WYP
News Guru
Last edited:
Dying Light 2: Stay Human will use Denuvo on PC
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
They'll remove it a year after release, That's when I'll buy it.
AlienALX
Well-known member
That'll be when it's all patched and worth playing TBF.
KingNosser
Well-known member
Well picked it up, so we'll see not expecting high fps even at 2k for my system but should play fine i think even with DXR turned on 
Idk if FSR is a day one thing or not thou, least had a driver update
Update: Only played a short ways in basically intro, loved it
( FSR I have set to balanced )1440p max settings no motion blur all the bells basically I get anywhere from 70fps down to 30fps but smooth enough to enjoy, seems the more foliage there is the more the impact indoor areas being the higher end of fps.
Needless to say I thought Metro Exodus looked good, but this is really a very stunning game, everything looks crystal sharp for me, but fps at native is 30fps and lower without FSR, but saying that it looks very sexy
Tbh I didn't expect it to run so well so i'm rather happy concidering it has that drm crap on it also given the fact i still need to sort a better CPU at some stage
Idk if FSR is a day one thing or not thou, least had a driver update Update: Only played a short ways in basically intro, loved it
( FSR I have set to balanced )1440p max settings no motion blur all the bells basically I get anywhere from 70fps down to 30fps but smooth enough to enjoy, seems the more foliage there is the more the impact indoor areas being the higher end of fps.Needless to say I thought Metro Exodus looked good, but this is really a very stunning game, everything looks crystal sharp for me, but fps at native is 30fps and lower without FSR, but saying that it looks very sexy
Tbh I didn't expect it to run so well so i'm rather happy concidering it has that drm crap on it also given the fact i still need to sort a better CPU at some stage
Last edited:
AlienALX
Well-known member
40 FPS on a 2080ti at 1080p.
No thanks. I will wait until they remove Denuvo.
It's bad enough making your GPU shat itself running a ultra modern game but it's kinda depressing that you know FPS are being robbed by even more resources.
To add. I nearly bought this. I had it in my cart on CDKeys for £43. I really don't know what I was thinking. After having done more research it appears that Denuvo was added 2 days before release, and after reviews had been done. I'm kinda smelling Cyberpunk at this point.
When I refreshed the page the CD key in my cart was £49.99. I decided against it. Then I read IGN's review and noted this.
Bug Alert!
If your tolerance for bugs is low, I do not recommend jumping into Dying Light 2 on day one. Or day 10. Maybe day 30? I was able to play it to completion, but only barely: leading up to launch it is absolutely drowning in a sea of upsetting technical issues, whether it’s crashing (which happened to me dozens of times in my more than 80 hours with it on Xbox Series X and to others at IGN on PlayStation 5 and PC), all dialogue stopping during cutscenes, all audio being replaced with a loud screeching noise, getting locked out of quests because a character won’t let you talk to him or being unable to finish because the objective never spawned in, uneven framerates making me seasick, and too many more to list here. Most glitches are temporary annoyances or even amusing wonkiness, but some are more dire – one IGN editor playing on PS5 had his entire save file corrupted, leaving him with a never-ending loading screen and locking him out of his save pending an upcoming patch.
Normally I expect a certain lack of polish in ambitious, open-world games, but even with my expectation for jankiness set to maximum, Dying Light 2 has been really, really rough. The longer I played, the more frequent the issues seemed to become; by the end I was having to quit out and reboot multiple times per hour, and breathed a huge sigh of relief when credits rolled and something hadn’t catastrophically broken my save file. In terms of stability issues and the danger of losing progress, it’s been considerably more severe than our experience with the PC version of Cyberpunk 2077, where the bugs we hit were mostly visual in nature. Techland is aware of all of this and is reportedly hard at work on patches to address it, but if history is any indication it’s going to take more than a few real-world day-night cycles to sort out this many issues.
And that was on a console.....
I don't need that. Not any of it, no matter how pretty the game looks in stills.
Sigh.
Nothing ever changes.
No thanks. I will wait until they remove Denuvo.
It's bad enough making your GPU shat itself running a ultra modern game but it's kinda depressing that you know FPS are being robbed by even more resources.
To add. I nearly bought this. I had it in my cart on CDKeys for £43. I really don't know what I was thinking. After having done more research it appears that Denuvo was added 2 days before release, and after reviews had been done. I'm kinda smelling Cyberpunk at this point.
When I refreshed the page the CD key in my cart was £49.99. I decided against it. Then I read IGN's review and noted this.
Bug Alert!
If your tolerance for bugs is low, I do not recommend jumping into Dying Light 2 on day one. Or day 10. Maybe day 30? I was able to play it to completion, but only barely: leading up to launch it is absolutely drowning in a sea of upsetting technical issues, whether it’s crashing (which happened to me dozens of times in my more than 80 hours with it on Xbox Series X and to others at IGN on PlayStation 5 and PC), all dialogue stopping during cutscenes, all audio being replaced with a loud screeching noise, getting locked out of quests because a character won’t let you talk to him or being unable to finish because the objective never spawned in, uneven framerates making me seasick, and too many more to list here. Most glitches are temporary annoyances or even amusing wonkiness, but some are more dire – one IGN editor playing on PS5 had his entire save file corrupted, leaving him with a never-ending loading screen and locking him out of his save pending an upcoming patch.
Normally I expect a certain lack of polish in ambitious, open-world games, but even with my expectation for jankiness set to maximum, Dying Light 2 has been really, really rough. The longer I played, the more frequent the issues seemed to become; by the end I was having to quit out and reboot multiple times per hour, and breathed a huge sigh of relief when credits rolled and something hadn’t catastrophically broken my save file. In terms of stability issues and the danger of losing progress, it’s been considerably more severe than our experience with the PC version of Cyberpunk 2077, where the bugs we hit were mostly visual in nature. Techland is aware of all of this and is reportedly hard at work on patches to address it, but if history is any indication it’s going to take more than a few real-world day-night cycles to sort out this many issues.
And that was on a console.....
I don't need that. Not any of it, no matter how pretty the game looks in stills.
Sigh.
Nothing ever changes.
Last edited:
KingNosser
Well-known member
Well I've played 6h30 so far, only bug i had was a sound bug from encounter music.
I've enjoyed it a fair amount, mainly when having to run my ass off at night it has nice atmosphere and when it go's wrong that one missed jump can land you right in the mix of many zombies and some real nasty ones
As for the 40fps, this game needs DLSS or FSR to get better fps pretty sure if you played about with settings your get higher fps and res. As for ever running it at 4k 144hz it isn't going to happen for a few gens is my feeling this game is harder to run than cyberpunk 2077 by a fair old wack as well.
but so far i like it
I've enjoyed it a fair amount, mainly when having to run my ass off at night it has nice atmosphere and when it go's wrong that one missed jump can land you right in the mix of many zombies and some real nasty ones
As for the 40fps, this game needs DLSS or FSR to get better fps pretty sure if you played about with settings your get higher fps and res. As for ever running it at 4k 144hz it isn't going to happen for a few gens is my feeling this game is harder to run than cyberpunk 2077 by a fair old wack as well.
but so far i like it
Last edited:
AlienALX
Well-known member
Even with DLSS it's still pitiful. Need a 3090 for 4k. DLSS in this doesn't have the impact it should, IMO.
I know that right now the gaming market is literally starving, but busted buggy messes are becoming a waaaay too prevalent thing. In fact I don't even remember the last time a big title came out without all of the drama and BS. Even Crysis Remastered was a joke.
If it had always been this way? then sure. But it certainly has not. It's actually alarming how no games seem to be even close to completion at launch when £55 is being asked for them.
I didn't like the first one that much tbh. I mean I liked it, I just didn't like it as much as Dead Island. The parkour was good fun, but like you say fall and you were effed. The weapons were total crap and broke after about four strikes and it was just all a bit unrealistic. I read that they have addressed that, and it is better. But seriously the guy can climb literally anything, jump from roof to roof and run like a mofo but gets knackered after swinging a machete twice?
First one was a graphical treat. Was my first decent experience at 4k. The game under it though? just felt a bit low tech. And from what I am reading that hasn't changed very much.
I think I will just heat my 2080Ti with a blow torch to simulate running this whilst looking at photos in 4k. At least it saves me £55.
I know that right now the gaming market is literally starving, but busted buggy messes are becoming a waaaay too prevalent thing. In fact I don't even remember the last time a big title came out without all of the drama and BS. Even Crysis Remastered was a joke.
If it had always been this way? then sure. But it certainly has not. It's actually alarming how no games seem to be even close to completion at launch when £55 is being asked for them.
I didn't like the first one that much tbh. I mean I liked it, I just didn't like it as much as Dead Island. The parkour was good fun, but like you say fall and you were effed. The weapons were total crap and broke after about four strikes and it was just all a bit unrealistic. I read that they have addressed that, and it is better. But seriously the guy can climb literally anything, jump from roof to roof and run like a mofo but gets knackered after swinging a machete twice?
First one was a graphical treat. Was my first decent experience at 4k. The game under it though? just felt a bit low tech. And from what I am reading that hasn't changed very much.
I think I will just heat my 2080Ti with a blow torch to simulate running this whilst looking at photos in 4k. At least it saves me £55.
KingNosser
Well-known member
I did pay £55 I get some of your points tbh but there has been little around until this year in games for me I have many games but gems are rare i find been playing GOW and some others but this i'm enjoying.
So far not a buggy mess for me.
I guess a 3090 can do 4k 60 almost, the game is really demanding thats for sure, but it's done well, has more DXR features than any other DXR game atm.
It's better than the first weapons do break but take a fair bit longer to do so not like 10 swings and replace more like 100 i'm feeling, but the running and jumping is less of a change but i've only unlocked 3 skills so far with exp and only one hp upgrade did pick up a 2nd but idk if it was the three parts that were needed or just a single, past the tutorial elements at least now.
Your not so much eff'd you just run at times way too many to handle, one early building i had to sneek past a bunch to do the quest but it took a few attempts and when it go's wrong holy it's scary lol i like that about it kinda a little tension feeling all the time.
You don't get punished much if you did if at all just respawn and continue from a safe room kinda thing so it makes you braver than before.
the stamina isn't too bad tbh like 2 seconds and it's refilled so tatics is a thing slightly, but idk if it will get better or more of the same, the roof tops are your friend really but it is more fun doing a bit of everything.
I get some of your points, and being honest now DLSS and FSR are working well these kind of games are going to be a lot more common with only future gens running them better they are going to push them harder than the past, any bugs in all the newer games i feel is part a learning curve and needing 1 year extra, but high framerates are not here atm, i expect elden ring and stalker 2 as well as atomic heart to all be similar demands.
if you actually like the first one, then this game is better and more intresting and far more open world in a way, but overall kinda the same least until i unlock more skills and get further in but it's decent and i've enjoyed it so i could easily say 7-8/10 on my play so far but i've done zero co-op and never will most likely so maybe that is where more bugs are to be found cause atm it's been fine tbh.
So far not a buggy mess for me.
I guess a 3090 can do 4k 60 almost, the game is really demanding thats for sure, but it's done well, has more DXR features than any other DXR game atm.
It's better than the first weapons do break but take a fair bit longer to do so not like 10 swings and replace more like 100 i'm feeling, but the running and jumping is less of a change but i've only unlocked 3 skills so far with exp and only one hp upgrade did pick up a 2nd but idk if it was the three parts that were needed or just a single, past the tutorial elements at least now.
Your not so much eff'd you just run at times way too many to handle, one early building i had to sneek past a bunch to do the quest but it took a few attempts and when it go's wrong holy it's scary lol i like that about it kinda a little tension feeling all the time.
You don't get punished much if you did if at all just respawn and continue from a safe room kinda thing so it makes you braver than before.
the stamina isn't too bad tbh like 2 seconds and it's refilled so tatics is a thing slightly, but idk if it will get better or more of the same, the roof tops are your friend really but it is more fun doing a bit of everything.
I get some of your points, and being honest now DLSS and FSR are working well these kind of games are going to be a lot more common with only future gens running them better they are going to push them harder than the past, any bugs in all the newer games i feel is part a learning curve and needing 1 year extra, but high framerates are not here atm, i expect elden ring and stalker 2 as well as atomic heart to all be similar demands.
if you actually like the first one, then this game is better and more intresting and far more open world in a way, but overall kinda the same least until i unlock more skills and get further in but it's decent and i've enjoyed it so i could easily say 7-8/10 on my play so far but i've done zero co-op and never will most likely so maybe that is where more bugs are to be found cause atm it's been fine tbh.
AlienALX
Well-known member
It will perform better. I can almost assure you of that.
Whilst Metro : Exodus worked OK at launch they improved it massively over time. To where the performance shot up hugely.
At launch people were struggling with it. Now? it flies on my 2080Ti. And yes, I know this uses far more RT stuff than that did but I reckon it will improve. I also find it really annoying that they let people review it and then added Denuvo two days before launch. I will be interested to see people go back to it. It may not affect it at all, but I don't think that will be the case.
I'm with you on future gens dude, but tbh it should perform better than this.
If a 3090 struggles to run this at 4k then IMO they should have either cut back the features or waited to release it. Right now a 3070 costs almost a grand and gets totally shamed by this. That's not good.
In fact from what I read the 3080 can't do 4k properly so you are looking at a 3080ti or 3090 for 4k. Meaning it's a joke. Who will spend two grand to play this at 4k?
I don't blame hardware. I never do. Whenever something doesn't run properly I always blame the software, as you rightly should. Every one was hyped over the original Crysis and almost liked how it ran so badly. Then they release the remastered version last year and it turns out it is still running on a single core. So what was at fault? the hardware (because when it came out dual and higher cores were commonplace) or the game?
I know that RT is still in the very early stages. However, the prices certainly aren't. If this is the shape of things to come then this is actually worse that early adopting 4k. Because at the time a supposed 4k GPU cost around £600. Not two grand.
And whilst we can blame some of that on the pandemic? well let's put it this way. A 2080Ti Strix totally pre pandemic cost over £1500. And from the looks of it (let's just assume this game does run "well" under the circumstances) no matter how much GPUs bounce back after the pandemic its pretty clear that RT is going to cost you two grand every two years at least.
Which to me? you'd have to be insane.
Oh, and AMD really need to sort out their RT because in this title it's a joke. Even more than Nvidia.
Whilst Metro : Exodus worked OK at launch they improved it massively over time. To where the performance shot up hugely.
At launch people were struggling with it. Now? it flies on my 2080Ti. And yes, I know this uses far more RT stuff than that did but I reckon it will improve. I also find it really annoying that they let people review it and then added Denuvo two days before launch. I will be interested to see people go back to it. It may not affect it at all, but I don't think that will be the case.
I'm with you on future gens dude, but tbh it should perform better than this.
If a 3090 struggles to run this at 4k then IMO they should have either cut back the features or waited to release it. Right now a 3070 costs almost a grand and gets totally shamed by this. That's not good.
In fact from what I read the 3080 can't do 4k properly so you are looking at a 3080ti or 3090 for 4k. Meaning it's a joke. Who will spend two grand to play this at 4k?
I don't blame hardware. I never do. Whenever something doesn't run properly I always blame the software, as you rightly should. Every one was hyped over the original Crysis and almost liked how it ran so badly. Then they release the remastered version last year and it turns out it is still running on a single core. So what was at fault? the hardware (because when it came out dual and higher cores were commonplace) or the game?
I know that RT is still in the very early stages. However, the prices certainly aren't. If this is the shape of things to come then this is actually worse that early adopting 4k. Because at the time a supposed 4k GPU cost around £600. Not two grand.
And whilst we can blame some of that on the pandemic? well let's put it this way. A 2080Ti Strix totally pre pandemic cost over £1500. And from the looks of it (let's just assume this game does run "well" under the circumstances) no matter how much GPUs bounce back after the pandemic its pretty clear that RT is going to cost you two grand every two years at least.
Which to me? you'd have to be insane.
Oh, and AMD really need to sort out their RT because in this title it's a joke. Even more than Nvidia.
KingNosser
Well-known member
I kinda agree to a point, the cost is large atm.
After the day one patch i'm seeing 70fps more often, but amd's RT really isn't as bad as your saying, sure nvidia have a lead but i'm playing this maxxed with fsr balanced and it's fine.
Even a nvidia card needs DLSS for similar performance be it a 2080ti or a 3070/80 all be it a few frames more, but amd's stuff while not as good isn't a joke, as i said i've got all of the RT on ultra with no issues
As for metro exodus in the enhanced version not only does it look better but for me performs a lot better, RT on amd isn't bad by any means, and being real honest with a chance of being wrong my feeling is amd's rdna3 is going to really give nvidia a run for it's money in all areas.
FSR by all accounts works better in DL2 than DLSS going by what i've seen on the forums ect but for me i'm enjoying this game it's running fine i've had only that one sound bug and that was easily fixed played now about 10 hours ish i guess it's a decent game, not that i'm trying to sell you on it your get it when you get it
After the day one patch i'm seeing 70fps more often, but amd's RT really isn't as bad as your saying, sure nvidia have a lead but i'm playing this maxxed with fsr balanced and it's fine.
Even a nvidia card needs DLSS for similar performance be it a 2080ti or a 3070/80 all be it a few frames more, but amd's stuff while not as good isn't a joke, as i said i've got all of the RT on ultra with no issues
As for metro exodus in the enhanced version not only does it look better but for me performs a lot better, RT on amd isn't bad by any means, and being real honest with a chance of being wrong my feeling is amd's rdna3 is going to really give nvidia a run for it's money in all areas.
FSR by all accounts works better in DL2 than DLSS going by what i've seen on the forums ect but for me i'm enjoying this game it's running fine i've had only that one sound bug and that was easily fixed played now about 10 hours ish i guess it's a decent game, not that i'm trying to sell you on it your get it when you get it
Last edited:
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
I played on a friends Steam account, Maxed out 1440P with DLSS set to Quality and got around 80'ish FPS if memory serves.
While 4K does look crisp, The visual difference between it and 1440P isn't worlds apart so the extra performance needed to me just isn't worth it.
While 4K does look crisp, The visual difference between it and 1440P isn't worlds apart so the extra performance needed to me just isn't worth it.
AlienALX
Well-known member
It is as bad as I am saying dude. In fact, it's possibly worse.
https://hitechglitz.com/dying-light-2-pc-performance-a-new-benchmark-for-ray-tracing/
The situation is similar with the RX 6700 XT at 1440p, the target resolution of this graphics card. With ray tracing enabled and FSR set to Balanced, the 6700 XT only manages 32 fps at 1440p. Turn off the ray tracing effects and that number jumps to 113 fps.
At least in Dying Light 2, it’s just not worth enabling ray tracing on an AMD graphics card. And when you turn it off, you get extremely good performance across the board. Don’t get me wrong, the game doesn’t look like it Poorly With ray tracing enabled, it’s just a little different. And honestly, the game will probably be easier without the lighting effects, so keep that in mind.
Now obviously you can turn it off. However, for the prices AMD are charging? it's not good enough.
In most games AMD seem to do OK. However, that's OK with no RT. When you enable it it totally cripples the card. And yeah, my opinion of RT has not changed yet, and I emphasise yet. However, if this is how every big title that comes out from now on is going to go down? then it's a bit of a shambles.
Bear in mind that *if* you need to do without RT? then you can do without the stupid prices AMD are charging. As of right now I can go to OCUK and snag a 3070Ti for less than £800.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/nvidia/geforce-rtx-3070-ti
Which I still think is a total pee take. However, when I think about it a bit harder? I paid twice that for my 2080Ti. Now yeah, mine was the top of the pile but even a "normal" 2080Ti was £1300 when I bought mine. And sure, it is missing enough VRAM IMO but it doesn't seem anywhere near as bad as paying £1000 for a 3070. Which IMO *was* a downgrade from the 2080Ti. As VRAM goes the 3070Ti doesn't have enough *but* this game doesn't seem to need it and it's very rare for 1440p titles to overcome the 8gb.
Now if we compare that to a card that basically performs the same from AMD with terrible RT support/performance?
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd/radeon-rx-6800-series
£100 more. For less. I've not spent hours looking at the raster performance but even I know that if the 6800XT is not enough and gets you 20 odd FPS then that won't be enough either.
Up until now? I would have totally agreed with you. Like, totally. However, as we know all it takes on the PC is one killer app like this and things change overnight.
Yes this game is quite stunning without RT. However, it is quite clearly far superior with it. So why would you pay what AMD are charging?
I've held my patience with AMD for a long time now. I'm now starting to really dislike them. Fact is plenty of their GPUs are in stock. I can find nearly every product through the stack. Including 6800XT
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd/radeon-rx-6800-xt-series
lmao over £1000 and even the 6900XT
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd/radeon-rx-6900-xt-series
lmao £1350. Only to be completely humbled by one game.
Now as I said in previous posts I really do expect this game to perform better when they remove Denuvo and start working on optimising it. I also expect maybe even a newer version of DLSS that works even better.
What I don't expect is AMD's poor implementation of RT to improve. At least not on this gen. Which leaves them standing in Woolies with a bare arse IMO. Their prices need to drop to reflect this huge deficit in features. Especially DLSS (or FSR as they call it) because it is clearly inferior to DLSS because the fact is their cards don't have the physical hardware needed in order to make the game look as good as possible for using it and even higher FPS.
https://hitechglitz.com/dying-light-2-pc-performance-a-new-benchmark-for-ray-tracing/
The situation is similar with the RX 6700 XT at 1440p, the target resolution of this graphics card. With ray tracing enabled and FSR set to Balanced, the 6700 XT only manages 32 fps at 1440p. Turn off the ray tracing effects and that number jumps to 113 fps.
At least in Dying Light 2, it’s just not worth enabling ray tracing on an AMD graphics card. And when you turn it off, you get extremely good performance across the board. Don’t get me wrong, the game doesn’t look like it Poorly With ray tracing enabled, it’s just a little different. And honestly, the game will probably be easier without the lighting effects, so keep that in mind.
Now obviously you can turn it off. However, for the prices AMD are charging? it's not good enough.
In most games AMD seem to do OK. However, that's OK with no RT. When you enable it it totally cripples the card. And yeah, my opinion of RT has not changed yet, and I emphasise yet. However, if this is how every big title that comes out from now on is going to go down? then it's a bit of a shambles.
Bear in mind that *if* you need to do without RT? then you can do without the stupid prices AMD are charging. As of right now I can go to OCUK and snag a 3070Ti for less than £800.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/nvidia/geforce-rtx-3070-ti
Which I still think is a total pee take. However, when I think about it a bit harder? I paid twice that for my 2080Ti. Now yeah, mine was the top of the pile but even a "normal" 2080Ti was £1300 when I bought mine. And sure, it is missing enough VRAM IMO but it doesn't seem anywhere near as bad as paying £1000 for a 3070. Which IMO *was* a downgrade from the 2080Ti. As VRAM goes the 3070Ti doesn't have enough *but* this game doesn't seem to need it and it's very rare for 1440p titles to overcome the 8gb.
Now if we compare that to a card that basically performs the same from AMD with terrible RT support/performance?
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd/radeon-rx-6800-series
£100 more. For less. I've not spent hours looking at the raster performance but even I know that if the 6800XT is not enough and gets you 20 odd FPS then that won't be enough either.
Up until now? I would have totally agreed with you. Like, totally. However, as we know all it takes on the PC is one killer app like this and things change overnight.
Yes this game is quite stunning without RT. However, it is quite clearly far superior with it. So why would you pay what AMD are charging?
I've held my patience with AMD for a long time now. I'm now starting to really dislike them. Fact is plenty of their GPUs are in stock. I can find nearly every product through the stack. Including 6800XT
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd/radeon-rx-6800-xt-series
lmao over £1000 and even the 6900XT
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd/radeon-rx-6900-xt-series
lmao £1350. Only to be completely humbled by one game.
Now as I said in previous posts I really do expect this game to perform better when they remove Denuvo and start working on optimising it. I also expect maybe even a newer version of DLSS that works even better.
What I don't expect is AMD's poor implementation of RT to improve. At least not on this gen. Which leaves them standing in Woolies with a bare arse IMO. Their prices need to drop to reflect this huge deficit in features. Especially DLSS (or FSR as they call it) because it is clearly inferior to DLSS because the fact is their cards don't have the physical hardware needed in order to make the game look as good as possible for using it and even higher FPS.
AlienALX
Well-known member
I would rather have good RT implementation than 4k. 4k is just as stupid now as it ever was. Funny thing is Nvidia touted the 3070 as the cheap new 4k card that was as good as the 2080ti. Oh how it gets laughed at by the first truly next gen game with RT.
I don't count Metro Exodus in that. It clearly doesn't make enough difference. This game and Cyberpunk though? oh hell yeah.
Which reminds me I really must reinstall Cyberpunk. That said I played it OK before it just wasn't all that interesting to me. Got a good 30 hours out of it though, which for £27 was more than enough for me.
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
In a lot of places IMO a lot of RT effects are unnoticeable in anything other than side by side screenshots and even then it's "meh", The only RT effects that to me at least are biggies are the ones that have anything to do with reflections and lights but not necessarily shadows.
When it comes to shadows I honestly couldn't give less of a hoot, I'll use the baked in stuff happily, Reflections and things that make light bloom I think look great but all the other effects seem small yet tank performance.
When it comes to shadows I honestly couldn't give less of a hoot, I'll use the baked in stuff happily, Reflections and things that make light bloom I think look great but all the other effects seem small yet tank performance.
KingNosser
Well-known member
I can agree on price wise then amd is the lesser value not arguing that.
But bare in mind i won my 6800XT and I have zero issues in any DXR game they all look and run perfectly fine, yep nvidia are ahead but as i said it's not massive really least in a way that effect how a game looks or plays, this game DL2 is by far the hardest to run but even CP2077 on insane settings i get 45fps perfectly playable for me.
So while I agree on price it's not good it's still not as bad as it seems, i know as i'm playing all DXR titles maxed out with no issues.
Rasta wise AMD is ahead but yet again still not by much, but come next gen i expect the gap to close completely, but price wise next gen is going to cost an insane price it's going to get worse that side of things without any doubt.
but you can't really fairly compare a 6700 to a 6800XT that is a big gap, i'd say DXR wise that a 6800XT is more inline with a 3070 and a 2080ti is a better card so we agree on many things tbh.
But saying DXR is bad on my card is just not the reality this 6800XT is a beast and really is more inline with a 3080 in all other areas.
I've got DL2 maxed no issues no stutters or huge noticing dips it's butter smooth and my card isn't even making a huge noise when playing it's a solid card.
But prices are a different story to what i've been getting at and in all honesty if i hadn't won it idk when i'd have gotten it maybe 6 months later if i'd been able. Thing is i wanted this card this exact card and it's not disapointed me and i actually prefer the amd drivers something i wasn't expecting.
RDNA3 is going to change things but prices well they suck now and they will suck then it's just a bad mix of things that means most gamers are kinda screwed tbh gone are the days of mid range cards being enough on the al la crysis titles.
As for DXR being good or bad some are way better than others Metro exodus and DL2 are the best so far and cp2077 is alright and everything else is kinda a non issue i feel, but going forward it'll be more common and in DL2 and exodus the games look very different to how they do with DXR turned off i enjoy all the subtle eye candy i'm a total gfx whore always have been
But bare in mind i won my 6800XT and I have zero issues in any DXR game they all look and run perfectly fine, yep nvidia are ahead but as i said it's not massive really least in a way that effect how a game looks or plays, this game DL2 is by far the hardest to run but even CP2077 on insane settings i get 45fps perfectly playable for me.
So while I agree on price it's not good it's still not as bad as it seems, i know as i'm playing all DXR titles maxed out with no issues.
Rasta wise AMD is ahead but yet again still not by much, but come next gen i expect the gap to close completely, but price wise next gen is going to cost an insane price it's going to get worse that side of things without any doubt.
but you can't really fairly compare a 6700 to a 6800XT that is a big gap, i'd say DXR wise that a 6800XT is more inline with a 3070 and a 2080ti is a better card so we agree on many things tbh.
But saying DXR is bad on my card is just not the reality this 6800XT is a beast and really is more inline with a 3080 in all other areas.
I've got DL2 maxed no issues no stutters or huge noticing dips it's butter smooth and my card isn't even making a huge noise when playing it's a solid card.
But prices are a different story to what i've been getting at and in all honesty if i hadn't won it idk when i'd have gotten it maybe 6 months later if i'd been able. Thing is i wanted this card this exact card and it's not disapointed me and i actually prefer the amd drivers something i wasn't expecting.
RDNA3 is going to change things but prices well they suck now and they will suck then it's just a bad mix of things that means most gamers are kinda screwed tbh gone are the days of mid range cards being enough on the al la crysis titles.
As for DXR being good or bad some are way better than others Metro exodus and DL2 are the best so far and cp2077 is alright and everything else is kinda a non issue i feel, but going forward it'll be more common and in DL2 and exodus the games look very different to how they do with DXR turned off i enjoy all the subtle eye candy i'm a total gfx whore always have been
Last edited:
