Spork3245

It’s really THAT broken. Like where I mentioned I can remove AA for around 60fps, with DX12 enabled that drops to sub-30, like 27 or something iirc. It’s seriously a 50%+ performance drop.

If you do try running it, remember to keep it in DX11 because DX12 adds nothing visually but kills performance even more. If I disable AA (ew) I can get around 60fps at 4k iirc.

I lost it when KEVIN was shown

Guys

For real, though: This is still one of the best looking games out there.

Cross posting from the Musk thread due to relevance:

One game I’m curious to try with the 4090 is Deus Ex MD. 4k with 4xAA averages 38fps with my 3080 Ti. Every time I run the benchmark I go “damn, I forgot how good this game looks”

Yea, it took 30 minutes of searching to figure out what the issue was too

Valhalla’s FSR won’t work unless you have an AMD card: it literally crashes if you try to enable it with an nVidia card, to where you have to find the configuration ini file and manually edit it to disable fsr So, Valhalla is actually programmed better than previous AC entries at least. Odyssey runs way worse.

FWIW, Far Cry 6 ran at a constant 80-90 for me and AC Valhalla was 70 on average (it runs better than either Origins or Odysee )

I think the 45% increase of the GeForce 4 Ti 4600 vs the GeForce 3 Ti 500 works pretty well

I just checked benchmarks, and I realized they’re ignoring refreshes. To get to that huge of a jump from the 9xx to the 10xx, it would be the 980 vs the 1080, which ignores the 980 Ti. The jump from the 980 Ti was around a 30% increase for the 1080.

Yea, I’m not counting refreshes of an active generation vs a previous generation. Just top end of the previous generation (ie: GeForce 2 Ultra) vs top end of a new generations launch (ie: GeForce 3, not the Ti 200 and 500 which were the refresh). The 980 Ti was a marvel even vs the base 980, though. It still can run most games maxed out (obviously no ray tracing and not with maxed AA) at 1440p and get around 60fps.

Don’t you have a 12900k?

It’s funny because my initial thought was the 980 vs the 780… but the 980 wasn’t that much faster, it just ran a lot cooler and had way less power consumption. So, I thought “oh, maybe the GeForce 3 vs GeForce 2 Ultra”… no, the GeForce 2 Ultra BEAT the GeForce 3 in DX7 benchmarks with the GeForce 3 only winning (noticeably) in DX8 games. Which is weird as I remembered how badly I wanted a GeForce 3 for the new DX8 features (pixel and vertex shaders) and hated being stuck on a GeForce 2 Pro at the time (even though apparently performance was almost 1:1 in most games ) - I guess the 3 wasn’t worth it until the Ti 500 came out. Then I remembered my next card was a GeForce 4 Ti 4600 so I checked the benches and damn, it was 45% faster than the GeForce 3 Ti 500. Absolute night and day performance gap.

I’ve been thinking about the reviews and, even without AI frame generation, I’m honestly trying to think of the last time we had a performance gap this large. I went back and looked at some benches for some cards I remember being a big deal, and I think the closest I may have found is the performance jump of the GeForce 4 Ti 4600 vs the GeForce 3 Ti 500

Lol that you think he’ll testify. This is to cause a tantrum from him.

The American public’s memory is shorter than a gold fish. Now is the time.

I don’t believe so, but I walked away from the TV for a couple minutes so I may have missed it

Doing it live during this hearing will likely cause a ratings boost and/or more people to view it later and overall. This is a Trump-esq reality TV tactic.

Not sub-based services, ones you can buy/rent from.

Crazy dedicated