Ive still got an RTX 2070 super and an i7 9700k and 16 gigs of ram, i can still run games prettt darn well at 2k even cyberpunk runs great with my setup but i think devs are getting lazy and relying on FSR and DLSS to do most the heavy lifting for poor optimization.
Look at the graphical difference between stalker 2 and cyberpunk. I think the foliage is the real killer here. Cyberpunk is nothing but flat roads and buildings, lots of shine and vehicles. Even the desert is fairly vegetation free. Stalker 2 has so many small objects to render, and if you want epic settings you're gonna need an epic system. If not you'll be dropping the quality to bump up the performance.
What kind of people get mad at the person speaking out against bad optimization? Its the worst feeling when a game isnt working well when you have a decent pc or next gen console. Its almost 2025 we should be getting amazing visiuals ALONG with good performence. Games from 10 years ago still look decent enough and arent nearly as demanding as modern titles. I think most gamers can agree that we all prefer perfomence over things like high textures or ray tracing.
@@JeekyWeeky It's not a fact lol, it's still an opinion. It's a popular opinion, but that doesn't make it a fact. Take into consideration the range of hardware, you can't expect a game like this to run at 60 fps on bottom end 'modern' hardware. I'm not saying these charts look good, not at all. But it's simply not that simple. I've been worried about the performance of this game ever since I heard it was being made on UE5, that engine, and UE4 too, has garbage performance in general. If you ask me, they never should have gone for unreal engine.
It's not wanted or needed at all if devs learn to optimize the games. It's a band aid and a fad that will go Poof as soon as the devs get a clue or start using better tools. Those things are not fixing a problem, they are just trying to cover up a problem as well as pushing expensive hardware thats Not needed. All part of the scam.
@sneakycacti @06:24 yes every single one of them is upscaled Graphics Preset: LOW / Resolution: 1080p / Target FPS: 30. SSD required. The listed specifications were evaluated using TSR and comparable technologies. Graphics Preset: HIGH / Resolution: 1440p / Target FPS: 60. SSD required. The above specifications were tested with TSR, DLSS, FSR and XeSS.
Look, I don't really think 4k plus max settings is really a realistic goal, especially considering how hard the old S.T.A.L.K.E.R games were to to run back in the day. GSC seems to be very concerned about optimizing the game as much as possible, which is shown by the fact that the game is playable on the Series S. My goal is 1080p, 60 fps, medium-high settings, and as far as I'm aware my computer will have absolutely no trouble with that
I expect the game to look fine at 1080p and 1440p without relying on dlss. The number of people playing at 4k resolutions is likely to be low. So the lack of frame rate at those resolutions is a fix the developers will most likely focus on last.
4k is a surprisingly minimal upgrade from 1440p at double the cost unless you're using a TV but god help you if that's the case cause TVs cause all sorts of input delay and screen tearing in games
Yep system requirements have been increased and upscaling is a requirement and frame gen for bad cpu utilisation Ue5 and modern developers, we are fucked
It's not just these days, UE4 had the same problem. UE5 engine only made it worse, these engines look great but they've always been horribly unoptimized.
@@sixx2683 Yeah, and the reason so many games are using UE is because it's easy to use and saves a lot of time not having to build your own engine for a game. Unity is the same story.
@@xILLxChronic Most of them were Russians, I do not think that they are around now when ukros banned Russian language from this game. (I mean original player base for SOC)
Yup, just recently finished Silent Hill 2 Remake. Oh god it was torture, stutter every corner, inside buildings. I forced myself to finish it, after that uninstalled. I also dont agree that we should not blame the devs, but the engine. The devs decided to use a shtty engine, its their decision and responsibility.
You know what? Im gonna say it. If this game wasn't a STALKER game, it 100% would get flak for it's shit optimization and ESPECIALLY for the bugs. Fuck, if this was a fallout title, we wouldn't hear the end of it about how bad it is.
Between GSC reputation and modern AAA experience, that is, unfortunately, kinda expected at this point. Hope my 3060/5600x combo will give a playable FPS on my 1080p monitor. If not, I'll just wait a couple months till it's fixed, not a big deal IMO.
Id imagine a map size of 60km^2 with immense detail, interactive environments, weather patterns/particles aswell as an AI that roams around and is actove at all times whether the player is there or not would be a rather large file. Not even mentioning all the mechanics and items, aswell as mod support and multiplayer modes
I’ve been playing games since morrowind and I played shadow of Chernobyl when it released and then clear sky . Both of these games were broken messses on launch , but I expect that it won’t be too bad on 1080p or 1440p . 1440p 60 fps with my rx 6800 xt should be good enough , at worst I’ll just turn settings down .
as a guy who is eagerly looking forward to stalker 2, this whole optimization thing concernes me too, yeah original stalker games were your regular slavjank and similar to fallout it was modded to death to run well by some people, i still think technology has evolved enough to not have such issues (i mean it isn`t evolved enough to handle UE5 for some reason), whatever it is i also understand circumstances devs had to face in their real lives and it is still respectable that they took actual effort to fix their game
I am never getting Stalker 2 cause in the gameplay trailer the reloading animations for the guns didnt look like the mag went all the way in so im never playing it makes me angry
I’m also worried about the performance. Btw, expect “fanboys” will attack you for this. 7800x3d, 32gb, 4070ti user here. I’m worried about the UE5 traversal stutters
this might be a cpu issue because at 1080p the top 3 cards were maxing out the game at 85fps. the games ai runs off cpu so that might be the main culprit and having to have all npc's loaded for a large part of the map and interacting with each other prob eats up a lot of cpu power. a 4090 should not be 1 fps ahead of a 4080 that seems off to me
As a midrange PC gamer I always have to tinker with settings to get an optimal experience and I've grown to enjoy the process. I'm more concerned about traversal stutter in an open world UE5 game. Luckily we have refunds and game pass to give it a go ourselves.
i mean, the original stalker games were peak slavjank so i don't really expect stalker 2 to run well or be very polished. I'm still going to love it, and will probably play it twice like i did with Call of Pripyat
@@sneakycacti Got the same CPU and crashes (also in Frostbite engine). You need to install Intel(R) Extreme Tuning Utility and put the performance core ration 2-3 bits down. This should fix all the crashes. Also, latest GPU driver of course.
Even og games never ran this bad on launch, zoomers always post benchmarks but they always ran them at much higher resolutions than average people had at a time, while I was playing at 1280x1024 and my fps was always fine. Modern devs are ultra lazy, lack the passion, the drive to make playable and scalable game, they want to automate everything and go home to grind cards like slave at fifa. I'm tired of those dumbasses forcing shitty muddy dlss/fsr and soap opera frame gen that gives you massive input lag. You can compare dynamic shadows generated by your flash light in stalker soc/cs/cop to absolutely nothing in stalker 2 what a massive downgrade... Speaking of downgrades I bet A-life will also be massively dumbed down and require nasa cpu to run like MH wilds beta. Devs never said anything about dynamic living world with npcs trying to make living they only talk about combat ai which is just sus. For consoles expect perf as bad as Wukong so fake disgusting frame genned 60fps with massive unplayable input lag. Just kill modern gaming already im tired of this shit. They delayed game at least 3 times and even restarted development from scratch it had red flags written over it like cp2077 just peak of the incompetence.
Ur MH Wilds video had a pretty positive response honestly just glancing at it. All the stupid comments are basically unpopular. Its easy to ignore comments like that since they are not based on reality
@@spyro91rep.productions22 hogwarts have this issue cuz of denuvo mostly i play on 1650 and it works on low 50 fps with freaking dlss and cyberpunk works on 75 on medium high XD
I have the Ryzen 5 1600 with a RX 580 card with 8 gigs dedicated video ram. I can play Cyberpunk 2077 at 60 FPS at 1080P my monitors limit. The new requirements say this is a Low setting. I just laugh at the Propaganda thats trying to get you to buy expensive hardware. System requirements are always a Joke. They also do it to hide day one optimization problems because no dev actually play tests anymore. I bet you 100 bucks I'll be able to play Stalker 2 as well as I can Cyberpunk.
Great video and I couldn't agree more if you're system is the most up to date machine new games should run like butter at max settings I remember the memes about Crysis being tough to run at max back in the day and they were true but back then the top tier systems were optimizing for 60hz monitors and 30fps only the most obnoxious of gamers cared about 60fps back then now its the standard for all metrics in a decade it'll be 120fps
I think that performance will be the least of the problems. Gsc is infamous for making their games not only run like shit, but also full of bugs. I hope im wrong and the game will be good otherwise well have to wait for fans again to fix all of this
Oh don't worry they optimized it for consoles and delayed it for optimization on the Series S, but nah - fuck the PC players. Where the game series started on, the PC.
I'm tired of consoles and mid tier tech holding back graphics. All of the settings used for benchmark were ULTRA. Turn it to medium you'll be fine. Ie turn off ray tracing.
Well if it can run on a Series S it cant be that bad, it just seems to be a pretty big divide between medium and high/recommended. im a 108060fps guy I dont really care about triple digit framerates. Of course, if a 6700 xt will still require frame gen to hit 60 on low or medium, then yeah I'll pass until they fix it. Give it a year or so.
bad excuse since gpu's nowadays have AI to enhance fps and are also much more expensive and I shouldn't need a 1600$ dollar graphics card to play the game without stutters and fps drops
@@Valvefan75 Game suited for future hardware. Think of games back the 2000s. We run those like butter now. It’ll run ok for now, but incredible later on without sacrificing or downgrading anything.
I personally don’t have the best pc but mine can run almost anything i have a 1650 super and i can run tarkov at high cyberpunk at 60 no problem but i dont think ill be able to actually play it thats why im hesitant to buy it most game devs just became lazy with optimization and rely on dlss nowdays
if the specs provided are for native rez and no frame gen. It shoud be fine Also the graph where the 4090, 4080 and 4070 are all at ~85 fps, seems like it might be a cpu issue / limit. Because it doesnt make any sense these 3 gpus to have the same fps
@@sneakycacti85 fps with ray tracing and everything to be fair . Think you are being a bit too harsh on the game imo , GSC is infamous for making unoptimized games back in the day . I remember with clear sky you needed a top of the line pc to even be able to play it at 40 to 60 fps . The fact that I can get 60 fps 1440p high with my 6800 xt is good enough for me .
@@sneakycacti i mean at 1440p Ultra settings, my Ryzen 7 5800x can only handle 25-ish fps in Monster Hunter Wilds Beta (in the main camp/hub) everywhere else i still have the 25-30fps, but because the gpu - rx 6700 xt
@@sneakycacti for me it was not quite instant, but i only did the tutorial and 1 other large monster hunt. Then uninstalled But i still have a bit of hope, the full release will run better
the game is more like an rpg than an fps game, like fallout. it's Slavic fallout after all. but still, really hope it gets better optimized. specially in he storage area, like holy, that's fallout 4 with like 200 mods installed.
I was playing call of duty yesterday it barely happens but it probably was my internet The friend rates was so bad it was stuttering I had stopped playing call of duty frame rates don't bother me until I'm playing games like that it was so bad I just started playing a single player game I'm going to try to jump on call of duty again hopefully it's not so bad
Only thing i can here is people being pissy that they can't make the game run on the max graphics like, if you truly are looking just at the graphics charts congratulations you can take the door, you value the look of the mud more than the potential story, game mechanics and innovation. I know that some people are just too much into the look of games but come on, if that bugs you i can't begin to imagine all the games you must refuse to play just because it's not on ultra 16K 200 FPS and yes I'm hyper balling for comedic effect. Honestly you should let it happen and not discouraged people from taking the game because "graphics bad" and "won't be on 60 FPS" A little reminder for everyone, the deference between 30 and 60 fps is so minimal that only professional player can actually use the difference, for anybody else 30 capt is the best you can and should have
You're fucking retarded if you genuinely think nobody but professional players can see the difference between 30 and 60 FPS. In fact, I remember during the PS5 Pro reveal that Mark Cerny, the system architect for Playstation, found that 75% of PS5 users would choose performance mode when given the option between a 30 FPS quality mode and a 60 FPS performance mode. You would have to be Helen Keller to not see the difference.
Haven't you seen it yet? It's called 'War Game: The Making of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Documentary' here on youtube on GSC channel, it's in Ukrainian with subs though.
unreal engine 5 has done more bad than good for consumers yeah it might be easier to use as a dev but yeah.... fking epic is a plague on our planet first with fortnite than their exclusivity BS than unreal engine 5.
It's cool to see that a game i have been waiting for since 2009 is gonna run like shit on my pc. Nice For those interested, just mod the shit out of og stalker if you cant run this game. Og stalker modded is free.
@@sneakycacti GSC gameworld relesed the source code for the og stalker games when they went bankrupt, so you can leagally download the games for free modded
I’ve talked to people that played the most recent preview and they said it ran good on both PC and Xbox. They also said that the x box version looked surprisingly good for how steady the frames were. They said they occasionally got small dips but that’s all. I’m not sure of the specs of the PCs at the last previews, but I don’t think there’s that much to be worried about. And the devs promised a fully polished product. I know we’ve heard that from other dev teams but GSC has dedication and passion for their product unlike a lot of other companies.
5800x/3070 here, as long as I can get 1440p60fps without upscaling, I'm good. And it certainly looks like that'll be the case, though perhaps not at completely maxed out settings.
I'm excited to play the game once I get a better PC (CPU is a decade old, and it wasn't exactly high end on release) but I do like to hear about gaming news. IDK what it is with Unreal games, but so many have been unoptimized. Even games that look like they should be easy to run are resource hogs
I think developers are getting too lazy. Now I know that's a harsh statement considering what this developer in particular has gone through with the war. But they rely a lot on upscaling, AI and frame generation. Stop the obsession with graphics and high resolutions.
If I can play at a stable 30fps at lowest settings (I should comfortably), I really don't care. People cry too much about the optimization stuff, back in the day games were capped at 30fps and it was all good
its like people want to run the game smoothly on high FPS to utilize their screens. 30fps is horrible and it wasnt bad back then because we didnt know better
Yeah... I'm going to be a little more forgiving of a small studio working in a war zone, bouncing around different locations compared to a massive AAA developer. If the game has some technical issues, I'll be fine as long as it's still fun.
It's an Open world, AAA game that uses Lumen and UE5. Is uncompressed, 160gb and is 64KM with zero loading screens using the latest and greatest for photogrammetry and motion capture. If you're on a 5 year old GPU, Tough cookies bruh. It's just how it is, Optimization is a myth. It's mostly people whining they can't brute force a game to run at 200fps the day it comes out. Apparently you all forgot about crysis. Furthermore, A 4070ti will get around 85 fps with DLSS according to the nvidia charts if you use simple math, The grey bar is without any other garbage so make of that what you will. 1440p is the sweet spot and it's tied to memory speed, expecting to max out a modern game on UE5 at 4k using lumen and nanite goes beyond reasonable expectations.
@@AlexanderderGroe-rd1nk dude you have no idea how many dumb arguments i got on how UNREAL & EPIC bad. yet clearly epic it's not the problem you can still make a bad game with bad optimization in any engine also, valve has 30% more of a monopoly on gamers and game devs over epic
This video aged well
@Vhaal-666just don't buy it and you can fine the company $60. If the govt fines them you won't get any money.
@@sneakycacti thats hilarious. Modern gaming is so shit
yike
bro cmon everyone has
Ryzen 7 9800X3D
RTX 5090
64GB of RAM
3TB NVMe SSD
imagine being a poor peasant in 2k24
I hope this video ages poorly as the game admittedly looks super fun! fingers crossed guys!
Ive still got an RTX 2070 super and an i7 9700k and 16 gigs of ram, i can still run games prettt darn well at 2k even cyberpunk runs great with my setup but i think devs are getting lazy and relying on FSR and DLSS to do most the heavy lifting for poor optimization.
My old pc is that exact build but a 9700 instead of 9700k
Look at the graphical difference between stalker 2 and cyberpunk. I think the foliage is the real killer here. Cyberpunk is nothing but flat roads and buildings, lots of shine and vehicles. Even the desert is fairly vegetation free.
Stalker 2 has so many small objects to render, and if you want epic settings you're gonna need an epic system. If not you'll be dropping the quality to bump up the performance.
What kind of people get mad at the person speaking out against bad optimization? Its the worst feeling when a game isnt working well when you have a decent pc or next gen console. Its almost 2025 we should be getting amazing visiuals ALONG with good performence. Games from 10 years ago still look decent enough and arent nearly as demanding as modern titles. I think most gamers can agree that we all prefer perfomence over things like high textures or ray tracing.
To answer that question check the comments of my MH wilds video lmao
Correct.
Morons is the answer, and there's plenty of them about...
In my opinion every game should play at 60 FPS
Well yeah, but it's going to depend on your hardware obviously.
Thats not your opinion, thats a fact. If a game cant run at 60fps with modern hardware then the game is not finished and shouldnt be sold.
@@JeekyWeeky It's not a fact lol, it's still an opinion. It's a popular opinion, but that doesn't make it a fact. Take into consideration the range of hardware, you can't expect a game like this to run at 60 fps on bottom end 'modern' hardware.
I'm not saying these charts look good, not at all. But it's simply not that simple.
I've been worried about the performance of this game ever since I heard it was being made on UE5, that engine, and UE4 too, has garbage performance in general. If you ask me, they never should have gone for unreal engine.
@@rafox66 it is that simple though, there is no reason why devs r being so lazy
@@JeekyWeeky so when things aren't going well at your job, it's because you're lazy?
upscaling and frame gen is the last nail in the coffin of PC gaming
It's not wanted or needed at all if devs learn to optimize the games. It's a band aid and a fad that will go Poof as soon as the devs get a clue or start using better tools. Those things are not fixing a problem, they are just trying to cover up a problem as well as pushing expensive hardware thats Not needed. All part of the scam.
Well, now console gaming started to use this features, what you think sony done to new ps5 pro?
yep...games come out in a shitty state and developers only rely on dlss
@@sixx2683 That's because of majority stupid "gamers" you should thank them. This tendency because of that masses.
I hate frame generation...adds werid effects
I tend to not believe Nvidia charts but if this true then this game is cooked.
@sneakycacti
@06:24
yes every single one of them is upscaled
Graphics Preset: LOW / Resolution: 1080p / Target FPS: 30. SSD required. The listed specifications were evaluated using TSR and comparable technologies.
Graphics Preset: HIGH / Resolution: 1440p / Target FPS: 60. SSD required. The above specifications were tested with TSR, DLSS, FSR and XeSS.
Look, I don't really think 4k plus max settings is really a realistic goal, especially considering how hard the old S.T.A.L.K.E.R games were to to run back in the day. GSC seems to be very concerned about optimizing the game as much as possible, which is shown by the fact that the game is playable on the Series S. My goal is 1080p, 60 fps, medium-high settings, and as far as I'm aware my computer will have absolutely no trouble with that
I expect the game to look fine at 1080p and 1440p without relying on dlss. The number of people playing at 4k resolutions is likely to be low. So the lack of frame rate at those resolutions is a fix the developers will most likely focus on last.
4k is a surprisingly minimal upgrade from 1440p at double the cost unless you're using a TV but god help you if that's the case cause TVs cause all sorts of input delay and screen tearing in games
Yep system requirements have been increased and upscaling is a requirement and frame gen for bad cpu utilisation
Ue5 and modern developers, we are fucked
I love having to pay for a 4k set up to play on 1080p
yeah these days games not optimization at all like silent hill 2 remake
It's not just these days, UE4 had the same problem. UE5 engine only made it worse, these engines look great but they've always been horribly unoptimized.
@rafox66 true
@@rafox66 yep.
@@sixx2683 Yeah, and the reason so many games are using UE is because it's easy to use and saves a lot of time not having to build your own engine for a game. Unity is the same story.
@@rafox66 UE is not optimized tho and that's a prob
It's on brand for stalker to be poorly optimized.
t. Stalker fan who bought SOC back before Steam
Wasn't Steam already a thing in 2007?
that was a completely different GSC and their own custom engine, I'd be interested in seeing how many people from SOC are even still around there
@@xILLxChronic Most of them were Russians, I do not think that they are around now when ukros banned Russian language from this game. (I mean original player base for SOC)
how could they ban rus language when ukr is basically a dialect of rus language lmao
SOC released in 2007? Almost 20 years later, that is NOT a valid excuse. Sorry.
I’m not worried about performance or gpu/cpu grunt, I’m more worried about it being a UE 5 stutter fest
Yup, just recently finished Silent Hill 2 Remake. Oh god it was torture, stutter every corner, inside buildings. I forced myself to finish it, after that uninstalled. I also dont agree that we should not blame the devs, but the engine. The devs decided to use a shtty engine, its their decision and responsibility.
I was honestly looking forward for the game but after seeing those performance benchmarks I lost a lot of interest.
can't blame you
Quit being poor
@@NicholasAdamDemonte No you can't make me
@@OnyxLegacy I’m gonna count to three and if you’re not a proud owner of a new Ferrari….
@@NicholasAdamDemonte plz no
I want to know how this effects AMD cards and Nvidia RTX 3000 series or earlier. Since they don't have the good version of DLSS
I wonder videos like this get disliked to hell, like literally almost every thing AAA that came out recently are packaged with horrific optimization
because people hate the truth and would rather lie to themselves
You know what? Im gonna say it.
If this game wasn't a STALKER game, it 100% would get flak for it's shit optimization and ESPECIALLY for the bugs. Fuck, if this was a fallout title, we wouldn't hear the end of it about how bad it is.
Between GSC reputation and modern AAA experience, that is, unfortunately, kinda expected at this point. Hope my 3060/5600x combo will give a playable FPS on my 1080p monitor. If not, I'll just wait a couple months till it's fixed, not a big deal IMO.
Id imagine a map size of 60km^2 with immense detail, interactive environments, weather patterns/particles aswell as an AI that roams around and is actove at all times whether the player is there or not would be a rather large file. Not even mentioning all the mechanics and items, aswell as mod support and multiplayer modes
I’ve been playing games since morrowind and I played shadow of Chernobyl when it released and then clear sky . Both of these games were broken messses on launch , but I expect that it won’t be too bad on 1080p or 1440p . 1440p 60 fps with my rx 6800 xt should be good enough , at worst I’ll just turn settings down .
I've got a 6800 and a 5800x with 32 gigs of RAM, even with that I'm wondering if it gonna run smoothly whitout burning m'y pc and m'y electric bills
as a guy who is eagerly looking forward to stalker 2, this whole optimization thing concernes me too, yeah original stalker games were your regular slavjank and similar to fallout it was modded to death to run well by some people, i still think technology has evolved enough to not have such issues (i mean it isn`t evolved enough to handle UE5 for some reason), whatever it is i also understand circumstances devs had to face in their real lives and it is still respectable that they took actual effort to fix their game
I am never getting Stalker 2 cause in the gameplay trailer the reloading animations for the guns didnt look like the mag went all the way in so im never playing it makes me angry
This does have me worried, but I think/hope that these charts are with ray tracing enabled.
I’m also worried about the performance. Btw, expect “fanboys” will attack you for this. 7800x3d, 32gb, 4070ti user here. I’m worried about the UE5 traversal stutters
Rtx 4090 85 fps on 1080p is really bad
this might be a cpu issue because at 1080p the top 3 cards were maxing out the game at 85fps. the games ai runs off cpu so that might be the main culprit and having to have all npc's loaded for a large part of the map and interacting with each other prob eats up a lot of cpu power. a 4090 should not be 1 fps ahead of a 4080 that seems off to me
what do you mean 40 to 70 fps lmao
As a midrange PC gamer I always have to tinker with settings to get an optimal experience and I've grown to enjoy the process. I'm more concerned about traversal stutter in an open world UE5 game. Luckily we have refunds and game pass to give it a go ourselves.
That’s unreal 5 for you
Bruh where in the chart says fg is enabled.
The text before the chart implies it
This game runs like ass on my rig and visually the game isn't pretty enough to justify how poorly it runs
Hmm, I wonder what engine it's using?
(One google search later)
Say it with me: every single time
I'm good, these settings from the screenshot are probably with RT stuff so my RX 6900XT and R7 7700X can chill on medium -high settings at 2 k
Just play on high settings instead of max settings. The change is going to be barely noticeable.
I think your grievances are with the PC gaming industry's fixation of frame generation instead of CPU's and GPU's actually improving performance.
My 4090 is ready, but I'm not :OOO
I rather my games be at the lowest settings to avoid DLSS and frame generation so games don't look all blurry/fuzzy and run above 60
i mean, the original stalker games were peak slavjank so i don't really expect stalker 2 to run well or be very polished. I'm still going to love it, and will probably play it twice like i did with Call of Pripyat
Ill probably come back to it 5 years down the road once hardware is able to brute force it if its unoptimized
@@sneakycacti With the 5k Series graphics cards around the corner I doubt you'll have to wait 5 years. (Hopefully)
@@dylanrobertson8162 Id wait until 60 series
@@sneakycacti im praying more games get the IDtech7 treatment.
@@sneakycacti fair enough
I find frame gen works decently well with 35-45 fps as well
What are your specs?
14900KF, 4070, 32GB RAM, I have to play on console tho because UE5 games just crash constantly for me tho lol
@@sneakycacti Got the same CPU and crashes (also in Frostbite engine). You need to install Intel(R) Extreme Tuning Utility and put the performance core ration 2-3 bits down. This should fix all the crashes. Also, latest GPU driver of course.
@@LethalKicks I usually go 56X
Even og games never ran this bad on launch, zoomers always post benchmarks but they always ran them at much higher resolutions than average people had at a time, while I was playing at 1280x1024 and my fps was always fine. Modern devs are ultra lazy, lack the passion, the drive to make playable and scalable game, they want to automate everything and go home to grind cards like slave at fifa. I'm tired of those dumbasses forcing shitty muddy dlss/fsr and soap opera frame gen that gives you massive input lag. You can compare dynamic shadows generated by your flash light in stalker soc/cs/cop to absolutely nothing in stalker 2 what a massive downgrade... Speaking of downgrades I bet A-life will also be massively dumbed down and require nasa cpu to run like MH wilds beta. Devs never said anything about dynamic living world with npcs trying to make living they only talk about combat ai which is just sus.
For consoles expect perf as bad as Wukong so fake disgusting frame genned 60fps with massive unplayable input lag. Just kill modern gaming already im tired of this shit. They delayed game at least 3 times and even restarted development from scratch it had red flags written over it like cp2077 just peak of the incompetence.
I will be playing it on game pass, so hopefully, it runs well.
Ur MH Wilds video had a pretty positive response honestly just glancing at it. All the stupid comments are basically unpopular. Its easy to ignore comments like that since they are not based on reality
There's a difference between 'badly optimized' and 'demanding', but I'm not saying your concerns are unfounded.
3070 and ryzen 7 5800h, I hope is enough at least for medium graphics at 1080p 😬
minimum specs require i7 7700k so likely not
@sneakycacti damn, ill play on xbone at 30 fps then 😂
@@alonsom4270it probably will be I doubt 60 because idk how laptops cpus scale.
The 5800h outperforms a 7700k.@@sneakycacti
Why graphics cards recommend higher gpus I mean seriously people can’t afford higher gpus or gaming laptops >
It will have a stutter because ue5 has a stutter problem baked into its engine, however we can only hope it’s minimal
Hopes so too man because I been playing battlefield 1 still and other games does not stutter or have prepared shaders (hogwarts legacy >
Yep.
@@spyro91rep.productions22 hogwarts have this issue cuz of denuvo mostly i play on 1650 and it works on low 50 fps with freaking dlss and cyberpunk works on 75 on medium high XD
I have the Ryzen 5 1600 with a RX 580 card with 8 gigs dedicated video ram. I can play Cyberpunk 2077 at 60 FPS at 1080P my monitors limit. The new requirements say this is a Low setting. I just laugh at the Propaganda thats trying to get you to buy expensive hardware. System requirements are always a Joke. They also do it to hide day one optimization problems because no dev actually play tests anymore. I bet you 100 bucks I'll be able to play Stalker 2 as well as I can Cyberpunk.
Great video and I couldn't agree more if you're system is the most up to date machine new games should run like butter at max settings I remember the memes about Crysis being tough to run at max back in the day and they were true but back then the top tier systems were optimizing for 60hz monitors and 30fps only the most obnoxious of gamers cared about 60fps back then now its the standard for all metrics in a decade it'll be 120fps
I think that performance will be the least of the problems. Gsc is infamous for making their games not only run like shit, but also full of bugs. I hope im wrong and the game will be good otherwise well have to wait for fans again to fix all of this
Bugs don’t ruin a game if they get fixed eventually cyberpunk went from the most hated game to know everyone’s sucking it
Oh don't worry they optimized it for consoles and delayed it for optimization on the Series S, but nah - fuck the PC players. Where the game series started on, the PC.
I get you man, to come up with such pathetic frames while using dlss and frame generation, there is a serious issue. This is just blatantly ridiculous
my rtx 2060 and ryzen 5 3600 are not gonna handle this game at 1080p 60 fps low lol
i was excited for this game till i realized i wouldnt be able to play it because it wont be on ps5
I'm tired of consoles and mid tier tech holding back graphics.
All of the settings used for benchmark were ULTRA. Turn it to medium you'll be fine. Ie turn off ray tracing.
Ya..i have 4090. I dont worry at all. And i play in 2k.
But i dont expect any Game to gets released in top shape.
Playing bo2 not on Plutonium is wild
This is world at war ☠️
@@sneakycacti WAIT WHAT LMAO I didn't know that thats kinda cool
Still tho playing Waw without Plutonium is STILL wild lol
@@WaddupBozo I bought the game with my first pc from 2018 lol and just played on my steam copy
Well if it can run on a Series S it cant be that bad, it just seems to be a pretty big divide between medium and high/recommended. im a 108060fps guy I dont really care about triple digit framerates. Of course, if a 6700 xt will still require frame gen to hit 60 on low or medium, then yeah I'll pass until they fix it. Give it a year or so.
Epic settings includes TXAA and Lumen/nanite. Just turning it down one notch will have you playing at 90+ fps with just dlss 3 and no FG.
@@mikeity2009 Oh cool! That does make me hopeful :)
As time goes on the game will run better as hardware advances anyway. Like Crysis that old game.
bad excuse since gpu's nowadays have AI to enhance fps and are also much more expensive and I shouldn't need a 1600$ dollar graphics card to play the game without stutters and fps drops
but that's the problem. modern gaming has become "wait 5 years for hardware to catch up" for so many releases
100% @@Valvefan75
@@Valvefan75 Game suited for future hardware. Think of games back the 2000s. We run those like butter now.
It’ll run ok for now, but incredible later on without sacrificing or downgrading anything.
@@asthyz3004 "It'll run okay" 60 fps in 1080P on a 4060 with upscaling is NOT "ok"
I personally don’t have the best pc but mine can run almost anything i have a 1650 super and i can run tarkov at high cyberpunk at 60 no problem but i dont think ill be able to actually play it thats why im hesitant to buy it most game devs just became lazy with optimization and rely on dlss nowdays
750 canadian? that's like 5 bucks.
if the specs provided are for native rez and no frame gen. It shoud be fine
Also the graph where the 4090, 4080 and 4070 are all at ~85 fps, seems like it might be a cpu issue / limit. Because it doesnt make any sense these 3 gpus to have the same fps
If a 14900k can only handle 85fps this game is cooked
@@sneakycacti85 fps with ray tracing and everything to be fair . Think you are being a bit too harsh on the game imo , GSC is infamous for making unoptimized games back in the day . I remember with clear sky you needed a top of the line pc to even be able to play it at 40 to 60 fps . The fact that I can get 60 fps 1440p high with my 6800 xt is good enough for me .
@@sneakycacti i mean at 1440p Ultra settings, my Ryzen 7 5800x can only handle 25-ish fps in Monster Hunter Wilds Beta (in the main camp/hub)
everywhere else i still have the 25-30fps, but because the gpu - rx 6700 xt
@@captainjimo Yeah that would be an instant uninstall from me LMAO
@@sneakycacti for me it was not quite instant, but i only did the tutorial and 1 other large monster hunt. Then uninstalled
But i still have a bit of hope, the full release will run better
If I gotta use dlss to stay above 50; I'm refunding.
But it's perfornance with rt, as i know
the game is more like an rpg than an fps game, like fallout. it's Slavic fallout after all. but still, really hope it gets better optimized. specially in he storage area, like holy, that's fallout 4 with like 200 mods installed.
Yeah only difference is fallout gunplay is complete dog balls
RPG? Nah, it is an atmospheric shooter.
@@pacivalmuller9333 it is an rpg though sure it’s a shooter but that’s like saying destiny or borderlands aren’t rpgs because they’re shooter games
@@AnnoyingMyself But in Borderlands and Destiny you have "character building", meanwhile in Stalker the choices in gameplay and story are not big.
I was playing call of duty yesterday it barely happens but it probably was my internet The friend rates was so bad it was stuttering I had stopped playing call of duty frame rates don't bother me until I'm playing games like that it was so bad I just started playing a single player game I'm going to try to jump on call of duty again hopefully it's not so bad
COD has great performance, targets 120fps and usually stays at least at 80 on consoles
Friend rates is crazy
@@sneakycacti probably was my internet or somebody else's internet I mean the stuttering was bad
@@sneakycacti yeah it's better today it hadn't been my internet or the hostess internet
Just trun down the res
War hammer 40k can run on the deck 🫡
Anyway looks like the best method is to pirate it take a look IF IT RUNS and then buy
Only thing i can here is people being pissy that they can't make the game run on the max graphics like, if you truly are looking just at the graphics charts congratulations you can take the door, you value the look of the mud more than the potential story, game mechanics and innovation.
I know that some people are just too much into the look of games but come on, if that bugs you i can't begin to imagine all the games you must refuse to play just because it's not on ultra 16K 200 FPS and yes I'm hyper balling for comedic effect. Honestly you should let it happen and not discouraged people from taking the game because "graphics bad" and "won't be on 60 FPS" A little reminder for everyone, the deference between 30 and 60 fps is so minimal that only professional player can actually use the difference, for anybody else 30 capt is the best you can and should have
"the deference between 30 and 60 fps is so minimal that only professional player can actually use the difference" Source?
😭😭😭
@@sneakycacti "My source is that I made it the fuck up" ~Senator Armstrong~
You're fucking retarded if you genuinely think nobody but professional players can see the difference between 30 and 60 FPS. In fact, I remember during the PS5 Pro reveal that Mark Cerny, the system architect for Playstation, found that 75% of PS5 users would choose performance mode when given the option between a 30 FPS quality mode and a 60 FPS performance mode. You would have to be Helen Keller to not see the difference.
I want to see a making off of the game because i heard it was extremely bad because of the war
Yeah... They had to move whole studio, anyway im waiting for more than half of my life for this game. They had a bunch of time to make it good.
And i think few of them went to war
Haven't you seen it yet? It's called 'War Game: The Making of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Documentary' here on youtube on GSC channel, it's in Ukrainian with subs though.
i bought a series s for this game only so if it runs like shit hopefully the ps5 port will be better if that ever even comes out😂
Red fall 2 ))))?
unreal engine 5 has done more bad than good for consumers yeah it might be easier to use as a dev but yeah.... fking epic is a plague on our planet first with fortnite than their exclusivity BS than unreal engine 5.
Thought the video was stalker 2 footage. Can't get surprised by anything these days. Thank god its not.
it's world at war from 2008 lol
@@sneakycacti bo2 ahcktually 🤓 love ur content
@@Makarovmw371 its a world at war mod of a bo2 map lol
@@sneakycacti HUH! Cool!
It's cool to see that a game i have been waiting for since 2009 is gonna run like shit on my pc. Nice
For those interested, just mod the shit out of og stalker if you cant run this game. Og stalker modded is free.
its free?!
@@sneakycacti GSC gameworld relesed the source code for the og stalker games when they went bankrupt, so you can leagally download the games for free modded
pray for my rtx 3050🙏
it's gonna need it lol
The new Crysis
Guaranteed stutter on every platform . Get ready to be disappointed
I’ve talked to people that played the most recent preview and they said it ran good on both PC and Xbox. They also said that the x box version looked surprisingly good for how steady the frames were. They said they occasionally got small dips but that’s all. I’m not sure of the specs of the PCs at the last previews, but I don’t think there’s that much to be worried about. And the devs promised a fully polished product. I know we’ve heard that from other dev teams but GSC has dedication and passion for their product unlike a lot of other companies.
its the engine and possible cpu bottleneck. lol
Get Stalker out of there!
Hello there
Complaining about ultra graphics on a 2025 game.
I have a 4060 ti
UE5 😨
I hope tttthhhhhooo
5800x/3070 here, as long as I can get 1440p60fps without upscaling, I'm good. And it certainly looks like that'll be the case, though perhaps not at completely maxed out settings.
Xbox 60fps good and pc 60fps bad😅
I'm excited to play the game once I get a better PC (CPU is a decade old, and it wasn't exactly high end on release) but I do like to hear about gaming news. IDK what it is with Unreal games, but so many have been unoptimized. Even games that look like they should be easy to run are resource hogs
I wanted to play on steam deck or ROG ally maybe, Guess not :(
I think developers are getting too lazy. Now I know that's a harsh statement considering what this developer in particular has gone through with the war. But they rely a lot on upscaling, AI and frame generation. Stop the obsession with graphics and high resolutions.
Booo hooo Russia is gonna win lol
@@DMTEntity88 mf they're getting their ass handed to them atm tf you are on?
Right...
They also rely a lot on blaming the possible future of this game on the war😂
@@DMTEntity88 dude, stop lying.
If I can play at a stable 30fps at lowest settings (I should comfortably), I really don't care. People cry too much about the optimization stuff, back in the day games were capped at 30fps and it was all good
growing up it was 60 for a lot of games for me, I started on gamecube
its like people want to run the game smoothly on high FPS to utilize their screens. 30fps is horrible and it wasnt bad back then because we didnt know better
Yeah... I'm going to be a little more forgiving of a small studio working in a war zone, bouncing around different locations compared to a massive AAA developer.
If the game has some technical issues, I'll be fine as long as it's still fun.
I think its a bit more understandable tbh if that's the case
It's an Open world, AAA game that uses Lumen and UE5. Is uncompressed, 160gb and is 64KM with zero loading screens using the latest and greatest for photogrammetry and motion capture. If you're on a 5 year old GPU, Tough cookies bruh.
It's just how it is, Optimization is a myth. It's mostly people whining they can't brute force a game to run at 200fps the day it comes out. Apparently you all forgot about crysis. Furthermore, A 4070ti will get around 85 fps with DLSS according to the nvidia charts if you use simple math, The grey bar is without any other garbage so make of that what you will. 1440p is the sweet spot and it's tied to memory speed, expecting to max out a modern game on UE5 at 4k using lumen and nanite goes beyond reasonable expectations.
Part of me wants UE5 to meet the fate of old yeller lmao
@@sneakycacti If you're worried just disable Lumen, it just makes everything look orange and you'll get like 30fps for almost no visual difference.
"optimization is a myth" keep coping, ain't gonna play this unoptimized mess.
Least we still have GAMMA.
at least the game is not made in unreal so quick your yapping
Only because its not unreal it can still be unoptimized
quick?
Delete this comment. Stalker 2 is Unreal Engine 5.
@@AlexanderderGroe-rd1nk dude you have no idea how many dumb arguments i got on how UNREAL & EPIC bad.
yet clearly epic it's not the problem
you can still make a bad game with bad optimization in any engine
also, valve has 30% more of a monopoly on gamers and game devs over epic
@@godkekliveshere431what are you yapping about ? The game is made with unreal engine 5