This is mostly for dynamic lighting and shadows, and turning this to low improved performance by around 15 percent. Not surprisingly, lighting quality is one of the settings that has the biggest impact on performance. I'd leave both on ultra unless you're severely VRAM limited.
Texture filtering also has a negligible impact on performance (2-3 percent going from ultra to low), though the visual impact is less. The drop in quality at low and medium is too great to warrant the 2-4 percent increase in performance. Texture quality on the 3GB and 4GB cards I checked has very little performance impact, so this one is best left at ultra, or at least high. Grabbing a couple of screenshots, this appears to impact the amount and quality of showmaps used, but it ends up being a very small change in image quality. That's partly because I'm starting at the ultra preset as my baseline, but it still appeared to give a small boost even when starting from the medium preset on a 4GB card. I don't know what exactly gets downgraded or changed, but on both GPUs I tested, turning it on actually helps performance to the tune of around five percent. GPU memory restriction is designed to help the game engine avoid using more VRAM than you actually have available. Going below 100 is less useful, unless you're already at you display's minimum resolution-and upscaling anything below 50 percent tends to look pretty awful. If you have spare graphics horsepower, you can opt for a value greater than 100 to get supersample antialiasing, though the demands for that are quite high. Resolution scale does exactly what you'd except-it renders offscreen at anywhere from 25 percent to 200 percent of the current resolution, and scales the result to your selected resolution. Digging into the customizable settings helps explain where the biggest gains come from, and I performed some quick testing using the GTX 1060 3GB and R9 380 4GB to check the impact of the various options. Medium is likewise a substantial 40-50 percent bump in performance over ultra, but the high present only yields 8-10 percent more performance. ultra will typically double your fps (and more if you happen to be VRAM limited). TAA (temporal antialiasing) is one setting I'd try to enable if at all possible.Īs far as the performance impact of the presets goes, running at low vs. I didn't really notice the drop in texture quality or lighting, but aliasing (jaggies) on the ground and other objects was very noticeable and distracting at the low and medium presets.
While the above still images show a clear progression in image quality, I'd also point out that in motion, differences are both more and less severe. High quality improves shadows and textures, with ultra providing the usual incremental improvements over high. Medium quality provides a good boost to overall image fidelity and is what I'd target on lower end hardware. Low quality has little in the way of dynamic lighting, ambient occlusion, and other effects, and it also has significantly lower texture quality. Checking out the four presets, there's more of a distinct progression in quality than in some games.
0 kommentar(er)
