I don't know if you intended it in your joke, but you make it sound like Nvidia would give up on adding ray tracing hardware just so cards can play at stable 1080p 60 FPS haha
1080ti or 2080 + G-Sync is enough for a perfect "60fps experience" in 1440p. You only have to reduce clouds - rest can stay on Ultra. Beats every 4k30 experience by far.
I really enjoyed the comparison to XB1X settings including a full list of settings used. It’s nice to see how well your own hardware stacks up and it showcases how capable the X is.
I really do love these PC analysis videos from you Alex. You're one of the best things to have happened to this channel. Thank you for all you do. Cheers.
One thing I'd be interested in knowing is whether the game requiring AVX Instructions (Pentium G4560 and Phenom II Series lack this) is due to the game itself or to do with the DRM that the game is actually utilising. As you say in the video a dedicated swap to either DX12 or Vulkan would be likely but given the trend of just creating "DX12 Wrappers" of sorts ... If we see a return to the days of Ubisofts FC3 era stuff which I've always found to run quite nicely (Was just testing it at 900p High Settings on a £30 775 PC) which is a great example of how 2 APIs can be included within a game then maybe....just maybe we can start expecting better framerate in some of this newer Ubisofts titles.
The game requires processors with AVX instruction extensions so sandy bridge and up. Ubisoft claims they will patch that requirement out later but who knows.. That said a game that needs a GTX 1080 to stay above 60fps @1080p and where the latest RTX 2080Ti dips down to the 50s fps on 1440p ultra is something I would avoid like the plague on low end systems.
Jesus - No CPU in existence that does not have these extensions is able to run the game beyond 30fps - period. My 1600X (with a 1080) struggles to keep the game above 50 fps in CPU intensive scenarios like Athens for ex. I get why people are upset, but Minimum System Requirements exist - and it is totally not unreasonable to upgrade your CPU every 5 years. Additionally - it seems the game has trouble with streaming in assets, and something is up with the high CPU usage.
I'd be very curious as well. You can do wonders with vector computations, it would be a waste to use it for DRM only. So instead of patching it out, I'd much rather see devs utilize the newer techs (btw 7 year old tech), and force users to upgrade their 10+ year old CPUs, because frankly it's preposterous to demand that modern games should run on 10+ year old hardware. People need to realize that core count and clock speed equals to absolutely nothing in itself. 15 years ago, I could have a 4 core 4 GHz CPU, yet if I get a CPU with the same "speed" it will exponentially perform better, than the old one, because of years optimizing hardware for specific technologies. So anyway I'd like to see more games use vector extensions, and see what can be achieved. By the way AVX is always optional, you can still use traditional sequential computing, but you can optimize with vector computing by a large amount, especially if you take the time to go to "machine code levels", and write assembly code to speed up your tasks even more.
Ubisoft are just bad as Engine Build, Anvil Next is just an Anvil with snippets code taken from Any Open Source GameEngine. Dunia is just a Modded CryEngine. Disrupt is just a Mix of All the Engine used between Ubisoft Studio. Ubi must do like Rockstar or DICE, build un All In One Engine from Scratch, and use it on every games they made.
Snowdrop is an incredible engine with a great set of very advanced features, but I feel it is just designed for a very different type of open world. The Division still stands as one of the most technically impressive games I've ever seen with all that environment detail and those lighting effects, but the world of TD is a tightly-packed city that you traverse entirely on foot and don't really get to see from a distance. Wildlands, Origins and Odyssey on the other hand are gigantic open worlds with landscapes of varying density, cities, towns, deserts, hundreds of NPCs, and of course massive bodies of water that you can play with. You also explore the world on foot, horseback, or from a literal bird's eye view. I'm sure AnvilNext is just built for and better suited for sprawling open worlds. That said, I do for sure hope we see more of Snowdrop in the near future.
Yes, performance is not an issue in modern gaming even in low budget PC's. Let's go for Ray Tracing because the average gamer can definetely afford it.
New Sub here. I just discovered your channel and what I like about it is its simplicity and delivery. I didn't feel like you were trying to explain GPU Architecture or throwing up random stats to the Novice. I just bought an RX580 8gb from a Geforce 1050 and this video is really helpful. Thanks!
Hardwareunboxed did a video similar to this, where they benchmarked each setting. They came to a similar conclusion (i.e. the ones that hammer performance the most are the volumetric clouds and depth of field). Put clouds to medium and DoF to low (or off if you don't like it) and boom, over 20% FPS gained. And there's like almost no visual difference either.
This all just goes to show why I made such a good choice in switching to a G-Sync monitor. I absolutely hate the concept of locking down my framerate to 60 or 30, when I can have variable framerates that are significantly higher. With G-Sync, I rid myself completely of screen tearing, and just get the frames as they're produced, without any unnecessary stutter. I highly recommend it to everyone - get a G-Sync/Freesync monitor if you can. It really DOES make a difference. No more locking framerates.
CptPakundo I rather take the tearing and stutter before going Nvidia. G-Sync is the most anti-consumer thing I have ever seen. EA doesnt come even close.
well it's just another way to getting screwed over if u go with gsync. if we assume 150-200 dollars nvidia charges per gsync implementation, that is more than enough money probably to step up your graphics card sygnificantly to go over x freshhold. while nvidia could put a simple driver update, that would allow their cards to run freesync without problem and they could allow amd to run gsync displays without a problem too, BUT they don't because the same way ubisoft fucks people with insane drm like denuvo + vmprotect, that kill your cpu nvidia steals your money through g-sync bs. however for freesync i agree with u!
@carlos guzman i got so disapointed by the insane vega pricing and still insane rx vega aftermarket pricing, that i went with a polaris 10 card and rather wait for 7 nm navi. maybe 7nm navi will be a bit faster than rx vega without all the issues (power consumption, hbm2 prices, complex design, etc...) and a bunch cheaper. i'm hoping we get big 4k uhd screens (35 " +) with a good freesync range soonish, because that would be a cool upgrade and freesync really helps out at 4k uhd.
cataria pega I bought my Vega 56 like 3 weeks ago for $400, for me that price is totally fair comparing it to 1070, 1070ti and 1080 prices and performance (Vega 64 is overpriced garbage i will admit). Plus I got this game (AC Odyssey) for free, it was a win win for me :)
Alex, you're a legend. I enjoy listening to these from an academic perspective and I find the quality to be on par with something similar to how I found TweakGuides to be in the day. Specific, informative and straight to the point with visual samples.
I really have to say, i love these kind of videos. Showing me which graphic options hit the most. It really saves me a lot of try and error stuff. Keep it up !
You shouldn't expect to be able to max every game out on a 1070, it's good that this game has options that take advantage of higher end hardware. In most other games high end hardware only offers higher frame rates or higher resolution. That's the problem these days people are too focused on higher resolution instead of better visuals.
The issue is that many people mistake "demanding" with "unoptimized", and I think in the case of this game, or similar ones, might be a bit of both (clearly the game's full potential could've been achieved with a better API, like it supposedly does on console) but people tend to firmly grip the "not optimized" flag without even start to analyze the benchmarks. From what I see in this video, you can get the game running and a very stable 60 FPS with some tweaks on the settings, nothing more, on hardware that's not even high end. That to me is somewhat decent optimization, and so is the fact that the game provides settings that scale performance in a decent and meaningful way. On the optimization part, yeah, they could have added DX12 support, but considering the only proper DX12 game where palpable results can be clearly see has been Shadow of The Tomb Raider, recently, I can understand that having a DX12 toggle in the options may not always be a life saver, so we can't really tell what could've been or not, maybe the developers would know this, I suppose.
@Subi_fan Sure, how about a source? Also, there are no games with Denuvo completely removed. As far as I know they all still have Denuvo working in the background.......It is simulated and tricked into thinking it is legit copy. Even when removed by the devs it still does not affect the performance as much as you claim, time and time again it was debunked.
I thought my CPU was just starting to get too weak since it keeps bottlenecking this game at some places like towns, but after watching this video I’m frankly amazed it can hit 1080P60 at all in most places (minus some towns where it drops to 55 or so), So thanks DF. Good work as always.
@@gamesboy123able Either is fine really, just depends on your preference for which exclusives. Can always opt for all 3, with Xbox still being redundant.
preach my brother! preach! on serious note, having ps4 pro + 1080ti pc build is heavenly, as you will not miss any blockbuster AAA games. nintendo switch.. well, nintendo's games aren't suitable to my liking. i ended up selling my switch lol
They should really reduce the Cloud Quality on Xbox ! This just tanks performance so hard for no really benefit in graphics ! Instead they turned down important visual features like draw distance and you have a big problem with pop in. Seriously this is just a waste of resources, i am playing the game on Xbox one X and i would really love to see Ubisoft turn down the Cloud Quality from Very High or High on Xbox one X to Medium or LOW and use the massive amount of performance you will gain (25%) to increase the draw distance of objects and shadows ! This will increase the Visual Quality much more !
Probably true lol i posted about this issue on the Ubisoft Forums hours ago. Still no reply... The sad thing is that no one really notices the "volumetric" clouds anyway personally i think they look even worse then the traditional skybox models because you can see a noticable artifacting near the edges of the clouds. And this "effect" tanks performance by up to 35%. GG
Volumetric metric clouds is purely gpu limited unitil u use ultra high. But environment quality is heavily cpu limited. On my fx 8350 with GTX 1050 ti can only get into the 30 fps territory by reducing environmental quality to high. My whole gameplay is cpu bottlenecked with the fx.
CPU bottleneck I am pretty sure. GTX 1080 needs an I5 or I7 usually, and sometimes I5 can hold one back in CPU heavy games like this one. If you can get a Ryzen 5 / 7, or I7, it may help. Or play around with the settings. CPU is very important and I3 is good sometimes, but mostly for mid range or low end GPUs.
A lot of people have done in depth analysis of games released with and without denuvo, and they've seen pretty little performance differential. For the bad CPU performance on this (and origins) i'm betting it's a mix of bad optimized code adn the use of dx11, that stuffs all its draw calls in 1 thread, thus not taking advantage of multiple cores. The developers of these big AAA openworld should really start using dx12 or vulkan, because they provide (if used well) a very low interface to the gpu and grant access to multiple cores when sending draw calls to the gpu. For example, on my i7 3770, rise of the tomb raider's geothermal valley on dx11 tanks the cpu, while in dx12 the game is (almost) always gpu bound.
Origins is unplayable in Alexandria on practically all rigs. Unless you have a 12+ core and a 1080ti you're not going to get a consistent 40+ fps, let alone a locked 60 fps.
@psykosonikwarrior I'd have to disagree. I went back and forth between Witcher 3 and AC:O, and I have to say that W3 looks better. Sure, I have a couple mods to increase the draw distance to 400 meters and grass density up to the same as what you see in AC, but even doing that on top of the already amazing W3 game I can run 4k at 45fps or 1440p around 70fps. The draw distance on AC is about 7ft and the NPC's look like a Make A Wish kid drew them. Moral of the story, there is no damn reason that AC should be as demanding as it is. It is purely flaming white dog shit when talking about optimization. Gigabyte OC 2070 @ 1950Mhz
@psykosonikwarrior bruh, he just said it in the video that you need much more powerful pc to even match the performance and visuals of xbox, which means its un-optimised
The game actually is very optimised. Just making use of dx12 could've been better cuz of cpu usage. This is one of the best looking games and there is a reason for it to be demanding.
Thanks using your "alex's optimized settings" i got huge framerate improvements. Also what i found to reduce stuttering and improve gpu and cpu usage is to disable full screen optimizations and set the cpu priority to real time using windows task manager. Opening up nvdia control panel and turning off all the anti aliasing settings or making them application controlled and setting vertical v-sync to fast and in game to off. Setting power management mode to high performance. Using nvdia riva tuner statistics to enable a frame rate cap of 95 because i am using a 3440x1440 100hz g-sync panel. I also set my resolution scale to 120% this gave me a near perfect image coupled with the anti aliasing in game setting to high, almost no jaggies. I also bumped up my 6700k from 4.2ghz to 4.7ghz. Coupled with a rtx 2080ti i am getting a benchmark result of 73 FPS, in game i am getting between 65-95fps averaging i would say at 75 fps in most areas and 70 fps in cities. With the cpu usage almost always above 85% usage and gpu usage happily staying at 96 and above %. Compared to when i first installed the game my gpu usage always stayed 60% and cpu usage always stayed at 50% no matter what the graphics settings and frame rates always stayed at 30-60 fps and was very stuttery. So i dont know exactly which setting solves this problem but i have a good feeling it was setting the AC OD exe. cpu priority in the windows task manager to real time.
I don't like Denuvo but there is no proof it affects performance, games that have been tested with/without Denuvo with no performance difference include FF15, Shadow of War, Titanfall 2, the only game where it was reported to run better without it was Rime which had performance issues on other platforms at launch.
Get it on Xbox One X to have 30FPS and nothing else? No thanks. Best version my ass. In no world is 30FPS better than 60FPS. And pay for online? No thanks. Paying to use my own internet is laughable at best.
@GoogIe+ to be honest, I don't really bother playing any of the new Assassin's Creed games, if I'm having to pay more to get a better advantage. The last good one, in my opinion, was Assassin's Creed IV black Flag
The xbox one x has officially become the Benchmark SYSTEM as microsoft predicted, well done MICROSOFT. i'll get this game on PC just so i could get higher fps
@TheMusic4Soul - Yes, framerate is the primary upgrade by playing a particular game on PC vs Xbox One X at this point. Nevermind that the PC would be more expensive than the Xbox to get that higher framerate.
Pc plays all Xbox one games better even better than the x and ps4 has the best single player games of the generation. Seems pc and ps4 pro is the ideal at home setting to play the best games the best way
Still debating if to get it on the X or pc. Xbox for the comfort of the couch, pc because i have a 1080ti and a 7700k which im sure will give me great frames. Ahhhh
That High ambient occlusion is HBAO+, i know how it looks and i love it. HBAO+ is something you dont notice in a single picture it changes the whole game to a better looking darker shadows of everything.
I checked it with the configuration file in the documents folder. All ambient occlusion settings use varying quality of ssao. No hbao+ is present in this game.
@@NostalgicMem0ries this game is better than witcher??? Its good, but dont get cocky. Not to talk about all the stuff they are copying from them. Witcher is still superior unless you're ac fanboy.
By the time new console comes out, we would have newer PC parts would render previous generation in the dust. In the 90's, this trend was even more emphasized than what we're seeing today.
@@nighttimestalkerI doubt it. Because when the new consoles come out, the PC requirements shoot up! It did this current Gen, and the consoles were very underpowered compared to previous jumps. Just saying.
My two cents: Set AA to low and bump up the internal resolution until satisfied. Game looks considerably less blurry at 1440x2560 140% with low AA than native with maxed AA, and performs similarly enough for me
Why an I5 8400 can't get stable 60 fps with normal settings? The Answer is: Denavo + VMProtect + Uplay DRM, all these things eats around 2 Cores from your CPU So yeah.. 4 cores alone can't handle this $hit by Ubi$oft Even my I7 - 7700 at 4.0GHz get 100% usage with dips and spikes xD
Just a question, have you tried testing everything at night time in game, when there is a lot of light sources? I noticed that during night time in towns (and other areas with multiple light sources) the performance really can take a big dip in performance.
I can already hear lots of people complain about performance after cranking everything up to ultra high. I mean, there is so little difference, if any, between clouds on high vs ultra, but damn that performance loss... Awesome video, again, DF. Nice work.
Another great video! If I'd known that there are still this many games that rely so heavily on CPU I would've opted for an i7 instead of a Ryzen 5 1600 in combination with my GTX 1070. Oh well. I'm gonna try out the recommended settings and see if I can play this game at 1080p60 :)
The terrain textures are dragging the overall experience down a lot; the draw distance seems really low even on Ultra High and the terrain that's 6 feet in front of me looks like hell.
They can't increase texture detail more than it is, because it would compete with the choice of targeting near 4K resolutions on the base consoles, the focus is high resolution, not high res textures, and you can't have both since there's not ENOUGH dedicated VRAM on the consoles.
+Soetdjuret With virtual texturing and all the fancy rendering techniques I don't believe VRAM is that big of a deal. Rather for some odd reason when you apply any significant amount of AF on textures [with consoles] the TMU's shit themselves.
I assure you, it's due to VRAM limitations. Didn't you watch the video? Alex talked about the game already surpassing 7GB, and that's with the filthy low-res textures in place. Imagine proper 4K or 8K multi-layered textures on top of that. A shitbox X would choke to death lmfao.
Would argue a lot of it is wasted. I can't mudsling at HOW the developers manage their memory resources but we've all seen better texture work. I wouldn't blame the console [heavily] for how the game looks. Correct me if I'm wrong but increasing the texture quality is usually the cheapest option on modern PC hardware. Seemed that way to me on an Nvidia 9500 GT, Radeon HD 7700, R9 380, etc.....
@@vladiusko Interesting.. Does that make horses like fish? or their bellies digests all that salt? Still not convinced.. animals will die from dehydration before they even think drinking from Salty Waters
Alex when you do Shadow of the Tomb Raider PC vs Xbox One X detailed analysis? You said after patch you will do another comparison. Digital Foundry you did not even about Rise of the Tomb Raider an analysis about the Xbox One X release, while you promised it. You should keep your word.
@@NexGenTek He did mention a few. Either way that game is shit on all consoles. None can hold a steady framerate. And Xbox is full of screen tearing. Horrible downgrade compared to rise imo
When ever i get a new Graphics card or like last month a new Pc : this is the first game i fire up to benchmark, if it plays A C Odyssey at 1080p with ultra max settings at 60 frames = i’m good !! 🇵🇹
So many salty PS4 fanboys! They really don't like that the X is used as the standard of comparison between console & PC. It must really suck having an obsolete system.
Krešimir Mandić Sit down my child *pats head* the grown ups are talking about resolution, graphics, and performance. We all know Sony has better exclusives, that's ancient history now and that debate is over.
Gameplay beats resolution, graphics and performance every single day. Even to this date I enjoy 16-bit games to the fullest. God of War shows a well optimized game does not need raw power.
Rudey Capone Thats not even what I'm saying or talking about. Why can't people understand that some of us like geeking out about technical capabilities of hardware? Gameplay & storytelling is another completely different subject but that's not what people come to DF for. So please, like I said before, let the adults talk. Listen and you might learn something.
the ps4 is stronger than the xbox one and the one x is better than the ps4 pro, this is objectively true. supremacists of all gaming platforms are embarassing
What happened after Syndicate? I mean seriously? I got 1080p 60 fps on my rig with a mix of ultra and high settings in Syndicate but then origins came out and even on the lowest resolution with lowest setting my pc can't run it. I see only around 40% of my GPU being used but CPU is getting hammered left and right with 100%. Ubisoft please get your stuff together with CPU optimizations.
The framepacing issues with this game are driving me nuts! I can lock it down (with rivatuner, the in-game framelimiter is NOT consistent at all, in-game Vsync on, Nvidia Vsync off) to a perfectly stable 30fps with no framepacing, go into a menu and mess around in the inventory for 30 seconds, and when you go back into the game it's still 30fps, but the framepacing is all over the place! If you alt-tab in to windows 2-3 times in a row when this happens, the framepacing is back to being even again!! What is happening??! It's as if the games Vsync gets confused and has to be reminded to sort itself out again!! This is with i7 7700, 1060 6gb 16gb ram running off SSD Anyway, it's a great game and I'm really enjoying it, it's just this one issue is very annoying! EDIT: You can see the framepacing inconsistency throughout the whole of this video. I was so glad it wasn't just me! EDIT2: I'M BACK!!! It's a year later and I have an RTX 2070, i79750, 32gb. No amount of fiddling will get the frame pacing even. There is always a little stutter. The game was fucked from the start :) Also, the in-game fps limiter actually limits it to 1fps over what you set it to. It's bugged and was never fixed :)
Just use half refresh rate vsync from nvidia inspector. I got smoother 30fps experience than rtss cap. Just make sure u have rock solid 30fps else frame drops become more noticeable with this method.
@@narayanamurthybabu7302 I actually fixed the micro stutter with the strangest method: Disabled Hyperthreading. Completely got rid of it and it runs at 60fps ultra settings constantly with no framepacing issues. I looked into it a bit and apparently quite a few Ubisoft games seem to run better with Hyperthreading disabled. How weird!
i have 1080TI/ i7 6800K and i`ve noticed that this game likes DRAM Memory bandwith. 2800 CL16 to --> 3200 CL 16 improved my avg and min. frames a lot. Also best settings for 1440p is Clouds to high, shadows to high, and AA low. Everything else max out, resolution modifier 120%(somehow reduces my cpu usage) Never drops below 60 and avg frames about 90.
You forgot (or didn't knew) That Shadow Quality has a bigger Impact at night especially when you pull out your torch in a cave. A setting of High "Enables" Dynamic Shadows, which cause a massive performance hit on light sources other than the Sun.
@Caffeinated Critic agreed. Can't really blame the pc gamers for not buying a game just because the devs were incompetent and lazy. Like you said, PC gamers have very high standards for a Pc port (incl me lol)
I am currently starting the game on ultra settings with a i7 6700 and an overclocked GTX 1070. Looking to run 1440p 60 FPS. I capped at 31 FPS, your video helped me a lot. Thank you
My I7 4770K was not good enough so I solved my 1080TI huge FPS fluctuations with RivaTuner server. Keep the AA at high and don't lock the frames within the game. In Rivatuner I locked it to 65fps which considerably improved the frametimes and delivered smooth allaround gameplay
i hear ya, at 1440p im getting around 60-70fps and on 1080 around 90-100fps.....all on an Intel 8700k and gtx 1080. and of course people are calling me a liar...
tbh I think the clouds on the Xbox one x are at medium as well they really don't look like very high as he said i would recommend anyone to skip this because hardware unboxed video on this game is presented well and they seem to have did multiple tests for each setting and such and not just one quick test with one graphics card
@@schof215 I dont think theres anything to doubt peoples performance is terrible because of their CPU , i have a 1080 but because I've a 4 core i5, i get sub 60fps at 1080p. Unless you have an 8/12 core CPU you're not gonna get a smooth performance no matter the GPU
Optimization sucks. I started at 4k 60 and the further I got the more I had to turn down I eventually had to go down to 1080p60 on 980ti sli and i7 4.7ghz ... So I decided on 4k30 with medium high settings except for the clouds they eat frames like crazy
It doesnt supoort sli natively, to get it working at all you'll have to use nvidia inspector and usr the AC Unity profile, it'll still run like crap though.
@@Sheen334 The xbox version uses aggressive dynamic resolution that drops below 4K significantly (only get 4K when you look at clouds), and runs 30fps. I don't think runs better than 980 Ti if you play at 30fps. PC version only have trouble for 60fps were you have to sacrifice a lot of setting to get 60fps (specially if you have weak CPU)
Just to share a tip that I found to work extremely well on a 2080 TI at 4K, right click on the game's executable and go to compatibility tab and check "Disable fullscreen optimizations". I still can't get a solid 60 FPS, but it's much, much closer.
This is an excellent video. At everything ultra high, I could run 1080p 60fps (gtx 1070, skylake 6700hq, 16GB DDR4 2400MHz on a gigabyte laptop) but GPU/CPU temps were > 90C. This is insane. So I lowered these - Volumetric Clouds to Low, Fog to Medium. Clutter to Medium, AA to Medium, Shadows to Low, Character to Very Low and tbh I don't see much of a diff in the game at all. Everything seems to look exactly as smooth and sharp as before. In fact, clouds and shadows look more real now!! Anyways, this dropped the temps to around 78-80C for both GPU/CPU. Also, I set vsync on and set the fps lock to 45fps. Game looks and plays just as smooth as 60fps. I don't even notice any difference. I've tested with many people young and old and no one can really tell whether 45fps is smoother or 60fps is smoother so I've left it at 45fps. At 60fps, the temps rise around 5-6C to 86C. I'd rather keep the components cooler... Game itself is quite amazing.
@Alex Here's the mystery solved for you: CPU usage is so f... because of DRM. Low level API and optimizations are for the same consoles released in 2013. Jaguar with all the API and optimizations, just CANNOT be just 2x slower than any Intel i5 released after 2010. This mess is just Ubisoft not caring about 30fps. As a result, this means to get the same performance as it would've been without DRM, you are forced to upgrade your PC with hundreds of dollars. 1990-2013 = upgrade to see awesome graphics 2013-2017 = upgrade to play the same games as created for weak consoles. 2017-??? = upgrade cause our DRM requires more threads/cores Sad :( For any game running at 30fps on 2013 consoles, i5 2500K should EASILY achieve 60 or 120fps. Please be more informative about shady moves from big publishers. Call them out on their BS. Ubisoft degrades performance for the sake of milking more money (better DRMs mean that, at least in their eyes). This is not OK. Not that Ubi is the only big corpo doing that, of course. PS. Also, please provide some shots from native 4K without AA for people like me, who hate any blurs and temporal AAs.
The lack of knowledge and/or experience on PC gaming from console players in the comments is unfortunate. Don't bother replying to them. If they can't understand how it is better by now, they never will.
They have to tell themselves they have the best system in the world - no matter if the have to hate High End PCs or Nintendo Switch to achieve that. That's why they are called peasants in the first place.
Before anyone says it, the game is scaled well not optimised poorly. It actually has visual settings other than resolution that utilise high end hardware to make the game look better.
@@NexGenTek ahahahhaa the peasantry is strong in this one! 1700p-1800p, 27 FPS, uneven frametimes, medium-high settings, Welcome to the world of PC gaming... True 4K, Ultra settings, 60 FPS... Mods, superior controls, DLSS, Ray Tracing, etc. Now go and cuddle with you plastic box of cheap hardware and enjoy your blurry sub 30 FPS with degraded graphics kiddo! 😂
Tolles Video ich finde die Cpu Auslastung in Origins und Odyssey etwas übertrieben, es ist einfach nur nervig das dadurch Ruckler entstehen obwohl diese Spiele die Mindestanforderungen alter Assassins Creed Teile haben wie Syndicate E.g aber ja gut Tolles Video mach weiter so! ;)
war weeny If that were the case it would be running at sub 10 fps kiddo. There's very little difference between high and ultra high settings, the X1X would be using the high settings, not ultra.
I have an RTX 2070 and an i5 9600k. On all Ultra, I hold around 60 - 80 fps. In large cities, however, it can drop in the 50’s. But it’s worth it, because the game is gorgeous.
All the Xbox Fanboys who kept telling me the Jaguar CPU was more than strong enough to run this game at 60 frames per second, I am so going to send them this video.
I'd actually go as far say saying both consoles are a mistake. But especially the Xboxes, since they doesn't even have exclusives = no reason to get an Xbox. The playstations are also a waste of money, since we can emulate the games on a proper PC, we can already emulate PS3, and PS4 will soon follow.
Thats just laughable at this point. A modern 8-core, 16-thread cpu isn't able to feed a GTX 1070 enough data to achieve stable 60fps because of DRM software thats hogging all the resources. Hilarious. Especially because a GTX 1070 usually obliterates 1080p gaming...
@@thecolossus4244 jupp, 500 dollar PC still better than consoles :) because a 100 dollar CPU shits all over the ancient jaguar CPU and it allows for 60 fps :)
![[4K] Gears 5 PC: One Of The All-Time Greatest PC Ports?](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TaI2n6KIB-4/mqdefault.jpg)
![เปิด อาณาจักร หมื่นล้าน "สาระตั้ม" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3XE0nPF4YkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I hate having to restart games after applying different settings
It's not the end of the world. The real issue is long load times.
@@putinstea If u istall the game on a SSD the load times are really short atleast for myself.
@@strohhuttv8848 same here i do hate having to restart though😅
Expecially fucking gta
@@putinstea what if you have 2 minutes to live?💀
Played best on RTX4080ti
Only for the price of a kidney on the Russian black market.
I don't know if you intended it in your joke, but you make it sound like Nvidia would give up on adding ray tracing hardware just so cards can play at stable 1080p 60 FPS haha
soooooo RTX is not in nvidia future anymore?
@@massimiliano1306 after disappointing sales of the RTX they realized ppl play on PC because of high frames not super realistic shadows 😂
1080ti or 2080 + G-Sync is enough for a perfect "60fps experience" in 1440p. You only have to reduce clouds - rest can stay on Ultra. Beats every 4k30 experience by far.
11:11 for all settings details.
Optimized settings: High
Buy the performance DLC in the Shop only 24,99$ for 60 Fps/4k with a Gtx 1050.
lol I get it😂😂🤣
I absolutely love how much Alex goes nuts over graphic setting menus. He's like my brother from another mother.
I really enjoyed the comparison to XB1X settings including a full list of settings used. It’s nice to see how well your own hardware stacks up and it showcases how capable the X is.
I mean it's easy to crank up all the settings when you're targeting 30 fps lol
I really do love these PC analysis videos from you Alex. You're one of the best things to have happened to this channel. Thank you for all you do. Cheers.
Jeez, seeing this game in 60fps makes the world look so much more alive. I would love a 1080p 60fps patch for my X.
X cannot hit 60 fps due to cpu bottleneck. It is only possible with dx12
ok
it's available now for xbox series x! 🙏
One thing I'd be interested in knowing is whether the game requiring AVX Instructions (Pentium G4560 and Phenom II Series lack this) is due to the game itself or to do with the DRM that the game is actually utilising.
As you say in the video a dedicated swap to either DX12 or Vulkan would be likely but given the trend of just creating "DX12 Wrappers" of sorts ... If we see a return to the days of Ubisofts FC3 era stuff which I've always found to run quite nicely (Was just testing it at 900p High Settings on a £30 775 PC) which is a great example of how 2 APIs can be included within a game then maybe....just maybe we can start expecting better framerate in some of this newer Ubisofts titles.
The game requires processors with AVX instruction extensions so sandy bridge and up. Ubisoft claims they will patch that requirement out later but who knows..
That said a game that needs a GTX 1080 to stay above 60fps @1080p and where the latest RTX 2080Ti dips down to the 50s fps on 1440p ultra is something I would avoid like the plague on low end systems.
Jesus - No CPU in existence that does not have these extensions is able to run the game beyond 30fps - period. My 1600X (with a 1080) struggles to keep the game above 50 fps in CPU intensive scenarios like Athens for ex. I get why people are upset, but Minimum System Requirements exist - and it is totally not unreasonable to upgrade your CPU every 5 years. Additionally - it seems the game has trouble with streaming in assets, and something is up with the high CPU usage.
I'd be very curious as well. You can do wonders with vector computations, it would be a waste to use it for DRM only. So instead of patching it out, I'd much rather see devs utilize the newer techs (btw 7 year old tech), and force users to upgrade their 10+ year old CPUs, because frankly it's preposterous to demand that modern games should run on 10+ year old hardware. People need to realize that core count and clock speed equals to absolutely nothing in itself. 15 years ago, I could have a 4 core 4 GHz CPU, yet if I get a CPU with the same "speed" it will exponentially perform better, than the old one, because of years optimizing hardware for specific technologies.
So anyway I'd like to see more games use vector extensions, and see what can be achieved. By the way AVX is always optional, you can still use traditional sequential computing, but you can optimize with vector computing by a large amount, especially if you take the time to go to "machine code levels", and write assembly code to speed up your tasks even more.
Ubisoft are just bad as Engine Build, Anvil Next is just an Anvil with snippets code taken from Any Open Source GameEngine.
Dunia is just a Modded CryEngine.
Disrupt is just a Mix of All the Engine used between Ubisoft Studio.
Ubi must do like Rockstar or DICE, build un All In One Engine from Scratch, and use it on every games they made.
Snowdrop is an incredible engine with a great set of very advanced features, but I feel it is just designed for a very different type of open world. The Division still stands as one of the most technically impressive games I've ever seen with all that environment detail and those lighting effects, but the world of TD is a tightly-packed city that you traverse entirely on foot and don't really get to see from a distance. Wildlands, Origins and Odyssey on the other hand are gigantic open worlds with landscapes of varying density, cities, towns, deserts, hundreds of NPCs, and of course massive bodies of water that you can play with. You also explore the world on foot, horseback, or from a literal bird's eye view. I'm sure AnvilNext is just built for and better suited for sprawling open worlds. That said, I do for sure hope we see more of Snowdrop in the near future.
Yes, performance is not an issue in modern gaming even in low budget PC's. Let's go for Ray Tracing because the average gamer can definetely afford it.
Your sarcasm is too obvious.
Who says it's made for the average gamer? It's called something special for people who want it. Not for mainstream kids who play 8 hours in a month
I felt the same way about Myst when it came out back in the day. Buying an expensive CD-ROM drive for that game seemed ludicrous.
It's not a problem it's Ubisoft incompetentence
Forza 4 runs 10 times better than this unoptimized pos
New Sub here. I just discovered your channel and what I like about it is its simplicity and delivery. I didn't feel like you were trying to explain GPU Architecture or throwing up random stats to the Novice. I just bought an RX580 8gb from a Geforce 1050 and this video is really helpful. Thanks!
2007 but can it run crysis ? 2018 but can it run Assassin's Creed Odyssey ?
My thoughts as well.
2020 But can it run Minecraft?
I average mid 70 fps on my pc in ultra 🤷♂️
I have rx570 4gb oc and r5 1600 but when ı play GTA sa ı get 30 fps😁😁
No worries crytech confirmed crysis 1 remastered
Hardwareunboxed did a video similar to this, where they benchmarked each setting. They came to a similar conclusion (i.e. the ones that hammer performance the most are the volumetric clouds and depth of field). Put clouds to medium and DoF to low (or off if you don't like it) and boom, over 20% FPS gained. And there's like almost no visual difference either.
This all just goes to show why I made such a good choice in switching to a G-Sync monitor.
I absolutely hate the concept of locking down my framerate to 60 or 30, when I can have variable framerates that are significantly higher.
With G-Sync, I rid myself completely of screen tearing, and just get the frames as they're produced, without any unnecessary stutter.
I highly recommend it to everyone - get a G-Sync/Freesync monitor if you can.
It really DOES make a difference.
No more locking framerates.
CptPakundo I rather take the tearing and stutter before going Nvidia. G-Sync is the most anti-consumer thing I have ever seen. EA doesnt come even close.
well it's just another way to getting screwed over if u go with gsync.
if we assume 150-200 dollars nvidia charges per gsync implementation, that is more than enough money probably to step up your graphics card sygnificantly to go over x freshhold.
while nvidia could put a simple driver update, that would allow their cards to run freesync without problem and they could allow amd to run gsync displays without a problem too, BUT they don't because the same way ubisoft fucks people with insane drm like denuvo + vmprotect, that kill your cpu nvidia steals your money through g-sync bs.
however for freesync i agree with u!
cataria pega Vega 56 + Freesync user here, its the greatest thing in the world.
@carlos guzman
i got so disapointed by the insane vega pricing and still insane rx vega aftermarket pricing, that i went with a polaris 10 card and rather wait for 7 nm navi.
maybe 7nm navi will be a bit faster than rx vega without all the issues (power consumption, hbm2 prices, complex design, etc...)
and a bunch cheaper.
i'm hoping we get big 4k uhd screens (35 " +) with a good freesync range soonish, because that would be a cool upgrade and freesync really helps out at 4k uhd.
cataria pega I bought my Vega 56 like 3 weeks ago for $400, for me that price is totally fair comparing it to 1070, 1070ti and 1080 prices and performance (Vega 64 is overpriced garbage i will admit). Plus I got this game (AC Odyssey) for free, it was a win win for me :)
Alex, you're a legend.
I enjoy listening to these from an academic perspective and I find the quality to be on par with something similar to how I found TweakGuides to be in the day.
Specific, informative and straight to the point with visual samples.
This type of video really helps a lot! I used to test out all the options by my self, now we got DF helping us with in depth analysis!
I really have to say, i love these kind of videos. Showing me which graphic options hit the most.
It really saves me a lot of try and error stuff. Keep it up !
This level of Optimization is a damn shame for ubisoft
You shouldn't expect to be able to max every game out on a 1070, it's good that this game has options that take advantage of higher end hardware. In most other games high end hardware only offers higher frame rates or higher resolution.
That's the problem these days people are too focused on higher resolution instead of better visuals.
It runs fine, just don't expect to run it at ultra high 60 fps, no different than the Witcher 3 with hair works or Kingdom Come with SVOGI lol.
GoogIe+ The Xbox One X wouldn't be able to run this game at 60FPS even if you lowered the resolution to 1080p. Hilarious indeed.
GoogIe+ Using common sense = damage control now, how about an actual argument instead.
The issue is that many people mistake "demanding" with "unoptimized", and I think in the case of this game, or similar ones, might be a bit of both (clearly the game's full potential could've been achieved with a better API, like it supposedly does on console) but people tend to firmly grip the "not optimized" flag without even start to analyze the benchmarks.
From what I see in this video, you can get the game running and a very stable 60 FPS with some tweaks on the settings, nothing more, on hardware that's not even high end. That to me is somewhat decent optimization, and so is the fact that the game provides settings that scale performance in a decent and meaningful way.
On the optimization part, yeah, they could have added DX12 support, but considering the only proper DX12 game where palpable results can be clearly see has been Shadow of The Tomb Raider, recently, I can understand that having a DX12 toggle in the options may not always be a life saver, so we can't really tell what could've been or not, maybe the developers would know this, I suppose.
This reviews and performance/quality recommendations for mid-tier hardware are pure gold for us budget PC gamers.
And no talk about the elephant in the room: Denuvo + VMprotect
He doesn't want DF to be blacklisted by Ubishit.
I understand that its a common sense but playing it so blind wont help them either
MGS TPP Runs flawlessly and uses same Denuvo on rise of tombraider
@Subi_fan Sure, how about a source? Also, there are no games with Denuvo completely removed. As far as I know they all still have Denuvo working in the background.......It is simulated and tricked into thinking it is legit copy. Even when removed by the devs it still does not affect the performance as much as you claim, time and time again it was debunked.
hell even i ran mgs TPP On dual core cpu with gt630 at 30fps
I wonder how much of that insane CPU requirement is coming from the layers upon layers of DRM
DRM normally doesn't affect performance beyond margin of error.
^keep telling yourself that.
@Bad Man - It is a proven fact at this point that DRM has very little effect on performance.
It depend on the CPU low end cpu will not run Ubishit well
Jen Soon Ng incorrect
I thought my CPU was just starting to get too weak since it keeps bottlenecking this game at some places like towns, but after watching this video I’m frankly amazed it can hit 1080P60 at all in most places (minus some towns where it drops to 55 or so),
So thanks DF. Good work as always.
PC + PS4 = best combo for gaming. Doesn't matter if Xbox X is more powerfull than PS4 if it doesn't have any games
This.
Tell em man
Nope ps4 is just a bad pc.
Pc+switch is the way to go
@@gamesboy123able Either is fine really, just depends on your preference for which exclusives. Can always opt for all 3, with Xbox still being redundant.
preach my brother! preach!
on serious note, having ps4 pro + 1080ti pc build is heavenly, as you will not miss any blockbuster AAA games.
nintendo switch.. well, nintendo's games aren't suitable to my liking. i ended up selling my switch lol
Perfect timing DF! I just bought the Ultimate Edition and am installing it now.
They should really reduce the Cloud Quality on Xbox ! This just tanks performance so hard for no really benefit in graphics ! Instead they turned down important visual features like draw distance and you have a big problem with pop in. Seriously this is just a waste of resources, i am playing the game on Xbox one X and i would really love to see Ubisoft turn down the Cloud Quality from Very High or High on Xbox one X to Medium or LOW and use the massive amount of performance you will gain (25%) to increase the draw distance of objects and shadows ! This will increase the Visual Quality much more !
Probably true lol i posted about this issue on the Ubisoft Forums hours ago. Still no reply...
The sad thing is that no one really notices the "volumetric" clouds anyway personally i think they look even worse then the traditional skybox models because you can see a noticable artifacting near the edges of the clouds. And this "effect" tanks performance by up to 35%.
GG
Volumetric metric clouds is purely gpu limited unitil u use ultra high. But environment quality is heavily cpu limited. On my fx 8350 with GTX 1050 ti can only get into the 30 fps territory by reducing environmental quality to high. My whole gameplay is cpu bottlenecked with the fx.
so much dedication, I really appreciate your effort, thanks
and they listed minimum requirements i5 2500... hahahahaaha thats a great joke
My i3-6100 and rx 580 carry me through, if you can accept high settings 50 fps 1440 p... The game IS horribly optimized though...
I have gtx 1080 and i3 8100 and it give me like 40 to 55 at very high why ???
CPU bottleneck I am pretty sure. GTX 1080 needs an I5 or I7 usually, and sometimes I5 can hold one back in CPU heavy games like this one. If you can get a Ryzen 5 / 7, or I7, it may help. Or play around with the settings. CPU is very important and I3 is good sometimes, but mostly for mid range or low end GPUs.
I got 40 plus for with i3 2100,gt1030 ddr5, 8gb ram 900p medium.
i now have I5 3570K, 16gb ram, gtx 950 OC and get 40+ on 1080 medium
Got the drm choking the cpu. Learnt my lesson from origins.
A lot of people have done in depth analysis of games released with and without denuvo, and they've seen pretty little performance differential. For the bad CPU performance on this (and origins) i'm betting it's a mix of bad optimized code adn the use of dx11, that stuffs all its draw calls in 1 thread, thus not taking advantage of multiple cores. The developers of these big AAA openworld should really start using dx12 or vulkan, because they provide (if used well) a very low interface to the gpu and grant access to multiple cores when sending draw calls to the gpu. For example, on my i7 3770, rise of the tomb raider's geothermal valley on dx11 tanks the cpu, while in dx12 the game is (almost) always gpu bound.
Origins is unplayable in Alexandria on practically all rigs. Unless you have a 12+ core and a 1080ti you're not going to get a consistent 40+ fps, let alone a locked 60 fps.
mistervanderveer I have an i7-8700 and a GTX 1080 and I'm able to get stable 60 fps throughout the whole game.
DRM isn't causing problems. It's a myth. The game is just cpu heavy and should be using dx12 instead of dx11
Maybe the CPU problems related to AVX stuff & the multi-DRMs shenanigans? (as people have been discussing it)
More like "ultra unoptimized"
@psykosonikwarrior I'd have to disagree. I went back and forth between Witcher 3 and AC:O, and I have to say that W3 looks better. Sure, I have a couple mods to increase the draw distance to 400 meters and grass density up to the same as what you see in AC, but even doing that on top of the already amazing W3 game I can run 4k at 45fps or 1440p around 70fps. The draw distance on AC is about 7ft and the NPC's look like a Make A Wish kid drew them.
Moral of the story, there is no damn reason that AC should be as demanding as it is. It is purely flaming white dog shit when talking about optimization.
Gigabyte OC 2070 @ 1950Mhz
@@T1cksandLeeches I totally agree. It's insanely unoptimized. Even the gameplay is not smooth at all.
@psykosonikwarrior HAAAAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAA HAA HA HA HA HA HA! More more! Tell me more jokes
@psykosonikwarrior bruh, he just said it in the video that you need much more powerful pc to even match the performance and visuals of xbox, which means its un-optimised
The game actually is very optimised. Just making use of dx12 could've been better cuz of cpu usage. This is one of the best looking games and there is a reason for it to be demanding.
My PC has officially been defeated by this game
Thanks using your "alex's optimized settings" i got huge framerate improvements. Also what i found to reduce stuttering and improve gpu and cpu usage is to disable full screen optimizations and set the cpu priority to real time using windows task manager. Opening up nvdia control panel and turning off all the anti aliasing settings or making them application controlled and setting vertical v-sync to fast and in game to off. Setting power management mode to high performance. Using nvdia riva tuner statistics to enable a frame rate cap of 95 because i am using a 3440x1440 100hz g-sync panel. I also set my resolution scale to 120% this gave me a near perfect image coupled with the anti aliasing in game setting to high, almost no jaggies. I also bumped up my 6700k from 4.2ghz to 4.7ghz. Coupled with a rtx 2080ti i am getting a benchmark result of 73 FPS, in game i am getting between 65-95fps averaging i would say at 75 fps in most areas and 70 fps in cities. With the cpu usage almost always above 85% usage and gpu usage happily staying at 96 and above %. Compared to when i first installed the game my gpu usage always stayed 60% and cpu usage always stayed at 50% no matter what the graphics settings and frame rates always stayed at 30-60 fps and was very stuttery. So i dont know exactly which setting solves this problem but i have a good feeling it was setting the AC OD exe. cpu priority in the windows task manager to real time.
Denuvo really needs to go. It gets in the way of a PC games performance
That won't happen until people stop buying games with it.
I don't like Denuvo but there is no proof it affects performance, games that have been tested with/without Denuvo with no performance difference include FF15, Shadow of War, Titanfall 2, the only game where it was reported to run better without it was Rime which had performance issues on other platforms at launch.
Denuvo or any other DRM doesn't affect performance.
Get it on Xbox One X to have 30FPS and nothing else? No thanks. Best version my ass. In no world is 30FPS better than 60FPS.
And pay for online? No thanks. Paying to use my own internet is laughable at best.
@GoogIe+ to be honest, I don't really bother playing any of the new Assassin's Creed games, if I'm having to pay more to get a better advantage. The last good one, in my opinion, was Assassin's Creed IV black Flag
Thanks Alex! Most reviewers were testing exclusively at the highest settings, which was not what we needed.
The xbox one x has officially become the Benchmark SYSTEM as microsoft predicted, well done MICROSOFT. i'll get this game on PC just so i could get higher fps
"just"
@TheMusic4Soul - Yes, framerate is the primary upgrade by playing a particular game on PC vs Xbox One X at this point. Nevermind that the PC would be more expensive than the Xbox to get that higher framerate.
Pc plays all Xbox one games better even better than the x and ps4 has the best single player games of the generation. Seems pc and ps4 pro is the ideal at home setting to play the best games the best way
Still debating if to get it on the X or pc. Xbox for the comfort of the couch, pc because i have a 1080ti and a 7700k which im sure will give me great frames. Ahhhh
@@dex21plus you can get both on PC. Get a xbox 360 or xbox1 wireless controller for windows and it auto syncs.
I was struggling toying around with the setting and this video was uploaded
Thank you Zeus
Every game of Ubisoft will lower your performance at Very High or Ultra High except older games
That High ambient occlusion is HBAO+, i know how it looks and i love it. HBAO+ is something you dont notice in a single picture it changes the whole game to a better looking darker shadows of everything.
I checked it with the configuration file in the documents folder. All ambient occlusion settings use varying quality of ssao. No hbao+ is present in this game.
This Witcher 3 mod looks good.
freemium store mod included, for player's choice of course ;)
by many stuff its better than witcher so stfu :)
@@NostalgicMem0ries the witcher is 10x better than this garbage game
Witcher 3 has to be the most overrated game I've ever seen
@@NostalgicMem0ries this game is better than witcher??? Its good, but dont get cocky. Not to talk about all the stuff they are copying from them. Witcher is still superior unless you're ac fanboy.
Great presentation Alex, you’re really finding your own style and I like it 👍🏻 greets from Holland
Just imagine what spec PC you will need when the new consoles come out!! Crazy!!
By the time new console comes out, we would have newer PC parts would render previous generation in the dust. In the 90's, this trend was even more emphasized than what we're seeing today.
exactly what he said
by the time the new consoles come out PC Hardware will already be more powerful than what they will have to offer
We'll probably have budget cards running 4K 60 while consoles can still only run 1080P or 1440p at 60 frames.
Dawson Sheen
A 1070? 1070Ti max?
@@nighttimestalkerI doubt it. Because when the new consoles come out, the PC requirements shoot up! It did this current Gen, and the consoles were very underpowered compared to previous jumps. Just saying.
i like these kind of videos! good job DIGITAL FOUNDRY! plz make video about every other demanding game :)
My two cents: Set AA to low and bump up the internal resolution until satisfied. Game looks considerably less blurry at 1440x2560 140% with low AA than native with maxed AA, and performs similarly enough for me
Turn off fullscreen optimization and turn down clouds a lil bit, that did wonders for me.
Why an I5 8400 can't get stable 60 fps with normal settings?
The Answer is:
Denavo + VMProtect + Uplay DRM, all these things eats around 2 Cores from your CPU
So yeah.. 4 cores alone can't handle this $hit by Ubi$oft
Even my I7 - 7700 at 4.0GHz get 100% usage with dips and spikes xD
Thank you for the final list. that´s Make my life easier!!! You could put the list in the description for future reviews.
Just a question, have you tried testing everything at night time in game, when there is a lot of light sources? I noticed that during night time in towns (and other areas with multiple light sources) the performance really can take a big dip in performance.
I can already hear lots of people complain about performance after cranking everything up to ultra high. I mean, there is so little difference, if any, between clouds on high vs ultra, but damn that performance loss...
Awesome video, again, DF. Nice work.
So ac:odessy is the most demanding game 2019? Not counting metro on 4k+ultra rtx .
Another great video! If I'd known that there are still this many games that rely so heavily on CPU I would've opted for an i7 instead of a Ryzen 5 1600 in combination with my GTX 1070. Oh well. I'm gonna try out the recommended settings and see if I can play this game at 1080p60 :)
The terrain textures are dragging the overall experience down a lot; the draw distance seems really low even on Ultra High and the terrain that's 6 feet in front of me looks like hell.
Try forcing AF to 16x in the driver. That solved it for me.
They can't increase texture detail more than it is, because it would compete with the choice of targeting near 4K resolutions on the base consoles, the focus is high resolution, not high res textures, and you can't have both since there's not ENOUGH dedicated VRAM on the consoles.
+Soetdjuret
With virtual texturing and all the fancy rendering techniques I don't believe VRAM is that big of a deal. Rather for some odd reason when you apply any significant amount of AF on textures [with consoles] the TMU's shit themselves.
I assure you, it's due to VRAM limitations. Didn't you watch the video? Alex talked about the game already surpassing 7GB, and that's with the filthy low-res textures in place. Imagine proper 4K or 8K multi-layered textures on top of that. A shitbox X would choke to death lmfao.
Would argue a lot of it is wasted. I can't mudsling at HOW the developers manage their memory resources but we've all seen better texture work. I wouldn't blame the console [heavily] for how the game looks.
Correct me if I'm wrong but increasing the texture quality is usually the cheapest option on modern PC hardware. Seemed that way to me on an Nvidia 9500 GT, Radeon HD 7700, R9 380, etc.....
Informative video as usual, many thanks!
Check at 16:12 ...
Good job Ubi$oft..
the horse is drinking from sea (horses drink water with salt eh?)
LOL
XD
@@vladiusko Interesting..
Does that make horses like fish? or their bellies digests all that salt?
Still not convinced.. animals will die from dehydration before they even think drinking from Salty Waters
such a good channel, keep it up guys
Alex when you do Shadow of the Tomb Raider PC vs Xbox One X detailed analysis? You said after patch you will do another comparison. Digital Foundry you did not even about Rise of the Tomb Raider an analysis about the Xbox One X release, while you promised it. You should keep your word.
After what patch, the PC DLSS Raytracing patch? If so that didn't come yet.
He already did in his video on it but it was a brief mention
It was a mix of medium and high settings
@@nighttimestalker There were no medium settings buddy..
@@NexGenTek
He did mention a few.
Either way that game is shit on all consoles.
None can hold a steady framerate. And Xbox is full of screen tearing.
Horrible downgrade compared to rise imo
When ever i get a new Graphics card or like last month a new Pc : this is the first game i fire up to benchmark, if it plays A C Odyssey at 1080p with ultra max settings at 60 frames = i’m good !! 🇵🇹
So many salty PS4 fanboys! They really don't like that the X is used as the standard of comparison between console & PC. It must really suck having an obsolete system.
It really sucks playing new Spider-man and other fantastic exclusive games 🤣
Krešimir Mandić Sit down my child *pats head* the grown ups are talking about resolution, graphics, and performance. We all know Sony has better exclusives, that's ancient history now and that debate is over.
Gameplay beats resolution, graphics and performance every single day. Even to this date I enjoy 16-bit games to the fullest. God of War shows a well optimized game does not need raw power.
Rudey Capone Thats not even what I'm saying or talking about. Why can't people understand that some of us like geeking out about technical capabilities of hardware? Gameplay & storytelling is another completely different subject but that's not what people come to DF for. So please, like I said before, let the adults talk. Listen and you might learn something.
the ps4 is stronger than the xbox one and the one x is better than the ps4 pro, this is objectively true. supremacists of all gaming platforms are embarassing
I have a i5 8400 with a 1080ti and 16 gig of ram and this game runs like a dream. Great video as always.
What happened after Syndicate? I mean seriously? I got 1080p 60 fps on my rig with a mix of ultra and high settings in Syndicate but then origins came out and even on the lowest resolution with lowest setting my pc can't run it. I see only around 40% of my GPU being used but CPU is getting hammered left and right with 100%. Ubisoft please get your stuff together with CPU optimizations.
same here with i5 4690 and rx 580... the perfomance of this game is shit .
I have a 1080 and my card is struggling on this lmao
Thanx man i tried your recommended settings...now it gives 45 fps(gtx 1050 ti) with very little visual quality decrease..you get one sub.
The framepacing issues with this game are driving me nuts! I can lock it down (with rivatuner, the in-game framelimiter is NOT consistent at all, in-game Vsync on, Nvidia Vsync off) to a perfectly stable 30fps with no framepacing, go into a menu and mess around in the inventory for 30 seconds, and when you go back into the game it's still 30fps, but the framepacing is all over the place! If you alt-tab in to windows 2-3 times in a row when this happens, the framepacing is back to being even again!! What is happening??! It's as if the games Vsync gets confused and has to be reminded to sort itself out again!!
This is with i7 7700, 1060 6gb 16gb ram running off SSD
Anyway, it's a great game and I'm really enjoying it, it's just this one issue is very annoying!
EDIT: You can see the framepacing inconsistency throughout the whole of this video. I was so glad it wasn't just me!
EDIT2: I'M BACK!!! It's a year later and I have an RTX 2070, i79750, 32gb. No amount of fiddling will get the frame pacing even. There is always a little stutter. The game was fucked from the start :) Also, the in-game fps limiter actually limits it to 1fps over what you set it to. It's bugged and was never fixed :)
Just use half refresh rate vsync from nvidia inspector. I got smoother 30fps experience than rtss cap. Just make sure u have rock solid 30fps else frame drops become more noticeable with this method.
@@narayanamurthybabu7302 I actually fixed the micro stutter with the strangest method: Disabled Hyperthreading. Completely got rid of it and it runs at 60fps ultra settings constantly with no framepacing issues. I looked into it a bit and apparently quite a few Ubisoft games seem to run better with Hyperthreading disabled. How weird!
i have 1080TI/ i7 6800K and i`ve noticed that this game likes DRAM Memory bandwith. 2800 CL16 to --> 3200 CL 16 improved my avg and min. frames a lot.
Also best settings for 1440p is Clouds to high, shadows to high, and AA low. Everything else max out, resolution modifier 120%(somehow reduces my cpu usage) Never drops below 60 and avg frames about 90.
It takes RICH BALLs to run ubs games at 1080p 60fps .
You forgot (or didn't knew) That Shadow Quality has a bigger Impact at night especially when you pull out your torch in a cave. A setting of High "Enables" Dynamic Shadows, which cause a massive performance hit on light sources other than the Sun.
Still the best version of the game available.
Oh I shat 8 turds thus far, but THIS... This 9th one is the best one yet!
denial
I was about to check for this, i thought i missed the notification, for it to pop up just few seconds before i launch the youtube app
Thanks for another console port Ubi, im just sicked of it, no buy!
Its okay pc gamers pirate mostly. They will earn from console sales
@@leonneel Excuse you.
@@leonneel and console gamers buy used games anyway which don't support the dev, sooooo...........
@Caffeinated Critic agreed. Can't really blame the pc gamers for not buying a game just because the devs were incompetent and lazy.
Like you said, PC gamers have very high standards for a Pc port (incl me lol)
@Caffeinated Critic Boom, that's what I'd wanna hear.
I am currently starting the game on ultra settings with a i7 6700 and an overclocked GTX 1070. Looking to run 1440p 60 FPS. I capped at 31 FPS, your video helped me a lot. Thank you
I found out a mixed settings with my 1070/7700 playing in 1440p at 48 FPS perfectly!
what can you expect from ubisoft they are making the worst optimized games
My I7 4770K was not good enough so I solved my 1080TI huge FPS fluctuations with RivaTuner server. Keep the AA at high and don't lock the frames within the game. In Rivatuner I locked it to 65fps which considerably improved the frametimes and delivered smooth allaround gameplay
I'm getting 1440p, 60fps+ on a i7 4790k at 4.5 GHz and a GTX 1080 MSi Gaming X. All setting at max, apart from clouds at Medium.
i hear ya, at 1440p im getting around 60-70fps and on 1080 around 90-100fps.....all on an Intel 8700k and gtx 1080. and of course people are calling me a liar...
@@schof215 for me the GPU is at 98-100% at 1440p, 65fps, whereas the i7 4790k is at 60%.
tbh I think the clouds on the Xbox one x are at medium as well they really don't look like very high as he said i would recommend anyone to skip this because hardware unboxed video on this game is presented well and they seem to have did multiple tests for each setting and such and not just one quick test with one graphics card
@@schof215 I dont think theres anything to doubt peoples performance is terrible because of their CPU , i have a 1080 but because I've a 4 core i5, i get sub 60fps at 1080p. Unless you have an 8/12 core CPU you're not gonna get a smooth performance no matter the GPU
@Don'tMaskTruth and we will do that because?
Finally! Thank you! I'll be back to watch when I get off work.
Optimization sucks. I started at 4k 60 and the further I got the more I had to turn down I eventually had to go down to 1080p60 on 980ti sli and i7 4.7ghz ... So I decided on 4k30 with medium high settings except for the clouds they eat frames like crazy
It doesnt supoort sli natively, to get it working at all you'll have to use nvidia inspector and usr the AC Unity profile, it'll still run like crap though.
Just buy an XB1X, much cheaper and looks better.
@@Sheen334 looks better? Lmao
yep,looks better.
@@Sheen334 The xbox version uses aggressive dynamic resolution that drops below 4K significantly (only get 4K when you look at clouds), and runs 30fps. I don't think runs better than 980 Ti if you play at 30fps. PC version only have trouble for 60fps were you have to sacrifice a lot of setting to get 60fps (specially if you have weak CPU)
I REALLY appreciate these videos.
One should not have to drop settings on a 1070 at 1080p... 😑
I have a 1080ti and it still drops below 60fps rip
Just to share a tip that I found to work extremely well on a 2080 TI at 4K, right click on the game's executable and go to compatibility tab and check "Disable fullscreen optimizations". I still can't get a solid 60 FPS, but it's much, much closer.
Another day, another Ubisoft style un-optimized pos.
Origins ran really well actually. My 1080 and i7 ran it in 4k on almost everything maxed at 45 to 50 fps (AA turned off obviously)
Taelan Baylor Have you seen the console versions? They're not any better. Hell on the base consoles they're downright terrible.
Taelan Baylor smart man 👍🏾
@Fernando Portal - No they don't. lol
Yes they did, the video itself show it, can you run AC at 60FPS on Console ? no.
This is an excellent video.
At everything ultra high, I could run 1080p 60fps (gtx 1070, skylake 6700hq, 16GB DDR4 2400MHz on a gigabyte laptop) but GPU/CPU temps were > 90C. This is insane. So I lowered these - Volumetric Clouds to Low, Fog to Medium. Clutter to Medium, AA to Medium, Shadows to Low, Character to Very Low and tbh I don't see much of a diff in the game at all. Everything seems to look exactly as smooth and sharp as before. In fact, clouds and shadows look more real now!! Anyways, this dropped the temps to around 78-80C for both GPU/CPU. Also, I set vsync on and set the fps lock to 45fps. Game looks and plays just as smooth as 60fps. I don't even notice any difference. I've tested with many people young and old and no one can really tell whether 45fps is smoother or 60fps is smoother so I've left it at 45fps. At 60fps, the temps rise around 5-6C to 86C. I'd rather keep the components cooler...
Game itself is quite amazing.
I paused playing AC ODYSSEY for this hahaha
@god no its not its the one of the best post edzio assassins creed. Better than unity origins and syndicate.
Great video. Congratulations.
Nothing is more expensive in this game than the fire light torch. Dude... It's heavy.
@Alex Here's the mystery solved for you: CPU usage is so f... because of DRM.
Low level API and optimizations are for the same consoles released in 2013. Jaguar with all the API and optimizations, just CANNOT be just 2x slower than any Intel i5 released after 2010.
This mess is just Ubisoft not caring about 30fps. As a result, this means to get the same performance as it would've been without DRM, you are forced to upgrade your PC with hundreds of dollars.
1990-2013 = upgrade to see awesome graphics
2013-2017 = upgrade to play the same games as created for weak consoles.
2017-??? = upgrade cause our DRM requires more threads/cores
Sad :(
For any game running at 30fps on 2013 consoles, i5 2500K should EASILY achieve 60 or 120fps. Please be more informative about shady moves from big publishers. Call them out on their BS. Ubisoft degrades performance for the sake of milking more money (better DRMs mean that, at least in their eyes). This is not OK. Not that Ubi is the only big corpo doing that, of course.
PS. Also, please provide some shots from native 4K without AA for people like me, who hate any blurs and temporal AAs.
again, another excellent analysis from alex.
The lack of knowledge and/or experience on PC gaming from console players in the comments is unfortunate. Don't bother replying to them. If they can't understand how it is better by now, they never will.
They have to tell themselves they have the best system in the world - no matter if the have to hate High End PCs or Nintendo Switch to achieve that. That's why they are called peasants in the first place.
Before anyone says it, the game is scaled well not optimised poorly. It actually has visual settings other than resolution that utilise high end hardware to make the game look better.
I agree with you. People miss use the word "optimise" often these days. That word doesn't mean it can run on toaster. It's more about scalability.
every game should at least launch on toaster. change my mind!
Loving the pc focused content keep up the good work Df 😀😃. Ignore all the infuriated 😡😡🤬🤬 console fan boys playing at sub 30 fps. 👈🤣😂
Who's that its basically locked at 30fos on x with 80% 4K. Also looks like pc got short end of the stick...
@@NexGenTek ahahahhaa the peasantry is strong in this one! 1700p-1800p, 27 FPS, uneven frametimes, medium-high settings,
Welcome to the world of PC gaming... True 4K, Ultra settings, 60 FPS... Mods, superior controls, DLSS, Ray Tracing, etc. Now go and cuddle with you plastic box of cheap hardware and enjoy your blurry sub 30 FPS with degraded graphics kiddo! 😂
Just fyi if you don't have it: you can play it for free (streaming) by signing up for Google's Project Stream beta. Input lag is pretty decent.
I still think this game is unoptimized. Im Sorry.
Tolles Video ich finde die Cpu Auslastung in Origins und Odyssey etwas übertrieben, es ist einfach nur nervig das dadurch Ruckler entstehen obwohl diese Spiele die Mindestanforderungen alter Assassins Creed Teile haben wie Syndicate E.g aber ja gut Tolles Video mach weiter so! ;)
And as per usual, there is hardly a difference between the ultra high settings and xbox settings.
yeah....for shitty Ubisoft ports. That's simply not true for many other games....
@@schof215
Like what? PUBG?
war weeny
If that were the case it would be running at sub 10 fps kiddo. There's very little difference between high and ultra high settings, the X1X would be using the high settings, not ultra.
Doesn't PUBG on Xbox run like at a mixed bag of high medium and low on Xbox? Or did it anyways before the graphics change that pissed everyone off.
@@phloppywhoppy7476 for example, it's a day and night difference
I have an RTX 2070 and an i5 9600k. On all Ultra, I hold around 60 - 80 fps. In large cities, however, it can drop in the 50’s. But it’s worth it, because the game is gorgeous.
All the Xbox Fanboys who kept telling me the Jaguar CPU was more than strong enough to run this game at 60 frames per second, I am so going to send them this video.
Well they can run it at 60 so??
@@youaintasbadasyouthink
The Jaguar CPU can not run this at 60.
The 8400 is far superior to the Jaguar and already is maxed out
Perhaps instead of chasing fanboys all while being a fanboy yourself, you should work on how to calculate percentages instead. Just a thought
We knew it wasn’t enough and we knew why Microsoft did it as well
No lol just no. On Xbox one X and PS4 Pro this games runs at 30FPS and still dips.
Runs fine on i7 8700K/GTX1080 @ 1440p/60fps the only thing that kills the framerate is the torchlight at night, hope they fix it.
Garbage optimization but still better than PS4 Pro mistake.
Go away troll.
I'd actually go as far say saying both consoles are a mistake. But especially the Xboxes, since they doesn't even have exclusives = no reason to get an Xbox. The playstations are also a waste of money, since we can emulate the games on a proper PC, we can already emulate PS3, and PS4 will soon follow.
All you needed to do was do a benchmark in Alexandria, if you really understood how bench marking(not cherry picking) works!
Thats just laughable at this point. A modern 8-core, 16-thread cpu isn't able to feed a GTX 1070 enough data to achieve stable 60fps because of DRM software thats hogging all the resources. Hilarious. Especially because a GTX 1070 usually obliterates 1080p gaming...
poetry in motion these type of videos
I want to eat that chicken but it was covered in GREECE! Oh wait the PC was a potato and runs like dog 💩.
Amazing video alex
Played best on PC. As always.
Not really.
How not? Pc offers the best performance easily.
Played best on a $1500 PC not a $500 PC
@@thecolossus4244 jupp, 500 dollar PC still better than consoles :) because a 100 dollar CPU shits all over the ancient jaguar CPU and it allows for 60 fps :)
@@soetdjuret xb1x is better than a $1000 pc
Great video! Please do this for every game ever. :)