I have a 780ti, 3770k with an overclocked turbo of 4.5GHz and 16GB of RAM. At first I was running the game at 35FPS on High, and depending on the area lower. In order to get to the sweet spot I have to lower the graphical settings to medium to get a good 37 to 45 FPS.
Is it just me, or is the game unoptimized? The graphics seem on par or a little better than Dragon Age Inquisition's so what gives? Or do I need to do a clean install?
Apparently its running like crap for a lot of people without a 900 series geforce card...
I'm planning on testing it tonight, but I don't expect it to run good until AMD goes through a couple driver releases with optimizations. My system has i7-5930x w/ 3x R9 290's. Everything at stock clocks. I try to run everything at highest setting shooting for 100 fps on 2560 x 1440 monitor.
nVidia gimped it via gameworks and the like for anything that isn't 900 series. AMD and 700 and later cards are just SOL.
i7 [email protected] , 2x290x
Maxed it all on 1080p ultra got 40-110fps (including hairworks, postprocessing, all maxed out)
(and actually took it one step beyond ultra by editing configs, more draw distance etc...)
I've noticed that this game utilizes 6 cores (but editing witcher's configs you can make it run at 8, so amd cpu's might perform better in some cases)
Its also buggy with CF, and I've seen on CDPR forums that SLi has problems too.
I run it on High settings, 1080p, with medium post processing and hairworks only on Geralt on a R9 270 with an 8350 with 16GB of Ram. All at stock speeds.
It is very playable. I get around 30 FPS and the game still looks great. If I use low post processing I get a good boost in FPS. If the new AMD driver helps that is probably how I will be playing it. I suspect that in medium I can get around/close to the 50s. It is also a very clean Windows install, since I only use windows for games.
Visually I think that the High settings are significantly better than Dragon Age on Ultra (It so happens I begun to play it just last week) and my system can handle fine on around 30-45 FPS. So Dragon Age looks better optimized for sure but not by much.
At least in my mind, DA: Inquisition looks very cartoony whereas Witcher 3 looks more gritty/realistic. The differences in art style alone would affect my opinion of the way the game looks. That said though, DA: Inquisition is one of my favorite games of recent years. You should definitely get into it. Took me about 60 hours to play through.
That is true. Although the more cartoonly look does make for better performance so that must play a role in the good optimization. I am mostly judging from the evirorment myself.
And I am definitely into it. I have been a huge fan of Origins and this looks really good too. And i am afraid that it might take me more than 60 hours since I am a bit of a completionist with RPGs and the game looks really dense until now. But it is a good thing to do while waiting for the more optimized drivers and patches for the Witcher 3. I doubt I can fit both games in my schedule anyway so I might finish DA first or shift between the two or sth.
So I had some really annoying drops in some places (20-24) and worked on tweaking the settings. I kept everything on high except shadows and background NPC that kept in medium and also kept post processing in medium and got a significant boost. Medium shadows look fine so not a big deal. Now I get 35+ FPS. If the new drivers give 3-5 more it would be quite a good result.
So you can try tweaking the shadows to get the smoother FPS while keeping things on high.
Intel Core i7 3770 @ 3.40GHz
Asus Nvidia GeForce GTX 970 GPU (Stock clock)
8GB G.Skills ARES DDR3-1600 RAM
Settings are High to Ultra, Post processing is medium, Anti-ailising in on medium, Hair works is off
Game updated with Day one patch
Im geting aount 60FPS some times it dips below that, but not badly
Game looks good, Im happy with preformance
Just mentioned this on another thread before I saw this one but if you edit the visuals.ini file to ramp up the cutscenes to 60 FPS it really makes them look a lot better. Changing the mouse settings to hardware cursor on also makes turning and changing viewing angles much smoother.
Intel Pentium G3258 @ 3.7 GHZ
Gigabyte GTX 660 Stock
8 GB @ 1400 Hz RAM
21" 1080 16:9 and 2 17" 1024 5:4 monitors
Its a family computer
With a little testing I put High settings and little post-processing definitely no hairworks
at 1080 getting 30-35 FPS
at 1024 5:4 getting 45-50 FPS
at 1024 surround with two monitors effectively 21:9 20-25 FPS
All the FPS numbers depends on weather effects and action on screen and are given in low action scenarios, like running and scaring peasants around the starting village. Day time is the most taxing
I would like to see when I over clock the CPU/GPU
OFF settings: MotionBlur, Blur, AA, Sharpening, Vignetting, Vsync, Hairworks
ON: Bloom, HBAO+, Depth of Field, Chromatic Aberration, Light Shafts
The rest was set to high
I posted some of this info on the downscaling thread sorry I got off topic there.
Are you guys running fraps or some internal meter?
I had everything cranked up to Ultra last night and it ran great on my gamebox didn't get an actual fps reading though . Once the clock hits 5, I'll give it a go on my work computer and postback here. I'll re-test my gamebox tonight when I get home.
i7-3770K @ 4.3Ghz on stock voltage w/ Noctua NH-D15
Asus Sabertooth Z77
16GB 1600mhz DDR3
EVGA GTX 980 SC @ +75mhz GPU and Memory clock offset
Asus 27" 1440p Display
I'm running a mix of High and Ultra, Geralt for Hairworks, AA on with SSAO. My average FPS is 53 FPS, with the lowest being 44 and the high being 62. I'm not sure why people have been having so many issues running the game. I'm running mild overclocks, running the game over 1440p, and having no issues at all. Granted, with Hairworks fully on, and everything else on Ultra, I was hurting, at around 30 FPS. I left Hairworks on for Geralt, which looks great and I only suffer a bit on FPS.
FWIW, I'm using FRAPS to capture all this data. I have only tweaked the game using in-game menus. CPU sits around 65C and GPU gets to 73C max.
I fixed it! I did a clean re-install of the drivers and bam, currently 60-94FPS in Velen. I set it to the high preset and turned off the hairworks because, honestly, I don't pay attention to that when I'm fighting monsters or animals so it's pointless to have it on for me.
I'll try it on ultra and check the fps but honestly, I think there will be little to no descernable difference in visual fidelity, so I'd rather keep it on high with nice smooth frame rates.
Tried it on Ultra, Maxed out EVERYTHING, I get 30 to 40FPS, which is consistent with what people have been posting about the 780ti. It's playable, but I prefer 60+FPS and I see no real difference in visual fidelity anyway.
GTX 970 @ 1400mhz
16GB of DDR3 Memory
I'm running Most things on Ultra except Shadows on High and grass and foliage distance which are on Medium. HairWorks is disabled, I'm using normal SSAO, and Anti-Aliasing is off. Seems like I'm maintaining a pretty steady 40-45fps. Looks good to me and while not ideal, I can suffer through 40fps.
It's not going to be playable for me until AMD release a CF profile for it. I've tried AFR mode but there's tons of flicker. FPS stays in the 85-100 range with Hairworks on, 120-135 with it off. I've only tested the opening scenes but I can wait till a stable crossfire profile is released. I gave up playing at 60 FPS a while back. If I can't run a game at around 100 FPS then it's just not worth it.