Been playing this, I personally have not noticed it to be using any more horsepower than CP 1.6/2.0, so anyone worrying how it'll play based on how well the original played, I'd say you've got nothing to worry about This is with RT on as well Just thought I'd mention this in case anyone is worried after seeing the higher requirements
Can confirm after a further 6 hours, still no slow downs/frame drops, you literally wouldn't know it was any different to the original games performance, bar the fact it visually looks WAY nicer! Very impressed with this!
It's witchcraft. 1.6 I had to run the overdrive optimisation mod at DLSS quality to get decent frame rates with Path Tracing on at 1440p. Balanced looked horrible. 2.0 I've ditched the mod. Running full path tracing with DLSS balanced and ray reconstruction, and it still looks better than before, at the same frame rates, despite dropping DLSS.
2080 Ti got 20 FPS in the benchmark at 3440x1440 DLSS performance with path tracing and ray reconstruction. Hum... where to start Phantom Liberty? Using old save or start a new save? I remember my old save already had skill points reset with a previous patch. I lost interest in messing about.
I'd start new. I attempted to work through skill tree and item changes on an existing save and just got overwhelmed with the options and changes. Plus armour is now tired to cyberware rather than clothing, so you're likely better off picking up loot than trying to buy and upgrade everything, unless you've got a huge pile of cash. Which even then, you burn through very quickly.
Last time I played this game was long before "RT Overdrive", and even then I had to enable DLSS in order to get more than 60FPS when ray tracing was enabled (mix of high/ultra settings @ 1440p on a 3070Ti). Without ray tracing I could easily hit over 90-100FPS or more with the same quality settings. Hardware requirements for the 1.6 and 2.0 updates have only increased, so I'm not exactly holding out much hope that I'll be playing Phantom Liberty at high framerates - at least not if I ever want to enable ray tracing. In the days of 144Hz monitors, 120Hz TVs, and variable refresh rates, high framerates really matter. It only took me two years to get back to the point where I again have to start making serious compromises and heavy use of upscaling in order to get good performance. The £530 I spent two years ago on a 3070Ti is now worth £625 after adjusting for inflation. That now gets me either: a 7800 XT, where I can basically forget about RT altogether and have fewer features than I do now; or at best a 4070, where I will still have to rely on upscaling to get more than 60FPS if I want to use all the features offered. I'm still going to buy Phantom Liberty (eventually) because I want to play it, and I'm still going to just shut up and make do with the sacrifices needed to get 40-60FPS minimum. I often sit at around 40-50FPS in Starfield because any further compromises on image quality are just too much of a sacrifice - I already see a lot of nasty artifacts and weird jank from upscaling. I'm still enjoying Starfield, and I'll almost certainly enjoy Phantom Liberty, but that enjoyment is in spite of all the pissing around with graphics settings. Honestly sometimes it's enough to make me want to pack in the whole bloody shebang and just go back to the low cost, simplicity, and immediate accessibility of a console. I've seen this cycle play out so many times in games on home computers over the last ~30 years and I'm so tired of it... At least publishers/developers optimise for consoles, there'd be uproar if Starfield or Phantom Liberty ran like tepid dogshit on the Xbox Series X and people had to spend a couple of hours researching and testing graphics settings before they got started. PC gamers are paying the highest premium that exists in gaming simply for the privilege of shat on. That... er... that got more ranty than I initially anticipated... EDIT: Definitely start from scratch.
This game is over 9 years old and I still think it looks better than most new games, Starfield included. Ai3 by SuperHans123 posted 28 Sep 2023 at 19:59 Ai2 by SuperHans123 posted 28 Sep 2023 at 19:59 Ai1 by SuperHans123 posted 28 Sep 2023 at 19:59
Just did a couple of quick benchmarks on CP2077 2.01. I don't have Phantom Liberty yet, but it's the same game engine so not having the expansion likely won't make any difference. 5900X, 32GB RAM, 3070Ti, running at 1440p Ultra: 71 avg/51 min RT Low: 62/50 RT Ultra: 28/23 RT Ultra with DLSS Auto: 55/26 RT Overdrive: 9/4 RT Overdrive with DLSS Auto: 32/21 So I can get away with RT Low with native rendering, but if I want to go higher than that then it's definitely DLSS time. I don't know what kind of quality setting "Auto" will apply, I'll tweak that closer to the time I'm ready to actual get stuck in to Phantom liberty. Assuming I don't upgrade my GPU before that, which is very likely at this point. RT Overdrive was pretty as f', but LOL that framerate...
I've only just reinstalled CP2077 with the new patch, just to try it out on the 4060LP mini rig. I didn't go mad - 1440p high native. I basically ran through a few hours to see if I got any slowdowns or stuttering and, if I did, I'd run through it with Afterburner/ Rivatuner overlays to check minimums/averages VRAM usage etc.. I prefer to do it that way, because I'm not focussing on the metrics on screen, just my feeling when playing - If it feels good, IDGAF about metrics. It was as smooth as you like. I suppose I should try high/ultra combos with RT, DLSS and Frame Gen, but I only really care about DLSS out of those three. I've never felt RT offers enough to support the performance hit* and I think, on the lower 40 series cards at least, Frame Gen definitely adds a perceptible touch of input lag - it just feels ever-so-slightly sluggish compared to native/DLSS without Frame Gen. This comes from a combination of my very unscientific "trying it out a bit" and reading/watching some reviews. *Yes, RT on with DLSS can offer similar frame rates to native RT off, but I'd rather go with DLSS Quality RT off and massively improve the frame rate. My 3090 has the muscle to handle RT and achieve decent frame rates, but I just don't really notice the benefit of RT. I don't stop and look at the way the street lights hitting a puddle is reflected in a shop window. There's still too much hype about it, and it will only really matter when it becomes so automatically integrated that it isn't really remarked on any more.
Honestly, in the vast majority of cases I really couldn’t give a flying one about RT. But IMO Cyberpunk 2077 is one of those “showcase” games that really shows off just how good it can look. It’s still a good looking game even without it; I first played it a couple of years ago when I still had a 1060 6GB, when 3000-series cards had only launched a few months prior. I only got around 40-50fps at 1080p, and only with a lot of graphics tweaking, but I still really enjoyed it. When I came back to it after getting the 3070 Ti, I was again happy enough to have lower frame rates because RT looked so good; and this time I had a variable refresh rate monitor, so 50-70fps looked a lot better than it used to. Like you say, I don’t sit there staring at reflections in puddles, but the aggregate improvement in visual quality was worth the performance sacrifice IMO. It takes the hyper-neon setting of Night City and just dials it up to 11, and for me that really enhances the overall immersion and aesthetic. I don’t need it to enjoy the game, but for me it makes something that’s already enjoyable even better. But in any other game… I can happily live without RT. It doesn’t exist in Starfield or Baldur’s Gate 3, and I’m really enjoying those games.
