Outer Worlds Benchmark Test & Performance Analysis

[R00kie]

Which usually indicates the pre-release optimization came from AMD.

Which is what I was implying.

 

[Xuper]

hmm , stock 3900x is faster than Stock 8700K

 

[Vayra86]

OK, so Obsidian didn't bother to test or optimize on AMD cards at all, or what? Those results are absurd and, unless AMD does something about it, are going to greatly skew any video card review that decides to included the Outer Worlds in the selection of tests...

Has it occurred to you that AMD also didn't give a flying hoot what performance would be like, and never did pre-empt this pretty serious release with a few engineers that paid a visit?

Because that's how Nvidia rolls and where they get their results. Optimization doesn't magically happen as it is, there is an investment to it.

Which usually indicates the pre-release optimization came from AMD.

More often than not, this does not shine through in the FPS results. I'm not a believer. I just think its a badge that gets traded for a sum of money, in other words, a simple advertisement.

 

[cyberloner]

this game screw amd

 

[r.h.p]

no DX 12 !!! wtf. def looks like a dx 11 game , no way for me . Thx for the review W1zzard

 

[rtwjunkie]

no DX 12 !!! wtf. def looks like a dx 11 game , no way for me . Thx for the review W1zzard

Because we all know visuals are the most important component of a quality game.

If you were familiar with Obsidian. You’d know that they absolutely nail story, atmosphere and character. Their gameplay is second to none. What they make are absolutely fun to play games.

 

[Cheeseball]

If you've got a RX 5700 XT, just run the game at High instead of Ultra. You will hit ~110 FPS.

 

[silkstone]

I got the game thru the Xbox pass, but it just refuses to play. Crashes to the desktop every time without an error code.
I only really got the xbox subscription to play this game so I'll be cancelling if they don't fix it soon!

 

[bobalazs]

45-70 fps with 1070 + 8500.
Outside of town 58-62 fps.
1440p Ultra.

 

[erocker]

Just finished the game. I was using GSync, never bothered to look at FPS only a few times I noticed a slowdown. Loved every minute of it. I can only hope they make more!

 

[Aquinus]

It looks good, but it doesn't look that good. I would expect better 4k frame rates across the board for what I'm looking at. Perhaps it's just a poorly optimized game in general.

 

[Vayra86]

Started playing yesterday for a little while.

Highly consolified game, it feels very much like No Mans Sky in a lot of ways. Luckily, combat and general movement feels a lot better than it or say, Fallout 4.

First impression: this is an open world shooter with some light RPG sprinkled on top. Borderlands without the million guns, really.

Then I got a headache from graphics. Luckily there is a fix

Disable Chromatic Aberration in The Outer Worlds

• Open Engine.ini using any text editor, such as Notepad.
• Add [SystemSettings] to the bottom of the file, if it isn't already there.
• Under [SystemSettings], add r.SceneColorFringeQuality=0
• Save the file, and exit the file.

I hope the story is good. So far not horrible but certainly not TW3 material either... graphically Im more annoyed than impressed with it, not the most pleasant thing to look at. Tonight Ill revisit that with tweaked GFX...

 

[stdout]

Who said SLI was dead? Cant wait to try this one.

 

[TheLostSwede]

I got the game thru the Xbox pass, but it just refuses to play. Crashes to the desktop every time without an error code.
I only really got the xbox subscription to play this game so I'll be cancelling if they don't fix it soon!

Works fine for me, played quite a few hours so far.

 

[silkstone]

Works fine for me, played quite a few hours so far.

I got it to work by downclocking my my 1080Ti. Weird as it seems lots of people are having this issue. Interestingly enough, I had to do the same to get ME3 to work. I wonder if it's base don the same engine.

 

[r.h.p]

Because we all know visuals are the most important component of a quality game.

If you were familiar with Obsidian. You’d know that they absolutely nail story, atmosphere and character. Their gameplay is second to none. What they make are absolutely fun to play games.

lol in some ways your right bro , the review says its a great game to play but my machine likes dx 12 and titles running it eg: BF5 , Civ6 look awsome , and its 2019 now....

 

[Apocalypsee]

1070 performs better than V56 and even V64, looks like I made the right decision to trade V56 for 1070. For this game at least.

Only played a bit of its tutorial, this game feels like a lot of games (Borderlands, Bioshock, Fallout). Not a bad thing, the last time I feel like this are positive (Titanfall 2 and Singularity)

 

[dirtyferret]

Big difference there from the 125FPS average from @W1zzard 's test results with the 9900K. Any patch that increased performance by so much?

My guess would be the specific in game area they tested. For pcgamer

There's no built-in benchmark in The Outer Worlds, so I just ran through the same sequence for each hardware configuration and logged frametimes using FrameView (which is basically a tweaked version of PresentMon). That sequence starts at the gates of Edgewater and runs back to the Unreliable, and then follows the path to the right.

@W1zzard didn't state his sequence but I'm willing to bet it's a different area hence the different FPS.

 

[W1zzard]

but I'm willing to bet it's a different area hence the different FPS.

correct

 

[Aquinus]

There's no built-in benchmark in The Outer Worlds, so I just ran through the same sequence for each hardware configuration and logged frametimes using FrameView (which is basically a tweaked version of PresentMon). That sequence starts at the gates of Edgewater and runs back to the Unreliable, and then follows the path to the right.

I'm actually sort of unhappy about that. It leaves a certain level of variability between test runs. In cases like these, I would expect multiple runs per graphics card so we can have an idea for the amount of error between runs.

@W1zzard did you run the same test against a single GPU to see what the kind of variability is between testing the same hardware multiple times? You know, just to rule out how much the human factor play into this sort of thing. Where you're looking (the direction of the camera,) can have a huge impact on frame rates and frame times and it makes me wonder if the results can be reproduced within a reasonable margin.

For this reason in particular, I like automated benchmark runs for the purposes of comparison, so the same scene can be produced in its entirety in a consistent way where there is absolutely no potential for human error to impact the results.

 

[W1zzard]

did you run the same test against a single GPU to see what the kind of variability is between testing the same hardware multiple times

I always do that for each new game I'm testing.. it's usually below 1%.

 

[Aquinus]

I always do that for each new game I'm testing.. it's usually below 1%.

Was it in this case? If you typically do this, it might not be bad data to provide in a review, particularly if we're focusing on a single game.

 

[W1zzard]

Was it in this case? If you typically do this, it might not be bad data to provide in a review, particularly if we're focusing on a single game.

yeah. these tests are quite repeatable - as long as you heat up your cards properly. a cold turing/navi/vega card will be considerably faster than a prewarmed one

 

[EarthDog]

I believe he just meant variability between runs as in path/movement/shooting,/ai, etc. Its not the same frames going through each run...


...but such as it is when there isnt a built in benchmark. You can only do the best you can and try to repeat as best you can. That said, I know the Dirt series benchmark isnt the same each time (same track and weather, but finishes in. Different.place, like 4th then 2nd, etc). and it is integrated/canned (but still within 1%). I want to say F1 2018 is too? There's a couple.

 

[danbert2000]

This is great news for the eventual Switch port seeing that the usually-close 1080 is 33% faster than the Vega 64 at 1080p. The Maxwell Tegra X1 should be able to punch above its weight and maybe turn in something that's only a little bit lower resolution than the PS4 or Xbox One versions.

You have to wonder what is up with this game. I agree with W1zz, it's probably a situation where AMD put all the effort towards the Call of Duty game, but man this is a route on the order of the Control performance.