• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Cyberpunk 2077 Benchmark Test & Performance

lexluthermiester said:
They attached a pic on mobile without posting it. You don't see that?
Click to expand...
I can see the attachment, and I can also see the attachment shows a 3090 at 4k RTX OFF not even breaking 50fps.
EDIT: Let me help actually
1eeb4da0-71df-46f3-9d80-09eb11a632b6-png.180934
 
lexluthermiester said:
That's the attachment? Why am I not seeing it?...
Click to expand...

Why do you need to see the attachment? Read the performance review before posting and arguing with other users about it. It's in the review lol.

I'm just spelling it out for you.
 
Ravenas said:
Why do you need to see the attachment?
Click to expand...
Possible site glitch that W1zzard might need to see.
Ravenas said:
Read the performance review before posting and arguing with other users about it. It's in the review lol.
Click to expand...
I don't care about your silly point, been running you in circles just for giggles because you were being a dink.
Ravenas said:
I'm just spelling it out for you.
Click to expand...
Oh really? Please allow me to spell it out for you. In your original statement you said the following;
Ravenas said:
I really don't even want to talk about 4K, because neither card is capable of running the game at optimal 60 FPS, but still the difference is 6 FPS.
Click to expand...
...then you followed up with...
Ravenas said:
Ultra settings to Ultra settings.
Click to expand...
There is a HUGE difference between the word "optimal" and the word "ultra". The word "optimal" usual means optimized for the best balance between performance and quality. Optimal does NOT equal Ultra.
Ravenas said:
It's ok to be wrong from time to time.
Click to expand...
You were saying?
 
lexluthermiester said:
Possible site glitch that W1zzard might need to see.

I don't care about your silly point, been running you in circles just for giggles because you were being a dink.

Oh really? Please allow me to spell it out for you. In your original statement you said the following;

...then you followed up with...

There is a HUGE difference between the word "optimal" and the word "ultra". The word "optimal" usual means optimized for the best balance between performance and quality. Optimal does NOT equal Ultra.

You were saying?
Click to expand...

Now its a glitch in W1z's review. Lol...
 
I'm fairly sure Ravenas was calling the framerate (being 60) optimal, not the settings. You know it's ok to say you missed something instead of dragging this all out
 
bubbleawsome said:
I'm fairly sure Ravenas was calling the framerate (being 60) optimal, not the settings. You know it's ok to say you missed something instead of dragging this all out
Click to expand...

No apparently W1z had a site glitch, he might need to see.:roll:
 
bubbleawsome said:
I'm fairly sure Ravenas was calling the framerate (being 60) optimal, not the settings.
Click to expand...
His choice of vocabulary and sentence structure say otherwise. When someone says "optimal 60fps" that does NOT equate to all settings on maximum.
bubbleawsome said:
You know it's ok to say you missed something instead of dragging this all out
Click to expand...
Ravenas said:
No apparently W1z had a site glitch, he might need to see.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sure, whatever...
 
lexluthermiester said:
His choice of vocabulary and sentence structure say otherwise. When someone says "optimal 60fps" that does NOT equate to all settings on maximum.


Yeah, sure, whatever...
Click to expand...

You’re just reaching for some form of a win at this point. Even after I restated so you could understand, you still argued it wasn’t true.

I then provided you the results of the review via and attachment. You then said W1z made a mistake on the site that you needed to check on.

Even after repeatedly shown evidence, you’re still trying to reframe the argument. I guess you just can’t stand to be wrong.

Anxious to know what’s next. o_O:laugh:
 
Last edited:
Palladium said:
Also, I think people who praised CP2077's DLSS is good are the ones who never bothered to run the game on native to begin with. It's not a day and night difference, but native is discernably less blurrier (at least on 1440p).
Click to expand...
I mean it is quite huge difference from my own experience! DLSS max quality looks quite good, but when compared to native 4k its not even close. I also disable all of the "film" options like film grain, motion blur, etc... they just make everything grainy and blurry and look bad and unfocused.

Yeah, some text seems to be a bit better off with dlss, it looks sharper and fuller, but other than that pretty much every texture looks worse. And its not like my own experience is unrepresentative, I'm looking at tpu, gamer nexus, etc... videos and images and there is no question DLSS looks much worse than native.

Again max quality dlss doesn't look half as bad, but the difference is still quite obvious.
 
lexluthermiester said:
Hell yes and think of it as a futuristic take on a GTA5ish kind of world but with better, more intuitive controls, better GFX and (IMHO) a much better, if more linear, story line.
Click to expand...
Agree with most but it's far from GTA V looking at physics and other mechanics: cars driving under water, punching characters through a window without breaking, cats sitting under water, cars burning under water, NPC walking through objects all the time ... there is no end to this list. There are plenty of videos comparing and loosing to GTA IV. Let's be honest here CDR needed another year at least of hardcore putting some overtime kind of effort to release a version of the game polished to the level we were promised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top