Sapphire AMD Radeon R9 280x 3GB Dual X graphics card
Transcend 8GB DDR 3 1333MHhz RAM
Was really excited to play this game, and had even per-ordered it. But the game is almost unplayable. I have turned off Anti-aliasing, as well as soft shadows, ambient occlusion and PureHair. My video drivers are also up to date. I really don't know what's wrong. The game slows down to a slideshow, especially during the cutscenes. The gameplay is significantly better, although there are microstutters.
Is it just me, or does the game have serious performance issues on AMD hardware?
I herd its because of the Denuvo DRM they added to the game.
Is that so? I have also played Metal Gear Solid: The Phantom Pain and Mad Max on Steam, but they ran fine, in spite of being protected by Denuvo. Batman" Arkham Knight was also a mess, but that was more due to WB's negligence, and had nothing to do with Denuvo.
Well for 1080p you need R9 290 or 780ti type of gpu to get 40+ fps.... Whats funny is that GTX970 performs virtually the same as Fury nano upto the FuryX ~50 fps.
Well for 1080p you need R9 290 or 780ti type of gpu to get 40+ fps.... Whats funny is that GTX970 performs virtually the same as Fury nano upto the FuryX ~50 fps.
I would just wait it out for drivers and patches
Yeah, I realised that lowering the graphics quality WAY down, made the game playable. This seems to be an unoptimised console port, just like so many other PC games. I don't have the luxury of waiting for patches, since I would be moving out of the country soon, and won't have access to a gaming PC for the next 6 to 9 months.
I have the game pre-loaded and I will try it out tonight. I am not worried about performance as I have a 980Ti, but it sucks that it is not running well on lower end specs. The game does seem to have very impressive graphics, so maybe the barrier to entry is just higher than normal.
Game runs fine for me at 3440 x 1440 at 100hz. Have all the settings dial up except Shadows on High and using FXAA. Majority of the time it stays above 80fps but sometimes it drops into the 70s.
The only issue I have is that SLI scaling is okayish, but like usual it isn't to an ideal level.
Tomb Raider uses a lot of tessellation so GPUs that aren't as good in tessellation like the GCN cards and Keplar, might see a good improvement with it lowered. In Maxwell, it is fine but that is pretty much Maxwell's big thing, tessellation performance.
I have the game pre-loaded and I will try it out tonight. I am not worried about performance as I have a 980Ti, but it sucks that it is not running well on lower end specs. The game does seem to have very impressive graphics, so maybe the barrier to entry is just higher than normal.
But I read a couple of websites, which mentioned that game's graphics is almost identical to the XBox One version, except for a few extra effects and stuff. That console is a lot less powerful than my PC, even when you factor in the resources needed for running the OS in the background. This does seem like a badly optimised game for the PC. I ahven't faced this issue with any other game. Even Arkham Knight, when it came out, ran like a charm on my rig.
@ShadowDeathX said:
Game runs fine for me at 3440 x 1440 at 100hz. Have all the settings dial up except Shadows on High and using FXAA. Majority of the time it stays above 80fps but sometimes it drops into the 70s.
The only issue I have is that SLI scaling is okayish, but like usual it isn't to an ideal level.
Tomb Raider uses a lot of tessellation so GPUs that aren't as good in tessellation like the GCN cards and Keplar, might see a good improvement with it lowered. In Maxwell, it is fine but that is pretty much Maxwell's big thing, tessellation performance.
Maybe I should turn tessellation off, crank up the other settings, and see if I get acceptable performance.
@unrealgunner said:
Yes I said that in my thread here and I got hate for it at the end of the day it is an unoptimized game not the worst but unoptimized no doubt
Actually it has become somewhat of a 'norm' now to release badly optimised ports for the PC, then take their own sweet time to patch it. The worst part is, hardly any games have demos now. If I could actually know how this game performed, I would never have bought it until a few months after release. Even on low setting, my graphic's cards fans whine like a jet turbine while playing this game. A clear indication that it is using a lot more resources than needed.
Game runs great for me 1440p max settings with no AA. Very smooth so far. Unfortunately, there are some pre-rendered scenes that kick in and run at 30fps. :(
Game runs great for me 1440p max settings with no AA. Very smooth so far. Unfortunately, there are some pre-rendered scenes that kick in and run at 30fps. :(
Yeah, I did a bit of online research. People with NVidia cards are able to get better performance compared to comparable AMD cards. And AMD hasn't even released an updated driver after the game release. After all, this is anyway an NVidia optimised game so I should have expected poor performance on my AMD hardware.
Also, I did notice that the game runs pretty smooth until I encounter one of those nasty pre-rendered scenes, which are way too choppy. But when I gain back the control of my character, the choppiness remains and I have to restart the game.
Game runs great for me 1440p max settings with no AA. Very smooth so far. Unfortunately, there are some pre-rendered scenes that kick in and run at 30fps. :(
Yeah, I did a bit of online research. People with NVidia cards are able to get better performance compared to comparable AMD cards. And AMD hasn't even released an updated driver after the game release. After all, this is anyway an NVidia optimised game so I should have expected poor performance on my AMD hardware.
Also, I did notice that the game runs pretty smooth until I encounter one of those nasty pre-rendered scenes, which are way too choppy. But when I gain back the control of my character, the choppiness remains and I have to restart the game.
I have not noticed choppiness, just that the pre-rendered scenes are indeed 30fps and all the load is taken off the GPU. I run all my games off SSD, so that may make a difference. Also, Nvidia did release the game ready drivers for this game and The Diivision beta. AMD driver support sucks in general. Nvidia will release game ready drivers even if it is not an Nvidia sponsored game.
Man, it looks like the game needs a Crossfire/SLI set-up to look similar to those screenshots!
No, I am running a single 980 Ti. Shots were taken with Steam 1440p max settings, no AA. Unfortunately, the gamespot compression sucks. They look better on my steam profile, but not as good as the local files on my PC.
@funkyzoom: I was just thinking... did you check your VRAM usage. With 3 GB, you will not be able to use the highest texture setting. That in itself could be the cause of your stuttering.
I'm playing this game on a GTX970 and put my settings just shy of maxing it out (Textures on High, SMAA for AA, motion blur, vignette blur turned off)
I can run this game at 60 FPS at 1080p and it looks absolutely gorgeous. I don't think screenshots do it even justice.
The graphics, the detail in the geometry, the animations, the physics, the tesselation... all of it has to be seen in motion to be believed. This is easily the best looking game I've ever seen.
I do hope patching and driver updates help you alleviate your problems. Seems like TR2013 ran better on AMD and this one runs better on NVIDIA ?
There are a couple of benchmarks that some sites did:
Guru3D:
Rise of the Tomb Raider: PC graphics performance benchmark review
TechpowerUp:
Rise of the Tomb Raider: Performance Analysis
They seemed to use different settings/version:
Using GTX Titan X, which has 12 GB of VRAM, we tested the memory usage of the game. As you can see it always fills up around 6-7 GB of VRAM. This may sound shocking at first, but in reality the game runs very well with cards that don't have as much memory - look at the performance charts. It seems that Crystal Dynamics' engine will happy use as much VRAM as it can, but is very well optimized to make due with much less, without sacrificing framerate.
------
@funkyzoom: So, by seeing all these, you have to sacrifice some settings in order to play with 60FPS with R9 380X.
@funkyzoom: i dont have the game, amd hasn't released a driver update yet, and it is a gameworks game, but
if you have crimson drivers installed, uninstall radeon settings, as the tesellation and shader cache options are always set to amd optimized in global settings. for graphics options turn off depth of field and motion blur. fxaa for aa should be fine, as well as low shadows. pure hair should be ok too as its not nvidia's hairworks tech. as a last resort reduce your ram speed to 1066 in bios these might help a little.
@funkyzoom: I was just thinking... did you check your VRAM usage. With 3 GB, you will not be able to use the highest texture setting. That in itself could be the cause of your stuttering.
came in here to say this, I have had a bit of stuttering in cutscenes and during some areas with gameplay and turning Textures to High from Very High fixed this. I'm on a GTX970 so with 3gb of Vram you will definitely want to keep textures down a notch
@funkyzoom: I was just thinking... did you check your VRAM usage. With 3 GB, you will not be able to use the highest texture setting. That in itself could be the cause of your stuttering.
What you said is correct. I was playing the game at pretty low settings. I tried setting everything else to their highest values, except for Anti-aliasing (which was off) and Texture resolution at 'High'. The game runs like a charm now, with NO stuttering! I even have Purehair at it's highest, and tessellation is on as well.
@funkyzoom: I was just thinking... did you check your VRAM usage. With 3 GB, you will not be able to use the highest texture setting. That in itself could be the cause of your stuttering.
What you said is correct. I was playing the game at pretty low settings. I tried setting everything else to their highest values, except for Anti-aliasing (which was off) and Texture resolution at 'High'. The game runs like a charm now, with NO stuttering! I even have Purehair at it's highest, and tessellation is on as well.
Glad you get to enjoy the game and I am sure it still looks very good with your settings.
@funkyzoom: I was just thinking... did you check your VRAM usage. With 3 GB, you will not be able to use the highest texture setting. That in itself could be the cause of your stuttering.
What you said is correct. I was playing the game at pretty low settings. I tried setting everything else to their highest values, except for Anti-aliasing (which was off) and Texture resolution at 'High'. The game runs like a charm now, with NO stuttering! I even have Purehair at it's highest, and tessellation is on as well.
Glad you get to enjoy the game and I am sure it still looks very good with your settings.
Yeah, all thanks to you! The game looks pretty stunning now. The fans of my graphics card continue running at very high speeds when I play the game, but I don't suppose that's an issue
@funkyzoom: This game uses a lot of advanced rendering and your GPU is being pushed hard (lots of heat). The fans are just doing their job. As long as it is not crashing, no need to worry. :)
The very high textures use double the vram compared to the high texture setting.
It's funny because the difference between very high and high is pretty much unnoticeable in most cases except for close up cutscene shots of Lara and a few more details here or there on select few textures.
Certainly doesn't seem worth going from 3GB of vRAM to 6GB vRAM at 1080p.
If you have the vRAM then enable very high textures because there is no performance difference but if you are not sporting a 290/290x/390x 8gb version or 980ti/Titan X then don't bother switching to very high textures because you will experience lots of stuttering once you get past chapter 2 and reach the Soviet Installation.
Nvidia themselves made this statement so it's not like I am the only one who doesn't see much difference.
In the majority of scenes there's a minimal improvement on Very High, as exemplified by the following set of images and comparisons.
Those with 4GB GPUs are recommended to use High as VRAM stuttering can be observed on Very High, especially when swapping between gameplay, cutscenes and cinematics, and between gameplay zone transitions.
For a smooth experience with those max-quality, 4K x 4K textures, a 6GB GPU is instead recommended.
I think i'll wait till end of the year to play this. Hopefully it'll get some updates and run better at that point. I have a 970 gtx and I'm not gonna play this game at 50 fps.
Sapphire AMD Radeon R9 280x 3GB Dual X graphics card
Transcend 8GB DDR 3 1333MHhz RAM
Was really excited to play this game, and had even per-ordered it. But the game is almost unplayable. I have turned off Anti-aliasing, as well as soft shadows, ambient occlusion and PureHair. My video drivers are also up to date. I really don't know what's wrong. The game slows down to a slideshow, especially during the cutscenes. The gameplay is significantly better, although there are microstutters.
Is it just me, or does the game have serious performance issues on AMD hardware?
First of all, wait until AMD actually has a new driver for this. They are slow, thats the thing with AMD, they are cheaper while giving performance, but you have to wait for decent drivers. Once AMD gets a new driver out I'm sure it will be a better experience for you. But knowing AMD it could be well past a month before they get the driver out. (This is why I haven't looked upon them since the 5870). But don't use Very high textures. With 3 gb of vram, ti's not enough. Using Very high textures i'm using around 7-9gb of vram out of my 12. So stick to medium or high if it doesn't give you stuttering.
Just realize AMD sucks at delivering drivers close to launch. Once they do however, you should be fine.
Well for 1080p you need R9 290 or 780ti type of gpu to get 40+ fps.... Whats funny is that GTX970 performs virtually the same as Fury nano upto the FuryX ~50 fps.
I would just wait it out for drivers and patches
LOL, does it look any better the previous Tomb Raider? it looked good and worked well for the most time.
EDIT: as far as I see it doesn't look any different, so I guess lazy optimization
@PredatorRules: Rise of the Tomb Raider looks noticeably better than the previous game and is using a more advanced engine. It is not surprising that the new game is demanding as it is one of the best looking games I have played. The previous game still looks good though.
At least Guru3d confirms my own beliefs of games being enjoyable enough at ~40 fps, so long as minimums are 30 fps or better.
It all depends what your standards are. 40fps to me is still not smooth enough. Even with G-Sync, you still notice the lack of frames. I recommend using motion blur if you are struggling to maintain a good framerate. It will at least give the illusion of smooth motion.
Game runs fine for me at 3440 x 1440 at 100hz. Have all the settings dial up except Shadows on High and using FXAA. Majority of the time it stays above 80fps but sometimes it drops into the 70s.
The only issue I have is that SLI scaling is okayish, but like usual it isn't to an ideal level.
Tomb Raider uses a lot of tessellation so GPUs that aren't as good in tessellation like the GCN cards and Keplar, might see a good improvement with it lowered. In Maxwell, it is fine but that is pretty much Maxwell's big thing, tessellation performance.
Log in to comment