It's runs on ultra on my 1060 gtx, I'm not surprised it runs well on consoles, the game is pretty nicely optimized
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
121 points (90.6% liked)
Games
16651 readers
915 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You probably haven't gotten to Act 3 yet, the game is extremely CPU bound. I have a Ryzen 9 7950X and while Act 1 and 2 were basically locked to 144fps the entire time, in Act 3 I have seen dips down to the 40s.
Try turning off "Dynamic Crowds" in settings. I didn't notice much difference in how the crowds behaved, but it supposedly simplifies their AI and pathfinding to cut down on CPU use. It helped me a lot in the city.
Ah my CPU is pretty modern compared to the 1060, and no I'm not even into act 2 yet
3080 + 12700k @4k. I needed to run everything in performance mode on DLSS to get even a consistent 60. Still jittery in the big areas.
2060 super user here. I'm assuming you haven't made it to Act 3? The game has some performance issues there. I happily turned down the graphics to continue playing smoothly but was a tad disappointed.
I'm on my second playthrough though and they have patched it since my first experience so hopefully the evil campaign runs (visually) smoother.
Act 3's issues aren't GPU bound, it's entirely CPU bottlenecked. It's likely someone with a slower GPU won't see as big a drop in performance in act 3 as you, and it's likely you don't see any performance gain from using DLSS in act 3. My 2080 Super was sleeping through it even at 3440x1440 on ultra while my Ryzen 7 3700x was getting thrashed.
More info from the article: quality mode is 1440p 30fps, and performance mode is 960p (upscaled to 1440p using FSR2) 60fps. Although late-game, specifically the big cities in act 3, can dip into mid-20fps range
So not exactly
I don't get all the performance complaints about Act 3. The worst lag I ever had in the entire game was the first time I walked into the druid grove, dropped to 1-5fps for like 20 seconds and then it was more or less fine the rest of the game. One crash in 160 hours of playing, and I'm still on patch 0.2 atm.
Wait did you play like 5 hours a day or is that the beta?
That is the full release only. It's also less than accurate to say 5 hours a day everyday, it was more like 10-15 hours a day with some days where I didn't play at all.
Yeah, it runs very nicely on ultra on a variety of hardware. It's been optimized and has even improved since release.
I am hoping they improved the controller interface, though. I use that even though I play the PC version, and it was somewhat broken as of a couple weeks ago.
I think this game could run on PS4 just fine. Turn off raytracing and a few other things and it would probably work.
But then, I guess they can't keep releasing for the old console forever.
It seems pretty CPU limited and the CPU on last gen was dogshit from day one.
I ran it on an i7 4790k initially and definitely felt it. I think you're right that whatever APU is in the PS4 would scream and run.
There's no RT in BG3. At least not yet.
Given that the issue with the Xbox S is the split screen, I'd suspect that the PS4 would have the same issue.
If there is money in it... Why not?
We got millions of gamers on old hardware. If they can do it, let all gamers have at it imho
PS5 gamers are more likely to put down $70 for a new game than PS4 players are to put down $60 on a new game. It's probably just not a worthwhile investment.
Consoles are expensive. Cutting off support to older equipment is rough. Keeping your entertainment "current" is a big ask for a lot of people who are already struggling. As long as people are using the old stuff, devs should do what they can inside the technical limits to extend their lifespan.
This article repeatedly says that the game is running in 1440p, but I thought that the PS5 didn’t support 1440p. TIL they added it.