- #DYING LIGHT ONLY USING 5GB OF RAM 1080P#
- #DYING LIGHT ONLY USING 5GB OF RAM PS4#
- #DYING LIGHT ONLY USING 5GB OF RAM PC#
Yet at the same resolution with the slightly lower quality high settings we see that the 4GB 960 and 380 are faster than their 2GB parts.
#DYING LIGHT ONLY USING 5GB OF RAM 1080P#
Interestingly we didn't see a performance difference between the 2GB and 4GB graphics cards when testing at 1080p using the very high quality settings. The R9 380 on the other hand was 18% faster with 4GB's of VRAM, but with an average of 33fps, and frame drops as low as 25fps or 14fps for the 1% results, we question the playability at these settings. Now at 2560x1600 we find that Just Cause 3 consumed 3.4GBs of VRAM when available and yet despite that the GTX 960 delivered much the same performance using either the 2GB or 4GB card. 4GB cards, so obviously the same was found for the 4GB vs. Testing with Just Cause 3 at 1080p using the maximum in-game quality settings shows no difference in performance when comparing the 2GB vs.
:) I force myself to trust the Nvidia GFE presets, give or take an AA setting maybe, otherwise I know I'd end up in that rabbit hole.Benchmarks: Just Cause 3, Star Wars Battlefront, Dying Light Choosing the right Dark Souls armor pieces is a baby game by comparison. Those pages of advanced technical video settings are evil sometimes, becoming a mini-RPG trying to min/max it. Maybe if they presented it as choosing between graphics quality, or speed/smoothness.
#DYING LIGHT ONLY USING 5GB OF RAM PS4#
60fps in Last of Us, Call of Duty, PvZ and others on PS4 feels amazing, but people are gonna get spoiled. Oddly enough the consoles may have an advantage here (higher detail), they would be wise to avoid too many 60fps games if they want to make those GPUs last 8 years. Even if settling for 30 might mean I could run at max detail or something.
#DYING LIGHT ONLY USING 5GB OF RAM PC#
I don't mind playing GTA at 30fps on my PS4 because it's running as intended, but if I can't get every PC game to 60 it bugs the shit out of me and makes me feel like the loser who got a 770 shortly before the 900s came out (facepalm). I get weird about this stuff on PC for some reason, and it bums me out. Alien had just awful cutscenes with stutter, bad framerate, and even the character models looked pretty bad. Lately I feel like developers are having a very hard time with cutscenes, things like facial animation & lip sync seem pretty bad compared to a few years ago. They just said above that "frame rates are higher than during gameplay", so what's the deal? Maybe it's a bug. Speaking of cutscenes, any time there's a cutscene it seems to lock at 30fps (according to Fraps, vsync enabled). That's really weird, but makes some sense because there you don't have something like GTA's cover mode where it would make sense to enable DoF during gameplay.
However, as these are non-interactive, and frame rates are higher than during gameplay, the performance impact of NVDOF is typically negated, and therefore goes unnoticed. Performance: The extensive use of high quality depth of field blurring during cutscenes and conversations results in a significant performance impact.
As such, the main menu offers the most accurate 1:1 comparison between the two available settings. Does disabling DoF even help? Nvidia has this to say about it:ĭepth of Field is rendered almost exclusively during cut scenes and conversations, with no ability to toggle the setting on the fly.
0 kommentar(er)
