Honestly, that's mostly how I think they're supposed to be used ;p

@@KindOldRaven Yes. Ultra is for "future hardware".

its been 5 years, time you revisit said games

YES!! this would be amazin

That would be lovely, we need someone to pick up after Nvidia. Preferably using midrange cards from both manufacturers.

Clell Biggs Very good idea!

Big yes to this!!!

They do it already. Not for every game of course.

A man of culture

Preach

That says more about the quality of AAA games than anything else.

That's me 😂

Biggest reason I got Witcher 3 for my new laptop... Now looking for some more demanding games.... Cause I'm sitting over 100 fps maxxed

Same here!

Same and it always looks fantastic and I love it... Having Shadows set to high or very high or Ultra looks great but medium shadows look good too and you don't notice the difference too much when the rest of your settings are set at a mixture of high ,very high, and Ultra textures Etc at 60fps in 4k

@@dawgzofwar6674 I think the difference in shadows in The Witcher 3 is very obvious.

I set the shadows and motion blur to off most of the time and only focus on textures and anti aliasing because i can see my enemies easier with these settings but sometimes I need to see the shadows then I set them to lowest possible. I even play burnout paradise without shadows.

Same !!! Never turn off shadow. The gam ugly and pale. At least medium, even the other setting low

the higher your resolution the less you need AA

That's a general true answer, but every game acts differently. Playing a game like Borderlands 1 with its comic design is way better in 1440p. But the performance hit is another question, wether playing in 1080p, high settings with 16xAA or 1440p with moderate settings and lower AA is worth it.

Depends on the game and/or engine. At 1440p I can play Wolfenstein 2 without AA but GTA5 absolutely needs at least 2xmsaa or fxaa to get rid of them jags

Why would you be running the game with AA at 1440p if your monitor's native resolution is 1080p?

ThrashingBasskill I can't think of any title at 1080p or up that needs 8x aa let alone 16x aa. At that point you might as well downsample from 4k.

Especially now that he found a good rythm for his voice

I like that his videos are nice and simple, too. No distracting music, no fuss, just technical information.

MegaManX4 Him talking is snooze inducing. DF should consider finding someone like John or Tom who can present videos without making us sleepy

L

I like his German accent. It's pretty soothing. When he said "Wolfenstein" and "Uber" I nearly came lol

Chasing the higher end cards is often pointless. Much eye candy is not noticeable unless you start comparing it or have mad OCD.

Lee R Definitely agree. Mid range is the sweet spot. With low end you end up having to sacrifice too much, with high end you end up paying too much for something you can barely tell apart unless you're carefully comparing 2 things side by side, unless we're talking 4K on high/ultra, but then that's almost like comparing apples to oranges and the price at this point just isn't worth it for most people.

chrisutubeism - you need new eyes.

adm It's true graphics in video games just aren't really improving at such a rate that the difference is that obvious. It's a very different situation from 10 or 20 years ago. Hardware makers have just managed to convince people they need all the tiny little details cranked up to the max to enjoy a game, and at a resolution which is far too high for the size of their screen. I mean PC gamers today seem to think they need as many pixels in their 21" computer screen they view from one foot away as in the 70" television in their living room that they watch from across the room.

@@BigUriel yup

"Eu-bar"

Thanks Randy. Love your ava here :D

Yup, don't treat audiences like morons and you won't get an audience like that! Everyone wins. I love educational videos, and so do many others.

Hi Mr. Marx

This is the most sincere comment out there.

it might be sincere but that just makes you an asshole

He was being sarcastic, satirizing certain people who don't play games, but brag about how much money they have or spent on a PC and its components. Some do play games and brag though too. It is sad, but to each their own.

I barely game anymore, yet I built a 7k$ rig because, SK it btch! Bragging rights. And yes I'm an a$$hole!

@@19971997gt ok zoomer

It's been proven in the past that you don't need a beast of a system to play FPS games. Remember how awesome Half Life 2 looked? The specs for that game were minimal and it still looked incredible. Even running Crysis on its release at the lowest settings still looked impressive.

Thanks for the tip, gonna be replaying DOOM in 2020.

@@aiden_macleod As someone who played Crysis in 2007, I can assure you the game looked like utter dogshit on Low. Medium was where it was at. Anything beyond that, you needed to either get a loan or consider selling a kidney on the black market to get a computer that could run it lol

really, i only get 30 fps as a standard

@@BITCOIlN über with an üüüüüüüüü

Damn straight dude. I've been doing this stuff a long time, and when I was younger it was fun keeping up with all the new terms and technologies; but generally we just had simple stuff like AA, AF, dynamic lights and bump mapping to worry about. Then there came a point a few years ago, when I realised I just had no idea hat the hell all those sliders were doing any more, and what's more, I wasn't sure I cared enough to find out. Every new game I installed would take a term I recognised, and throw a random new letter into the acronym. As I get older, I want to screw around with the settings less and less- Don't get me wrong, I still love to tinker and find that sweet spot. That's WHY I'm a PC gamer. But Ihate spending hours flipping every setting on and off again in that trial and error ritual, when instead, the devs could just tell me what in the goddamn fuck the "post processing" box actually, specifically, does.

It might seem silly given what you take for granted as a dev, but you actually gave me quite the epiphany with this post for contextualizing just how much my selecting those menu options despite having less and less understanding of what they're even doing as the years go by is ego. So, thanks for that. :)

Game settings need technical writers.

Non-descriptive yet self-evident descriptions ftw :p (Good comment!)

I never liked it when my friends brag about their rigs and what settings they run at but I'd gladly be a hypocrite if it means showing off deez nuts

and killing the hard work of the developers who made some Ultra settings to stand out.

That was never the intention of this video. He acknowledges that Ultra settings are great for future proofing a game, but for a mid range card they're a waste of valuable GPU power.

Vishal Gupta did hey say anything about not having ultra settings?

I am using a GTX 1070 amp extreme with an i5 6600k on dual 1080p monitors. I normally play on high settings and I have personally not seen any big difference between high and ultra and the fps difference between both is massive so high is ok for me

yeah I use only 1 which is 144hz, another 60hz is for multitasking only which I mostly use for discord, Spotify and facebook/twitter

I feel the same way. Amazing visuals are nice to have, but gameplay is what makes a game special

I’ve always advocated for this. My cousin always looks for best story but can’t stand playing some games because it was so boring to play. Gameplay trumps every aspect. The story and graphics could be amazing, but if I’m not having fun, I won’t touch the game

I used to had Ultra setting addiction. Thankfully I was cure before dropping my money on a gtx 1080

The video game at ultra in the video isn't even remotely close to how it looks like in reality, this is due to the low bitrate of the uploaded video, enforced by youtube's heavy compression. For refrence, the Witcher Ultra in this video looks like Medium settings, if you want actual represntation then look in youtube for "The witcher Ultra," and look for videos that have 4K in order to ease the compression and increase the bitrate.

Publisher/Developer now more focus on trends....unlike 10-20 years ago where we actually have more developer experimenting with varies type of games (nowadays most of them been acquired by bigger companies).....

Alex is German.

How does people pronounce "ü" then usually? :o I haven't even paid attention before I read your comment :D

@@65EKS65 most english speakers usually pronounce it as an u.. uber for example.. or fuhrer.. whatever.. heard it so many times..

@@Dunkelelf3 Oh ok, that sounds so weird tho for example that "fuhrer" :D Maybe I always subconciously translated in my head as "ü" then. :D

@@65EKS65 i pronounce uber as you-ber,

Where's Prince Dizzy anyway?

Nice meme

Mr. Boppin living under a bridge lol

He is indeed german. At the end you can hear "und auf Wiedersehen" which is german.

Ich denke, er ist Deutscher

his pronunciation caught me off guard lol

I thought so, too, because his German pronounciation was so perfect at the beginning where he said "Angst", and also in the Wolfenstein part. But then I hestiated again, since his English also sounds so good. Since I'm not an English native speaker I might not hear it as well as German, but sounds great to me. And certainly, great work in general! Awesome video!

Yup, "Angst" was an instant giveaway. :)

And über

Is he German?

John Chapman yes

No. John Linneman said Alex was American.

NovaPrima listening to the "und auf Wiedersehen" at the very end of the video, I'm 99% sure that he is either a native German or has lived for many many years in the country at least. It's just way too perfect :D

Yup, showing everything and a graph after that is just a bliss.

Difference between 1440p and 1080p is not that great that you should sacrifice 144fps experience for it just to have higher resolution. 1080p @144fps just gives greatly better gaming experience compared to 1440p @60fps so that is just wrong with your comparisons in my opinion. In general yeah I guess I admit that there are many people "brainwashed" that they "must have ultra", but I don't really care as it doesn't affect me. :D Me and my friends have decently high end PC's but we are not obsessed with the ultra settings but rather not having fps drops (at least this applies to me if not to all my friends lol). I play every game 1440p @144fps and if I see dropping much below 144fps I turn down few settings to get that stable 144fps. My next upgrade will be when 4k @144fps comes actually doable with decent investments so I think I will keep my current setup (updated last year) for good 3-5 years. If the games start require much more then I just have to adjust the settings lower and lower so that I can still get the 144fps experience.

What bothers me more than anything is unoptimized games. I typically turn settings up to max but that's just because I can. If I'm trying to 1440p 144fps I'll turn settings down to hit it. But when I have to turn down my settings to low or medium to come close to that while only having 50% GPU usage and 30% CPU I get annoyed as my $1500 setup shouldn't be forced to run at such low settings even for 60fps at 1440p.

"but the reality is that they've been doped into buying into something that offers almost no return on investment. " You're wrong on that, I've bought cards with the idea of achieving ultra settings when in reality I could just achieve it. My investment was returned about 6 years later when more demanding games came out and I could play them at 60 FPS on medium high. Now I have a gtx 1080 and use Nvsurround. Basically good for it for the next 6 years.

nah, id only consider the 2080ti the 4k 60fps card. the 1080ti is really the 2k 144 max everything card

Not really, I just hate aliasing and like to get the most texture and model resolution and best lighting out of everything while maintaining at least 60 fps. You're way overcomplicating this.

Thank you. So many retards think you need 2 gtx 1080tis for 4k, while you can VERY well play any game at 4k with only a 1070 or even 1060 if you use your brain and use proper settings.

Hey just for the record once you're playing in 4k you don't actually need anti-aliasing at all and therefore you should always have it off when you're playing in 4k cuz I just Hawgs up massive amounts of your GPU and PC resources while giving you no returns

fraggsta I also play at 4K, you can easily hit 60fps with decent settings with a gtx 1060 if your smart about it.

@@anotherfan2870 not that I don't believe you or anything my dude but I find that extremely hard to believe in general... The 1060 series is at most a 1080 P card or maybe 1440p at extremely low settings and frame rates... Not saying that you haven't been able to accomplish this but if you did you're barely running at 30 frames per second if even that and almost all of your settings are turned down to medium or low otherwise there's no way you could be running 4K anything on a 1060... and for the record you guys if you're playing in 4k you absolutely do not need to have anti aliasing of any kind this is a fact check it out online just Google it it is a fact... When you're playing in 4K resolution the only thing anti-aliasing is going to do for you is hog more sources and put even even greater stress on your gpus in your entire system as a whole which is completely unnecessary... So turn off anti-aliasing at 4K and use that vram you just saved to turn up a couple other settings like Shadows for medium to hide and so on and so forth etcetera

@@bobmarl6722 you're not going to be able to play any game at 4K and 30fps on a 1060 unless you have all your settings turn down to medium or low including anti-aliasing and everything else but then again you don't need anti-aliasing in 4k so that doesn't matter none , my son has a 1060 in his laptop and he can't do anything but 1080p Ultra because the 1060 series is a 1080 P card.

Yeah, they don't really put enough into ultra for it to be worth it.

H Koizumi totally agree with you im running i7 8700, Gtx 1080ti, and i find it funny i still prefer high/medium, I really don’t know why..

@Transistor Jump No, I agree with him. I've seen people saying "I'm switching to console gaming" or "PC gaming is a waste of money" all because they can't run games at 4K max settings lol.

I expect to be able to play any game I own at ultra and get 60fps but that's cause I have one of the best GPUs on the market and my system should be able to handle it. However I do have a 1440p 144hz monitor so I do turn settings down to be able to hit 144fps. But really what gets me is unoptimized games. When I have to play at medium settings to get 60fps with 50% GPU usage and 20% CPU just bothers me.

you dont even have a 2080ti,you arnt saying anything good

JoPe - TuYaTroJoueY What song is that?

That's right. The song is "Hero" from the Serious Sam 3 BFE OST.

Not trying to be cocky, this channel is great and you actually learn a lot from his videos, but the fact that this channel his one of the few on YT to have metal music as background (besides metal music channels obviously) was the main reason for me to subscribe to him. Yeah, I love metal. Kudos, my fellow heads!

Above all else.

@Führer des Benutzers deutsche Sprache, deutsche Sprache

@@disputeone Uber alles

It sounds stupid as fuck. Even the devs don’t pronounce it like that.

@@VaydaladaVodalada Well Alex is German so Im pretty sure he has more authority on how to pronounce it

Thanks Ryan! Not always speaking english with others does this I think :D Best to you and thanks, Alex

WTF?

When your a English major

Mark Martin you're*

@@tigerheaddude shut up

retropolis gaming Alex ist Deutscher oder?

yep

Ultra and high settings usually doesn't look that different from medium nowadays, but back when Crysis released, the difference could be night and day. Baseline visual fidelity is so friggin' high nowadays, dialling down a couple of settings doesn't feel like giving up key parts of the experience anymore.

For me it should atleast be high - ultra settings. I'm only gonna do Medium settings if the games is really demanding and doesn't get 50 - 60 FPS average.

Ozziw162 fuck. Crysis 3 looked amazing even on Consoles.

I'm already contented with the graphics of my ps4 slim. Oh and btw not barley, it's barely

Absolutely Ultra is pointless. You don't see a difference once you are playing.

SLi/Crossfire is not a thing anymore man. No games support it. Single GPU only.

@@nexxusty Past games do support it. Some with excellent scaling, and others may require an alternative SLI Profile. However, as of the last 2 years much less games support it and it's been dwindling.

Martian Manhunter Exactly!

Personally, even if I can run a game, I like turning the settings down so my fans stay quiet. I COULD run Overwatch with high texture quality but my GPU would be really noisy.

very ratio much logix wow

No machine can do ultra 60fps at 4k.....

I would add frame rate AND frame rate stability over fidelity. There is such a thing as unpleasantly choppy 60 fps.

For me, very high textures led to shortage on VRAM on GTX 1060, which should not be the case in a 6GB GPU. There was definitely a memory leak as I ran MSI afterburner and saw that VRAM usage slowly climb up despite me entering in new areas. This disappeared when I set the textures to High. Maybe they patched it now. I should go back to it and check it out.

I am not even sure i want to know how you run 12Gb of ram. In any case, you are sacrificing speed.

@@ColdieHU did that before.. but it was on the 1366 socket with the i7 920.. and that was a tripple channel plattform.. nowadays it's usually either dual or quad.. so yeah 12 gb seems stupid..

amen

"want"? I want the game to run well.

Question is are ultra setting worth the cost? Answer is No.

That's subjective. For me, it's worth it. For you , it may not be. A Rolls Royce will get you to the same places as a Hyundai, but some want the extra comfort and trimmings.

REDDY71 of course but the difference is not that big, if you have the money and there isn't anymore you need/want to buy yeah go for it.

But the massive hit to frame rate it has means it is worth it only for the those with expensive hardware to match. Plus you can kiss DX12 goodbye since it doesn't support it.

Gopal Chatterjee the 980 is still a damn fine card. It's pretty much a 1060 and will still play at 1080p 60fps no prob for years to come. Sure maybe not at ultra, but like you realized, lowering a few settings here and there to high, it'll be capable of 60 for a good while, at that res. Even lowering to medium after a year or so after that will extend its life even further. Med settings aren't too bad these days. Definitely still very playable and the differences aren't that drastic, night and day, like in the old days. It's a lot more subtle. Sure still noticeable but nothing huge. You'll be fine. I got a 1060 so I'm in the same boat. If I want higher fps or wanna up the res in the future, then yea, might wanna shell out the cash. But I'm satisfied for now. Oh and don't forget, there's also the used market if you wanna upgrade in the future for cheaper. Although I would be wary of it esp for this gen stuff, as a lot of them would have been used to mine. But next gen amd navi might be a lil comforting. It's rumored to be 1080 level for a midrange price of $250 next year, so maybe that'll be something to look forward to, given your budget. Same price as 1060 msrp for 65-75% more performance. Sounds pretty good to me. Idk about nvidia but I'm sure they'll also have something similar, for their midrange. As of now tho their next gen stuff disappointingly looks to be quite exp and not much of an upgrade, same price for the same performance e.g. 1170 = 1080 = $500, 1180 = 1080ti = $600 etc. We'll have to wait and see.

soopasoljah appreciate your response man.. makes me feel a lot better. Thanks a million. :) , And you're right , this is hunger for ultra settings is absolutely ridiculous until unless ur on a 1440p or 4k monitor where it matters the most. I get a pretty good visual experience with high to medium settings and its a lot less taxing on my GPU, so its a win-win. You won't believe how much obsessed I use to be.. I didn't even think twice.. even the Msaa settings...8x... I know... I know..then I started to hate my Pc then I delete the game..then another game releases..same vicious circle lol.

Psychologically tormented? God talk about first world problems...

Also just remember. Maxwell (aka GTX 900 series) was a silly good overclocker. 980s reference from Nvidia run at about 1100mhz, but I have seen them get up to the 1500-1550 range with good cooling and some clever tweaking. Useful to know if you need to elongate the life of your card for just a bit longer!

It's all in your head. These days ultra isn't worth it. Crysis was the last game that Ultra really made a difference.

Robert Lebrun 8700k 5.2ghz and 1080ti at 2.05ghz = still use high Fps>>>>>>>>ultra

Eh, even if I CAN technically "Ultra" a setting, if I can knock it down to "high" and get 10+ more FPS with a barely noticeable visual hit, I will take that extra smoothness/responsiveness over subtleties in the image that will be lost in motion ANY day, but that's me.

This sums up everything without making such a huge video !!!! :P :P :P Few things aren't correctly presented in video where there is Diff & they trying to say its similar. Well its "Ultra" is Ultra and your comment sums up everything.

i ultra everything out all i ever do is turn down AA gtx 1080 ti FE 2038mhz core 5951mhz mem and 6700k 4.6ghz running 1440p 120hz 1ms

the ultra is not enough, some games u have to put in the manual and put everything to the maximum and go into nvidia control panel and set the texture filtering on high quality and negative LOD on clamp

ArcaneThinker you imply content where there is non lol

meanwhile i played newest deus ex at 1440p full ultra with 2x MSAA and i got 80-ish fps AVG :D gtx 1080 ti FE + 6700k 4.6ghz (i have a vid on my channel)

Yea I'm not sure why he was focusing so much on the ground. Felt like he should be looking at walls or just objects in general, above the ground. I always thought that anisotropic filtering was the setting that had more control over ground textures and at different angles, not texture quality. That and tessellation. Whereas texture quality affected more the walls, doors, buildings, tree trunks, rocks/boulders, general objects, clothing, etc, you know, things that stand up vertically, up + down along the y-axis. I'm probably wrong tho. But that's what I noticed. Maybe it depends on the game too

It's called Google

Mad Lust Envy will do!

You're a wanted man Mr Morgan

Mad Lust Envy /Einstein, Bill Gates, etc. Are all nerds and yet they had a bigger impact on the world, so yea I'm a big nerd.

It gives hardware companies like NVIDIA and AMD a sense of pride and accomplishment. All you did was pay them to give you the fruits of THEIR labours. Sure you might overclock it a bit, but that's it, you can thank the companies of the cooling solutions you used.

The Infamous Sure, as though ever been with a woman, and what's her first name Vaseline?

And yet, if you really are immersed and don't just run around pew pewing people, you start to notice every little detail. I've lost count of how many times i was in the air in far cry 5 looking at the horizon and thinking, wow incredible foliage. Maxed ofc.

osricen 😂😂😂lol

That is because most games are designed around Medium-High settings due to consoles. Which is a good thing since it increases the life of our PC components before we absolutely have to upgrade. Usually the best performance to fidelity is achieved on the base console settings because that is what the game, levels, models, set pieces are designed to run on. There are very few games like the Battlefield, Witcher 3 or Doom that actually take advantage of your PC hardware. I have a GTX 1060 and most of the time I just lower the settings to all high instead of ultra just to get a stable 60. Or just use the Geforce experience's recommended settings for smooth 60. Ultra settings are usually just overkill features like MSAA or just experimental features like VXAO or Hairworks, that tank to performance hard.

On older games I use Ultra settings newer ones I usually have to blend between high and medium just do to not having the super gaming pc that is required for ultra or high all the way through. Mine plays Skyrim Special Edition on ultra and it looks great and the FPS never dips below 50 frames which is good, I usually get concerned if while playing your FPS dips drastically like in one area you have 60 fps during any situation and all of a sudden your in combat or what not and it dips to below 30 usually tells me a setting is too high.

And that's why having a console makes Sense

I play for sweet visuals. I barely used fast travel in odyssey or witcher 3 i always like to travel on horse and enjoy the view which i can’t with low/medium graphics

Meme nice. Up keep it!