[GameGPU] ac unity Benchmarks

[Carfax83]

Ubisoft will soon use the OakRidge Facility for PC game optimization.

Sorry, but if I can hit 60 FPS on a newly released title at maxed settings, then it's not poorly optimized. If I'm seeing full CPU usage across all 6 cores on my CPU, then it's not poorly optimized.

There's a saying, "There's no cure for stupidity." A lot of the complaints about ACU's PC optimization are valid, especially for AMD users. But that's expected, because the game was sponsored by NVidia and NVidia has had more time to optimize their drivers for the game. AMD will catch up undoubtedly. Nothing new about that.

But some PC gamers are just downright clueless. Take this one for instance:

gtx 970
i5-2500k 4.4ghz
8gb ram

get like 25 fps or less with everything maxed. little over 30 if i use TXAA instead of msaa x8

hopefully fps gets better with a patch. would at least like >= 50 fps on very high settings consistently.

very buggy game too

Taken from a message board. This user has a single GTX 970, and he thinks he can run the game maxed out with MSAA 8x

Just because someone is a PC gamer, it doesn't mean they know much about PC gaming. A large amount of PC gamers don't understand game settings, and what their performance impact on the game will be.

These are the same gamers accusing Ubisoft of poor optimization because they can't max the game out on their GTX 460s, or they think that just because they have a high end video card they shouldn't have to make any compromises.

 

[tential]

Thanks for the cryptic and meaningless "answer". Since you do not know, you probably shouldn't have said anything in the first place. Just FYI.

Anybody here that does know and have links? Or are a bunch of you just going to continue to post random un-sourced vid clips and photos and let people believe these are from the full release version of the game?

"We are aware that the graphics performance of Assassin’s Creed Unity on PC may be adversely affected by certain AMD CPU and GPU configurations," Ubisoft said on their forum. "This should not affect the vast majority of PC players, but rest assured that AMD and Ubisoft are continuing to work together closely to resolve the issue, and will provide more information as soon as it is available."

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/11/12/ubisoft-comments-on-assassins-creed-unity-pc-troubles

 

[Enigmoid]

The game runs great, so great in fact that I can hit 60 FPS at 1440p maxed out with FXAA. The reason for the low benchmarks from GameGPU is because they are using MSAA.

Sorry, but if I can hit 60 FPS on a newly released title at maxed settings, then it's not poorly optimized. If I'm seeing full CPU usage across all 6 cores on my CPU, then it's not poorly optimized.

Your statement is so full of holes.

Yay I can hit 60 fps on a mediocre looking game using overclocked IVB-E and 970 SLI. Yay I can brute force through a turd.

Your statement makes no clarification on the quality of the game. I have every right to criticize a game that looks like crap and requires an absurd amount of processing power to run. Now imagine minesweeper taking 970 SLI to run and running like crap on a 760. "Wow very optimized, I can get 60 fps on 970 SLI." Never mind that an Intel GMA from 2000 should be capable of running minesweeper.

It uses all six cores so yes it is designed for six cores. Does that mean its doing anything efficient with the 6 cores? No.

 

[tential]

I never understood why people were fascinated with a game using more cores. I'm starting to think that developers are purposely making the game use more cores just to make the community think the game is "optimized".

"Optimizing" a game means making it run efficiently, not making it use as much of the computer's resources as humanly possible.

Put the same game out, exact same, and have it use 6 cores vs 3 cores and people will say the 6 core version is "better optimized" even if on each version each core is at 20% utilization.

Making a game efficient means it has great Physics/AI/etc for it's CPU usage. Not that it's utilizing all cores. Similar to what Enigmoid said, if Minesweeper utilized all 8 threads of my CPU I would not call that efficient....

 

[iiiankiii]

This game looks butt ugly for a game that requires that amount of high-end hardware. I don't get. I thought this was suppose to be "next-gen". Ryse looks way better. That was release a year ago. Ubisoft is dropping the ball big time. Watchdog was a mess. Now this? Disappointed.

 

[Jodell88]

 

[Atomic Playboy]

The game runs great, so great in fact that I can hit 60 FPS at 1440p maxed out with FXAA. The reason for the low benchmarks from GameGPU is because they are using MSAA.

MSAA plus deferred rendering engine doesn't result in high performance. FXAA performs much better, and even looks better than MSAA in AC Unity.

Is SMAA an option in Unity? Because, frankly, every single implementation of FXAA I've ever seen looks just awful. It muddies textures to a degree that I consider unacceptable; I'd rather deal with jaggies than feeling like I just smeared vaseline across my monitor. Of course, the screenshots I've seen from Unity have been utterly unimpressive in the texture department independent of the antialiasing used, so maybe FXAA doesn't really have the negative impact it otherwise would; can't ruin something that was lousy to begin with.

 

[Phynaz]

Wasn't this originally going to be locked at 30 fps? Now we know why.

 

[Carfax83]

Yay I can hit 60 fps on a mediocre looking game using overclocked IVB-E and 970 SLI. Yay I can brute force through a turd.

Actually, I can hit 72 FPS with V-sync disabled. And if you think the game looks mediocre, that's your opinion. Many others including myself will differ with you.

Your statement makes no clarification on the quality of the game. I have every right to criticize a game that looks like crap and requires an absurd amount of processing power to run. Now imagine minesweeper taking 970 SLI to run and running like crap on a 760. "Wow very optimized, I can get 60 fps on 970 SLI." Never mind that an Intel GMA from 2000 should be capable of running minesweeper.

Who says it requires an absurd amount of processing power? I'm playing the game at 1440p, which is XD resolution, and I'm also using maxed settings. To play at 1080p wouldn't even require SLI or XFire..

Maybe you don't care about game technology, but there's a reason why ACU requires higher system requirements. The game is absolutely vast in scope and scale, and the amount of NPCs is unprecedented in a game of this nature. The game also uses PBR, or physically based rendering for many materials.

It uses all six cores so yes it is designed for six cores. Does that mean its doing anything efficient with the 6 cores? No.

Are you a programmer? Did you have access to the game's code? No you didn't. Your statement is just willful assumption and nothing more.

If the game merely used 6 or 8 cores but did not show any performance gain, then maybe your comment would hold some water. Judging by the benchmarks however, the game does take advantage of 6 to 8 cores and it shows in increased FPS..

So your comment is wrong..

 

[Carfax83]

Is SMAA an option in Unity? Because, frankly, every single implementation of FXAA I've ever seen looks just awful. It muddies textures to a degree that I consider unacceptable; I'd rather deal with jaggies than feeling like I just smeared vaseline across my monitor. Of course, the screenshots I've seen from Unity have been utterly unimpressive in the texture department independent of the antialiasing used, so maybe FXAA doesn't really have the negative impact it otherwise would; can't ruin something that was lousy to begin with.

No SMAA isn't an option, but it can be injected. And NVidia has been improving FXAA for quite some time now. The blur from when it was first introduced is gone, and the edge correction has improved.

But you don't have to take my word for it. NVidia already posted image comparisons on their ACU optimization guide:

No AA
FXAA
MSAA 2x
MSAA 4x
MSAA 8x
TXAA

Even TXAA has minimal blur. NVidia has clearly been improving the algorithms of their AA technology, because both FXAA and TXAA look clean.

But TXAA has a massive performance hit, and so does MSAA. Best to stick with FXAA for maximum performance.

 

[Gloomy]

I heard FXAA in this game is actually really super good, and better than the SMAA you can inject through sweetfx.

But the performance hit is way worse than SMAA.

It's probably not plain FXAA but something else, they likely just labeled it FXAA because that's recognizable.

 

[Pandora's Box]

No SMAA isn't an option, but it can be injected. And NVidia has been improving FXAA for quite some time now. The blur from when it was first introduced is gone, and the edge correction has improved.

But you don't have to take my word for it. NVidia already posted image comparisons on their ACU optimization guide:

No AA
FXAA
MSAA 2x
MSAA 4x
MSAA 8x
TXAA

Even TXAA has minimal blur. NVidia has clearly been improving the algorithms of their AA technology, because both FXAA and TXAA look clean.

But TXAA has a massive performance hit, and so does MSAA. Best to stick with FXAA for maximum performance.

Bad scene to compare AA in this game imo. Go look at a building. FXAA and SMAA has no effect on the aliasing on the building.

 

[JumBie]

Everyone is crying about AMD, look at the damn performance on a 760, 660, 680 and 750 TI...is that a joke?

 

[alcoholbob]

Anyone seen 4K benchmarks for ACU yet? I'm curious how much of a performance hit it is. I've seen anywhere from 3.6 times lower performance to 2.4 times lower performance than 1080p, so it varies by game.

 

[RussianSensation]

Everyone is crying about AMD, look at the damn performance on a 760, 660, 680 and 750 TI...is that a joke?

I don't think people are crying about AMD performance only. Performance on everything including Titan and 780Ti is a joke - low 40s at 1080p. 980 SLI can't sustain 60 fps at 1080p. Game looks like a 2010 at best. I was saying for months how every screenshot and trailer/video for the game showed its technical/graphical inferiority. But I didn't imagine that a 680 would be a 17 fps min / 20 fps average at 1080p despite such ugly shadows, lighting and average textures.

Also, using the argument that no other game has as many NPCs is worthless:

1. These NPCs don't do anything to enhance the gameplay experience.
2. They do not advance the plot since they are not interactive like in an RPG.
3. This is not a Total War game where you have hundreds of NPCs engaged in battle.

Remember the NV tessellated city demo? Just because technology is there to do something, doesn't mean you should use it inefficiently. This game is 5-10 years ahead of hardware and the game engine they used isn't good enough for portraying what they were trying to do. Fog is also everywhere in draw distance.

Anyone seen 4K benchmarks for ACU yet? I'm curious how much of a performance hit it is. I've seen anywhere from 3.6 times lower performance to 2.4 times lower performance than 1080p, so it varies by game.

Yes. 13 fps on a 970, 16 on a 980, 25 on a 970 SLI, 30 on 980 SLI. :biggrin:

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/assassin-s-creed-unity-test-gpu.html

 

[alcoholbob]

Hmm that's not too bad actually, 23fps average on a stock 980, overclock the card and its about 27 fps, and turn down shadows and SSAO and it should be over 30fps, basically console performance except PC details. Not bad at all actually. So technically 30-35fps at 4K is feasible with some minor adjustments.

 

[Carfax83]

980 SLI can't sustain 60 fps at 1080p. Game looks like a 2010 at best. I was saying for months how every screenshot and trailer/video for the game showed its technical/graphical inferiority. But I didn't imagine that a 680 would be a 17 fps min / 20 fps average at 1080p despite such ugly shadows, lighting and average textures.

So utterly dishonest. I'll let my screenshots rebuke you. Notice the FPS counter? They are all at 60 FPS, and this is at 1440p.

And I LOL'd at your "fog is everywhere in draw distance comment." :biggrin:

Also, using the argument that no other game has as many NPCs is worthless:

1. These NPCs don't do anything to enhance the gameplay experience.
2. They do not advance the plot since they are not interactive like in an RPG.
3. This is not a Total War game where you have hundreds of NPCs engaged in battle.

The crowds are there to provide atmosphere and immersion. Not really hard to understand, as the game is set during the French revolution where lots of demonstrations and protests were taking place..

 

[Fire&Blood]

Carfax, I like you, you're my buddy but I am worried about you, recently you are very attached to Ubi :biggrin:

You are brute forcing a 100 mil+ budget, 10 studio developed game to 60fps with a top 5% rig. Environment looks amazing, it will look even better with tessellation but the NPC's ruin the rest of the game that's running on a very overweight engine.

 

[Carfax83]

I can't help it man! This game is just too awesome and I feel I have to defend it from unjust attacks! It's been a long time since I've enjoyed a game to this extent.

I have no particular affinity for Ubisoft either (especially after having been burned by Watch Dogs), but I will say that I like how they make very ambitious titles; and AC Unity if anything, is very ambitious.

Too ambitious perhaps, because the PS4 and Xbox One are really struggling with it.

 

[Jodell88]

I'm interested to know what settings carfax is using. TotalBiscuit has a more powerful rig and the only way he can get it to 60 is on High, not very high or ultra high, just high. He is also using a 1080P monitor while carfax is using a higher resolution.

Something just doesn't add up.

 

[Carfax83]

I'm interested to know what settings carfax is using. TotalBiscuit has a more powerful rig and the only way he can get it to 60 is on High, not very high or ultra high, just high. He is also using a 1080P monitor while carfax is using a higher resolution.

Something just doesn't add up.

I'm using maxed settings but with FXAA. If I had to guess, his low performance are likely because:

1) He hasn't updated his SLI profile.

2) He's using MSAA or TXAA.

Both of these will drastically lower frame rate. Also, what kind of CPU is he using, and is it overclocked or at stock?

 

[tential]

Yes. 13 fps on a 970, 16 on a 980, 25 on a 970 SLI, 30 on 980 SLI. :biggrin:

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/assassin-s-creed-unity-test-gpu.html

with 2x MSAA enabled...

Still horrendous though.
I think I'll just get the new Borderlands game instead.

 

[tential]

I can't help it man! This game is just too awesome and I feel I have to defend it from unjust attacks! It's been a long time since I've enjoyed a game to this extent.

I have no particular affinity for Ubisoft either (especially after having been burned by Watch Dogs), but I will say that I like how they make very ambitious titles; and AC Unity if anything, is very ambitious.

Too ambitious perhaps, because the PS4 and Xbox One are really struggling with it.

You can enjoy a game.

I don't think ANYONE is commenting on the gameplay man. We're commenting on the amount of hardware you need to run in. That's GREAT that you can run it. What about the rest of us that don't sink that kind of cash into GPUs?

I'm willing to bet you've spent 5 times the amount I've spent on GPUs over the last 4 years. You're not indicative of the average gamer but of the top 1% of gamers who can afford SLI setups like that and can afford to upgrade(or care to upgrade) regularly.

That said mind taking screens at 1080p? I think because it's nonnative for me that your screens look so bad to me.

Edit: Steam's hardware survey shows ~.3% (Rounding up here) of gamers have a GTX 970.... You have TWO of them so that puts you well beyond the top 1% of gamers. Just because you can run a game with your extremely high end rig does not mean that it's a well made game (engine/graphics wise).

 

[Rakehellion]

Don't use MSAA. Ever. Use FXAA.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

The in-close environment looks pretty good, but the LOD IQ is absolutely disgusting. I mean, what the hell are the distance textures in these shots? The buildings look like the backgrounds of NES games. You can literally count the pixels in some of those textures. The fact that you have to brute force something that swaps in low-resolution textures at 50 feet is extremely disappointing.