Quality/Performance Issues in Assassin's Creed: Unity [WCCF]

[exar333]

DX12 or Mantle is not going to do anything for this game.

Its GPU limited on PC. Even an old i3 is more than enough.
On the consoles with lowlevel APi and whatever it gets 20fps because its CPU limited.(Xbox One better than PS4.)

There is something strange going on with performance.

Look at the 50% difference between the 290X and the 980. That's not normal.

Neither is the 100% difference between the AMD 8350 and the 5960x. That's a lot too.

These differences mean you can have some extreme performance combinations between different CPUs and GPUs.

All this points to a very poorly optimized game...

 

[wand3r3r]

Googling assasins creed unity news only turns out bug and glitch articles.



https://www.google.com/search?q=assassin's+creed+unity#q=assassin's+creed+unity&tbm=nws

 

[Keysplayr]

show a video of your awesome fps and setting, uncut. oh and less roof tops with almost nothing in sight like car's pictures. play the game instead of staring at the sky like car's screens.

do the above, is all I am asking. I am not stubborn () proof it and I will change my mind


I feel for you. can't you do a file integrity check? something like verify files/cache. a steam function. there is zero need to redownload everything.

I didn't get this through Steam, but through Uplay. I did not see any file integrity check. I've uninstalled and redownloading. I have a 50Mbit connection so it won't be so that long. a few hours.

And dude, leave out the "awesome" and "uncut" comments next time. My fps was respectably higher than you alluded to. And that was with a single 980, not 980SLI as you claim.

 

[ShintaiDK]

All this points to a very poorly optimized game...

Yep. And the PR engine is busy trying to put the blame elsewhere.

 

[Carfax83]

Since you are on 1440p with GTX 970 G1 SLI and running at 60 fps can you mention what MSAA you are running. Its useless to make statements on performance without mentioning settings at which you achieved it. I am assuming you are running maxed with FXAA and not MSAA. here are a couple of reviews

I'd have to be a complete idiot to use MSAA in this game, which uses a deferred rendering engine, knowing that the diminished quality would not be worth the massive performance hit.

So yes, I use FXAA.

So even with GTX 970 SLI , running the game even at MSAA 2x or 4x and maintaining constant 60 fps is not going to be possible. It might require a GTX 980 overclocked in SLI to get close to 60 fps with MSAA 2x. These are not impressive framerates on a top of the line card in multi GPU.

Again, you'd have to be stupid to use MSAA in this game because the quality of MSAA is diminished in deferred rendering engines due to how they work, but you still get the massive performance hit.

So only someone that's clueless would try to use MSAA in this game, and judge the game's performance with it turned on.

btw you have to blame Nvidia's SLI drivers for poor performance in WatchDogs. :whiste:

Um no... I've had Watch Dogs since the time it was launched, so I am very familiar with the ups and downs of it's performance. SLI drivers worked fine (though scaling was not optimal), but the game's latest patch broke SLI..

Watch dogs now performs well in single card mode with no or very minimal stuttering after the latest patch. But for SLI machines, the game's performance is actually worse.

So I lay blame for that on Ubisoft's doorstep, and not NVidia.

 

[Z15CAM]

AC3 Audio is old AVI mPeg2/mp2 720p CD Format.

Granted I like multi-channel sur-round sound AC3 Encoders such as SoftEnc - But really when ACV-ACC/Mp4-FLC-MKV FF-mPeg exist !!

 

[Carfax83]

Then clearly they have a problem with terrible MSAA implementation.

Normally 4x MSAA loses ~25-30% performance compared to none, but here it seems like its losing half or more.

The MSAA implementation isn't terrible. If you were familiar with the disadvantages of MSAA in a deferred rendering engine, then you wouldn't even be asking me this question.

And your screenshots are terrible considering its running maxed, washed out textures (probably not helped by blurring of FXAA) and extremely bad LOD cutoff/distance.

I respect your opinion, but I also think it's B.S because I know you're pro AMD and you hate anything that has to do with NVidia's Gameworks. So basically although you're entitled to your opinion, your opinion cannot be taken seriously as it's not objective.

So in conclusion, Ubisoft needs to license Frostbite and continue on making "grand" games that is actually optimized. No really. Imagine WD and AC with Frostbite.

Frostbite 3 is a capable engine, but I haven't seen the kind of visuals from any FB3 game that I've seen in ACU.

Examples. Not my personal screenshots, but they serve. These two screenshots alone are superior to anything seen in any FB3 game to date, including Dragon Age Inquisition.

The detail in ACU is unmatched, and so are the amount of animations, the quality of lighting, and even the hair simulation. Plus, ACU supports physically based rendering. Dragon Age Inquisition by comparison has plasticky looking hair and skin, and has no support for PBR as far as I know. Plus the tessellation factor is weak for a modern title, because AMD's tessellation performance is average at best.

And unlike you, my opinion is objective. I have the game on preorder, and I have no irrational hatred towards Bioware or EA..

 

[Carfax83]

Something you must not understand .Not because you don't have issue means that nobody has them or should not have issue. There are like billions of different PCs on the planet. And maybe you should provide a video of your settings then show the in-game quality. Because your screenshots look like Assassin Creed 1.

Whatever man. I don't take your opinion seriously at all, because I know you're biased as hell against NVidia and Ubisoft. And I sure as hell aren't going to go to the trouble of uploading a video just to satisfy your jaded curiosity.

 

[Z15CAM]

Gamers are missing the whole point here.

 

[Carfax83]

he plays thousands of games. and showed a video of his playthrough. you um might want to show a video also of your awesome fps and setting, uncut :twisted: oh and less roof tops with almost nothing in sight :twisted: play the game instead of staring at the sky :twisted:

I'm not going to upload any videos, because I don't care enough to do so. There are plenty of other sources (see GameGPU and PCGhardware.de's review) that will back up my claims as to what kind of frame rates he should be getting.

In the PCGH.de review, a single GTX 980 is getting 40+ FPS at maxed settings 1440p with FXAA. A single GTX 970 is getting around 34 FPS, and that's one of the slower models as well.

If your friend is only 30 to 40 FPS on a 980 SLI setup, then it's because he's either incompetent or made a mistake somewhere in the game configuration.

If I had to guess, he's using MSAA at 4x or TXAA, or maybe he hasn't downloaded the new SLI profile for the game from Geforce Experience.

 

[Z15CAM]

Al jest your not sucked into 60Hz HDMI.

 

[Grooveriding]

Far Cry 4 may be the final straw for Ubisoft in PC gaming. Another technical disaster like Unity or Watch Dogs and they'll have a near impossible time restoring their reputation.

Far Cry 4 can't be another low-tech shoddy port with mediocre visuals and huge performance demands. Shots of the pre-release are variable. One screen looks alright

Then you have a mess like this with some bad textures

So long as there are no next-gen skeleton faces.

 

[Keysplayr]

Ok, I've re-installed the game. Took a while so I couldn't run it til this morning.
i5 2500K @ 4.3GHz, 8GB, Z68, Single GTX980, 1920x1200
ACUnity: All settings Ultra, 4X-MSAA, Bloom, HBAO+
Never left the streets, and it was during the revolt where literally hundreds of people
were crowded at the gates and fighting in the streets. I never once looked up at the
sky to assure accurate gameplay benchmark. Never once climbed to rooftops where
fps is higher. This is the worst it gets for this game.

Any questions or things you want me to try, I'll be happy to.

Keys

 

[KaRLiToS]

I'm not going to upload any videos, because I don't care enough to do so. There are plenty of other sources (see GameGPU and PCGhardware.de's review) that will back up my claims as to what kind of frame rates he should be getting.

In the PCGH.de review, a single GTX 980 is getting 40+ FPS at maxed settings 1440p with FXAA. A single GTX 970 is getting around 34 FPS, and that's one of the slower models as well.

If your friend is only 30 to 40 FPS on a 980 SLI setup, then it's because he's either incompetent or made a mistake somewhere in the game configuration.

If I had to guess, he's using MSAA at 4x or TXAA, or maybe he hasn't downloaded the new SLI profile for the game from Geforce Experience.

Make a video to gain some credibility. If you want to prove a point, prove it right.

Yesterday I tried AC Unity on Quad R9 290x with triple monitor at 8040x1440 and to my surprise (not) only one card was utilized and it was litteraly a slide show. 10 fps max (at ultra settings of course) and please don't call me incompetent.

 

[Keysplayr]

Make a video to gain some credibility. If you want to prove a point, prove it right.

Yesterday I tried unity on Quad R9 290x with triple monitor at 8040x1440 and to my zurprise (not) only one card was utilized and it was litteraly a slide show. 10 fps max (at ultra settings of course) and please don't call me incompetent.

My performance numbers above seem to back up what Carfax is saying in this case. I could choose FXAA myself and boost the fps a bit higher than what I show in my graphs at 4X-MSAA.

And what does R9290X Quad fire at 8040x1440 have in common with Carfax's GTX980 at 1440 argument?
It seems to show that crossfire isn't working yet on the 290s and since only one is running nobody can expect a single card to run at that ridiculous resolution. Of course you're going to hit single digit fps.

 

[KaRLiToS]

My performance numbers above seem to back up what Carfax is saying in this case. I could choose FXAA myself and boost the fps a bit higher than what I show in my graphs at 4X-MSAA.

But according to the whole internet and their stock, it doesn't seem to work out well for everyone.

 

[Silverforce11]

The MSAA implementation isn't terrible. If you were familiar with the disadvantages of MSAA in a deferred rendering engine, then you wouldn't even be asking me this question.

I respect your opinion, but I also think it's B.S because I know you're pro AMD and you hate anything that has to do with NVidia's Gameworks. So basically although you're entitled to your opinion, your opinion cannot be taken seriously as it's not objective.

Frostbite 3 is a capable engine, but I haven't seen the kind of visuals from any FB3 game that I've seen in ACU.

Examples. Not my personal screenshots, but they serve. These two screenshots alone are superior to anything seen in any FB3 game to date, including Dragon Age Inquisition.

The detail in ACU is unmatched, and so are the amount of animations, the quality of lighting, and even the hair simulation. Plus, ACU supports physically based rendering. Dragon Age Inquisition by comparison has plasticky looking hair and skin, and has no support for PBR as far as I know. Plus the tessellation factor is weak for a modern title, because AMD's tessellation performance is average at best.

And unlike you, my opinion is objective. I have the game on preorder, and I have no irrational hatred towards Bioware or EA..

I'm actually not pro AMD. I use only Intel CPUs (because they stomp all over AMD's) and I buy whatever GPU that gives me the best bang for buck, brand agnostic. I strongly recommended the 970 when it was launched due to its great pricing. I also argued AMD needed massive price cuts across the range, well below what most expected. But accuse away...

My hate for FXAA isn't because its an NV technology. I equally hate MLAA and SMAA or any other shader based AA when it adds a ton of blur. I call it the Vaseline filters.

MSAA is still functional in a deferred rendering engine, case in point: BF3, BF4. Performance loss isn't major, certainly nowhere near the turd implementation from Ubisoft. I mean how is it acceptable for such massive performance loss to use MSAA? It's almost the same perf hit as SSAA! Rather than demanding better optimizations, you diss others who run with MSAA because they prefer a cleaner sharp image.

Those fake screenshots are great, straight from the pre-rendered factory. The fact that you play the game on "Max" settings and your own screenshots are rubbish in comparison should have alerted you to Ubi's often misleading PR selling "special" rendered images as in-game screenshots.

ps. My hatred of Ubisoft is very rational. Imagine your favourite franchise, case in point, AC.. now, suddenly imagine in-game, a core gameplay feature like jumping roof top to roof top.. no longer works, you fall through the roof and die, if your internet has poor latency to their servers in EUROPE. This is what happened with The Settlers. Those little guys that move goods to-and-fro warehouses to buildings? Ubisoft added DRM into their AI, everytime a settler enters a warehouse, it triggers a sync with Ubi servers to verify you purchased the game. If its not verified due to lag, the settlers get stuck and your game goes to the crapper. My legit Settlers was unplayable for a very long time (until they caved and patched to remove that lame DRM) and I paid a lot of money for it!

 

[Keysplayr]

I'm actually not pro AMD. I use only Intel CPUs (because they stomp all over AMD's) and I buy whatever GPU that gives me the best bang for buck, brand agnostic. I strongly recommended the 970 when it was launched due to its great pricing. I also argued AMD needed massive price cuts across the range, well below what most expected. But accuse away...

My hate for FXAA isn't because its an NV technology. I equally hate MLAA and SMAA or any other shader based AA when it adds a ton of blur. I call it the Vaseline filters.

MSAA is still functional in a deferred rendering engine, case in point: BF3, BF4. Performance loss isn't major, certainly nowhere near the turd implementation from Ubisoft. I mean how is it acceptable for such massive performance loss to use MSAA? It's almost the same perf hit as SSAA! Rather than demanding better optimizations, you diss others who run with MSAA because they prefer a cleaner sharp image.

Those fake screenshots are great, straight from the pre-rendered factory. The fact that you play the game on "Max" settings and your own screenshots are rubbish in comparison should have alerted you to Ubi's often misleading PR selling "special" rendered images as in-game screenshots.

ps. My hatred of Ubisoft is very rational. Imagine your favourite franchise, case in point, AC.. now, suddenly imagine in-game, a core gameplay feature like jumping roof top to roof top.. no longer works, you fall through the roof and die, if your internet has poor latency to their servers in EUROPE. This is what happened with The Settlers. Those little guys that move goods to-and-fro warehouses to buildings? Ubisoft added DRM into their AI, everytime a settler enters a warehouse, it triggers a sync with Ubi servers to verify you purchased the game. If its not verified due to lag, the settlers get stuck and your game goes to the crapper. My legit Settlers was unplayable for a very long time (until they caved and patched to remove that lame DRM) and I paid a lot of money for it!

Ubi just released a 792MB patch that may help alleviate some of your complaints about the game. But beware, after it installed on my PC, ACUnity would not start and hung on the mission loading screen forever. I had to uninstall and re-install. Took overnight.

 

[Keysplayr]

But according to the whole internet and their stock, it doesn't seem to work out well for everyone.

Obviously not the whole internet. And if it doesn't work out well for everyone and only some, that implies configuration issues as well. At launch this game was incredibly buggy. Right? I mean, I experienced a few little anomalies, but nothing like Arno falling through rooftops or people falling through streets. Ubi has begun patching. But even before the patch, I was averaging between 40 and 50 ish frames per second in most areas regardless of traffic or amount of action on the screen.
Well, what can I do to convince you that my findings are 1 million percent accurate besides offering you a kidney?

Hmmmm. shadowplay may be an option for you here. I'll look into making a video for you, if you require it.

 

[KaRLiToS]

Obviously not the whole internet. And if it doesn't work out well for everyone and only some, that implies configuration issues as well. At launch this game was incredibly buggy. Right? I mean, I experienced a few little anomalies, but nothing like Arno falling through rooftops or people falling through streets. Ubi has begun patching. But even before the patch, I was averaging between 40 and 50 ish frames per second in most areas regardless of traffic or amount of action on the screen.

Hmmmm. shadowplay may be an option for you here. I'll look into making a video for you, if you require it.

It is always fun making video of our gameplay though :biggrin:

Well, what can I do to convince you that my findings are 1 million percent accurate besides offering you a kidney?

Key, why do you always have to have an arrogant and sarcastic attitude? :| (It is in all your posts )
Check the above quote I did from you, your post would have been nice without this sentence. No?

Ubi just released a 792MB patch that may help alleviate some of your complaints about the game. But beware, after it installed on my PC, ACUnity would not start and hung on the mission loading screen forever. I had to uninstall and re-install. Took overnight.

I installed that patch, still have the hair flying in the air bugs. And slow fps, and no I won't disconnect my internet or try single monitor ( especially that there is a nice option in the Video Settings mentionning -multi-monitor so they support it out of the box...but it is not working well)

Don't get me wrong, I know they will fix their game, but why release it when half the product is ready ?

I am not biased because Ubisoft is (was) my favorite studio, I personnally know friends that worked there. I'm from Montréal you know, need to support the locals.

 

[Keysplayr]

It is always fun making video of our gameplay though :biggrin:




Key, why do you always have to have an arrogant and sarcastic attitude? :| (It is in all your posts )
Check the above quote I did from you, your post would have been nice without this sentence. No?




I installed that patch, still have the hair flying in the air bugs. And slow fps, and no I won't disconnect my internet or try single monitor ( especially that there is a nice option in the Video Settings mentionning -multi-monitor so they support it out of the box...but it is not working well)

Don't get me wrong, I know they will fix their game, but why release it when half the product is ready ?

I am not biased because Ubisoft is (was) my favorite studio, I personnally know friends that worked there. I'm from Montréal you know, need to support the locals.

Karlitos I understand that when you read something, you give it the attitude yourself in your own mind. I have no attitude, but I will say that in hindsight, I could have used a smiley to show it was an attempt at levity while at the same time opposing your view. But in the future, do try not to take everything I say personally attacking you or being not nice. It isn't about you. It's about the disagreement in our conversation. And I will use smileys for you. I don't want to spend the rest of our conversations telling you that I mean you no harm. Please. Otherwise, If I bother you that much I can suggest we block each others posts. But i don't want that to happen.

And I totally agree with you. Yes Ubi should fix their game, and I do think they should have waited until all these things were fixed before releasing the game. I mean, there isn't any way shape or form that Ubi did not realize the game had this many severe bugs. No way.

EDIT: I just set up shadowplay, and I'll make a recording for you. Just give me about 10 minutes and I'll get it on here.

 

[KaRLiToS]

Nice key . I hope you can upload it at 1080p60HD , I really like that new feature from YouTube.

 

[Mem]

Ubisoft should sack all their developers and get real with PR,maybe sack them as well,bad workman always blames his tools.

Ubisoft sad you have gone this low maybe stick with a simple pacman game ,master that before you move on to something a little more complicated.

 

[Keysplayr]

Nice key . I hope you can upload it at 1080p60HD , I really like that new feature from YouTube.

I'm kind of a novice at uploading YouTube vids. So we'll see. It's uploading now. keep in mind that when using shadowplay, the framerate takes about a 3 to 4 fps hit. Not much, but there is a small penalty. nothing compared to fraps that annihilates framerates.

Video is about 60% done uploading. I'll post a link when it's done.

Looks like it uploaded at 50+fps at 1080p. Let me know if the quality is good on your end. Like I said, I'm a newbie at YouTube uploads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBSyd1rR9sk

/cheers.

 

[KaRLiToS]

Wow keysplayr, looks very smooth. I bet that in two months you will have a locked 60fps with a single GTX 980 at the same settings (I left a comment on your vid)

________________________________

I just tried to run Black Flag to compare and apparently eyefinity doesn't work anymore with recent drivers. I haven't found many info about it on the net but still found some.

http://nerdanswer.com/answer.php?q=580632
http://forums.amd.com/game/messageview.cfm?catid=474&threadid=180100

Before the recent driver update, I was running some version of Catalyst 13.x (maybe it was 13.12?) and cropped resolutions weren't a thing, so I played AC4 at 5760x1080. The picture on the 1920x1200 monitor was stretched, but I got used to it. No biggie.

I just installed the new Catalyst driver, and was FINALLY able to get true 5760x1080. The Samsung monitor finally ran eyefinity with black bars on the top and bottom. Along with the vertical adjustment tool, every monitor was now rendering at 1920x1080 perfectly, no stretching or anything.

Fired up AC4, and find that only the middle monitor was working, despite changing the resolution in-game over and over to no avail. The two side monitors remained black, but did indicate that they were receiving a signal. I uninstalled the drivers using DDU and reinstalled 14.6 again. Still the same deal. Eyefinity works fine on the desktop and for web surfing. It's just AC4.

I fired up Bioshock infinite, and it seems to be working correctly. So this issue only happens in AC4. I just want to finish the campaign! Anyone have any ideas about this issue?

It really sucks.