showernota
Member
5800x and RX 6600 here and my experience with the beta was *not* recommended spec level IMO.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Monster Hunter Wilds Benchmark released on Steam
- Thread starter LectureMaster
- Start date
- Platform
FeralEcho
Member
It boggles my mind that there are actual people in this thread that think this muddled blurry mess that's an unnoptimized horseshit on top is "fantastic" looking.
No wonder this industry has become so devoid of ambition and we still have games from 10 years ago that look better than 90% of the crap coming out nowadays. The standards have become so low for some people that the devs actually believe the blurry shit they keep churning out is "impressive".
kevboard
Member
not only did the beta look like someone took a shit on your screen, but it didn't even come remotely close to holding 60fps.
and that is absolutely insane to me.
Last edited:
Celcius
°Temp. member
Between this and Ninja Gaiden, my 3090 is starting to show it's age
At Native 4K max settings I averaged like 37 fps but there were a few times where it dropped down to like 26 fps.
Turning on quality DLSS brought my average fps up to 51 which is within my monitor's VRR window and felt much smoother.
At Native 4K max settings I averaged like 37 fps but there were a few times where it dropped down to like 26 fps.
Turning on quality DLSS brought my average fps up to 51 which is within my monitor's VRR window and felt much smoother.
Last edited:
FeralEcho
Member
And its such a weird thing considering that until Dragon's Dogma 2,Capcom games ran beautifully on PCs and Consoles. Optimized well and looked the part so I really don't get how this engine can be so dogshit at openworlds.
FeralEcho
Member
More like the devs are starting to show they suck at optimization. Your card is fine...
Last edited:
winjer
Member
With the new Transformer model, you should be able to use DLSS Performance at 4K and not even notice much difference.
R6Rider
Gold Member
I also thought the beta looked awful. Just ugly textures and blurry.
People were also claiming it looked great at the time.
Last edited:
Lokaum D+
Member
this is the worst optimized game i"ve seen in a few years, how can ppl defend this shit is beyond me and the game dosnt even look "next -gen" imo
Lol, a 3090 should be more then fine for this game, this game optimization is atrocious.
Last edited:
Joelenheimer
Member
They’re just mad their shit pc’s are garbage over a decade later after building or buying it.
kevboard
Member
RE engine just doesn't work with open world or large level scales.
and RE engine is basically everything Capcom has currently, and they use it for every game no matter if the engine actually works well with it.
that's the issue here, and is why everything prior to Dragon's Dogma 2 was mostly fine
FeralEcho
Member
They should've just stuck with MT Framework for Open Worlds and evolve on it and keep RE for linear games.
Lokaum D+
Member
i get that DD2 is a open world, so RE engine is not good for that, but MHWi its looking more like an open zone ( bigger than World zone ) but still open zones.
Also, DD2 looks way more "graphically" advanced than MHWi and its looks like running better too, even if it is a fully open world.
Last edited:
Wooxsvan
Member
is there a vsync option in the actual benchmark tool?
kevboard
Member
MH isn't fully open world but it has very large areas. RE Engine works best with linear games or interconnected small scale worlds like in the Resident Evil games.
DMC5 on One X for example looked absolutely insane with that engine, because it was a perfect fit for it with its very linear design.
There isn't.
Idleyes
Gold Member
The first two months of 2025 have been absolutely packed with major PC game releases. While opinions vary on what’s worth playing, the lineup has been nothing short of insane:
- Monster Hunter Wilds
- Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2
- Final Fantasy VII Rebirth
- Avowed
- Marvel’s Spider-Man 2
T4keD0wN
Member
Well it looks like itll run about 10% better than Cyberpunk with pathtracing which is absolutely ridiculous given just how poorly it looks lmao.
Is this with or without frame gen?Two runs on my rig: Ryzen 7700X, 4070TiS, 32GB RAM
Ultra-DLSS Quality (no RT)
Medium-DLSS Quality (with Textures set to Highest and AF to 16x, obviously also no RT)
I am too lazy and it's not my job to test this for hours, but I expected to gain a lot more than roughly 10% going from Ultra to Medium. Doesn't seem to scale very well.
Last edited:
Mr Moose
Member
Without, I think.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
I don't remember the beta looking too blurry. Only running like poop.
FewRope
Member
Without
drotahorror
Member
High Settings / no RT / DLSS quality / motion blur off
Optimized settings (lol)
Turned several settings down and only got half a damn frame.
Really need a new PC.
Optimized settings (lol)
Turned several settings down and only got half a damn frame.
Really need a new PC.
delishcaek
Member
Without. The gameplay segments were generally between 70-90fps, for the most part around 80 and cutscenes 100-120fps. There were dips on camera cuts in the 40s in the hub section of the benchmark (just frame time spikes), but when the character walked through the hub, it was again in that 70-90fps range.
Lokaum D+
Member
how well do u run RDR2 ?
we need to stop this "really need a new PC" , problem isnt your PC, is Capcom engine and optimization
Trogdor1123
Gold Member
This is nearly my exact computer so this is promising for me. I wonder how much of a difference the next step down from ultra would get?Ultra preset. FSR3 Quality. Frame generation, motion blur and vignette disabled.
It took a long time to compile shaders, maybe 10-15 minutes. During this process, CPU usage was at around 50%
In the benchmark, it was silky smooth. No stutters.
BTW, this game uses Direct Storage 1.2.2
drotahorror
Member
Been a couple years but around 70-80 mostly max settings, dlss quality.
drotahorror
Member
I will say, people are doggin the graphics but I think they look really good. Lots of little details here and there, different things blowing in the wind, monsters look sick, just a really nice presentation. Skybox looks great, can't wait to see how they do rain and storms.
Lokaum D+
Member
Art direction is one thing and graphic fidelity is another, Wilds have a really nice art direction, but graphically is pushing absolutily nothing to justify such poor optimization.
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
5800x3D, 4060 Ti 16GB, 64GB RAM. 1440p, High Preset, No RT.
Default DLSS Version:
DLSS 'Balanced' = 71.27fps
DLSS 'Performance' = 75.82fps
DLSS 'Balanced'+FrameGen = 111.89fps
Newest DLSS Version:
DLSS 'Balanced' = 64.98fps
DLSS 'Performance' = 69.11fps
DLSS 'Balanced'+FrameGen = 99.99fps
Default DLSS Version:
DLSS 'Balanced' = 71.27fps
DLSS 'Performance' = 75.82fps
DLSS 'Balanced'+FrameGen = 111.89fps
Newest DLSS Version:
DLSS 'Balanced' = 64.98fps
DLSS 'Performance' = 69.11fps
DLSS 'Balanced'+FrameGen = 99.99fps
Robot Carnival
Member
going from 21:9 to 16:9 helped a little.
mèx
Member
I redid the benchmark making sure to have RT maxed out this time (7800X3D / 4070 Ti / 1080p / DLAA).
DLSS3, FG off: 84.80
DLSS3, FG on: 137.80
DLSS4, FG off: 82.42
DLSS4, FG on: 134.84
Not sure why the difference in FPS is so low, I would expect DLSS4 to be around 10% heavier. The difference in image quality is there though. I checked with DLSSTweaks and the correct presets are applying.
DLSS3, FG off: 84.80
DLSS3, FG on: 137.80
DLSS4, FG off: 82.42
DLSS4, FG on: 134.84
Not sure why the difference in FPS is so low, I would expect DLSS4 to be around 10% heavier. The difference in image quality is there though. I checked with DLSSTweaks and the correct presets are applying.
Original pics are jpg taken with Steam, so not the most correct comparison but it's still pretty visible.
Last edited:
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
Downloaded the benchmark. It’s been 10 minutes and the shaders are maybe 60% complete. Jesus fuck the state of pc gaming. Just a waste of time
Using 75% of 3700x and 60% of gpu doing that.
Anyway.... 4k with DLSS performance, ultra preset, RT OFF, Textures on highest make it stutter a ton (over vram), so textures high.
Around 40-60fps. Not too bad I guess.
Seems cpu limited though. Going from balanced to performance didnt change anything (dlss)
edit: btw asmongold idiot on stream - "should I enable dlaa? I dont know wha that is".... jesus....
Using 75% of 3700x and 60% of gpu doing that.
Anyway.... 4k with DLSS performance, ultra preset, RT OFF, Textures on highest make it stutter a ton (over vram), so textures high.
Around 40-60fps. Not too bad I guess.
Seems cpu limited though. Going from balanced to performance didnt change anything (dlss)
edit: btw asmongold idiot on stream - "should I enable dlaa? I dont know wha that is".... jesus....
Last edited:
Crayon
Member
Pretty annoying I have to watch for so long before it gets to the hard part.
5600/6800/16gb/Linux:
This is essentially a 30 FPS game for me. Too bad. I always capped my frames at 60 and through all the useless desert parts of this long ass bench I can get 70 to 85% GPU use. ( I should probably mention I take the clock down a bit and dump the voltage on the card to keep power usage really low. It runs almost like stock whatever.)
But when you get to the grassland scene there's really nothing reasonable to be done to get to 60. 1440 FSR quality is the last stop for a good image, but with a mix of settings that is only doing 35 to 45. Dumping everything down to low and setting the FSR to performance -which looks like shit- still doesn't get it to 60.
Yeah, sorry. The game looks good, but not that good. I'm happy to play it at 30. Or I should say happier than spending 600 bucks on a new GPU. I'm sure seeing how it runs on a PS5 will make me feel better lol.
5600/6800/16gb/Linux:
This is essentially a 30 FPS game for me. Too bad. I always capped my frames at 60 and through all the useless desert parts of this long ass bench I can get 70 to 85% GPU use. ( I should probably mention I take the clock down a bit and dump the voltage on the card to keep power usage really low. It runs almost like stock whatever.)
But when you get to the grassland scene there's really nothing reasonable to be done to get to 60. 1440 FSR quality is the last stop for a good image, but with a mix of settings that is only doing 35 to 45. Dumping everything down to low and setting the FSR to performance -which looks like shit- still doesn't get it to 60.
Yeah, sorry. The game looks good, but not that good. I'm happy to play it at 30. Or I should say happier than spending 600 bucks on a new GPU. I'm sure seeing how it runs on a PS5 will make me feel better lol.
Buggy Loop
Member
I agree with everything he says
It doesn't perform like it looks
Yes. Benchmark is new near release "optimized" code. Beta is the same old horrible code as the last beta.
Mister Wolf
Member
Last edited:
Lokaum D+
Member
Its worse
mèx
Member
Yeah, Dragon's Dogma 2 runs and looks better (cleaner).
P:axMagellanic
Member
Something seriously wrong with the image quality in this game, temporal shit pushed too far?