[gamegpu] Dragon Age Inquisition performance

[Worlocked]

At 1080p I think you're going to run into bottlenecks besides memory usage with a 670 or 270X. I've been pretty satisfied with my 270X so far, with MSAA turned off of course. Have you been playing the game with your 670?

I've been trying to, it's a stuttering, hitching mess. From what I've read windows 8.1 would clean it up quite a bit with an NVIDIA card, but mantle will help much more, especially once the mantle memory leak is fixed.

I think the draw call improvments are universal, can you link to anything specific for 11.2?

The 280x should be fine and you'll have the advantage of Mantle. You may have to turn MSAA off but the shader based AA is pretty good and doesn't blur things. Some people turn the tessellation distance setting down for a bit of extra performance but I like it maxed.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/11/24/battlefield_4_windows_7_vs_81_performance_review/5
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/battlefield-4-gets-dx11-1-dx11-1-will-improve-cpu-performance.html

I'm not 100% sure that draw calls weren't improved in W7, but the features used to improve BF4/Frostbite did not make their way into windows 7.

 

[Red Hawk]

Are you getting stuttering and hitching during combat, or just in cutscenes? It's possible that the hitching is just because of the problematic 30 FPS frame cap that BioWare put on cutscenes. Even people with high-end systems have been bothered by it.

 

[Worlocked]

Are you getting stuttering and hitching during combat, or just in cutscenes? It's possible that the hitching is just because of the problematic 30 FPS frame cap that BioWare put on cutscenes. Even people with high-end systems have been bothered by it.

It's during normal gameplay too, especially walking around the main camp where I get hitching for about 0.5 second where I presume it's loading in new textures every now and then. I do have it installed on an SSD if you're curious, so I don't think that's my bottleneck.

I've tried all the cap settings between 60 and 30. Setting sim rate to 30fps is retarded as it makes the menus 30fps and basically triples your load times. I have a sinking suspicion that without a cap the menus are literally uncapped, though, as when I DO add a sim cap my GPU no longer overheats and sounds like an airplane.

Tessellation also seems to be worthless with either 2gb vram or my GPU in general as all the little pebbles and things load in about 2 feet in front of me which is very jarring. Does that happen with more vram? I've tried setting it to ultra just to see and it doesn't seem to make a difference.

 

[escrow4]

It's during normal gameplay too, especially walking around the main camp where I get hitching for about 0.5 second where I presume it's loading in new textures every now and then. I do have it installed on an SSD if you're curious, so I don't think that's my bottleneck.

I've tried all the cap settings between 60 and 30. Setting sim rate to 30fps is retarded as it makes the menus 30fps and basically triples your load times. I have a sinking suspicion that without a cap the menus are literally uncapped, though, as when I DO add a sim cap my GPU no longer overheats and sounds like an airplane.

Tessellation also seems to be worthless with either 2gb vram or my GPU in general as all the little pebbles and things load in about 2 feet in front of me which is very jarring. Does that happen with more vram? I've tried setting it to ultra just to see and it doesn't seem to make a difference.

Its your hardware. I've finished this off and I had no crashes and no issues with my 5930K @ 3.7GHz and 780 Ti @ 1215MHz. No stuttering and next to no hitching outside of some cutscenes.

 

[bystander36]

It's during normal gameplay too, especially walking around the main camp where I get hitching for about 0.5 second where I presume it's loading in new textures every now and then. I do have it installed on an SSD if you're curious, so I don't think that's my bottleneck.

I've tried all the cap settings between 60 and 30. Setting sim rate to 30fps is retarded as it makes the menus 30fps and basically triples your load times. I have a sinking suspicion that without a cap the menus are literally uncapped, though, as when I DO add a sim cap my GPU no longer overheats and sounds like an airplane.

Tessellation also seems to be worthless with either 2gb vram or my GPU in general as all the little pebbles and things load in about 2 feet in front of me which is very jarring. Does that happen with more vram? I've tried setting it to ultra just to see and it doesn't seem to make a difference.

I'm with 2Gb, but I'm not getting hitching. I do have 680 SLI.

I have been playing on High settings, with Ultra textures and medium tessellation with 2xMSAA recently (not sure which I prefer. MSAA or downsampling from 1440p). I'm not having hardly any hitching. I might see a hitch once an hour, if that.

With medium tessellation, I haven't noticed the pebbles popping on me, I just noticed that I get like half as many pebbles with shape, compared to high. Maybe I'm just not paying attention enough. Either way, it doesn't bother me at medium.

The only reoccuring thing that occasionally happens, is some times when I load the game, some foliage might flicker, as if one of my cards is rendering them, and the other isn't. If I log out of the game completely and back, that is fixed. It seems to be a bit random on my initial load if that happens or not.

 

[frozentundra123456]

So should I "upgrade" from my 2gb GTX 670 to a 4gb R9 270x? I seem to be terribly vram limited. Mantle is pretty appealing as I have only a stock clocked 2550k(case airflow is lacking). I'm also not sure if my 8gb system ram is cutting for the game either.

I tried mantle in this game with an i5 and a HD7770, and it made absolutely no difference. I am sure the results vary depending on the hardware, but I would not switch to AMD for mantle in this game at least. Unless you have a quite slow cpu and powerful gpu it may not make much difference.

 

[escrow4]

And you may be held back with your CPU:

http://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/dragon-age-inquisition-pc-performance-analysis/

This scales well on up to 6 cores.

 

[3DVagabond]

I tried mantle in this game with an i5 and a HD7770, and it made absolutely no difference. I am sure the results vary depending on the hardware, but I would not switch to AMD for mantle in this game at least. Unless you have a quite slow cpu and powerful gpu it may not make much difference.

I would think that 7770 keeps you GPU limited even in DX.

 

[toyota]

I would think that 7770 keeps you GPU limited even in DX.

Lol yeah that is the exact opposite scenario of where Mantle will help.

 

[JoeRambo]

This game is like a poster child for GSync/Freesync. Ability to crank up quality while targeting ~40FPS without any tearing is working wonders here. I am looking forward to Witcher3 now, salivating and dreaming about @2560x1440p glory.

 

[psolord]

Anyone has any idea why fraps and MSI Afterburner register different framerates?

 

[tential]

a 270x is a DOWNGRADE from a 670.

R9 270 and GTX 670 neck and neck.

I'm guessing an R9 270x is faster?

Seems more like a sidegrade but still bad.

 

[bystander36]

Anyone has any idea why fraps and MSI Afterburner register different framerates?

Most likely due to the period of time they average out. The FPS shown is over a short period of time. It is also possible that you have virtu mvp on your motherboard, which makes most FPS meters lie about your FPS (over inflates), but some have had plans to fix that, and may have.

 

[bystander36]

R9 270 and GTX 670 neck and neck.

I'm guessing an R9 270x is faster?

Seems more like a sidegrade but still bad.

Two things to note:
1) Those are settings which are unplayable by most. At playable settings, things may change.
2) That is one game. Even if it was good for that game, it may be a downgrade for most other games.

 

[psolord]

Most likely due to the period of time they average out. The FPS shown is over a short period of time. It is also possible that you have virtu mvp on your motherboard, which makes most FPS meters lie about your FPS (over inflates), but some have had plans to fix that, and may have.

Unfortunately the difference is constant.

I did a whole benchmark session and noticed that although MSI Afterburner was showing around 50fps in its graph, fraps showed an average of 40fps.

So I went back and payed more attention of what both programs were showing and then I saw it. They have around 20% difference. Dual gpu or single gpu does not matter.

Can someone verify please?

Also I do not have mvp. My mobo is P67.

 

[bystander36]

Unfortunately the difference is constant.

I did a whole benchmark session and noticed that although MSI Afterburner was showing around 50fps in its graph, fraps showed an average of 40fps.

So I went back and payed more attention of what both programs were showing and then I saw it. They have around 20% difference. Dual gpu or single gpu does not matter.

Can someone verify please?

Also I do not have mvp. My mobo is P67.

Odd...could this be an issue with Mantle and the FPS meters?

 

[Black Octagon]

This game is like a poster child for GSync/Freesync.

Sure, if the game actually looked pretty enough to warrant this lacklustre performance.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Yea, I agree, the game looks nice, but not exceptional for the hardware demands.

 

[Red Hawk]

Two things to note:
1) Those are settings which are unplayable by most. At playable settings, things may change.
2) That is one game. Even if it was good for that game, it may be a downgrade for most other games.

I have a 270X and I find all settings maxed out at 1080p to be quite playable (though MSAA need not apply). Benchmarks have shown that AMD has an advantage in this game though (for the time being).

Even at a lower resolution, the 270X is neck-and-neck with a GTX 680. The 270 ties the GTX 760.

 

[bystander36]

I have a 270X and I find all settings maxed out at 1080p to be quite playable (though MSAA need not apply). Benchmarks have shown that AMD has an advantage in this game though (for the time being).

Even at a lower resolution, the 270X is neck-and-neck with a GTX 680. The 270 ties the GTX 760.

I'm not sure what you disagree with or are you trying to prove what I wrote? The benchmark shown before showed less than 30 FPS (different settings I guess), and I frankly don't consider 41 FPS average to be playable, but your mileage may vary. And just because the 270x can compete with the 680 in this game, doesn't mean they are equal in most games.

 

[Red Hawk]

I'm not sure what you disagree with or are you trying to prove what I wrote? The benchmark shown before showed less than 30 FPS (different settings I guess), and I frankly don't consider 41 FPS average to be playable, but your mileage may vary. And just because the 270x can compete with the 680 in this game, doesn't mean they are equal in most games.

It's an RPG, not an FPS. It is playable at such frame rates. Whether or not it is enjoyable is a different question. And really, since console players make do with such framerates frequently, you can't say that "most" people would find it unenjoyable.

 

[bystander36]

It's an RPG, not an FPS. It is playable at such frame rates. Whether or not it is enjoyable is a different question. And really, since console players make do with such framerates frequently, you can't say that "most" people would find it unenjoyable.

Well, I consider it unplayable at below 30 FPS for anyone. With your settings, at 41, I realize you might find it playable. I do not. At that frame rate, I get nauseated rather quickly, and it is just not fun. As in, motion sickness inducing.

I'd still consider a FPS rate that is unenjoyable to be unplayable. I can't force myself to play something that is considered entertainment if it isn't fun.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Yea, I agree, the game looks nice, but not exceptional for the hardware demands.

These days we will be lucky to even get diminishing returns in PC gaming graphics, most of the time new games looks the same or even worse than previous ones while requiring MORE hardware which means a complete regression, not diminishing returns. Besides, how a good looking a game looks now has a lot more to do with the art direction than rendering technicalities. But then the PC gaming master race are too busy doing hardware e-peen contests instead of realizing they are being played for fools...

 

[tential]

These days we will be lucky to even get diminishing returns in PC gaming graphics, most of the time new games looks the same or even worse than previous ones while requiring MORE hardware which means a complete regression, not diminishing returns. Besides, how a good looking a game looks now has a lot more to do with the art direction than rendering technicalities. But then the PC gaming master race are too busy doing hardware e-peen contests instead of realizing they are being played for fools...

I see people more worried about how many cores a game is using rather than if a game is looking better than before.
"Yes game uses 6 cores my 5820k purchase is getting some use yay!"
Game looks no better than last year's game....

We're just throwing more hardware at games that look exactly the same/worse.

 

[escrow4]

Well, I consider it unplayable at below 30 FPS for anyone. With your settings, at 41, I realize you might find it playable. I do not. At that frame rate, I get nauseated rather quickly, and it is just not fun. As in, motion sickness inducing.

I'd still consider a FPS rate that is unenjoyable to be unplayable. I can't force myself to play something that is considered entertainment if it isn't fun.

This. If I don't game at around 50-60FPS with settings yanked up I may as well give it all up and buy a console.