CYBERPUNK 2077 [XO, XBSX|S, PC, PS4, PS5]

1660ti on high settings at 1080p

Wow impressive for a 1660ti. Guess you have a nvme ssd too? Anyway, cant stress it enough how amazing this game looks, it just doesnt get old. Nothing comes even close.

I made it through the prologue finally today after being distracted for quite awhile. Was playing it through this morning on headphone in Dolby Atmos, thank you @PSman1700

Wow, what an intense sequence of events! Really looking forward to all this.

This dolby atmos is a real game changer for audio imo, its a clear difference, atleast when using headphones. Its not as pronounched on a speaker system, even if its atmos certified. Its 15 dollars in some regions to enable atmos but its totally worth it just for this game. Good thing is you have it permanently, more games are going to use atmos for sure going forward.
 
AMD' cpus are underutilized due to this issue
~15% hit in minimum FPS benchmarks

Thanks for reporting this;
I got +16% improvement with the hack

default
orgclk3n.png


with hex edit
hxdeb2skdg.png
 
Explanation of what was going on -- it's essentially a GPUOpen library method that is determining the CPU Core Count, which is likely used to dynamically determine how many worker threads can be used by the game.

The proposed hex string is sub-optimal, because it inverts the check instead of neutralizing it (thus potentially breaking Intel). It is safer to change the hex string to EB 30 33 C9 B8 01 00 00 00 0F A2 8B C8 C1 F9 08 instead

Now here's the weirder part. The new code calculates the number of threads by checking the reported thread count. Then it would check if an AMD CPU is installed. If an AMD CPU is installed, it would then check if a FX CPU is installed. If it's both an AMD and FX, it would use the thread count that the CPU reports (which is identical to Intel, despite FX CPUs misreporting) If it's an AMD CPU, but not a FX CPU (so CPUs like Ryzen), it use the reported core count to count the number of threads (which is also incorrect because Ryzen properly reports thread count if I am correct). So on the new code, if a 4-core 8-thread Intel CPU is installed, then it would report "8" as the number of threads. if a 4-core 8-thread AMD Ryzen CPU is installed, then it would report "4" as the number of threads. If an "8-core" AMD FX CPU is installed, it would report "8" as the number of threads.


 
So I managed to get it running on my 6600k + 2060 with RT lighting and, it looks pretty good. With a 45fps cap I'm keeping the GPU at 95% usage most of the time and the CPU is not causing any major issues.

Cyberpunk2077_haPUkfk7UI.jpg
 
1.0.4 I believe is now available for Series X? It moved to XboxOneGen9aware after the patch.
 
I'm playing on ps5 and I'm having a great experience.
I hoped for a sharper image but the performance (holding to that 60fps !!) is
pretty awesome.
So I'm happy with my purchase.
If I didn't have a next gen console, I think I'd be a little disappointed with how this product turned out.
 
1.0.4 I believe is now available for Series X? It moved to XboxOneGen9aware after the patch.
This is what I expected.
Only thing I can think is the metadata was incorrect in previous version but the actual code was still gen9 aware.
 
Mind blown by this game. It's going to be hard for anything to surpass this game in the coming years.

This might be one of the ultra rare open world games I actually finish. If I get the time to play it that is.

Graphics are unbelievably good even on my potato GTX 1070. The lighting is gorgeous. So much detail everywhere.

Hopefully this gets to be on game of the year awards for 2021, because it potentially deserves game of the year from what I've seen so far, and I've only barely scratched the surface.

Oh, and I've sold a ton of ashtrays and garbage. Damn, I can't help myself though. Have to help keep the environment clean, you know?

Regards,
SB
 
So I managed to get it running on my 6600k + 2060 with RT lighting and, it looks pretty good. With a 45fps cap I'm keeping the GPU at 95% usage most of the time and the CPU is not causing any major issues.
Why 45fps? Does your monitor support a multiple of that refresh rate? I capped to 40 and ran my monitor at 120hz and it was pretty good most of the time, but I missed the extra performance I got in some of the combat sandboxes that ran faster, so I went back to uncapped.
 
Back
Top