Fallout 4 - PC Graphics Settings Menu Revealed
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
ImprovizoR
Well-known member
Perhaps. But it would explain the GTX 550Ti minimum requirement for Nvidia and HD7870 for AMD.
AlienALX
Well-known member
That could be as simple as the game, for example, using FXAA, which is a Nvidia method of anti aliasing that's not too hard on a GPU.
Also? those pics in the OP are clearly FAKE. Since when did they make spelling mistakes?
Resolutions my crusty corn hole.
Resolutions.
And a shot I just took of a real Fallout 3 settings menu. Resoltion, no S.
They even forgot when doing their Photochop to add in the graphics adapter.
FAIL.
Last edited:
WYP
News Guru
Going to leave this here. Word from Bethesda themselves which talks about their friends at Nvidia and some features that are part of GameWorks, though GameWorks are not mentioned.
http://www.overclock3d.net/articles...plains_the_graphics_technology_of_fallout_4/1
This also confirms a lot of the stuff from the graphical menu screenshots will be included in the game, like Temporal AA, Screen Space reflections, SSAO and Bokeh Depth of field.
http://www.overclock3d.net/articles...plains_the_graphics_technology_of_fallout_4/1
This also confirms a lot of the stuff from the graphical menu screenshots will be included in the game, like Temporal AA, Screen Space reflections, SSAO and Bokeh Depth of field.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R
New member
I remember i was playing previous Fallout 3, and also New Vegas completely maxed out on 1080p with nice fps on my antient cheap oced GTS 450 it was very nice and playable, and Fallout 4 will be unplayable i am pretty sure consider NVIDIA gimp works and helping to developer...and graphics looks mediocre compared to old games..but we will wait for few days for game to be released who knows
The first options window is referring to the resolution you are setting for use, so of course it will be in singular form not plural.
And in the cell lower down where you have a plethora of different resolutions they then correctly title it as plural.
If anything I would say the grammar and spelling in FA3 is wrong. But this is nitpicking at irrelevant stuff really.
I'm in it for the gameplay not the gfx. Seems if graphics are high then people complain their PC can't run it, if its low, they complain that its a bad game... is no one happy anymore? :mellow:
shambles1980
New member
im happy every 1 else is jelly
gfx aside, im looking forward to playing this soon. Just waiting on a few new watercooling components and then i'll be putting my revamped 900D back together. Until then, my standby pc will not do it justice.
barnsley
born in a.....
I wouldn't say jelly. More like annoyed. Even on my 'fantastic' nVidia card most gameworks games don't run as well as they could.
Normally I'd be concerned however It could very much be like the way Unreal have implimented nVidia tech in their engines . IIRC they made changes to the way the features work on non nVidia products so it runs much smoother.
shambles1980
New member
im not overly worried about game works code..
GTA v was in the same boat. when i 1st got that i had a hd 7870 and boy was it bad. stutter fest is the best way to describe it.
Had a quick look at amd web page and found a beta driver release that was a day or 2 old. installed that and it was fine..
Now GTA V had some other underlying issues. the amount of ram it uses is ridiculous and it does seem to take a hit every now and then because of that regardless of gpu mfr.
(i dont know if game works code is to blame for that at all, personally i think its how they handle texture packing, and having to extract them on the fly)
Assasins crudd apparently was terrible too but i think that was fixed pretty fast..
And then you have batman. which wants exessive ammounts of ram so it wont page.
im not overly concerned because the textures of fallout dont look that impressive which in theory should lower the overhead.
i dont hear any mention of hair-works which im happy about because that was always going to kill gpu performance.
the only reall problem i see is nvidias insistence on using tessellation to do as much as they possibly can. there are much more efficient ways to do things that create less work load on a gpu. they seem to offset this by removing the higher quality AA options, the only thing i see that doing though is making games run slightly worse on amd cards because nvidia do tessellation a bit better (its not like amd couldnt work on that) but it also gives us worse options for jaggies removal. so that is kind of a bad trade off just to get a slightly better performance rate than the competitors..
having seen the screen shots i dont think any of it is going to be overly demanding though. i do think bethesda have limited the usage to a minimal and reduced texture quality to make the game accessible and playable to as many people as possible.
If i can game at 1080p med/high with my OC'd 780 il be pretty happy.
depending how the game utilizes gpu ram i think some 970 users will end up worse off than i am. but id imagine a 290/290x 980/980ti would be pretty happy with performance..
but we do need to see what will happen once the texture packs start arriving.
as for the game and gpu's i would imagine we will start seeing some beta drivers from both sides around the 10th-15th
GTA v was in the same boat. when i 1st got that i had a hd 7870 and boy was it bad. stutter fest is the best way to describe it.
Had a quick look at amd web page and found a beta driver release that was a day or 2 old. installed that and it was fine..
Now GTA V had some other underlying issues. the amount of ram it uses is ridiculous and it does seem to take a hit every now and then because of that regardless of gpu mfr.
(i dont know if game works code is to blame for that at all, personally i think its how they handle texture packing, and having to extract them on the fly)
Assasins crudd apparently was terrible too but i think that was fixed pretty fast..
And then you have batman. which wants exessive ammounts of ram so it wont page.
im not overly concerned because the textures of fallout dont look that impressive which in theory should lower the overhead.
i dont hear any mention of hair-works which im happy about because that was always going to kill gpu performance.
the only reall problem i see is nvidias insistence on using tessellation to do as much as they possibly can. there are much more efficient ways to do things that create less work load on a gpu. they seem to offset this by removing the higher quality AA options, the only thing i see that doing though is making games run slightly worse on amd cards because nvidia do tessellation a bit better (its not like amd couldnt work on that) but it also gives us worse options for jaggies removal. so that is kind of a bad trade off just to get a slightly better performance rate than the competitors..
having seen the screen shots i dont think any of it is going to be overly demanding though. i do think bethesda have limited the usage to a minimal and reduced texture quality to make the game accessible and playable to as many people as possible.
If i can game at 1080p med/high with my OC'd 780 il be pretty happy.
depending how the game utilizes gpu ram i think some 970 users will end up worse off than i am. but id imagine a 290/290x 980/980ti would be pretty happy with performance..
but we do need to see what will happen once the texture packs start arriving.
as for the game and gpu's i would imagine we will start seeing some beta drivers from both sides around the 10th-15th
S.T.A.L.K.E.R
New member
Very nice post....but they need to sell new cards and promote them as much better..and tesselation is one of best ways to kill performance on older cards,and gamers cannot see it visually 8,or 16X or even 32x in future...same as massive DOF has killed Fermi cards, in Metro 2033, dead rising 3...its business i am not surprised..thats why many people do not buy flagship cards they get obsolete very soon
barnsley
born in a.....
GTA doesn't use gameworks. It does have vendor specific features for both AMD and nVidia though. The RAM usage makes sense because of the open world nature.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R
New member
GTA 5 is very good optimised...except ultra grass....compared to Batman AK worse game in history nvidia i blame you for game fiasco,and your gimp works inplementations which are coded in game whetever gameworks effects are enabled or disabled :cussing:
barnsley
born in a.....
Its the developers fault. Not nVidia.
AlienALX
Well-known member
Yeah as bad as Gameworks is performance wise Batman was not Nvidia's fault. It was a rushed out poorly made game that needed at least another year in dev.
Look at Tomb Raider.. It used Tress FX wonderfully and yes, whilst it did come at a cost the cost wasn't so great that the game ended up an unplayable mess.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R
New member
I do not agree with you,i blame nvidia..Batman AK is not first nvidia sponsored game that has destroyed hardware,,,,i still remember original Metro 2033 from 2010 year, or Cryostasis 2009 game it was unplayable many years and finally you have high playable frames now on latest hardware...I believe thats nvidia sneaky long term profit strategy lets ruin game now, and we will sell more future hardware in next few years, they are playing on human vanity to max out game. Batman AK could easily be fixed but its not profitable and that game will become one more benchmark and Pascal brute force power will have descent fps to bypass poor coding...they paying developers and give them gpu-s and later works with them in game creation...nvidia GimpWorks is cancer of pc industry and AMD is way beter Tress FX works good on nvidia cards,same as MLAA and other
barnsley
born in a.....
Stop fanboying. No one is taking you seriously. The true cancer of the PC industry is fanboys
.Its not 'destroyed hardware'. Its an incredibly poorly optimized PC port done by a small team. The recent Ubisoft gameworks games are just crap because of the choices made by Ubi/the development team farmed off to do the PC port.
Or are nVidia magically involved in making games that make the whole nVidia brand look crap too?
S.T.A.L.K.E.R
New member
Stop fanboying. No one is taking you seriously. The true cancer of the PC industry is fanboys
Its not 'destroyed hardware'. Its an incredibly poorly optimized PC port done by a small team. The recent Ubisoft gameworks games are just crap because of the choices made by Ubi/the development team farmed off to do the PC port.
Or are nVidia magically involved in making games that make the whole nVidia brand look crap too?
As i know NVIDIA is involved in Ubisoft games..nvidia has work with developers in many games..and all those games are poorly optimised so that cannot be coincidence... i do not want to be fanboying, sorry
Kilbane
Hagrid Look-A-Like
Name one game that Nvidia helped create? Creation and post effect coding are completely different ends of the game.
Nvidia and AMD help developers utilise their specific coding into a game that is already created. If the game runs like crap or has poor gameplay. That is down to the developer to fix, not Nvidia or AMD.
