What is the most graphics intensive game out there right now? I just built my first peecee and I just want to see how far I can push it.
Right now I've been playing witcher 3 maxed out with hairworks on and hd texture mod and increased lod mod at 1440p and I'm running at a consistent 55-60 fps
You could try playing poorly optimized games. Last I heard DE:MD was very badly optimized and even people with good rigs couldn't or could barely get 60 out of it.
Rise of the Tomb Raider
You could VSR/DSR Witcher 3 for supersampling, as that (and any other game for that matter) would get exponentially demanding... Crysis 3, Just Cause 3, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, GTA:V with texture&shader mods. Hell, I'll throw in AC Unity, as that game looks fucking gorgeous D/VSR sans MSAA/TXAA
try an ARMA game.
they will rape your CPU to shreds.
Because the those games aren't optimized you dumbass.
Serious Sam 3 cranked to 11.
>a game that calculates ballistics and penetration, on top of having a few hundred square kilometers of terrain with weather effects, NPCs with some degree of tactical behavior and physics
>and still has photorealistic graphics
GEE i fucking wonder why
Doesn't the engine only run on one core or something? Useless for testning a CPU from this century.
Try the new Doom instead, it got support for dx11, 12 and vulkan. Maybe Total War Warhammer as well for a pure PC game
>What is the most graphics intensive game out there right now? I just built my first peecee and I just want to see how far I can push it.
Why not get one of those benchmarking programs, like 3dMark?
I'm sure whatever you've built can't max out those program's most intense tests.
ARMA III should be as optimized as that game could be
No it's running on an upgraded version of the old engine and only utilizes 2 cores. It's really shitty optimized
Arma is a poorly optimized. Battlefield proves it, and still essentially fucks up. The kind of demanding like you're talking about is DCS with all possible addons/mods running.
Maybe he wants to see what his computer can actually do and not just get a fancy number
Fird post best post
>Battlefield proves it
but battlefield doesn't do even a fraction of the stuff Arma does
i can't stress how fucking bloated that game is.
Currently not even the new titan x pascal in 3 or even 4 way sli can handle any current gem "graphics intensive games" at 8k, and still aren't comfortably playable at 4k on more average rigs.
Doot's problem is that it's too optimized, and cheats by using the shitty Carmack Don't-Look-Too-Close™ textures. I've seen pretty low mainstream gpu's get ~50fps on it @ 1080p maxed.
I would say MGS:GZ/MGS:TPP
Even though the textures may not be the best, faces, animations and the complete engine technology is what makes it impressive for an open-world game.
>Those settings
>recently got a GTX 1080 and a 144hz monitor
>haven't updated my CPU yet, i5 3570k 4.4ghz (like 4 years old)
>every single fucking game out there is single threaded and CPU intensive as fuck and I can't get above 90 FPS on ANYTHING
please post some fucking games with good CPU optimization so I can finally get some use out of this $800 brick
That one is only intensive if you play with the enemy multiplier and have 500+ enemies at once on screen.
>mgsv
>intensive
Homefront 2 runs good, but needs a powerful PC.
All the games that can take advantage of a Topline pc just aren't pretty enough to warrant it. It's frustrating.
Literally looks no better than Far Cry 3.
MGSV is probably the most well optimized game I've ever played. Even when my PC had heating issues with the CPU MGSV ran near flawlessly all the time.
It's actually amazing that the guy looks so good and runs so fucking well.
It actually does.
Probably because of the low res textures, the low polygon count, the fact that 90% of the map is just flat ground, and that you never see more than 10 NPCs at the same time.
Yea, I understand it's basically playing an upscaled ps4 game. But my reply was mostly that the game is not remotely hard to run, even fairly older systems can run it comfortable.
While I agree with what you said, the engine itself was clearly made very well. It's nice to be able to install a game and have to do like no tinkering with the settings. It definitely looks pleasing to the eye no matter what.
battlefield 4 didn't even work for a year and the maps are small
>Battlefield proves it
you're comparing cod to ro2
I agree, just saying that it's no miracle, there's reasons why it runs good.
Good lighting always covers up a lot of other graphical settings.
AC Unity and Batman HamHam knight are best graphical games i ever seen.
Call of Pripyat with the misery mod
Total War Attila
...
>Battlefield proves it,
modded skyrim is the answer to any "what game does x" question
>poorly optimized
>graphics intensive
They seem to be the same thing.
Speaking of new PCs, what are good free antivirus software? Is the built in W10 one decent enough?
Common Sense.