Capcom to Gamers: Monster Hunter World PC Port is CPU Heavy

[Manu_PT]

For 1080p@30fps and for what currently seems medium-ish details, fairly modest PC will do.

Did you read the article? A 2500k + GTX970 can´t sustain good framerate. If you consider that better than "fairly modest" (your words), then good luck running it on gtx 750ti or an i3/PentiuM G for example.

 

[nemesis.ie]

All this talk of loading up the cores and no mention of how it runs on e.g. AMD's R7 2700X or other "moar coars" with (maybe) lower clocks CPUs? A little side note on that in the article might be good too.

 

[londiste]

I did.
There are complaints about occasional very heavy stuttering. Together with the comments from Dev it's likely a problem with asset streaming and probably related to storage rather than anything else. I am also sure it will get patched out quickly.

I'm playing on my i5-3570k, GTX 970, and 16GB RAM using the 'high' preset at 1080p and am very happy with the performance so far. It's not a steady 60 fps but the dips typically drop to around 45 fps,

I've been playing on medium settings at 1920x1080 borderless windowed on a machine with a GTX 970, Intel Core i5-2500k 3.3 GHz CPU (which is an older CPU and below the minimum spec) and 16GB of RAM. At low-intensity moments the game can exceed 60 frames per second, and during a hunt or two in the first area it hovered between 40 and 50, but the big problem so far has been consistency of performance.

 

[Ubersonic]

Horrid port to be fair. It's a game for people with deep pockets to enjoy, since (and this is the first time I've said this) it'll be better to get a PS4 for this.

Hopefully they will optimize it before launch. Requiring an i7 and 980ti or equiv for a decent experience is going to make this a very niche game if they don't fix it.

 

[enxo218]

do they think everyone is rocking a 7th gen and above to play such a poorly optimised port at console quality no less? they can keep it

 

[Vya Domus]

Explain to me how those measly Jaguar cores at low clocks are faster than an Intel quad with HT.

They are not , who said that ? The game often runs below 30fps on PS4/Xbox One. This won't run worse than it does on consoles , isn't that obvious ?

They aren't lying, the port is CPU heavy - but that's just because its a bad port.

How should I put it , there isn't really a way you can make a bad port with this console generation. x86 is x86, work on multi-threading will be carried over to PC in the same manner. What you are expecting is extra work for PC , which ain't going to happen , ever.

 

[chaosmassive]

its didnt make any sense
console using same uarch as PC processor
check that PS4/XBONE CPU using APU from FX-era able to run
and now you say that i7 7700k paired with 980 Ti barely run ?

 

[Capitan Harlock]

I have a Vega64, by most reviewers it's not capable of 4K gaming.
Granted, competetive games at 4K is no go, however singleplayer games at 60 fps is easily done at 4K with some OC to the vega and setting reasonable settings that far exceed any quality settings you get at 1440P.
Can't max it, no it's not 4K capable which is somewhat of an odd conclusion but when benchmarking 2400G, GT1030, GT1050ti they drop settings and say they are 1080P capable and what not.

At 4k you don't need AA most of the time and in the case of MHW an Effect so heavy like Volumetric Fog disabled can get you a lot more Fps.
We have to see how it goes with driver optimization .
I play all my games at 4k no problem because some stuff is useless at 4k and some effect after certain levels don't make any difference visually.

 

[_Flare]

?? First Game Taking Full Advantage Of Threadripper ??

 

[Xpect]

Performance at HIGHEST SETTINGS in a resolution of 3840x2160 net 20FPS, that is actually very good.

Just saying: Consoles, even the PS4 Pro, render the game at 1080p without heavy AA at ~30FPS
So, quadrupling the resolution, using higher AA and presumably more details/effects than the consoles offer as well as running on a less optimized-for-the-hardware operating system (as in, more tasks that run in the background which are simply not present on consoles) and you still need only roughly 3 times the performance for that FPS?
Well, where is there a reason to whine? I don't see any.

 

[StrayKAT]

Performance at HIGHEST SETTINGS in a resolution of 3840x2160 net 20FPS, that is actually very good.

Just saying: Consoles, even the PS4 Pro, render the game at 1080p without heavy AA at ~30FPS
So, quadrupling the resolution, using higher AA and presumably more details/effects than the consoles offer as well as running on a less optimized-for-the-hardware operating system (as in, more tasks that run in the background which are simply not present on consoles) and you still need only roughly 3 times the performance for that FPS?
Well, where is there a reason to whine? I don't see any.

I don't see anything too out of the ordinary either.

But the 7th gen Intel reqs are silly.

 

[Recus]

And people claimed more cores isn’t better

Don't know rendering technology behind Ghost Recon Wildlands but 4c4t is enough to play it. That's 576km2 world (according to Reddit).

Monster Hunter Wold has medium size locations connected with narrow corridors. That doesn't make sense why old or low cores CPUs can't run it.

What's next Telltale games require 12 cores?

 

[sepheronx]

Don't know rendering technology behind Ghost Recon Wildlands but 4c4t is enough to play it. That's 576km2 world (according to Reddit).

Monster Hunter Wold has medium size locations connected with narrow corridors. That doesn't make sense why old or low cores CPUs can't run it.

What's next Telltale games requires 12 cores?

I had a 3570k previously at stock, with a 970 4gb and 12gb of ram. I ran wildlands no problem at full details at 1080p.

 

[BorisDG]

It's CPU heavy, because will be DENUVO bloated port... thanks C(r)apcom.

 

[windwhirl]

Plot twist: MHW is a PS4 emulator, not just a port.

 

[Gasaraki]

Its not a bad port. The problem don't lie on graphics or optimization. It lies on interactions and calculations needed for the game to work properly. Unfortunately old CPUs are not good in neither of the two.

A bunch of words that mean nothing. "interactions and calculations"? "Old CPUs" Oh you mean the PS4 cpu, cause that CPU is older than a 7700K.

 

[StrayKAT]

That Jaguar is a piece of trash by modern PC standards. Not sure "old" sums it up right. It's equivalent to a gimped FX 8350. Which wasn't much to begin with.

 

[las]

I find it hard to believe chips like the 7700k would struggle when it evidently runs fine on PS4, with its 1.6GHz (albeit 8 core) processor. Let's double the clockspeed to make up for the 7700k only having 4 cores... so let's pretend the PS4 has a 3.2GHz quad core chip instead. Yeah, no... a stock 7700k is still >1GHz faster.

wat

All current gen x86 consoles are based on very low end Jaguar CPU uArch. Developed for tablets and ultra low-end notebooks back in 2013 (they doubled cores for console tho). 1-2 cores are reserved on PS4/XB1, so games have 6-7 cores max.

7700K runs in circles around the CPU inside Xbox One X and PS4 Pro. It's probably 3-4 times as fast. Those console chips are closer to dualcore pentiums (2c/2t with low clocks) in terms of power or FX4000 series aka 4c/4t.

Still dev's can get alot out of those consoles because of to-the-metal access and very good optimization. Especially PS4 exclusives have amazed me.

 

[dirtyferret]

the i7-7700k and 980ti ran the game fine at 1440p

"How about practical performance? I switched to my native resolution of 2560x1440 and switched settings to the "High" preset, but disabled the variable resolution option to keep the game locked at 1440p. With this configuration, the game looks and performs great. The difference between Highest and High is minor, and I got between 45 and 60 frames per second, which felt perfectly responsive on my G-Sync monitor."

https://www.pcgamer.com/monster-hunter-world-pc-system-requirements/

On a laptop (parts would be 5-15% slower then their desktop counterpart)

On a PC with an i7-7700HQ, a GTX 1070, and 16GB RAM, I get something like 45 fps on average with some five-frame dips during combat on the ‘highest’ preset at 1920x1080

 

[StrayKAT]

the i7-7700k and 980ti ran the game fine at 1440p

"How about practical performance? I switched to my native resolution of 2560x1440 and switched settings to the "High" preset, but disabled the variable resolution option to keep the game locked at 1440p. With this configuration, the game looks and performs great. The difference between Highest and High is minor, and I got between 45 and 60 frames per second, which felt perfectly responsive on my G-Sync monitor."

https://www.pcgamer.com/monster-hunter-world-pc-system-requirements/

On a laptop (parts would be 5-15% slower then their desktop counterpart)

On a PC with an i7-7700HQ, a GTX 1070, and 16GB RAM, I get something like 45 fps on average with some five-frame dips during combat on the ‘highest’ preset at 1920x1080

45fps at 1080 is extremely shitty. I didn't know it'd be that bad. lol

edit: I mean, everyone knows the 1060 6GB and 1070 are like the "go to" cards for stable 1080p gaming (and even a little higher in the 1070's case). Nothing runs this badly with them. THE WHOLE POINT of these cards is do this well.

 

[dirtyferret]

45fps at 1080 is extremely shitty. I didn't know it'd be that bad. lol

laptop parts, the closest equivalent would an OC ryzen 1400 and R9 Fury X 4GB.

 

[StrayKAT]

laptop parts, the closest equivalent would an OC ryzen 1400 and R9 Fury X 4GB.

I just ninja edited.. but even a 1060 (6GB) is a stable 1080p card. The 1070, laptop or not, shouldn't be this awful.

This is a bigger joke than that Batman port that pissed everyone off not long ago. Little effort was put into this.

 

[Capitan Harlock]

Driver Optimization is last thing we need to see how it goes.
Other than maybe more than 1 patch to optimize the game because i'm sure we will get multiple patch .

 

[rtwjunkie]

I'm going to withhold judgement until @jormungand tests it. we should get the full facet of settings and really know what the game is like with performance.

 

[Dante Uchiha]

7700K is a lot faster than the poor thing in PS4 or XBox1. There is a lot more than clock speed to CPUs. That thing in both consoles is comparable to Atom, basically.

Worth noting that this is a console game.
1080p on PS4, 864p on Xbox1, struggling to keep at 30 FPS. XBox1X and PS4 Pro are both struggling around 40 FPS on 1080p.

Yep, the hardware of the consoles is inferior, but it's not a plausible comparison. It's not like comparing the performance of CPU\GPUs on PCs running Windows... Consoles use low-level programming language, allowing you to extract 100% of hardware performance without any abstraction.

Yeah, it could just be a bad port anyway.