[Multiple Sites] Watch Dogs GPU benchmark roundup

[AtenRa]

It looks good but also being a Ubisoft title I worry if the graphics will be downgraded once it actually is released. E3 2012 version of Watch Dogs looked a lot better, there was POM, better lighting, volumetric fog, etc.

Good comparison here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_A6Z3gkXlk

wow, didnt know there was such a difference in IQ between the trailer at E3 and the official release game. It seams to me the E3 trailer was pre-rendered.

 

[EJSLP]

It looks good but also being a Ubisoft title I worry if the graphics will be downgraded once it actually is released. E3 2012 version of Watch Dogs looked a lot better, there was POM, better lighting, volumetric fog, etc.

Good comparison here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_A6Z3gkXlk

whats wrong with me? I keep forgetting that!
you are absolutely right, so until i see it on MY monitor looking like that i will
stay thinking of the downgrading.
Ps, there is a guy called CY on the posts of the YT vid that brings up some really excellent points!

 

[EJSLP]

wow, didnt know there was such a difference in IQ between the trailer at E3 and the official release game. It seams to me the E3 trailer was pre-rendered.

absolutely! read the posts on the YT vid

 

[Attic]

Biggest thing lost between WatchDogs as shown at E3 vs the delivered game is that the graphics lost nearly all the grit and the world doesn't feel quite as alive or yep, "gritty", as the E3 reveal was impressing upon me.

 

[Silverforce11]

Biggest thing lost between WatchDogs as shown at E3 vs the delivered game is that the graphics lost nearly all the grit and the world doesn't feel quite as alive or yep, "gritty", as the E3 reveal was impressing upon me.

If it was a PC game from the start, you would get that.. but all these artistic visions collide into the reality that is console hardware.

 

[Makaveli]

Biggest thing lost between WatchDogs as shown at E3 vs the delivered game is that the graphics lost nearly all the grit and the world doesn't feel quite as alive or yep, "gritty", as the E3 reveal was impressing upon me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_A6Z3gkXlk

Agreed!

 

[f1sherman]

ALERT!

Superior drawing distance on "PC" version

 

[Kenmitch]

If it was a PC game from the start, you would get that.. but all these artistic visions collide into the reality that is console hardware.

So your blaming AMD in a round of about way....Just kidding!

Maybe after a patch or two or three or four they can make it run and look better. Looks like it might be an OK game once it's fixed.

Should be able to pick it up later this year for pretty cheap.

 

[dn7309]

I just popped in GTA 4 and the game forced me to run at low setting at 800x600 because

"Warning: Your graphics settings are near,or exceed,the suggested resource limits for your system. It is recommend that you reduce your graphic settings in order to run the game optimally"

I guess you guys are lucky that watch dogs are at least better optimized than this.

 

[toyota]

I just popped in GTA 4 and the game forced me to run at low setting at 800x600 because

"Warning: Your graphics settings are near,or exceed,the suggested resource limits for your system. It is recommend that you reduce your graphic settings in order to run the game optimally"

I guess you guys are lucky that watch dogs are at least better optimized than this.

GTA 4 freaks out if you have more than 2gb of vram. its a simple fix if you google it.

 

[tg2708]

if the witcher 3 and far cry 4 only requires 2 to 3gbs of vram to perform optimally then watch dogs is one poorly optimized game because as it stands those should offer a true next gen experience, especially witcher 3. Witcher is also an nvidia title.

 

[TreVader]

Absolutely amazed that Toms is still used as a reference. There's no agenda they are incompetent.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

if the witcher 3 and far cry 4 only requires 2 to 3gbs of vram to perform optimally then watch dogs is one poorly optimized game because as it stands those should offer a true next gen experience, especially witcher 3. Witcher is also an nvidia title.

I thought it was more than official that WD is poorly optimized?
if i am not mistaken properly optimized it would only require a max of around 2G's?

 

[blastingcap]

if the witcher 3 and far cry 4 only requires 2 to 3gbs of vram to perform optimally then watch dogs is one poorly optimized game because as it stands those should offer a true next gen experience, especially witcher 3. Witcher is also an nvidia title.

Requires is different than recommended for smooth play. Watchdogs requires only 1GB of VRAM if you want to get technical. We'll see what the next-gen-console-only ports require soon enough. I'm on 5760x1080 so all of this is kinda academic to me as I need 3GB VRAM at absolute minimum anyway.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

I need 3GB VRAM at absolute minimum anyway.

yeah see thats the thing, a lot of guys that are saying that 3g's is not enough are using higher res or multi monitor set ups.
I use single on 1080p so other than this broken watch dogs i should be good for
99.9% of other games.
all of a sudden watch dogs is released for pc and the "3g is not enough" or "over 3g's is the future" talk starts!
before WD i never heard one guy say 3g of vram was not enough for 1080 gaming.
I think Ubisoft should be boycotted!

 

[Enigmoid]

Absolutely amazed that Toms is still used as a reference. There's no agenda they are incompetent.

Eh they are okay. There seems to be certain tests that some sites do and others don't.

AT, though good, has some notable flaws in their benchmarking. Power consumption (system) vs. card for example. Toms also touches on things like hybrid crossfire which I haven't seen AT do. No one is perfect but if it fits with what is being seen on other sites there really isn't any reason to discard the data.

 

[Deders]

Anyone wanting to use Triple buffered Vsync on this game, I put Vsync on to 1 frame, applied, the set the window mode to borderless, then back to fullscreen. Now it works as it should.

 

[snarfbot]

so according to guru3d the game takes a 15% performance hit going from 1080p to 4k on 290x at ultra settings with 2x msaa.

the further tests were conducted with the 780ti only so whatever impact higher anti aliasing modes have on the 290x is a mystery.

however if i grab some benches from another site and compare them the 290x loses aproximately 28% fps from 2x msaa alone at 2560x1600.

clearly something is broken if its faster to render 4x as many pixels than take 2x as many aa samples.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

Quick question? since WD is a broken/poorly optimized game
are these benchmarks we are seeing even accurate?

 

[Deders]

so according to guru3d the game takes a 15% performance hit going from 1080p to 4k on 290x at ultra settings with 2x msaa.

the further tests were conducted with the 780ti only so whatever impact higher anti aliasing modes have on the 290x is a mystery.

however if i grab some benches from another site and compare them the 290x loses aproximately 28% fps from 2x msaa alone at 2560x1600.

clearly something is broken if its faster to render 4x as many pixels than take 2x as many aa samples.

Even 2xMSAA has a memory footprint, Guru3D massively underestimate SMAA, It does a better job than FXAA without blurring the textures. There is even a Temporal SMAA setting which improves it even more, all without the memory footprint of MS/TXAA.

They really should have tested the SMAA settings as the game updates itself.

I don't know about 1600p but I'm playing at 2560x1080 on a 3GB 780 with everything maxed out and it's running quite smoothly. The only issues are to do with streaming all that data from the hard drive. For instance in police chases, if a road block is randomly set up it will drop the framerate to ~30 for less than a second.

 

[Makaveli]

yeah see thats the thing, a lot of guys that are saying that 3g's is not enough are using higher res or multi monitor set ups.
I use single on 1080p so other than this broken watch dogs i should be good for
99.9% of other games.
all of a sudden watch dogs is released for pc and the "3g is not enough" or "over 3g's is the future" talk starts!
before WD i never heard one guy say 3g of vram was not enough for 1080 gaming.
I think Ubisoft should be boycotted!

not sure about the boycotting but the rest of your post I agree with.

We will know better by the end of the year with more games. People going nutts over vram and watch dogs is pointless. Its one over hyped game that needs patching.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

not sure about the boycotting but the rest of your post I agree with.

We will know better by the end of the year with more games. People going nutts over vram and watch dogs is pointless. Its one over hyped game that needs patching.

LOL! was basically just kidding about boycotting them. that was said out of all the trouble they(the game) have started, like you say people are going insane over vram on their cards and even running out buying 6g versions.
No doubt this game is a poor platform to use as a vram gauge
even the Ubi guy said it requires 3g vram for ultra textures but in its current state will use more the 4g. that says it all right there

 

[f1sherman]

WiP: Watch Dogs Kadzait24 XML Full MOD 1.0 - Check out real Ultra Graphics

 

[Carfax83]

WiP: Watch Dogs Kadzait24 XML Full MOD 1.0 - Check out real Ultra Graphics

I've been monitoring that thread, and so far, I still don't see anything different about the mod other than an excessive contrast ratio..

It's still vanilla ultra.

 

[KaRLiToS]

I tried to run watch Dogs today after finding 30 minutes of free time.

I tried 7680x1440 but it seems that the game doesn't support eyefinity out of the box and there is currently no fix yet to fix the FOV and HUD. Widescreen Fixer or Flawless Widescreen don't have a fix yet.

So I decided to give it a try on my middle monitor, which is the Samsung 4k U28D590D. I tried Ultra settings with MSAA and MSAA is totally broken on 14.6 Beta and watch Dogs. It was a total slideshow... like 2 fps.

I found out that FXAA does a pretty good job without hammering too much on the performance.

I get around 60fps with my current config

• i7 4930k @ 4.5 Ghz
• Corsair Dominator GT 2133 Mhz 9-11-10-27
• Crucial M4 SSD
• Quad R9 290x (Stock 1000/1250)
• Everything is watercooled and nothing is throttling

When I go to an open area I see big FPS dips. I don't feel that the today's games are optimized for PCs. It is very frustrating to have good hardware and not to be able to run everything maxed out. In 2008, my BFG Tech 8800GTX OC 2 was running every games I wanted

I will have more time maybe tomorrow to test thouroughly but I bought new toys that I need to test today.

One of them is: