OOOoooohhhh la-di-da! Me 4090 lad, that's how it goes mate.
I'll member this the next time you bitch about ANYONE saying x game runs poorly
Fuck off toni, I said that in regard to other 4090s where people cried it's unplayable, but easy to ignore a vast majority of info and simply pick something out to troll around.
I'll give you a wall of text if it needs to be, be warned it'll not be pleasant for you
Fuck off toni, I said that in regard to other 4090s where people cried it's unplayable, but easy to ignore a vast majority of info and simply pick something out to troll around.
I'll give you a wall of text if it needs to be, be warned it'll not be pleasant for you
Either do or don't, dafuq is that bullshit supposed to be?! "Watch out men it will not be pleasant... FOR YOU!!!11!1"
There's an optimizer out, restarted the game for the patch to see how this and the mod are faring.
But with the 4090 I can run it decently on 4k (High) so far, but I've only left the tutorial area now.
Only had to turn down the big killers, ultra shadows, ultra fog, ultra volumetrics, I miss example images for graphic settings a LOT to see what actually changes, thankfully you can at least hide the background from the menu to see what is happening.
But it's FAR from the performance debacle most people were calling, but of course Steam reviews are very negative now because nobody wants to tinker with settings, install the nvidia driver or else.
Apparently there's a bug where you get the deluxe and super deluxe DLC even with the base standard game, I just got it too
Nowhere I see that it's in regard to other 4090? You just vaguely mention people on steam complaining about performance.
Post your wall of text anyway then.
Thing is, I actually agree with you on overall UE5 performance based on my experiences with it so far; only played STALKER2 and Oblivion Remastered but performance was better than expected from reading what everyone else posted here and everywhere else
Think it's due to the 5900x (certainly is not to the 3070...), but a mix of high / medium settings works fine on my system for those two games. Can't say I'll try this one for comparison, MGS Delta I'll try someday but I'm expecting the same results. So far the absolute worse is STALKER2 shitting itself trying to handle more than 10 NPC's but that doesn't happen in OB:R so it's probably just shitty coding from GSC.
boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote:
i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then
Performance is 100% fine btw with my low end rig (4060, Ryzen 7 3700X). Stable 80 FPS. There is the occasional hiccup but I only noticed those in the starting area. Graphics are better then expected. Seems well optimised if they fix the occasional loading stutter.
People just don't know how to setup their game and/or expect 150 FPS at max settings.
Last edited by friketje on Sat, 13th Sep 2025 19:38; edited 1 time in total
@tonizito You did read it then, I wasn't going to write an essay on each Steam or reddit comment that's why (esp since nobody ever includes what settings they have, so it's pointing a flashlight into the dark) STALKER was one of the worst of the UE5 ones of all time, that is 100% true, and Oblivion is still not fully fixed from what I've heard.
But it became very common that some people use their PC like a console 'WHY U NOT WORKING'
Though I have seen the other day I've been living a lie with the Nexus 'UE5 Fixes' Mods on each game they just put in a ton of garbage values into the ini and some of them are not even used. They did help whenever I used them but technically speaking straight up jank...
Performance is 100% fine btw with my low end rig (4060, Ryzen 7 3700X). Stable 80 FPS. There is the occasional hiccup but I only noticed those in the starting area. Graphics are better then expected. Seems well optimised if they fix the occasional loading stutter.
People just don't know how to setup their game and/or expect 150 FPS at max settings.
120, or even better 144fps, is really optimal for shooters. You really do notice extra fps while aiming and shooting stuff. It makes for a much smoother experience. I'd much prefer high fps over graphical complexity. It's either that UE5 really isn't made for high fps, or that gpu manufacturers are doing something fishy under the hood. I'm really kinda baffled that even 5090 is not able to get double digit framerates on low settings.
Performance is 100% fine btw with my low end rig (4060, Ryzen 7 3700X). Stable 80 FPS. There is the occasional hiccup but I only noticed those in the starting area. Graphics are better then expected. Seems well optimised if they fix the occasional loading stutter.
People just don't know how to setup their game and/or expect 150 FPS at max settings.
120, or even better 144fps, is really optimal for shooters. You really do notice extra fps while aiming and shooting stuff. It makes for a much smoother experience. I'd much prefer high fps over graphical complexity. It's either that UE5 really isn't made for high fps, or that gpu manufacturers are doing something fishy under the hood. I'm really kinda baffled that even 5090 is not able to get double digit framerates on low settings.
Yeah sure. It hasn't been that long that your standard gaming monitor was 60hz (only own a 144hz one for 5 years). But for you 144fps is the norm now or the game is unplayable.
But if you believe a game should do 144 fps on low end hardware, this one is not optimised . This game does the 144fps without any problems with 5090 though. It even does so with my stoneage system if I set it to low settings or run it at 1080P.
It's not that games are not well optimised these days: people expect the impossible. I bought this 1500$ PC 6 years ago and it should do new games at high settings at 144fps .
Sure, dream on.
Last edited by friketje on Sun, 14th Sep 2025 22:37; edited 7 times in total
This game does the 144fps without any problems with 5090 though. It even does so with my stoneage system if I set it to low settings or run it at 1080P.
What an achievement! Low and 1080p! Btw, it's already struggling to hold 100fps on High and 1080p at 5090. So you really must have everything configured just right that you can get 144fps.
So basically, it doesn't run well for your friends, they just don't care.
It's fine to like the game and defend it for it's gameplay or whatever, but I can't understand why people are so invested in defending its performance, when it's just flat out false.
Any game that requires framegen to get 50-80 fps is a mess. Framegen never feels good regardless, but honestly, people are just ridiculous with this shit. The input lag is horrendous, I don't understand how people can't feel it. Even when you already have 60 it feels bad, but if your normal fps is sub 60, it's just unplayable.
Framegen never feels good regardless, but honestly, people are just ridiculous with this shit. The input lag is horrendous, I don't understand how people can't feel it. Even when you already have 60 it feels bad, but if your normal fps is sub 60, it's just unplayable.
I have never experienced noticeable input lag if the base framerate is 60+ using 2X framegen. Above 2x I'll visually see it but not necessarily feel it. Below 60 base fps maybe a little, so from my perspective this is a false statement.
Play a game at native 140+fps, than play a game that's around 60-80 and gets you to 140 with framegen. If you can't feel it, that's on you, sorry.
Yeah, you won't feel much of a difference if you boost it from 60 to 80, but then what the fuck is even the point? You're adding extra input lag for no reason.
Playing at 140fps+ natively is thing in the past, welcome to the new era where games need at least 4x FG to run well, you just need to accept it bro. 6xxx series will have 8x FG probably to sell even more unoptimized games.
Play a game at native 140+fps, than play a game that's around 60-80 and gets you to 140 with framegen. If you can't feel it, that's on you, sorry.
Yeah, you won't feel much of a difference if you boost it from 60 to 80, but then what the fuck is even the point? You're adding extra input lag for no reason.
If you can't see the difference between 80 and ~300fps, then that's on you, sorry.
ASRock B550M Pro4 * 5800X3D * RTX 5070 Ti * 32gb 3600mhz CL16 * 1TB Adata XPG 8200 Pro * LG 55" B9 OLED * Sound Blaster Z * Sennheiser HD-650 * Asus AP201 * Super Flower 500w Fanless
If you can't see the difference between 80 and ~300fps, then that's on you, sorry.
What are you even arguing with me about?
Unless you're saying that 80 with framegen to 300 is the same, or similar to 300, in which case you're mental.
Well as far as I understood you were questioning the point in applying frame-gen on 80 base fps. I'm saying the point is that 80 base fps is going to look a whole lot smoother post-framegen when it's in the hundreds.
ASRock B550M Pro4 * 5800X3D * RTX 5070 Ti * 32gb 3600mhz CL16 * 1TB Adata XPG 8200 Pro * LG 55" B9 OLED * Sound Blaster Z * Sennheiser HD-650 * Asus AP201 * Super Flower 500w Fanless
Well as far as I understood you were questioning the point in applying frame-gen on 80 base fps. I'm saying the point is that 80 base fps is going to look a whole lot smoother post-framegen when it's in the hundreds.
Cool, going to "look" smoother and feel worse. Congrats! If you like that, good for you. It's complete shit. There's a reason nobody uses framegen in competitive fps.
30 FPS is 33.33333 ms
60 FPS is 16.66666 ms
90 FPS is 11.11111 ms
120 FPS is 8.333333 ms
144 FPS is 6.944444 ms
180 FPS is 5.555555 ms
240 FPS is 4.166666 ms
300 FPS is 3.333333 ms
...
People on competitive games might benefit from ultra low input lag and screen presentation, but most people won't.
For an average reaction time of 200 ms (mine), anything over 90fps is overkill in terms of input lag, but the extra frames are welcome from a visual standpoint.
Point is even for competitive gaming the input lag is only visual cause the extra frames don’t exist. But the better option is to max out fps by lowering settings.
Framegen is fine for non competitive gameplay cause it improves the visual quality, unless you realy can’t stand the slight delay in input.
no wonder the game runs like shit when they dont even know how to offer optimized settings, did they only played with framegen internally or wtf is this bs
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
STALKER was one of the worst of the UE5 ones of all time, that is 100% true, and Oblivion is still not fully fixed from what I've heard.
. This game does the 144fps without any problems with 5090 though. It even does so with my stoneage system if I set it to low settings or run it at 1080P.
.
