• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Forspoken Benchmark Test & Performance Analysis

Sithaer said:
Also there is this,I'm yet to try it personally but I might do that later and install the game on my crappy old sata SSD:
https://wccftech.com/enabling-direc...aster-loading-times-at-the-cost-of-lower-fps/
Click to expand...

Little update on this.
Yesterday I've reinstalled the demo on my old crappy sata SSD that does not support direct storage and I got very similar result as the test on that site.
Not much but I did gain a few fps like 5-8 on average with no direct storage and the game still loads pretty fast so in my case this is better.

I mean the game still runs like crap but now I would be interested in a 'proper' Direct storage review whenever it has support for more games.
 
Last edited:
Sithaer said:
Little update on this.
Yesterday I've reinstalled the demo on my old crappy sata SSD that does not support direct storage and I got very similar result as the test on that site.
Not much but I did gain a few fps like 5-8 on average with no direct storage and the game still loads pretty fast so in my case this is better.

I mean the game still runs like crap but now I would be interested in a 'proper' Direct storage review whenever it has support for more games.
Click to expand...

WCCF Tech article is based on a wrong conclusions made by PCGH in his article using bad CapFrameX tool that takes into acount high FPS during loading black scenes, as you put slower hard drive you get more average FPS. PCGH already said they did wrong.
 
Last edited:
It seems like some games are running 'not very well' ... despite having day-0 game-ready drivers. Why all this effort when a game is probably in need of a couple of patches ?
I mean not the effort of benchmarking and articles :) (that is how we get to know that it doesn't run well), but of creating day-0 game-ready drivers. Is it because of the media attention AAA titles get ?

Like some said, not all games need specific driver optimisations, or not all hardware needs specific driver optimisations ... ?

Would be great to have some analysis done on the usefulness or necessity of these 'day-0 game-ready drivers':
What is the actual effect of using game-ready drivers ?
is is useful for most users, or only the small percentage that is on the latest 40x0 or 7x00 hardware ?
Now that there are no new GPU releases planned in the near future ... maybe @W1zzard could do some investigation ? :)
(a small number of games that had game-ready drivers, tested with/without game-ready drivers, on a small selection of cards from different generations, from NVIDIA and AMD ... I think for Intel it's probably different, because they only have a new generation of graphics cards needing driver optimisations)
 
bl4C3y3 said:
Now that there are no new GPU releases planned in the near future
Click to expand...
I have in the review queue: Ryzen 7900 non-X, 13400F, 13900KS, 2x ASRock Arc, 1x RTX 4070 Ti, 2x RTX 4090, 1x RTX 4080 and a few SSDs

Have spent the last weeks retesting all my CPUs (on RTX 4090), all my GPUs (on 13900K), all my SSDs (on 12900K)
 
:D, it was worth a shot ... anyway, thx and looking forward to all the good stuff !
 
i can wait until its 90% off on a Steam sale :laugh:
 
Fluffmeister said:
But the 10GB 3080 is outperforming it's 16GB competition?

I do appreciate AMD seem to have abandoned RDNA2 recently.
Click to expand...
So long as the 3080 doesn't run out of video RAM. A lot of games run fine using around 6GB of video RAM however this game peaked at 14GB and crashed on my RX 6800 so I'm also curious how a 3080 with only 10GB of RAM would fair. I also hope way more people see Nvidia screwing them over with the totally whacked out video RAM configurations though nope. :rolleyes:

Also: I got this game free with my RX 6800 along with Saints Row (heard it is terrible) and Sniper Elite 5 which never crashed though used up to 15.7GB of video RAM.
 
JAB Creations said:
So long as the 3080 doesn't run out of video RAM. A lot of games run fine using around 6GB of video RAM however this game peaked at 14GB and crashed on my RX 6800 so I'm also curious how a 3080 with only 10GB of RAM would fair. I also hope way more people see Nvidia screwing them over with the totally whacked out video RAM configurations though nope. :rolleyes:

Also: I got this game free with my RX 6800 along with Saints Row (heard it is terrible) and Sniper Elite 5 which never crashed though used up to 15.7GB of video RAM.
Click to expand...
That crash may be due to the fact that AMD hasn't released a driver yet for the 6000 series for this game and not it using 14 out of 16GB of vram.
 
regs said:
Not every game needs fixes in drivers. Nvidia mostly releasing useless profiles that nobody using.
Click to expand...
Funny you mention this, you notice that the 6900xt is slower then a 3080 at 1440p? Remember when that card was faster then a 3090 at 1440p raster?

Vya Domus said:
But does the performance look uncharacteristically low compared to 7000 series vs previous titles ? No. So until then, what exactly is the worry ?



AMD sponsored game where Nvidia cards don't underperform which is usually the exact opposite when Nvidia does it and the game runs like crap on anything that's not the latest gen from Nvidia like Portal RTX.

Fanboy is confused, frantically shuffling his notes :

AMD FAILED TO GIMP THEIR COMPETITORS LIKE NVIDIA DOES, HA, GOT EM ! AMD SUCKS.

That's how stupid this sounds.
Click to expand...
Both the RX 6000 and RX 7000 are underperforming here. In an AMD sponsored game. Not a good look..
 
to be honest this game is beautiful and will run fine if you can manage your desire with your current hardware ;)
to enjoy this game with highest graphic settings @4K you will need at least 4080 (4090 preferred).
But many PC master racer with their high-end (but ancient) hardware was tempt to set all graphic settings to maximum (Ultra + RT ON) :D :D

If you have VRAM less than 12GB then you should set your graphic setting between LOW-STANDARD. You may set to HIGH with GPU with 16GB VRAM, and then set it to ULTRA if you have 24GB RTX 4090 :rockout:. This will prevent some ugly and blurry textures (pop-up and pop-in) during play the game. Especially on ground textures.
FORSPOKENDemo-2023-01-26-21-27-59.jpg


FORSPOKENDemo-2023-01-26-19-58-38.jpg

FORSPOKENDemo-2023-01-26-20-03-46.jpg

FORSPOKENDemo-2023-01-26-20-00-50.jpg

 
Very low FPS. you would need to get a high end card to play this game comfortably.
Not to mention the RT requirements. It's just ridiculous what cards you need to get to play this game at 4k.
 
I rate this game the worst looking game I have ever seen in awhile, I get nauseous watching DF review

df.jpg


Wth is this, looks like I'm watching Elder Scroll Oblivion
 
Worst looking game? Looks pretty damn good to me. Must be the lying through ommision. "Worst game!" (only played one game).
 
So I have a mixed array for storage. The first Drive I loaded the Game on was my RAID 0 NVME and I was getting 1.5 second load times on the first benchmark. I then switched to SSD RAID 0 and I jumped to 3.5 seconds. I then moved it to a 530 and I was getting 1.2 seconds. When I put it on my Frankenstein WD AN1500 I got .87 load times. It surprised me that the WD AN1500 running at X4 is actually faster than a RAID 0 (First Generation) 4.0 NVME RAID array. After I pick up my Daughter from the School Bus I will make a video and post it here and on Youtube.
 
JAB Creations said:
Worst looking game? Looks pretty damn good to me. Must be the lying through ommision. "Worst game!" (only played one game).
Click to expand...
Yeah, the game is "pretty" and the game is "beautiful" -
on a 4080 or 4090.
Whereas some games look incredible on a GTX 1650 too.
Forspoken is adorable even,
if you like it's half-assed script and stupid lines.
Only thing I saw somewhat okay-ish was movement and combat,
but that kind of thing fades away quick.
At least for players like me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top