[PC] Watch_Dogs graphical settings

[DF is BUSY]

Just wanted to share screenshots of the differences in the 4 graphical settings that had the most impact on performance in game.
- textures = HIGH, i should have did testing on ULTRA but by the time I realized I said fukk it.
- resolution = 1920x1200; 16:10


AMBIENT OCCLUSION:

Spoiler

(easily distinguishable differences, HBAO LOW added unnecessary shadowing in some places and MHBAO looked close enough to HBAO HIGH with less performance hit)

NO AO

MHBAO

HBAO LOW

HBAO HIGH

REFLECTIONS:

Spoiler

(surprisingly notable differences, if i recall, GTA4 had the same performance hits with these levels too. ULTRA hits too hard for the negligible aesthetic improvement. HIGH is sweet spot)

LOW

MEDIUM

HIGH

ULTRA

SHADOWS:

Spoiler

(actually had little impact on overall performance, most modern rigs can splurge and keep this at ultra)

LOW

MEDIUM

HIGH

ULTRA

LEVEL OF DETAIL:

Spoiler

(biggest hit on performance with very notable differences between LOW/MED and HIGH/ULTRA)

LOW

MED

HIGH

ULTRA

*edit
ANTI ALIASING:
looks like thecoli has a 20 image limit on posts, so i'll link it to another post= =
http://www.thecoli.com/posts/8616692/

 

[The Phoenix]

I have to be honest with you man. I see very little difference between those pictures, if any at all. I will admit though, I'm not real big on graphics detail. I don't obsess over it like a lot of people do and I'm willing to let a lot of stuff slide so I may not be looking at the correct points of comparison. I have to believe though given pictures side by side, I can spot noticeable detail or the lack thereof and I just don't see it in these pics.

 

[DF is BUSY]

I have to be honest with you man. I see very little difference between those pictures, if any at all. I will admit though, I'm not real big on graphics detail. I don't obsess over it like a lot of people do and I'm willing to let a lot of stuff slide so I may not be looking at the correct points of comparison. I have to believe though given pictures side by side, I can spot noticeable detail or the lack thereof and I just don't see it in these pics.

any specific sets you cant spot the difference?

 

[The Phoenix]

Mainly in the shadows and level of detail.

 

[King Sun]

Watch Dogs performance analysis • Eurogamer.net

 

[charmander]

i need to upgrade my computer bad

 

[DF is BUSY]

Watch Dogs performance analysis • Eurogamer.net

i dont like the way they tested though. not as detailed as your boy

Mainly in the shadows and level of detail.

yeah the shadows are hard to spot, thats why the performance hit is little to none. LOW has some fuzzy shadows, while on MED/HIGH/ULTRA it slightly gets sharper. I'd say the higher setting of shadow just increases the overall size of it for the most part. LOW is disgust though.

for the detail level, look at the floor mainly. LOW and MED can be grouped together and the same for HIGH/ULTRA

 

[iceberg_is_on_fire]

This game is an unnecessary resource hog.

 

[DF is BUSY]

*edit
ANTI ALIASING:

Spoiler

(i'll let the pictures speak for themselves. for some reason the 4x settings glitched out on me. It'll probably go away once I restart the game but whatever)

OFF

FXAA

SMAA

TEMPORAL SMAA

MSAA2X

MSAA4X

MSAA8X

TXAA2X

TXAA4X

 

[daze23]

there's a lot of info and benchmarking in the nvidia tweaking guide:

Watch Dogs Graphics, Performance & Tweaking Guide | GeForce

looking at their suggested settings, they don't recommend any AA above Temporal SMAA for ANY single gpu setup

as far as AO, I think MHBAO and HBAO+ (Low) look bad. it's just a black glow around objects. I use HBAO+ (High), as it's actually kind of subtle. I would turn AO off, but it makes the game look kind of weird

the funny thing is a couple of weeks ago the WD devs were talking about a gtx 670 being sufficient for 'ultra' settings

 

[daze23]

@DF is BUSY what On Screen Display are you using?

 

[daze23]

it's interesting that the only above situation where the gpu was at less than 99% load was with AA off. at 54fps, that indicates some sort of bottleneck to me, but you can also see none of the cpu's cores are under full load

 

[DF is BUSY]

@DF is BUSY what On Screen Display are you using?

MSI afterburner, meaning RivaTuner

 

[DF is BUSY]

there's a lot of info and benchmarking in the nvidia tweaking guide:

Watch Dogs Graphics, Performance & Tweaking Guide | GeForce

looking at their suggested settings, they don't recommend any AA above Temporal SMAA for ANY single gpu setup

as far as AO, I think MHBAO and HBAO+ (Low) look bad. it's just a black glow around objects. I use HBAO+ (High), as it's actually kind of subtle. I would turn AO off, but it makes the game look kind of weird

the funny thing is a couple of weeks ago the WD devs were talking about a gtx 670 being sufficient for 'ultra' settings

yeah, low HBAO is disgusting, it's really a toss up between mhbao and hbao high, the black glow/shadowing in mhbao isn't as subtle as hbao high but its not as 'scust as hbao low. the fps hit is also less than hbao high.

 

[daze23]

MSI afterburner, meaning RivaTuner

RivaTuner don't usually work with 64 bit games though though

maybe MSI rigged something up. you can use it with non-msi cards right? I do have a msi mobo