Rise of the Tomb Raider, sketchy benchmarks

Do all of them have pure hair on?

 

A better question is why are all these websites rushing to release benchmarks of the game that was released just yesterday?
IIRC, they usually wait almost a week for the game-specific driver releases from both vendors.

Are they purposely not waiting for the 16.1.1 drivers from AMD that bring a specific profile for this game and should be released within the next few days or hours?

 

You mean TressFx? unless amd have renamed it? or is this something else?

 

AMD should try to get their game hotfix drivers out in a timely fashion like their competitor. I know I'm asking too much.

Though new drivers may do nothing anyway.

 

Just played this on 970 GTX with the game ready drivers, and the game is certainly nice looking. And pretty enjoyable too, although it is a lot easier to die here than in Uncharted, where it always feels you are telegraphed the correct moves quite clearly. But perhaps I just didn't learn to pick up the signs in this game yet. Not counting the frames, but must be a solid 60 at least most of the time.

 

Does it shimmer ?

 

No. I only remember TressFX ran awful on my 6970, was glitchy and looked better disabled. I didn't play much of the game anyway.

By the way I never said "get their act together".

 

Update: Due to playing a pre-release build, I did not have access to Nvidia's Game Ready Drivers while writing this. I can now confirm that installing the Game Ready Drivers that were released today (January 27) did not fix the problems I discuss below.
In fact, I would say it's made things worse: the stuttering is more frequent and the loading times are now two or three times longer than what I saw pre-drivers.

http://www.destructoid.com/pc-port-report-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-336747.phtml

This is what you prefer?

 

Shimmy shimmy ya

 

That article reads like it's written by a whiney wordy guy who can't possibly play games without 60 fps.

Does this game have visuals that might be legitimately demanding? I'm not planning to own it and haven't seen it.

I think every single AAA game that gets ported around has controversially shitty performance. It's a wonderous modern game industry we enjoy. But then I also think every game receives the bitching regardless of any facts or realities. Teh intarwebz!

 

Maybe it was the game patches? Could be the same story here. Not exactly shocking, unprecedented stuff.

 

So far not at all. But I am not that far in. It's a beautiful game, way beyond the first one. Clearly made with 3GB+ texture memory in mind and way more polygon detail.

 

Update: definitely shimmer in some environments. Most clear instance for me was an indoor area with sunlight falling in through a crack in the ceiling. It looks a lot like the kind of HDR aliasing that nAo talked about a long time ago, which would explain why it is hard to get rid of by various AA techniques, but nAo did also suggest how to overcome this issue ... So would be interesting to know why the developers couldn't solve this.

 

I can't find the dx12 thread, though this would also make a good post for 'amd gpus age better' thread as well.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_page..._graphics_performance_benchmark_review,9.html