Tuesday, December 8th 2020

Cyberpunk 2077 Game and Performance Review Roundup—The Antidote to 2020?

The most anticipated (read: hyped) PC game for several years now—Cyberpunk 2077—from CD Projekt Red, is almost here, and several gaming publications posted reviews of the game, as well as the way it handles on the PC. Cyberpunk 2077 is an open-world action-adventure RPG set in the near-future, with a non-linear adventure plot-line joined by dozens upon dozens of main- and side missions—not unlike GTA or RDR. What sets Cyberpunk's premise apart has to be its beautiful world that seems sufficiently futuristic to seem "plausible," and doesn't get carried away by futuristic tropes set by sci-fi franchises like "Star Trek." There's also plenty of social commentary from the creators through the game, which points to where we are likely headed.

As of this writing, review aggregator Metacritic rates Cyberpunk 2077 at 91, based on 44 critic reviews; while OpenCritic bases its bases its Top Critic Average at 91. The single player campaign consists of a main quest with innumerable optional quests. Night City and thereabouts, the fictional post-apocalyptic megapolis the game is based on, is a sprawling techno-concrete jungle with plenty to explore and unravel. Your skill-tree and abilities are based on cybernetic body implants and weapon mods. Critics highly praise the gameplay, the main quest, and the production value of the game—what you're paying for. At the same time, technical reviews point to the game still being extremely heavy on even the latest "Ampere" and "Big Navi" graphics cards, and despite CDPR taking its own sweet time releasing the game; it's still riddled with bugs and glitches that the studio will spend weeks—if not months—fixing.
Gameplay Reviews
Cyberpunk 2077 is easily the year's most engaging game if you go by top critics; although it seems to fall short of being a "magnum opus."

Tom Marks from IGN writes "Cyberpunk 2077 kicks you into its beautiful and dazzlingly dense cityscape with few restrictions. It offers a staggering amount of choice in how to build your character, approach quests, and confront enemies, and your decisions can have a tangible and natural-feeling impact on both the world around you and the stories of the people who inhabit it. Those stories can be emotional, funny, dark, exciting, and sometimes all of those things at once. The main quest may be shorter than expected when taken on its own and it's not always clear what you need to do to make meaningful changes to its finale, but the multitude of side quests available almost from the start can have a surprisingly powerful effect on the options you have when you get there. It's a shame that frustratingly frequent bugs can occasionally kill an otherwise well-set mood, but Cyberpunk 2077's impressively flexible design makes it a truly remarkable RPG."

Right off the bat we see ominous signs that the game is riddled with bugs at launch.

Richard Scott-Jones from PCGamesN writes: "Groundbreaking, but not quite as much as you're hoping it is. Cyberpunk 2077 doesn't surpass its brilliant influences, but in Night City, Johnny Silverhand, and its chilling vision of hyper-capitalism, it claims territory of its own."

Cyberpunk 2077 evokes a 1980s retro-futurist core-aesthetic. Think about the Detroit city depicted in the original RoboCop. Throughout the '80s futurists imagined crime-infested cities run by mega-corporations where democracy is an illusion at best and a delusion at worst, and corporations settle their differences through street gangs as their proxies.

Despite its technical flaws, Cyberpunk 2077 lives up to its expectations of being a remarkable RPG which you'll be playing for long after you've finished the main quest, says Spanish reviewer Víctor Rodríguez of Areajugones "Cyberpunk 2077 gives the player the ultimate freedom to play. A video game that takes the best of modern RPG, first-person shooter, stealth and open world games and masterfully blends it into a single product. If Skyrim and GTA V represented a turning point for their genres at the beginning of the 2010s, Cyberpunk 2077 is called upon to do the same in 2020, despite its technical flaws."

Daniel Van Boom of CNET writes: "Plenty of gamers will find Cyberpunk too much. It has a slow start -- you'll play for about four hours before even seeing the "Cyberpunk 2077" title screen -- and sometimes the main story moves at too slow a pace. Additionally, the roleplaying elements allow for varied combat, but some may find them needlessly complex, or simply overwhelming. A lot of people don't want to spend 50 hours playing one game, much less 200 hours to 100% it, and would rather a more linear, streamlined experience. Even with its shorter main quest, Cyberpunk is unlikely to sustain this type of player from start to end." Van Boom remarks that that Cyberpunk 2077 isn't meant for people looking to run through its quest, but rather people looking for the ultimate escape. "Anyone who's followed the game knows what they're in for. Players keen for a world to get lost in, a game to sink untold hours into, will be satiated by Cyberpunk 2077," he adds.

"Separated from its marketing, hype, and expectations, so far Cyberpunk 2077 just feels like a huge, scope-ambitious video game, with tons of attention paid to its lore and scenery and lots of dramatic things to do. It's not the best game I've ever played, as so many fans seem to hope it will be." writes Riley MacLeod from Kotaku. "Despite the controversy that's swirled around it and its own missteps, it hasn't yet inspired me to immediately consign it to the trash heap of retrograde video game shit. In many ways, it feels like it's about itself—its genre and source materials, the work that went into it, the flexibility it wants to give the player—from its character creator to its in-the-moment play. Saying "it's just a video game" doesn't quite explain what I find compelling about it, nor what I find complicated. But after all the hype, and despite a certain disappointment of my own hopes, I'm also relieved to find that it's just a video game," he adds.

Cyberpunk 2077 more than manages to be a game where you blink and hours go by IRL, notes James Billcliffe from VG247. "In the midst of such intense anticipation and scrutiny, it's easy to get carried away with what Cyberpunk 2077 could have been. The final experience might be more familiar than many predicted, with plenty of elements that aren't perfect, but it's dripping with detail and engaging stories. With so much to see and do, Cyberpunk 2077 is the kind of RPG where you blink and hours go by, which is just what we need to finish off 2020."

So, should you play Cyberpunk 2077 on the merits of its artistic content and gameplay? Considering that it's being sold at the same price as your annual Call of Duty fix; absolutely! But can you? To answer this question, Tom's Hardware did a technical review of the game, focused purely on how it plays on various current-generation graphics cards, and how certain settings such as real-time raytracing and DLSS affect performance.

Technical Aspects and Performance
According to Jarred Walton from Tom's Hardware, who tested a wide selection of graphics cards, resolutions, and combinations of game-settings; a GeForce RTX 2060 or Radeon RX 5600 XT should set you up for comfortable 60 FPS gameplay at Full HD (1080p) with Medium settings. 4K UHD with Medium settings takes at least an RTX 3080, even the RX 6800 XT is bogged down, and averages 55 FPS—and we're not even running the highest settings or raytracing!
4K UHD with Ultra settings is devastating on most graphics cards, with the game being barely playable at 33 FPS with an RX 6800 XT, barely above 40 FPS with the RTX 3080, and no more than 46 FPS with an RTX 3090. The various DLSS presets come to the rescue of NVIDIA GPUs, adding 40-60 percent performance; however, AMD users won't have any such luck, with FidelityFX Super Sampling still being a unicorn.
Another interesting observation by Walton has to be their CPU testing. An RTX 3090 paired with a 3-year old i7-7700K barely loses 1-2% performance compared to a Core i9-9900K, which has double the muscle. Both chips have an identical IPC as their individual cores are derived from the same "Skylake" microarchitecture; however you're barely gaining 1-2% going from 4-core/8-thread to 8-core/16-thread. This should mean that with Cyberpunk 2077, IPC is king, and if you're building a PC specifically for this game, you should allocate more of your budget on the graphics card, than the CPU.

Update 08:25 UTC: As one of our readers correctly pointed out, the performance preview was tested on graphics cards without day-one performance-optimization drivers; and you should wait for technical reviews with these launch drivers. The preview version also uses Denuvo DRM, which probably impacts performance, the release version won't come with Denuvo.

All in all, Cyberpunk 2077 seems like a game that you should definitely check out, considering it costs the same as your yearly Call of Duty fix.
Add your own comment

105 Comments on Cyberpunk 2077 Game and Performance Review Roundup—The Antidote to 2020?

#76
MxPhenom 216
ASIC Engineer
Vya DomusDamn, pretty bad performance dare I say unacceptable for a game in development for so long. The fact that core scaling is so poor makes me wonder how did they even got the game running on old gen consoles, it must go into slideshow mode in certain instances.
Almost like having to suddenly go to working remotely due to global pandemic can royally screw up a games develop within a year of its launch date.

Also I think its the dumbest decision from these developers (not just CD Projekt) to also keep developing new games for last gen consoles. Move on already. Last gen consoles are ass cheeks.

@W1zzard Any plans to do your own performance review of the game? Id like to see your benchmarks.

Also off topic for anyone who is current playing Witcher 3. There are 2 mods on Nexus website that will restore its visuals back to the initial E3 reveal quality before they downgraded it for launch. Its essentially a lighting mod and the other essentially updates every texture in the game. They make the game look insanely good.
Posted on Reply
#77
W1zzard
MxPhenom 216Any plans to do your own performance review of the game? Id like to see your benchmarks.
spent too much time playing the game and messing with my test scene ... hopefully article tomorrow
Posted on Reply
#78
deu
Vya DomusDamn, pretty bad performance dare I say unacceptable for a game in development for so long. The fact that core scaling is so poor makes me wonder how did they even got the game running on old gen consoles, it must go into slideshow mode in certain instances.
I run it on a 1080Ti in ultra settings at 1440p: The fps is 100% acceptable for a singleplayer experience (no lags or funky stutter and from a 'i need +400 fps in csgo'-dude) The game looks like nothing out there, so imo ill take this games 30-50 fps ultra @1440p than say player unknowns choppy 100+
Posted on Reply
#79
OneMoar
There is Always Moar
done with main quest only bug I could repeat is sometimes the scan/quickhack bug would get stuck if you used it too quickly after a cutscene or exiting a building
annoying but nothing a restart didn't fix, had one instance of Deathproofitus where I had 0 hp but didn't die
had few insistences of the AI getting confused or stuck (punching them in the face usually fixed it )

all in all nothing out of the norm for a rpg of this scale and complexity

performance wise the only complaint I had was the odd fps drops when in certain areas/cut scenes

game-tech score 8/10 performance is great given the scale and complexity, room to improve i don't think the core-scaling issue is unreasonable you need to understand from a programing perspective it makes sense to run a lot on one core managing all assorted logic you need to make the game world sing is a tall order and making one core do the brunt of it makes sense in a game this complex every-time you need to go back to cache/ram you interduce delay you simply can not afford if you want a smooth experience

gameplay score 8/10 (because of the irritating UI, the UI is a bit pf a pain to navigate quickly when some Choom-ba is set on flatlining you, more then once I got killed changing weapons or performing a quick-hack

Story Score 11/10 I literally had a dream I was in the game last night, CD Projekt knocked it out as usual
over-all 9/10 outstanding
Posted on Reply
#80
lexluthermiester
OneMoarDo you enjoy being publicly ignorant ?
You clearly need a mirror, as demonstrated by the vast majority of your posts.
OneMoarDLSS is a near +30fps boost with little appreciable quality hit
DLSS gives a performance boost when COMPARED to any other form of AntiAliasing. Turning them both off allows the GPU to render frames WITHOUT any post processing. As always, when the GPU has to do LESS work, the framerate ALWAYS goes higher.
Posted on Reply
#81
Vya Domus
OneMoari don't think the core-scaling issue is unreasonable you need to understand from a programing perspective it makes sense to run a lot on one core managing all assorted logic you need to make the game world sing is a tall order and making one core do the brunt of it makes sense in a game this complex every-time you need to go back to cache/ram you interduce delay you simply can not afford if you want a smooth experience
Except other games similar in scope fair much better. I don't know how the game logic was implemented and neither do you but the evidence still says performance is underwhelming. I suspect the bulk of development happened in the last year or two.
Posted on Reply
#82
AusWolf
lexluthermiesterYou clearly need a mirror, as demonstrated by the vast majority of your posts.

DLSS gives a performance boost when COMPARED to any other form of AntiAliasing. Turning them both off allows the GPU to render frames WITHOUT any post processing. As always, when the GPU has to do LESS work, the framerate ALWAYS goes higher.
I think he (she?) meant that running the game at 720p + DLSS gives you better performance than 1440p + no DLSS, just worded it quite badly.

Of course using any post processing method on the same resolution impacts performance negatively. :D
Posted on Reply
#83
r9
This reminds me od Cyrix days where Quake run much better on Intel and they released their own benchmarks with conclusion that in fact runs better on Intel but regardless both systems were able to produce 13fps for smooth gameplay. lol
Posted on Reply
#85
goodeedidid
Vya DomusDamn, pretty bad performance dare I say unacceptable for a game in development for so long. The fact that core scaling is so poor makes me wonder how did they even got the game running on old gen consoles, it must go into slideshow mode in certain instances.
It's not developed for so long, it's being developed for two years IMO since the release of the 2018/19 cinematic. Either way I think it's an average overhyped game anyway even if it was bug-free.
Posted on Reply
#86
QUANTUMPHYSICS
I’m running Cyberpunk on my Core i9 Extreme/ 3090/64GB DDR4/SSD with all Ray Tracing settings turned up, but I’m playing on a Alienware curved 34” Gaming monitor at 1440p until I can upgrade to Alienware’s 38” 4K monitor.

The majority of the market is playing on a 1080p or 1440p monitor and as long as they have a 2060 or better, they should have no issues with detail turned way up and RTX ON.

I’ve had just 2 bug experiences:

#1 in a car chase, my shotgun disappeared from my hand while I shot at attacking drones.

#2 some inventory displays took so long to boot, I thought the game crashed.

Originally I was on the fence about this game and I was afraid that it was going to disappoint me. I can honestly say that this game hasn’t disappointed me at all and I’ve been amazed by the experience they’ve crafted here.

I give my experience as 9/10.

The GUI needs more explanation for crafting. It reminds me of when I played Fallout4 and I didn’t understand how to build a settlement until basically the end of the game. Had I known how to build up my settlement and trade lines throughout the game and how to manage items it would have made the gameplay a lot easier.

My major issue is that this game should have been made specifically for the PC and they should not have tried to port it so early. That would have allowed them to get it out of the door months ago and they could have focused the ports on the PlayStation 5 and and Xbox series X.

This game is basically unplayable on the original Xbox One and PS4.

This game barely works that well on Xbox one X or PlayStation 4. If they had targeted series X PS5 they would have created the best possible experience at the sacrifice of a few gamers not being able to play itbut at least everyone who played it would have gotten a similar quality experience.
Posted on Reply
#87
OneMoar
There is Always Moar
imagine thinking that DLSS is just anouther post processing filter then imagine that it and anti-aliasing do anything close to the same thing
Posted on Reply
#88
rtwjunkie
PC Gaming Enthusiast
OneMoarimagine thinking that DLSS is just anouther post processing filter then imagine that it and anti-aliasing do anything close to the same thing
If they didn’t do the same thing you could run them both simultaneously.
Posted on Reply
#89
Ravenas
Maybe this is a bad take, an even worse take because it's coming from an owner of a 5700 XT, but it seems like there is a lack of optimization if the game struggles to play at 60 FPS in 1080P (max settings excluding ray tracing) on a video card that delivers a minimum of 60 FPS at 1440P on all current gen titles.
Posted on Reply
#90
lexluthermiester
rtwjunkieIf they didn’t do the same thing you could run them both simultaneously.
But they do the same thing just in different ways and to various levels of effectiveness. Not all games support DLSS so the need of alternate forms of AntiAliasing still exists. A list of currently compatible games is below;
www.rockpapershotgun.com/2020/10/20/confirmed-ray-tracing-and-dlss-games-2020/

I own several of the games on that list but still disable DLSS and AA because I just don't like the way it looks when comparing the hit to performance. Would really rather have the extra performance.

With CP2077 I turn a lot of things down or off. It is the one game that I have that is now bottlenecking my CPU(Xeon X3680) in a serious way. Time for an upgrade...
Posted on Reply
#91
rtwjunkie
PC Gaming Enthusiast
lexluthermiesterBut they do the same thing just in different ways and to variously levels of effectiveness.
Correct. DLSS actually incorporates most of TAA within its process. Which is why you cant run them both at the same time.
Posted on Reply
#92
OneMoar
There is Always Moar
You don't seem to get it dlss offers Superior image quality versus TAA alone and with none of the performance drag of msaa why on God's green earth would I turn dlss and anti-aliasing off might as well just throw my monitor right out the window and the whole point about GPU load and performance is entirely irrelevant dlss does not run on the graphics core it runs on the tensor cores

So to reiterate why the hell would I turn anti-aliasing and dlss off for a vastly inferior image and less performance

saying that dlss is not needed is completely wrong. It absolutely is needed if you want the best image quality while maintaining good Performance

else you might as well just run everything at 720p on a 15-in LCD from 2010
Posted on Reply
#93
KranK65
R0H1TMaybe that's just the way it's meant to be played?
AMD's performance is even worse...wtf are you talking about? lol
Posted on Reply
#94
rtwjunkie
PC Gaming Enthusiast
OneMoarYou don't seem to get it dlss offers Superior image quality versus TAA alone and with none of the performance drag of msaa why on God's green earth would I turn dlss and anti-aliasing off might as well just throw my monitor right out the window and the whole point about GPU load and performance is entirely irrelevant dlss does not run on the graphics core it runs on the tensor cores

So to reiterate why the hell would I turn anti-aliasing and dlss off for a vastly inferior image and less performance

saying that dlss is not needed is completely wrong. It absolutely is needed if you want the best image quality while maintaining good Performance

else you might as well just run everything at 720p on a 15-in LCD from 2010
Actually what DLSS does is Upscale your image from a lower resolution and give you ALMOST the same quality you would get at the new resolution without any type of AA on. The main benefit is blurring most of the jaggies and giving you the ability to upscale.
Posted on Reply
#95
OneMoar
There is Always Moar
rtwjunkieActually what DLSS does is Upscale your image from a lower resolution and give you ALMOST the same quality you would get at the new resolution without any type of AA on. The main benefit is blurring most of the jaggies and giving you the ability to upscale.
Yes but how it works is irrelevant the results are. and the results are very good no I would not be against have a tensor core accelerated FXAA,TAA but turning dlss off and running with no anti-aliasing makes absolutely no sense the result with DLSS is closer to MSAA vs a post effect

Unilaterally claiming that dlss is not needed or that turning off anti-aliasing provides the same results is flat wrong

not at 1440p or even 2160p the new generation of dlss has a bunch of settings auto, performance, balanced, quality,

combined with FPS targeting an intelligent implementation the entire thing is entirely seamless only scaling when needed to maintain the FPS Target and not being overly aggressive unless the performance is exceptionally poor
Posted on Reply
#96
lexluthermiester
OneMoarmakes absolutely no sense
To YOU maybe, but that's it's matter of opinion. Some people prefer to turn it all off and get the most performance from their GPU. Why? Because the laddering effect, or "jaggies" if you wish, are so small at 1080p and above is to be unobservable unless you go looking for them. During active gameplay one is just not going to notice. No AA and it's just not a big deal. AA is a performance hog and so is DLSS. Now that I think about it, I haven't used AA consistently since the Pentium 4 days.
Posted on Reply
#97
OneMoar
There is Always Moar
k run your 32in monitor at 720p and report back on how much it bugs you
btw I am never wrong
Posted on Reply
#98
lexluthermiester
OneMoark run your 32in monitor at 720p and report back on how much it bugs you
Ooooo, witty response, I'm floored... Really... No seriously, totally feeling the verbal smack-down from you...
OneMoarbtw I am never wrong
And I'm sure that in your head everyone else is a complete blithering idiot... Once again, you need a mirror...

So to sum up, for the other users watching, if you're playing CyberPunk2077 and you're not getting the framerates you wish, turn off DLSS and/or AntiAliasing and turn down some of the other settings that hit your CPU/GPU in a hard way and you'll do better.
Posted on Reply
#99
R0H1T
Always on the internet
OneMoarbtw I am never wrong
Kinda agree with that sentiment :toast:
Posted on Reply
#100
lexluthermiester
R0H1TKinda agree with that sentiment :toast:
Oh? Please, do explain!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 22nd, 2024 06:01 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts