Monster Hunter World PC Performance Estimates Pop Up; GeForce GTX 1080 Insufficient for 60 FPS WQHD

[Raevenlord]

A performance preview of sorts for Monster Hunter World has surfaced via a post on Resetera, where user FluffyQuack posted his initial performance results with an advance copy of the PC version of the game. Initial impressions don't scale very well; performance isn't monstrous, but it isn't exactly pretty either. The game does look good, granted; however, there are some texture and fur processing quality issues that could be much better implemented.

Performance figures for a system equipped with 16 GB of RAM, an i7-4790k and a GTX 1080 are delivering a minimum of 44 FPS on the highest preset, 60 FPS on High settings, 65 FPS on Medium, and 108 FPS on Low. Of course, a day-one patch could optimize settings further, but there are some visually impressive games that both look and perform better. Still, the game looks good, and should be an interesting experience for the long summer.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Vayra86]

That dóes look pretty nice indeed. But yeah. Port woes.

 

[bug]

Idk what's the standard on consoles, but on PC that fur and those textures look definitely pre-2010.

 

[StrayKAT]

What? Something is definitely wrong if your game can't do 2k on a1080 at this point. edit: I remember putting this on my wishlist. Screw them. Taking it off.

 

[Tsukiyomi91]

poor porting it seems... can't believe this game tanked a GTX1080 non Ti. What's even more interesting is how Vega 56 or 64 handle this PC port.

 

[kastriot]

This graphics doesn't need more than GTX 1060 3GB it seems optimisation was downhill..

 

[StrayKAT]

lol Oh yeah, I have a Vega. I wonder if it fares better. Things like Forza 7 run sweet at 4k.

 

[dj-electric]

I'm grumpy. Everytime I see WQHD referred to as "2K" a cringe a little.
God is dead, we murdered him.

 

[IceShroom]

Thanks to Gimpwork.

 

[natr0n]

They should release a benchmark.

 

[Tsukiyomi91]

I don't think MHW has Gameworks... how sure are you that it's "gimpworks" when an Nvidia GPU got tanked for running 1440p when it's designed to run at that resolution? Anyways; here's a joke of an article from IGN with the punch-line "runs great so far."
http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/07/25/monster-hunter-worlds-pc-port-actually-runs-great-so-far

 

[AltCapwn]

You'll need a Quadro P6000 to be able to render all those hairs, and then you can have 60 fps on 2K with a 1080Ti that render the graphics.

 

[IceShroom]

You'll need a Quadro P6000 to be able to render all those hairs, and then you can have 60 fps on 2K with a 1080Ti that render the graphics.

Quadro dont have game optimized driver. So it will probabily run more carppy on Quadro. It need Titan V(Volta) to run 60fps at 1440p.

 

[bug]

I don't think MHW has Gameworks... how sure are you that it's "gimpworks" when an Nvidia GPU got tanked for running 1440p when it's designed to run at that resolution? Anyways; here's a joke of an article from IGN with the punch-line "runs great so far."
http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/07/25/monster-hunter-worlds-pc-port-actually-runs-great-so-far

He's not entirely wrong: with details ramped up, GameWorks also kills Nvidia hardware. If you choose to forget about that, you get a nice argument for the theory where GameWorks exists only to tank AMD hardware.
It exists for features that are not yet standardized by DX. And yes, most of them are heavy on the GPU.

 

[mgstraze]

Idk what's the standard on consoles, but on PC that fur and those textures look definitely pre-2010.

indeed

 

[M2B]

This is why we need new Generation of GPUs, of course these are minimum frames but GTX 1080 is becoming a Mid-Range GPU.

 

[B-Real]

Idk what's the standard on consoles, but on PC that fur and those textures look definitely pre-2010.

Just what I had on my mind.

This is why we need new Generation of GPUs, of course these are minimum frames but GTX 1080 is becoming a Mid-Range GPU.

1. Most of the predictions say new cards won't be such a big leap forward as Pascal was. So don't prejudge.
2. It doesn't look that beautiful to degrade the GTX 1080 to mid range. It's just a lack of well optimized engine.

 

[StrayKAT]

This is why we need new Generation of GPUs, of course these are minimum frames but GTX 1080 is becoming a Mid-Range GPU.

It's not the GPU's fault (unless you're referring to the hair works stuff.. then I agree).

That should be optional in this particular game though... and no reason why it should run so badly. The engine itself has already existed on PC (although it's heavily modified from game to game). I think the last PC version was Dragon's Dogma.

 

[kurosagi01]

The framerate on standard PS4 is pretty bad aswell, its playable but it can get pretty bad. Barely keeps at 30fps and dips down depending how chaotic it gets. Game itself even on consoles I don't think is also optimised that great either.
Monster hunter X on 3ds runs better, I'm hoping it be same when the port gets released on Switch.

 

[jormungand]

I already preordered the game... why?? Cuz ive been waiting too long for the pc edition and because i do want to play the game. Payed $45.75 and no regrets. For those who want to know about how it runs im gonna give my own exp later. (People pay top dollar for CoD every year) why???
Like someone i respect a lot said..... “for the sake of gaming”
Gtx 1070 at 1440p gonna see how the game performs and which setting should i tweak . Those who wanna wait... wait ill try to give my best to test the game and give you the results.

 

[GreiverBlade]

I'm grumpy. Everytime I see WQHD referred to as "2K" a cringe a little.
God is dead, we murdered him.

why? 1K is HD thus 720P 2k is WQHD thus 1440P (strangely enough 2x720= 1440) ... 1080P is 1.5K (720+360... well 1080p) 2520p is 3.5K and 1620P is often called 3K ... for the last one i would understand, 3K is 2160P

ergo 4K is a fake ... (alongside 3K ) 4K is 2880p (and not 5K ... 5K is 3600P following the initial logic )

is there a logic ? or just a commercial term ... behind 1/1.5/2/2.5/3/3.5/4/5K because 3, 3.5, 4 and 5K does not follow the logic that has been up to 2K

edit: oh well it is a commercial term ... hehe ... advertising a tv as 4K has more impact than saying it is, in reality, a 3K, or to say the new 5K iMac is in fact "only" 4K (and probably a mean to "make seems" they did achieve something while in reality they slowed down the pixel count multiplication and called the current result inadequately, not that it really matter ... actual top GPU are just "capable" of handling "3K" ... oh well 2K is the sweetspot.)

i know i know ... for most 2K is 1080p since 4K is 2160P

 

[Easo]

So... just not the best port?

 

[Capitan Harlock]

I think you should not take for good what this reddit user says at all.
You can't expect a game with no driver support jet to go in 1440p with a gtx 1080 when some settings are too heavy going over 1080p.
Is not bad optimization , the dude don't know what is talking about .

 

[siluro818]

It's a specific effect that is the culprit for most of that performance loss (Volume Rendering Quality), and one that hardly makes a difference at that. With all other settings maxed out the 1080 runs the game with 70 FPS at 1440p with VRC off, which falls to 50 FPS with VRC maxed.

So keep those preorders....

 

[Gasaraki]

I'm grumpy. Everytime I see WQHD referred to as "2K" a cringe a little.
God is dead, we murdered him.

Yes, people need to stop calling 2560x1440, "2K". Everytime someone says that, a kitten gets killed.

Just what I had on my mind.


1. Most of the predictions say new cards won't be such a big leap forward as Pascal was. So don't prejudge.
2. It doesn't look that beautiful to degrade the GTX 1080 to mid range. It's just a lack of well optimized engine.

I don't know what "predictions" you're reading but the early leaks i'm reading show the 1170 beating the 1080Ti in performance.