Is Quantum Break PC Fixed? Yes and No...Mostly No

Is this because of UWP? Remedy? Both?

Nvidia crashes. Can't get 1080p native and 60fps unless some big drops in quality are done.

Runs Xbox One settings flawlessly.

@Zero_epyon: mostly nvidia some of it is remedy as optimization of render engine to work with pcdrivers is developer job. Not providing solutions to hardware issues with nvidia cards is nvidia issue

The game is a hot mess all around, UWP games section needs to be more like a proper store front that launches games not as fucking apps and that would get rid of at least some of the obvious issues. Also did they finally patch in a way to turn off motion blur? I'll tolerate that shit on a console, but on a PC game? gtfo.

Haven't been able to play it since the update, won't load......pathetic

And nyadc tried to tell me the PC version was fixed lol. This is a short linear game that was in development for 5 years yet its broken like a Bethesda RPG.

I don't even think any Bethesda RPG was THIS bad. Maybe Skyrim on PS3? Dunno.

This is from even before they patched the game, if you're patient I'll make another post patch.

How is the game a "hot mess" all around ?

@dynamitecop: I remember when you made that vid for me and you said it was just my card. Remedy admitted they fucked up the frame pacing and since the patch I can run the game fine. So, clearly it was not just my card. Broken game is broken. What a surprise.

Good god, this is why you never buy the PCv until at least a year later.

which pc version has been bad not counting UWP games recently? AK and? Even From soft managed to make ds3 run fine, heck 30fps cap on pc runs better than the game does on consoles

Yeah, AK was the last notably shit release I can think of, and even that wasn't too recent. Games almost been out for a year now.

No. It will never be fix because microsoft dont want to overshadow thier baby xbox one.

Might do a new playthrough now that you can disable film grain, I didn't experience the driver crashes for some reason on my first playthrough

This game is such as mess that i'd feel dirty keeping this crap on my hdd. No HDD's deserve this 6/10 game.

@Zero_epyon: It's Quantum Broken... on NVIDIA hardware.

Quantum Break is fine on AMD PC GPUs.

@ronvalencia: My 980 Ti runs it fine. The game is a hog though and does not warrant the steep requirements. The graphics are blurry and unimpressive. Factor in the upscaling bullshit and how this game struggles (on all cards) when you disable it. There are serious issues with this engine and port.

HDD's and 2016, get on with the times!

My speculation...

If QB uses XBO's ESRAM strength with large among of TMU/ROPS read/write memory operations for it's effects layers (shader program could be simple with high memory write operations), it will gimped on PC GPUs without comparable memory bandwidth. 980 Ti has enough memory bandwidth to replicate XBO's ESRAM memory read and write operations. PC GPU's higher FLOPS power can't do anything about very large memory read and write operations bottleneck i.e. this is known as "memory wall" issue.

Fat PC GPUs works best with preforming complex/large shader programs within it's on-chip SRAM storage with less memory writes to VRAM usage i.e. any register storage (SRAM) spill over to VRAM incurs a large performance hit.

PC GPU memory usage patterns are closer to PS4 than on XBO i.e. Hitman DX12 wasn't that crazy like QB.

Large mount of flipping between small read and write operations incurs large overhead mode switch with GDDR5 or HBM i.e. both are half duplex DRAMs. Both PS4 and PC works best with burst mode read and write operations i.e. read and write with larger chunks of data with minimal mode switch.

We know XBO's 12 CU's TMU+ROPS can saturate ESRAM + DDR3 memory bandwidth with simple shader programs.

Both NVIDIA and AMD PC GPUs has "glass jaws" issues i.e. memory bandwidth wasn't increasing at the same pace as FLOPS power.

XBone has it's strength and QB has exploited it.

Four module HBMv2 is the attempt to close the gap between high FLOPS and memory bandwidth.

You speculations are shit, man! ESRAM has read/write possibilities, BUT EVERY 8TH CYCLE!

XBone has it's strength and QB has exploited it.

Something under NDA?

So what with the 8th cycle? ESRAM is a full duplex memory technology hence it has less mode switch overheads than half duplex DRAMs.

Sorry, it's just a technology type difference. My PC GPUs are also affected by QB's memory access patterns and it's different from Hitman DX12 (AMD Gaming Evolved title).

That means it doesn't have read/write operations unlike GDDR5 with every cycle!

Read http://electronicdesign.com/analog/memory-wall-ending-multicore-scaling

XBO's eSRAM has 156 GB/s and DDR3 has 52 GB/s effective bandwidth.

140 / 204 = 71 percent efficient (ESRAM)

52 / 68 = 76 percent efficient (DDR3)

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-the-xbox-one-architects

in real testing you get 140-150GB/s rather than the peak 204GB/

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-microsoft-to-unlock-more-gpu-power-for-xbox-one-developers

At our peak fill-rate of 13.65GPixels/s that adds up to 164GB/s of real bandwidth that is needed which pretty much saturates our ESRAM bandwidth

PS4's 135 GB/s (GDDR5)

135 / 176 = 77 percent efficient

AMD Radeon HD 5870 has theoretical 153 GB/s with a 108 GB/s practical i.e. 70.5 percent efficient.

AMD's memory controller efficiencies are pretty consistent i.e. AMD uses brute force to overcome their "glass jaws" issues with their memory controllers.

Polaris has a new memory controller and still supports GDDR5 i.e. it's about time AMD address this "low hanging fruit".

Intel... superior with low latency memory controller.

Intel's memory controller is superior in low access latency.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To test the memory bound problem

Can XBO's TMU saturate memory bandwidth?

Answer: Yes.

Fury X's HBM's 512GB/s x 77 percent efficient = 394 GB/s

394 / 140= 2.8X

Fury X's 1928x1080p = 2077440 pixels per frame x 40 fps = 83,097,600 pixels per second

XBO's 1280x720p = 921,600 pixels per frame x 30 fps =27,648,000 pixels per second

83,097,600 / 27,648,000 = 3.0X

Notice 2.8X is close to 3.0X, hence it's a memory wall problem.

GDDR5 is nothing without memory controller. AMD's memory controller is a f**king joke. As with Bulldozer CPU, AMD did not fix their "glass jaws" issues for a long time!!!! Hopefully, they fix this problem with Polaris !!

Quantum Break's shader programs was kept simple enough to exploit XBO's memory bandwidth strength. The PC version attempted to replicate XBO's memory handling and negated PC GPU's higher FLOPS power.

Shader programs such SweetFX are heavy shader programs hence it plays into PC GPU's strength.

.

The PC port already has to work from behind with the way the UWP is (no full screen, can't use any of your framerate counters or recording software like shadowplay, vsync), as that shit is just nonsense. Microsoft or Remedy, or both rushed a port clearly, given how many basic shit they had to patch. They had to patch their fucking logo during start up mate, that's the struggle we dealing with here.

Which is why I said Yes and No in the title.

I can tell you from my experience with the windows 10 version: The game still doesn't have an exit button... things like FRAPS don't work, some other minor fixes the community could have made are unavailable because of the windows 10 store as well.

The game doesn't run that smoothly, you won't enjoy it if you need a perfect 60fps because I don't think it's even possible no matter what hardware you've got, but I'm running it fine enough for my liking on a GTX 970 on pretty much max settings. Better than the Xbox One performance at least, though I couldn't tell you the average FPS because of the previously mentioned issue, but it's not all that consistent (on any graphics settings, even with the 30fps "lock" in place it doesn't stay at 30fps... and looks worse than just having it unlocked). If you're particularly bothered by frame rate fluctuations you'll wanna pass on playing the PC.

Worst thing about the game imo is the awful screen filter/blur that's apparently just an artifact of the actual graphics engine so it'll never be improved. I'm enjoying the game overall though, despite I finish the Xbox One version and now playing the windows 10 version. My personal advice, I would definitely NOT pay full price for it, but if you are still interested in it, I would suggest buying the Xbox One version should you chose to buy Xbox One console in the distant future, because the PC version just doesn't run well. The framerate dips way more than on the Xbox version. At the end of the day, Quantum Break is just very average all around.

@ronvalencia:

Did you know that Xbone has DGPU FPU double stacked eSRAM with HBM combined with MMU? And also Xbone is a Polaris archutecture? No? Know you know.

Keep dreaming, MrX follower. And about that PS4 bandwidth : Oddworld: New ‘n’ Tasty Dev On PS4’s 8GB GDDR5 RAM: “Fact That Memory Operates at 172GB/s is Amazing"

http://gamingbolt.com/oddworld-inhabitants-dev-on-ps4s-8gb-gddr5-ram-fact-that-memory-operates-at-172gbs-is-amazing

So, you add Xbone's GPU pixel fill-rate to ESRAM bandwith. Why not add PS4's GPU pixel fill-rate to GDDR5 bandwidth?

1. Sony has overridden that 172 GB/s assertion i.e. AMD's memory controller efficiency is consistent across multiple product lines.

2. 7950's 240 GB/s with about 177 GB/s effective memory bandwidth beats PS4's MSAA performance. If PS4 actually delivered 172 GB/s memory bandwidth, PS4 should have rivalled 7950's MSAA performance.

3. MSAA mostly affects memory bandwidth and ROPS.

4. ROPS includes MSAA resolve processors.

5. My old 7950-900 GPU still beats PS4 in MSAA.

6. Both 7950 and PS4 has 32 ROPS with the same amount of MSAA resolve processors.

@davillain-: Are you sure you downloaded the patch? Open Windows Store and go to your profile,Downloads & Updates and then check for updates. There is definitely an exit game option now. Also, frame pacing has been fixed and general performance is better. I get a solid 1080p/60fps when the upscaling is enabled.

Thanks for the heads up BassMan. I'll check the updates when I get home tonight, I been busy playing Dark Souls 3 for the most parts to even get back into QB.

What a terrible port.

This does not give me the confidence in future Xbox One to PC ports.

Its GFWL all over again. Still not buying anything while they don't support SLI.

Try Forza 6 Apex beta for PC.

Includes a frame rate counter.

If they were to release Total War Warhammer (one of my most anticipated games) exclusively on UWP, I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. It has to be the most obtrusive, unusable and badly laid out store fronts on the internet. On top of that the only game I have bought from it is QB, problems with bad porting aside, the other half of the issues lie squarely at the feet of the Windows App store. It's truly abysmal and while MS release their PC versions exclusively on it they will not receive a single penny from me.