A quick note: It looks like the FSR2 artifacting was happening on the 6700 XT as well, but I just didn't notice it until I tested the A750 and GTX 1060. Again, I wish I would have had time for testing more GPUs, as well as looking at CPU performance, but this was all I could fit in last night and this morning before having to get to work! Hopefully it's useful and/or interesting! Also: remember screen tearing is due to me recording on a 60FPS capture card with the game running at an unlocked frame rate. You would not see the screen tearing if you were playing the game on a freesync/gsync display within your range. Oh and the game is called Immortals of Aveum. Apparently I may not have actually said that in the video? There's lots of comments asking.

Love the new trend of games looking 20% better but requiring 400% more power than they did only a few years ago. Christ.

safe to say the 4060 is a great 720p card

There was a time when Low, High and Ultra had some difference along with FPS

I am a UE5/Unity dev. Lumen + Nanite are cool, it's the future definitely, although there won't be that massive of a jump from low to high with these 2 technologies running. There's a large spike of performance lost just to run these 2, but then it scales much better than traditional methods. So the bigger the game, the better the results. I wouldn't set anything to Ultra as I suspect that they just bumped Lumen quality to 2, theres massive difference in FPS between 0.25 and 2 without large visual impact.

The worst part is the game doesn't even look that visually impressive to justify being so heavy.

Safe to say the 4090 is a great 1080P Card !

Most fun thing about these new games is that they don't look much better than what we got before (actually often looking worse cause they're so muddy and shimmery) but often stutter and don't run well even on xx80 GPUs

Thank you AAA developers. The people have always been asking for games so hard to run you need a multi thousand dollar money sink computer just to run your games at a playable frame rate, not like, fun games made with passion for the creation first or anything.

My GPU is definitely ready. Got my 720p 30hz monitor out for my RTX 4080/5800x3d build. Probably won’t max out that high refresh rate monitor.

So this really is what we all need the latest and greatest features and newest top tier GPUs for? In Cyberpunk I'm at least able to see it... proves to me that art direction and creative area design will always be the standout "features" to look out for. :)

I love how this was the game that specifically said they prioritized how the game would look over making it run well but it doesn't even look that great its just your usual foggy, glaringly bright, "photorealistic" mess

Look at this game and see how it runs, now look at DOOM Eternal and see how that runs. Enough said really. I dont think we're making any progress sadly

We are lucky if we get 2 games in the next 5 years that are fully optimised

the only thing that surprise me was how capable the old gpus are compared to the new ones from a price to performance standpoint

So it's going to be like that huh? Devs relying on DLSS/FSR to reach playable framerates. Remnant 2 devs even said that they designed their game with DLSS/FSR in mind to reach playable framerates on modern PCs.

Hope you get millions of subs in the next few years. You’re great for the people who may not have the best of builds and you test and compare so many different GPUs that it allows for good recommendations

Daniel Owen is the ONLY reviewer that i don’t need to open subtitles to understand. Thank you very much for your dedication and ultra clear English both :)

Please dont change the way you do these videos. There is no other channel that provides such depth

The effort here is awesome. I've recently discovered your channel and will continue to tune in!

I have 6600XT. I can tell you right now, that i'm not paying for games that look and feel like tech demos for new engine. Give me good story and gameplay

Ue5 featutes are nice but its crazy what subpar optimization can do in combination with them

720p ultra is the new 1440p ultra in 2023. Thanks UE5, devs and Nvidia!

Let's also not forget, that is FoV ist at 75.5, which is pretty low. I don't want to imagine, how low the fps were with a FoV of 120.

From what I can tell, the problem with this game is that low settings aren't low enough. I still see details on the walls next to you running around on low. Then also ofc we have the fact that the 4060 is a 4050 in disguise..

Any feature that can drastically improve performance will not be used to drastically improve performance, but will be used to shorten dev time to pump more content or other games, keeping the performance same or worse.

I do think that UE5 needs to mature more in the hands of 3rd party devs. I dont think that the devs are using the UE5 utilities to the best of its ability.

All UE5 has taught me so far is that Nvidia can drag their feet introducing new AI features every generation and boldly claim how well it improves current games while offering miniscule rasterization improvements all for more money. Meanwhile game devs can spend less time optimizing and more time rushing middling reviewed games out the door so long as the visuals are prettier. Who cares if the actual game is good, just look at all those traced rays!

I'm kind of over the honeymoon phase of UE5. Remnant 2 was cool, but performance left a lot to be desired. I could be in heavy combat and have a locked 60 FPS, then an empty desert area with some fog would drop my frames from 60 to 45, and only going from 1440p to 900p with DLSS on performance would bring the FPS back up to 60. If this is how UE5 games are going to be going forward, I'll stick with older titles for a good while. Besides, Lies of P comes out in less than a month and that ran great in the demo. Playing Ratchet and Clank: Going Commando right now. That game is still good, even 20 years later.

So, a 3080 is now a 1080p card. Nice!!

For 4k I would definitely be using DLSS performance, that's still 1080 internal resolution.

This is similar to the horsepower to top speed issue with cars. It didn't take more than 150 hp to get to 60 mph or faster relatively quickly. but if you want to get to or past 200mph you need more then 1000 hp at least. Hopefully games can be optimized so our computers dont burn alive

I wish you would include the RX 7900XTX more in your videos as that was also one of the reasons why I love to watch your videos.

wow a game on UE5 using nanite, lumen and everything yet it looks no different from games 5-10 years ago and runs like crap... so what now?

Would be interesting to see medium settings mostly, as they do tend to look usually lot better than low and with not as high performance impact.

Thank you for taking the time to do this, especially with your busy schedule since school has started back up. It's nice to have simple informative videos from someone that enjoys computer technology from a hobby standpoint.

So instead of upscaling being a bonus and meaning older hardware can last longer, game devs are taking the piss and making upscaling a necessity ...

My fear with UE5 is that devs gonna get even more lazy with optimization and that u'll need and some kind of upscaling to play the games smoothly. Devs even already admitted that they are developing with a big focus on upscaling solutions + frame generation. Pls excuse my english btw ^^

I can see why people are complaining. Open air with rocks flying around wasn't tech showcase of UE5. Give us scenes with forest with grass/leaves, waterfalls, caves with light shining through dust, hairy boss monsters, things that previous tech has avoided or had to cut corners with.

Anisotropic Filtering does not seem to impact performance at a first glance, however it can severely impact frametime stability i.e. it can significantly increase or reduce texture streaming performance which is related to CPU or so called "stuttering" while traversing vast areas with a lot of textures. This is largely noticeable on slower CPUs (mid tear 10th gen i5, 2nd gen R5 range), lowering AF to 8X can improve minimum FPS and frametime stability at these specific scenarios. AF will not impact performance on static scenes or scenes with less diverse terrain texture wise. Also the texture resolution of the textures themselves can play a large role on how much AF impacts the performance in other scenarios. That said, this game runs just fine with minimal graphical fidelity modifications on PS5 up to 4K 60FPS. It's safe to say that this is an another bad console port and should not be taken as a general example on how UE5 games will run on your hardware.

it looks like the xPU rating system in the game settings is actually going to improve. currently those are indeed just arbitrary numbers and after an update or two they will be accurately representative. (DFClips video just dropped about this game...)

With every technological advancement, no matter how powerful hardware gets, game devs will find new ways to screw over their customers.

Im sure if they give devs 10 grand for every 1% performance they find without turning on upscaling im sure they all of a sudden can find 50% performance without any quality loss.

It is crazy how Epic with UE5 and AAA Devs don't seem to bother to see that the top 3 GPUs listed on Steam's hardware survey (and most like in the Epic Store's own hardware survey too) won't run their engine/games (top 3 gpus are the GTX 1650, RTX 3060 and GTX 1060) The pursue of this kind of insane graphics will come at a cost of sales.

Is it just me, or does that game not even look that good? Them using UE5 just looks like an excuse to put way too much lighting on everything. Or maybe most graphical gains from now on just won't add that much to begin with.

With the (not so) recent track record of poorly optimized games it is almost impossible to be sure if the bad performance is due to the new engine or the studio's fault. "1080 60fps graphics card" has lost all it's meaning. Graphic fidelity is the last concern at this point.

Got a 2nd hand 3060 ti for about 250 dollars. Best deal of my life. Serves three important purposes. Reducing e-waste, not giving money to Nvidia, providing incredible performance.

I’m actually more concerned with CPU than I am GPU. Would like to see you test this on the minimum CPU and see if you can still maintain 60 FPS even with higher end GPUs

I would like to have seen it on a 6800 XT or a 6900 XT just to get an idea of what a higher range AMD card would do.

Quite interesting, thanks a lot Daniel. Also very good gpu choice for this video.

I have yet to see any real advantage in UE5 that justifies the performance hit. Maybe the Dev's are too inexperienced with utilizing\optimizing UE5, but there hasn't been a single "wow" moment where I see the payoff when similar results could have been achieved with known game engines that actually perform.

I honestly couldn't notice much difference between low and ultra, except for some far details

I am of two minds about the graphics performance. On the one hand, I think it is great that they essentially future-proofed the game a bit by making sure that the highest settings at the highest resolution are meant for future hardware instead of limited by the current generation - I want a lot more of that. On the other hand, the game should support lower settings - the performance isn’t high enough at the lowest settings and it feels like they could really reduce the quality a lot more to take advantage so that 1060 6GB could get a locked 30 fps at 1080P at least and a 3060 and 4060 etc. could get a locked 60 fps at 1080P. That doesn’t seem like an unreasonable ask and I hope that they can introduce lower settings in a future patch.

What's interesting here is that your GPU is showing 99% load but it's not even close to hitting peak power draw (which is above 115W for a 4060, interestingly your GPU is also boosting beyond spec sheet). This may be a programming inefficiency, but I'm not enough of a programmer to be able to tell. May also be misreported data from RTSS. From my own 30 series RTX card I know that "GPU load" is basically a meaningless sensor, what's actually important is Power%. What I am able to tell is that using both Lumen and Nanite, your load does not go up as much as before with adding more objects to a scene. So, they have a rather large base footprint, but they're actually more efficient in crowded scenes like in a finished video game. And, for practical purposes, you're never running without DLSS if it's available. Also: Watch the frame time graph. It's really, really smooth. That's actually a very good thing, it means your GPU is always well fed with new tasks and never has to wait long for the next one.

8GB VRAM may just be enough to enjoy this game. Switching every graphics option to low weirdly only increases performance by around 20-30%, so playing at high to ultra is the sweet spot.

I was noticed several cores on my i9-13900k hitting 100% usage constantly. So seems like there is also a CPU bottleneck issue. Also of note all cores including e cores were being used by the game just not all at 100%

i am also a ue5 dev and i think that epic will optimize ue5 because we saw games like the matrix tech demo and lumen in the land of nanite tech demo which were playable with high frames more or less at this point it feels like some developers are getting lazy because of these drag and drop features like nanite litteraly no lods needed and lumen no baking of lights needed i am using a workflow of adding both nanite and traditional lod mesh and materials which doubles the fps without quality and fps loss and i am only using lumen lighting but not lumen reflections and so on

I don't want to be critical here, nor do I want to in any way condone the ridiculous system requirements of games these days, but just the fact that a 60 class card can run close to 60 fps on maxed out settings on a brand new game is kind of impressive. Maximum settings used to only be possible at 60+ fps on the top tier cards, and you are extremely close to that on a low tier card. Again though, I also realize that the 4060 costs way, way more than it should for being a low tier card.

I prefer what valve or capcom are doing with their engines than ue5. This wants to impress with excess amount of lighting and shine at big cost of performance

These "new" games dont look any better than a 2015 game and still demand a 4090 to play at 100fps. WTF???

6700 xt is a champ, best value 1080p card by a mile

I can understand a garbling of some moving elements on the screen with frame generation enabled. It's an understandable issue that other games suffered from with it's initial implementation. But distortion of a static element like a reticle makes no sense at all. Calls into question if anything else was implemented properly, and the small performance bump going from ultra to low settings doesn't make me too hopeful.

At that point, i think the 4090 is the best 1080p card for max settings native resolution in the next 5 years. Those super heavy games will make CP2077 look like an easy game to run before 2025...

Thanks for the analysis. I’ve heard some rumblings that UE5 was designed with the understanding that players would be using upscaling to achieve consistent performance, due to the demanding nature of Lumin and Nanite, and of course with the consideration that all console games using UE5 will by default be using some form of upscaling tech. It’s quite possible that all UE5 games are just going to require you to upscale, until we get GPUs that blow past all this.

Thank you for all the videos - It gives so much more having your voice explaning what is going on compared to all theese benchmark videos. The best is when you test the games on different GPU:s that many people have - and will have - Like the 6700 , 6800 XT and 6950 X., and of cource the upcoming 7700 xt and 7800 xt. And to see you test DLSS and FRS in games gives so much more comparing to reading a chart ! Thanks from Sweden - There GPU prices sadly are extrmly high ! !

How the frame gen visual bug of the reticle didnt get fixed is really insane, would be osmething u notice right away.

I think you should use the High preset for testing because Ultra is never worth it with how little the image quality improves meanwhile, the performance takes a big hit.

Gpu yes cpu idk

One thing I think people aren't talking about with UE5 is that a lot of tools like Nanite and Lumen are going to significantly cut down on development time by making certain tasks take a lot less time for developers. And something taking less time to do means more time to spend on other important things, so this could lead to games that are more finished and optimized on launch. The largest reason that unfinished and optimized games release so often is that development cycles get rushed by the business side, because most executives aren't game developers and don't even have a background in games. So this could overall be really good for games in general. Just ya know, maybe they should scale back the "low" settings a little bit so lower end hardware can still run the games at a playable framerate.

You should checkout Armored Core 6 when it comesout tommorow I heard it was very optimized. if it was true then we should celebrate that.

6700xt is a lot closer to 3080 than I expected, seems like rdn2 is gonna age better than ampere in UE5

Considering even a 4090 will struggle, no one is ready

I knew this would happen. Games starting to rely on DLSS and frame gen. Eventually we’ll get 30fps and they’ll just say “turn on frame gen for constant 60”

This game forces the UE5 features no matter what, so you can’t even turn off nanite, lumen, etc. smh

Max out settings to improve image quality at the cost of framerate. Use dlss to increase framerate at the cost of image quality. This sounds extremely inefficient. Is pc gaming really heading in the right direction?

just my opinion: I think we don't need graphical fidelity in video games beyond what was present in RDR2

The irony of UE5 being more capable than UE4 at getting great performance for the visual fidelity, but devs aren't spending enough time with it to actually optimize.

I love how a fews weeks/months ago games were using too much vram for most GPUs. Now they just use too much GPU for most GPUs.

As I’ve mentioned on other KZfaq comments before, the RTX 4060 is a new 720p GPU with no horsepower to drive any modern game and should be relegated to a ~$229 USD price point and no more!

Won’t be buying any games that don’t seem optimized, there’s just too many issues that come with it. The days of preordering need to be over. If my 6700xt can’t even get close to touching 60fps at 1440p I’m not gonna bother

Something weird has happened with videogame graphics in the past 5 years where it seems like modern games barely look better, but they require SO much more raw power. I mean, I have a 3060Ti and I honestly would expect that to do everything at 1440p pretty well, but it definitely still struggles with these modern games that don't exactly look incredible.

Are you going to do a 4070ti vs 7900XT comparison in this game? Looks like this is full on UE5 “And unlike open-world games you’re used to,” Mark says, “all our levels are meticulously designed with all this bespoke art, which is made possible by Lumen and Nanite. So covering that ground would actually be a lovely walk! And you’ll find all kinds of environmental storytelling that adds to the feeling that this is a lived-in world.”

Do you think once devs adapt to UE5 we will start to see better scaling to lower end hardware? Or has the baseline raised due to all this new tech

Games have barely improved in graphics during the last 10 years, but the requirments have increased so much.

It's a bit awkward to read all the comments blaming UE5 engineers for being lazy on optimization. By the end of the day, it's game developers' responsibility on how to build and optimize the game, not the engine responsibility. The engine is a tool, how game devs use the tool is like a one big question. Nanite is incredibly impressive technology which will allow games to stay below 100Gb disk space for little longer. Lumen is basically lightweight ray-tracing, and ray-tracing itself is a massively demanding and complicated technology. UE is not a dead engine too, it's being developed, fixed and improved constantly, with all the feedback of game developers. More game developers, more feedback, more fixes and optimizations.

the thing is the consoles are running xbox360 resolution natively. Gotta love AAA devs

Remember when a 50 series could play pretty much everything at 60 fps for multiples generation... good old days

Not big difference in fps between low and max setting. DLSS give you bigger boost in fps You probably can run it low setting + max textures and get same fps because texures has almost no impact on performance

Game is running just fine for me with a 6700 xt and 5700G CPU. Running some settings on low and some on high (don't see a medium option). FSR 2 Quality enabled and maxing out my basic 75hz 1080p monitor.

I played the tekken 8 beta on my 2080ti. It's UE5. After a bit of shader compilation woes it ran 60fps at max detail locked, yeah it's a fight game that focuses on two main characters but alot of this I suspect is going to hinge on each particular games optimisation.

this game is not even beautiful at all. it's just normal graphics to me

Lumen is the poor mans ray tracing. It runs crap on everything.

Is your CPU ready?

the worst part is that the fps difference between ultra and low is too small. ultra should only be for people with abundant graphics power generations after the game releases, and high should be the reasonable choice, with lower setting for older hardware. not here, it's always demanding no matter what settings and that's stupid

me, who has an old GTX 770: "wow, can't wait to play these games!..."

Nice to know my 6700xt can handle unreal engine 5 at the settings I'd normally play at

Optimization is always more important than relying on the consumer to buy a good enough card

Remember when Epic said in their reveals that Nanite and Lumen were really lightweight? and wouldnt affect performance despite beng in realtime? yeah.

Ok. I propose this 1. Draw game in lowest quality possible 2. Eat mashrooms, and your brain will make everything else.

the fact that a 4090 struggles at 4k tells you everything you need to know