx 8350 970 pny gpu 16 gigs ram tons of lag. Between DRM which i am sure is tanking performance and these so called fixes that seem to do nothing. Hate to say but Assassins Creed Unity and Syndicate ran better on my rig then this sadly.

[Red]

Originally posted by ObscureAngel:

Originally posted by Abook:

yah sure at very low resolution and this should be tanking the GPU not CPU, so your point??

while on the other hand, you see poppings all around whenever you get close, so we got stuff rendered at a very long distance with very low resolution but yet the more important stuff that should be rendered without poppings infront you with high res textures are not.

Wrong..
DrawCalls is a CPU Task.
You also forget the ammount of cloth physics running inside the villages.
VMProtect might have an impact on the CPU, but wouldn't go above 1% of usage.
Android did ran on virtual machines all it's life and it's far from slow even on ♥♥♥♥♥♥ SOCs

But there were multiple games that used Denuvo before and was removed, and I've failed to notice any difference.
well there was one, Rime, which after the update ran so much better, they removed the denuvo, but the patch was 1.1gb, so certainly it was much more than that.

Also the aggressive texture streaming is happening because for some reason ubisoft decided to not be agressive on vram usage, the game don't use that much vram, so less vram used, more streaming.
Altough I suspect the VMProtect have an impact on the streaming textures, altough on the CPU Load I think all those draw calls and cloth physics are justified.

I would love Ubisoft to remove both DRMs just for comparation, but, we all know that is not going to happen.

cloths physics good in this game? barely noticable on the main character. even Tomb raider is better. And AC is without proper hair physics. Even the sail on the boats does not flap.

physics based simulation is practically non-existant. And smoke ? That's considered OK 10 years ago. And the horse? Much worse than Witcher 3.

and fire ? Far Cry 2 is better . lol