RDR2 Moonshiners PC Patch - 1232.13 (1.15) | 13/12/2019

[Dryspace]

3 hours ago, Gforce said:

Congrats to , the game finally runs without crashing constantly, only taken 10 weeks time to start modding it 

I mean, uh....just so we're all on the same page, your position is basically that you're okay as long as the game isn't crashing? You're not claiming that you're experiencing none of the myriad bugs that have been reported (beside the flickering)?

 

Trains are smokin' okay? Weather transitions normally? No black tar glitches on the ground? No "alien snow circles"? Dynamic lights all showing up? Etc., etc., etc.?

 

EDIT: You say "congrats to Rockstar", but didn't you say that it was NVIDIA's beta driver that solved your crashing issues? It's not a GPU designer's job to get a game working properly--they only make drivers for their HW, not for games. The only thing they can do is provide workarounds for unscrupulous developers. (And the fact that NVIDIA is ultra-greedy is beside that point)

Edited January 20, 2020 by Dryspace

[T-ru]

To be honest the game is acceptable stable to me. 

 

I have only one problem, except for the lack of the train smoke, when I change the location there is a freezes moments this means riding from some forest to some town especially fast riding from the forest to Saint Denis the first seconds in the town are awful, seems like the game needs some time for adaptation to the new location then everything is normal, this happens no matter from the graphics settings.

 

I'm glad that I don't have glitches or flickering textures and lights and weather transitions is normal.

 

Definitely this game needs more updates!

[Gforce]

7 hours ago, Dryspace said:

I mean, uh....just so we're all on the same page, your position is basically that you're okay as long as the game isn't crashing? You're not claiming that you're experiencing none of the myriad bugs that have been reported (beside the flickering)?

 

Trains are smokin' okay? Weather transitions normally? No black tar glitches on the ground? No "alien snow circles"? Dynamic lights all showing up? Etc., etc., etc.?

 

EDIT: You say "congrats to Rockstar", but didn't you say that it was NVIDIA's beta driver that solved your crashing issues? It's not a GPU designer's job to get a game working properly--they only make drivers for their HW, not for games. The only thing they can do is provide workarounds for unscrupulous developers. (And the fact that NVIDIA is ultra-greedy is beside that point)

Firstly, Nvidia has been the culprit for many game issues not just RDR2, game devs tend to work alongside Nvidia and AMD to make games work, they share code, so the issue is actually a double sided one, it's generally impossible to get a game running properly if the drivers are dogsh!t, because you're trying to optimise for dogsh!t, R^ has a history of having a very stable game engine with GTAV.

the other aspect is that R* currently has the only game to be pushing Vulkan to these limits, nothing else comes even close to the visuals that R* are managing to achieve.

as for ingame issues, I get occasional flickering with the cutscene transitions, I get occasional alpha bug issues on tree LOD's and the water texture bug, all of which appear to be issues on the Vulkan side, I have no issues with smoke or any other bugs you mention, I think I have enough without having the same as everyone else.

lastly with regards to the game running without crashing, in the 40 yrs I've been playing video games, it's the one thing they all have in common when it comes to actually playing the game, it's the first thing you need/want, the ability to play the damned thing, it's #1, and my game was crashing every 10 minutes, removing that imho is a massive step forwards into going forwards,

no point polishing a car if the engine is dead and the tyres are flat, bald and it's going nowhere.


Edit: Just dawned on me that you totally failed to notice the sarcasm in the last line of my post you quoted, and you weren't alone 

Edited January 20, 2020 by Gforce

[Koltos]

Something wrong with pop-up textures in this game. Hate it.

[Dryspace]

9 hours ago, Gforce said:

Firstly, Nvidia has been the culprit for many game issues not just RDR2, game devs tend to work alongside Nvidia and AMD to make games work, they share code, so the issue is actually a double sided one, it's generally impossible to get a game running properly if the drivers are dogsh!t, because you're trying to optimise for dogsh!t...

I know many people have said that NVIDIA is to blame, but what's the evidence? And what's the evidence that their drivers are crap and don't do their fundamental job of providing access to the hardware? (Their control panel is stale as heck, I'll give you that)

 

As I said, NVIDIA, like AMD, design hardware. It's their job to design drivers for their hardware. Their job literally ends there. They have nothing to do with making games except secondarily--they often choose to help get PC games to work because it's in their interest to have games to run on their HW. It's certainly not their responsibility, and they certainly don't make any of the money from any work on those games--except secondarily. Note that any of NVIDIA's lame attempts to insert their proprietary software into games is beside this point, unless you can prove that such a thing actually effects a game beyond the reduction in performance when they're enabled.

 

It's a developer's job to make a game for particular HW/drivers. It's not NVIDIA's/AMD's job to make hardware/drivers for particular games.

 

9 hours ago, Gforce said:

the other aspect is that R* currently has the only game to be pushing Vulkan to these limits, nothing else comes even close to the visuals that R* are managing to achieve...R^ has a history of having a very stable game engine with GTAV.

You'd have to provide evidence that it's a failure of the Vulkan API, or of NVIDIA's drivers, rather than what I think should logically be assumed: That it's a failure of the developer. I've said many times that GTA V is a surprisingly good port. 'Surprisingly' being a key word. I don't think that Rockstar's track record is what you'd call good on the PC front.

 

9 hours ago, Gforce said:

Edit: Just dawned on me that you totally failed to notice the sarcasm in the last line of my post you quoted, and you weren't alone 

Yes, I did, lol. If you were speaking sarcastically, then I apologize, because that was the entire reason I even bothered to respond. That's just something that I freely admit "triggers" me. I've seen how far PC gaming has degraded in 10 years, and I just don't like seeing people appear to minimize or justify things that I know are actually inexcusable, or actually praise a dev for belatedly getting around to doing its job after having taken tens of millions of dollars from people. I know now that you weren't serious, but believe me, I've seen plenty of people who do say exactly that sort of thing!

[Gforce]

53 minutes ago, Dryspace said:

I know many people have said that NVIDIA is to blame, but what's the evidence? And what's the evidence that their drivers are crap and don't do their fundamental job of providing access to the hardware? (Their control panel is stale as heck, I'll give you that)

 

As I said, NVIDIA, like AMD, design hardware. It's their job to design drivers for their hardware. Their job literally ends there. They have nothing to do with making games except secondarily--they often choose to help get PC games to work because it's in their interest to have games to run on their HW. It's certainly not their responsibility, and they certainly don't make any of the money from any work on those games--except secondarily. Note that any of NVIDIA's lame attempts to insert their proprietary software into games is beside this point, unless you can prove that such a thing actually effects a game beyond the reduction in performance when they're enabled.

 

It's a developer's job to make a game for particular HW/drivers. It's not NVIDIA's/AMD's job to make hardware/drivers for particular games.

 

You'd have to provide evidence that it's a failure of the Vulkan API, or of NVIDIA's drivers, rather than what I think should logically be assumed: That it's a failure of the developer. I've said many times that GTA V is a surprisingly good port. 'Surprisingly' being a key word. I don't think that Rockstar's track record is what you'd call good on the PC front.

 

Yes, I did, lol. If you were speaking sarcastically, then I apologize, because that was the entire reason I even bothered to respond. That's just something that I freely admit "triggers" me. I've seen how far PC gaming has degraded in 10 years, and I just don't like seeing people appear to minimize or justify things that I know are actually inexcusable, or actually praise a dev for belatedly getting around to doing its job after having taken tens of millions of dollars from people. I know now that you weren't serious, but believe me, I've seen plenty of people who do say exactly that sort of thing!

The evidence for me that Nvidia's drivers were to blame was the fact that I went back from 441.97 to 441.66 and the majority of the crashing stopped and then going to 441.99 and I played an entire 12hr game session leaving the game on pause regularly, and it did not crash once, that kind of tells you the problem IS NOT the game, you know if like you say they release a gpu and driver and that's it, the game would behave the same on all 3 drivers given that the only thing that changed was the driver, it's basic power of deduction really.

and no, you're wrong, Nvidia and AMD do not simply create a driver and expect ALL the game devs to make it work, it's not quite that simple, it does not end there, not even close, consoles have 1 OS and driver and hardware setup to work with, the PC literally has billions of hardware and software combinations and gpu drivers even need optimising to run alongside certain cpu's and other hardware configurations, Nvidia and AMD both work actively with the major game devs, that's how they create "Day One Game Ready drivers" or is it simply guess work ? especially given that the only way to actually code for a driver is to have ALL of the code, so you know which commands to use for functionality etc, they're not open source with Nvidia.

as for saying it's Vulkan, well there's a pretty basic and simple test that ALL RDR2 players are able to conduct for themself to blame either Vulkan or DX12, it's sitting in the Graphics settings under the API setting, and how it works is you use one API and then the other and see if the problems are present on both API's, and if the problem is only present when using Vulkan, there's a very strong chance you found the API to blame.

Edit: there's also a bit of a clue in their release notes, the games with issues on Win10 all have the same thing in common, even Nvidia is telling us what it is, want to guess what that is ?




I too have seen the PC game stability problems increase, but I've also seen the possible hardware configurations multiply exponentially along with publisher greed throwing games out early to meet premium launch date windows and player expectations along with endless "Games as a service" options and games that release with 50 different package options with pre-order bonuses that are always online connectivity ................................................ and it's the end users that are ALL to blame for it happening and continuing to happen, the devs and publishers watch the market and see what the Whales are happy to tolerate and pay for, they're just giving players what they want and appear to be able to get away with,

R* had a very late release announcement along with a very late launch, although it wasn't the golden cash cow for Quintuple dipping that was GTAV with 5 platforms to target, I think it's fair to say that RDR2 being announced for PC took a lot of people by surprise and as for their track record, the only previous game to have any serious issues was GTAIV and that was down to them using Securom alongside GFWL mixed with Social Club, Securom and GFWL both being the reasons it's no longer available to buy on PC, none of their other PC games have ever given me an issue, iGTAIV was also their first foray into their own RAGE engine after switching from Renderware after EA bought Criterion, GTAV was not a surprise at all, the engine was coded heavily for PC ever since GTAIV and directly for PC, it supports SLI and runs smooth as butter, same as RDR2 does when it gets decent drivers to run on.

not sure where you seem to get the idea that Nvidia and AMD are somehow innocent in the problems here, I think you seriously underestimate the role they actually play in just about every single major game release, even RDR2 which was obviously thrown out the door to meet the Xmas launch window, I think you'll find that some game devs are even fixing Nvidia and AMD's driver code as they push the limits of the driver feature sets to their limits and find bugs that Nvidia or AMD did not find or anticipate, especially when Nvidia is constantly innovating their feature sets and creating new features, I mean, if they released a gpu and only ever one driver because that's it, their job done we wouldn't have ANY of the visual improvements we've seen in the last 20yrs, we'd all still be running Riva TNT's.

Edited January 20, 2020 by Gforce

[Dryspace]

3 hours ago, Gforce said:

The evidence for me that Nvidia's drivers were to blame was the fact that I went back from 441.97 to 441.66 and the majority of the crashing stopped and then going to 441.99 and I played an entire 12hr game session leaving the game on pause regularly, and it did not crash once, that kind of tells you the problem IS NOT the game, you know if like you say they release a gpu and driver and that's it, the game would behave the same on all 3 drivers given that the only thing that changed was the driver, it's basic power of deduction really.

You're saying that any developer has no idea if a game they create is going to work on PC at all--it's entirely a crap shoot as to if the GPU designer decides to make a driver for their game, or decides not to change something, etc.? Their entire ability to even release a game on PC is that uncertain?

 

The GPU designers release drivers that the developer are expected to understand and make use of. If they drop the ball, then the GPU designer can step in and help them, or just create work-arounds on its own, if a developer has failed to implement something properly.

 

As for your logic regarding switching drivers, that doesn't prove that the driver was faulty to begin with. If the GPU designer has to create workarounds, that opens up new opportunities for issues between updates. Yes, it could mean that the GPU designer screwed something up, but they would have screwed something up trying to fix something in the first place. I'm only saying that test alone doesn't prove what you're saying.

 

 

Quote

and no, you're wrong, Nvidia and AMD do not simply create a driver and expect ALL the game devs to make it work, it's not quite that simple, it does not end there, not even close, consoles have 1 OS and driver and hardware setup to work with, the PC literally has billions of hardware and software combinations

The "billions of combinations" misunderstanding has been around for a long time. There are not billions of combinations. Even if we were speaking of hardware (and we're not), there aren't even thousands of combinations, because when someone speaks of combinations, he must limit himself to hardware that is significant. When a person says "billions" he includes aspects that have no effect whatever for the purposes of software design.

 

But the point is that it's not hardware. If a developer had to account for even hundreds of combinations--one combination for 1% of the market, another combination for another 1%, etc. etc.--software design would be for all intents and purposes impossible. One does not developer for PC hardware, he develops for drivers and APIs, for abstractions that exist for this very reason. For RDR2 there are twelve combinations: Win7/Intel/NVIDIA, Win7/Intel/AMD, Win7/AMD/NVIDIA, Win7/AMD/AMD, Win8.1/Intel/NVIDIA, Win8.1/Intel/AMD, Win8.1/AMD/NVIDIA, Win8.1/AMD/AMD, Win10/Intel/NVIDIA, Win10/Intel/AMD, Win10/AMD/NVIDIA, and Win10/AMD/AMD.

 

There are hundreds of combinations of things in general, but they encompass situations that account for a small minority of the market. If a developer tests properly for each of the twelve combinations above, his game will work without serious problems for the large majority of PC gamers. An amount of time can then be spent researching the edge cases in which a particular peripheral is causing a problem, or testing for integrated graphics processors, e.g. It takes time, and it takes a desire to do a good job.

 

As complicated as game design is, it's not a manned mission to the Moon. I just don't like to see anyone excusing companies with hundreds of millions of dollars for failing to do what we know is entirely possible.

 

Quote

and gpu drivers even need optimising to run alongside certain cpu's and other hardware configurations,

Yes, that's something that the GPU designer does on its own.

 

Quote

Nvidia and AMD both work actively with the major game devs, that's how they create "Day One Game Ready drivers" or is it simply guess work ?

Yes, I said that. If the GPU designer knows that a game is not running properly prior to release, it is in its best interest to lend a hand. And of course it will offer any information a dev asks for as a matter of course.

 

Quote

especially given that the only way to actually code for a driver is to have ALL of the code, so you know which commands to use for functionality etc, they're not open source with Nvidia.

That's correct. But I think development is primarily for the API and not the driver. I'd like someone who knows a lot more than I to verify that. Whether it's open source or not is irrelevant. Consoles aren't open source, either. A designer provides the tools and documentation necessary to develop for its hardware.

 

Quote

as for saying it's Vulkan, well there's a pretty basic and simple test...if the problem is only present when using Vulkan, there's a very strong chance you found the API to blame.

How so? That logic doesn't hold up, since there's an equal--I'd actually say much greater--chance that the developer failed to properly code for the available driver/API. Either one is possible, right? Why would you assume that the API is broken?

 

For argument's sake, even if a new API has limitations, it's the developer's job to understand the limitations and not release a broken product, even if that means altering the game a bit. But I don't think Vulkan has any limitations that the XBox1/PS4 don't have.

 

Quote

I too have seen the PC game stability problems increase, but I've also seen the possible hardware configurations multiply exponentially along with publisher greed throwing games out early to meet premium launch date windows and player expectations along with endless "Games as a service" options and games that release with 50 different package options with pre-order bonuses that are always online connectivity ................................................ and it's the end users that are ALL to blame for it happening and continuing to happen, the devs and publishers watch the market and see what the Whales are happy to tolerate and pay for, they're just giving players what they want and appear to be able to get away with,

Other than configurations increasing exponentially, I absolutely agree. And except for the whale part, as whales are a tiny minority, whereas these things can only persist if the majority of the market supports them. You're entirely correct that gamers are to blame. But blame isn't a zero-sum game. Just because one party is 100% to blame for example, doesn't mean the the other party is 0% to blame. Both parties can be 100% to blame. Ten parties can each be 100% to blame.

 

It is the fault of the gamers who let companies get away with this, and it is also the fault of the unscrupulous companies who try to get away with it. It's entirely voluntary: Nobody is forced to support bad practices, and no business can get away with anything unless enough people allow it to by giving it money. We agree on this!

 

Quote

the only previous game to have any serious issues was GTAIV and that was down to them using Securom alongside GFWL mixed with Social Club, Securom and GFWL both being the reasons it's no longer available to buy on PC

Yes, Rockstar made bad decisions, and to this day have never bothered to fix the game they took PC customers' money for. Securom and GFWL aren't reasons it's not available--Rockstar could have done away with them as has been done with other titles, but they haven't. In my humble opinion, it just seems like if something isn't going to make megabucks, it's just not worth much of a hassle to them. Even if they've already accepted payment.

 

Quote

not sure where you seem to get the idea that Nvidia and AMD are somehow innocent in the problems here

It's not about innocence. My concern isn't defending or attacking any particular party--it's whatever the truth is. I don't want to point out things that we shouldn't put up with, I want the industry to be a lot more like it used to be, because I know that the changes aren't due to necessities and stark realities, but rather bad human behavior on "both" sides. That doesn't mean that I can't be wrong about something, but I'm going to try to counter misinformation if I can. If you can provide compelling evidence that anything I've said is wrong, I will admit it as much as it would pain me to do so.

 

Quote

I think you seriously underestimate the role they actually play in just about every single major game release

But they don't get a dime from the sales of a game--why would they want to spend any time developing a game for someone else's benefit? Like any company, they will provide assistance if asked for, or if they believe they can "fix" something that the developer has not taken care of, but they've got their own job to do.

 

Quote

especially when Nvidia is constantly innovating their feature sets and creating new features

I don't really think so....I don't count their proprietary crap. NVIDIA has to make sure an API's features work on its hardware, but other than that, they've hardly innovated driver-side.

 

For my part, I believe that a primary problem is that modern (post-2007) engines are coded and optimized for consoles, and developers simply do not want to put in the required effort during the porting process to get a game working properly and efficiently on PC hardware. We've seen it time and time again.

Edited January 20, 2020 by Dryspace

[Gforce]

Game devs work with gpu manufacturers to get their games working just like they do on consoles ....................... as for the rest of your constant insistance on being right, TLDR because you fail to see the simplicity in the fact the same game files were tested on 3 different drivers by Nvidia and the game ran differently on all 3, your argument is null right there, the problem is not the game, it's Nvidia's drivers, not hard to understand and given testing methodolgy that any idiot can perform within the game using 2 different API's and inbuilt benchmark tool, it's not rocket science ffs.

they work together because one wants to sell games and the other gpu's, it's buisiness along with innovation, again, not hard to figure out.

as for drivers, Nvidia is making it's drivers for a massive range of it's own hardware, it doesn't all handle all the features the same way, RTX does not run on GTX cards ................... or AMD, again it's staring you in the face, Maxwell, Pascal, Turing ................ etc etc, they're not all the same silicon across the ranges.

there really IS NO one size fits all scenario on PC with drivers, never going to happen, unless you go console or they decide to release one gpu instead of a dozen

Whales drive industry decisions because collectively they'll spend more the the entire caual collective

at this point you're simply arguing for the sake of it, the beta driver fixed my game crashing for me, maybe not everyone but in my scenario it WAS the drivers at fault, there really is no arguing it when the game runs perfect without crashes on the beta and relentlessly crashes on the other, it's really not that hard to see, and arguing it's not the driver, well, futile.

anyway, while you were typing for 30 minutes I was playing RDR2 and absolutely abusing it with Alex Blades trainer now the game is running solid for me, I don't have a capture card so I used a phone, it still shows me hammer the hell out of the game weather and times along with teleporting around the map into busy areas, you'll see weather transitions along with the odd water behaviour.

remember I'm running on a pair of watercooled 5yr old 980ti's in muti-gpu, and if ANY issues were going to show it would be on my aging hardware that's giving me performance I never expected and no reason to upgrade like I originally feared, all thanks to R* actively supporting multi-gpu in a modern title when those YT reviewers are all constantly telling lies about it not being supported by modern titles, I wonder who's paying their wages.

the video is not the best of quality, but it shows none of the bugs you mention, but some of the ones I have
 

it's currently sat in YT 360p hell waiting to be upgraded to 1080p, it's now 1080p.

and if you make it to the end of that video, I took a screenshot and you can see the overlay of my temps, closks, gpu usage etc

Edited January 21, 2020 by Gforce

[Armerius]

Any chance of an update this week? Patch i mean

[Dryspace]

7 hours ago, Gforce said:

as for the rest of your constant insistance on being right...

I don't see how I'm any more insistent on being right than you are?

 

Remember, I apologized for not getting your sarcasm, and originally the only thing I took issue with is the claim that a game released with serious and obvious problems is the GPU designer's fault. That doesn't make sense. I don't know about you, but I routinely play games that are 3, 5, 10, and 20+ years old, and that work just fine on NVIDIA's current GPUs and current drivers. It's a developer's responsibility to release a game that is tested and works properly for the hardware it's designed for, and as you agree, it is the GPU designer's interest to make sure it doesn't do anything that impedes that.

 

7 hours ago, Gforce said:

...you fail to see the simplicity in the fact the same game files were tested on 3 different drivers by Nvidia and the game ran differently on all 3, your argument is null right there...not hard to understand and given testing methodolgy that any idiot can perform...it's not rocket science ffs.

No, I don't agree with your logic!

 

7 hours ago, Gforce said:

at this point you're simply arguing for the sake of it, the beta driver fixed my game crashing for me, maybe not everyone but in my scenario it WAS the drivers at fault, there really is no arguing it when the game runs perfect without crashes on the beta and relentlessly crashes on the other, it's really not that hard to see, and arguing it's not the driver, well, futile.

Let's say you are trying to get a screw out of a piece of wood, but the head is stripped. One screwdriver fails, and then another fails, but then someone hands you a driver with a special bit and suddenly you're able to extract the screw. Clearly that proves that it was the screwdriver that was the problem, right? Again, I'm not saying I have all of the answers, but I am saying that your logic doesn't hold up, and that if PC development were the way you describe, no one would bother with it--it just wouldn't make any sense. I know I wouldn't, and I would consider myself passionate about PC gaming!

 

7 hours ago, Gforce said:

...all thanks to R* actively supporting multi-gpu in a modern title when those YT reviewers are all constantly telling lies about it not being supported by modern titles, I wonder who's paying their wages.

You sure that was sarcasm earlier?   Anyway, SLI hasn't been generally supported or implemented well enough in the past for me to bother with it anymore. My dual GTX 260's was the last time I messed with it. I wish that wasn't the case, because I need all the GPU power I can get these days with a 4K display, and AA being so much more expensive than it was with DX9.

 

However, I think we both know that only a small minority of media personalities are actually scrupulous and not lapping up the quid pro quo.

[Gforce]

Why is it so difficult to get your head around the fact that I used the exact same game files (NOTHING CHANGED!!!) with 3 different Nvidia drivers and got 3 different results ? your rationale is one that Nvidia release a driver and they're done, which for you means that there should be zero difference between driver releases, why is it that 3 different Nvidia drivers that YOU seem to think are identical and perform exactly the same, should be giving different results, explain that one first, same hardware, same game files, the only difference being the drivers used, and the very latest one being solid compared to the previous 2, yet the game files are faulty.

the game files haven't changed at all yet YOU blame the game, using DX12 on 3 different drivers and the game runs without crashing and the issues YOU highlighted do not appear, yet 2 out of the 3 drivers used with Vulkan crash like crazy cause massive flickering issues but the 3rd and final driver allows you to run the game without major issues except the visible water problem.............. Explain your theory that the problem is actually the game files when it runs pretty much perfectly on the final driver ? you trying to tell me that Vulkan on the first 2 drivers was actually working perfectly and that my game files were at fault, despite the fact they haven't changed ?

You're obviously the type of person who drives a car, it runs perfectly well yet you don't like the cost of the gas, your friend tells you about a cheap gas station the other side of town but warns you the fuel is not as good, but you ignore what he tells you because in your head gas is gas and the only difference is the price, and fill the car up with cheap gas, it runs like sh!t for a week until you're running low and out of desperation you refill with expensive gas because you can't get to the cheap gas station, you then have a conversation with your friend and tell him that the car was behaving badly but suddenly fixed itself, so there must be something wrong with the car, because it can't possibly be the gas you put in, because gas is gas.

as for SLI, I've been using SLI for 15yrs, it's far more supported than those YT channels would have you believe, one particular well known channel uses massive lists of games for testing, tells their audience SLI and multi-gpu is dead, yet more than 50% of the games they use for their benchmarks fully support SLI and Multi-gpu, but as usual if you repeat the lies for long enough and as many times as you can, your followers end up believing it, and stop buying 2 gpu's and game devs think demand has stopped, so stop coding for it, thus perpetuating the issue into death, SLI and multi-gpu hasn't died, it's being slowly murdered by the ignorant being paid to "Influence" their target sales audience, I have over 300 games that support it and fully intend to continue using it.

as for playing 20yr old games, I regularly go back further than that with emulation, but with regards to RDR2, R* are pushing Vulkan V1 further than anyone else has before, nothing released comes close to these visuals because nobody has pushed Vulkan this far before, therefore issues will arise, whether it's in the game code or the api code, when a game runs on one version of a driver and behaves badly with the Vulkan code and Nvidia has even highlighted their known issues with it in their driver release notes, then the beta driver comes out with Vulkan 1.2 and the game suddenly runs perfectly fine as you can see in the video, it kills any argument that the previous drivers were fully functional, the major clue being, the game files have not changed, which part of that you not seeing ? read my lips, "the game files are exactly the same" therefore it was the 2 previous drivers with faulty Vulkan api's that even Nvidia acknowledged were a problem, and not just with RDR2, they've been having issue with Vulkan on a multitude of games for months, they document it in their driver release notes, but nobody bothers reading them.

as for the YT channels, regardless of how informative they are and how impartial they appear to be, they're ALL on the intel, AMD Nvidia payroll bandwagon with their review videos which are actually cheap adverts in return for free hardware from a vendors perspective.

Edited January 21, 2020 by Gforce

[Dryspace]

54 minutes ago, Gforce said:

Why is it so difficult to get your head around the fact that I used the exact same game files (NOTHING CHANGED!!!)...

...your rationale is one that Nvidia release a driver and they're done, which for you means that there should be zero difference between driver releases...

...Explain your theory that the problem is actually the game files when it runs pretty much perfectly on the final driver ?

I didn't say or imply that there is no difference between releases--I said the opposite. I attempted to explain it using an analogy and other points that you haven't addressed.

 

I explained that if NVIDIA, for example, incorporates a workaround in order to address a problem with a game, it can have other unintended consequences, or NVIDIA can implement another workaround in a new driver that conflicts with the previous workaround, or NVIDIA can forget to implement a previous workaround and have to correct the oversight in a following release, etc., etc. This explains the situation logically, and makes a lot more sense than "Rockstar released a great, superbly-tested port, and then after release NVIDIA went and messed it all up".

 

Like I said, it's a developer's job to do whatever necessary to make sure its game works before release. That doesn't mean making sure a game "has no bugs" which is a straw man often used, but rather making sure that a game has no serious and/or obvious bugs. Rockstar had every ability to release a game with no serious and/or obvious bugs, and every opportunity to liaise with GPU designers, if necessary, before release. It is in the best interest of everyone that drivers are stable and not constantly changing in significant ways--to have a stationary target to develop for.

 

You say that developers fix the GPU designers' problems. Then why isn't Rockstar doing that? Is there some no-holds-barred down-and-dirty fight going on behind the scenes between Rockstar and NVIDIA?

 

Seriously, though: What would you do if you were spending tens of millions of dollars developing a game that somebody that you have no control over could so easily break? If I had to rely on someone else that I have no control over to get my game to run....there's no way I would even try. And I would very much like to develop games.

Edited January 21, 2020 by Dryspace

[Gforce]

The reason Nvidia hasn't told R* to fix the game code is because they've been having huge driver issues and the problem is in the drivers, they've been releasing hot fixes left right and centre lately, it also seems there were indeed massive crashing problems with 441.87 to the point they've released another hotfix, this time it's 442.01, yet the driver I'm using is a beta 441.99

441.87 release thread https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/game-ready-drivers/13/336229/geforce-44187-game-ready-driver-feedback-thread-re/

Hotfix 442.01 topic https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4960

AMD has also had similar Vulkan issues and failed to fix them, the AMD fanboys think the grass is greener on the Nvidia side and working properly https://community.amd.com/thread/245936


whenever games run badly these days the first thing people blame is a bad console port, R* has a dedicated PC game engine that's optimised for PC, they built it for GTAIV and have evolved it with Max Payne 3, LA Noire and GTAV and now RDR2, the game runs solid without issues with latest beta drivers, that kind of signifies their game code was correct to begin with, at the end of the day they have a closed Vulkan API instruction set to employ certain effects, that is controlled by Nvidia and AMD, they can only use command calls that are listed to function with the drivers, the same way I myself have written .net dll's with a multiple set of function calls contained within that can be called from 3ds Max, I can hide functionality in there and share the dll with others to use but limit the instructions they can use and limit the functional use by simply not giving them the full list of features they can use, if they were using those calls wrong they wouldn't run properly with the API and Nvidia would say fix it, but they didn't, Nvidia released updated beta drivers with updated API code, it went from V1 to V1.2, not a coincidence imho, more a signal they were being lazy and not bothering with old V1 code fixes, especially given the problems that a lot of other games have been having with Vulkan on both AMD and Nvidia, with Nvidia documenting these known Vulkan issues openly, the biggest difference between 441.87 and 441.99 being the jump from Vulkan V1 to V1.2, the game crashes with Vulkan on 441.87 but runs on 441.99, but Nvidia fixed a workaround for one game ? I don't think so.

R* fixing GPU code for Nvidia, they can't really do much given that Nvidia has closed source code, they can only optimise using the official open source Vulkan code that's available through the Kronos group and whatever api code Nvidia lets them see, again, no guarantee that Nvidia got the code right, and who's to say that behind the scenes R* have not been doing exactly that, using Kronos reference code and handing it over to Nvidia to fix their drivers for their game, yes there is a battle, Nvidia protecting the dirty little secrets of their texture compression methods to increase fps at the cost of overall image fidelity, .................. see "Tech Yes City" on YT.

as for bothering releasing a game on PC, they didn't bother with RDR, but then again their PC Rage engine was a diabolical mess with GTAIV and EFLC, so why bother, but with GTAV they created the worlds biggest cash cow in home entertainment history, I'd say that was incentive enough to bother and see if they can repeat half it's success.

[trulex47]

9 hours ago, Armerius said:

Any chance of an update this week? Patch i mean

Maybe, 3 hours ago there is beta patch marked on steamdb

 

There is some new update on xbox

 

Edited January 21, 2020 by trulex47

[Dryspace]

9 hours ago, Gforce said:

The reason Nvidia hasn't told R* to fix the game code...whenever games run badly these days the first thing people blame is a bad console port...

You're still saying the same thing: That it's not a developer's job to make sure his game works upon release. That there's literally nothing he can do at the end of the day. Just a blind man groping in the dark, hoping he lucks out and finds his way home...

 

9 hours ago, Gforce said:

R* has a dedicated PC game engine that's optimised for PC...

Rockstar has two engines? "Dedicated" means dedicated. I didn't know they had a dedicated PC engine and a dedicated console engine. I thought it was just one engine, and further, I thought it was common knowledge that Rockstar is a console-focused developer. Their engine may be a lot more capable of producing a PC game than others, but it's not a dedicated PC game engine.

 

9 hours ago, Gforce said:

the game runs solid without issues with latest beta drivers, that kind of signifies their game code was correct to begin with...

Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis? I can't know exactly what you mean by that, but I do know that failing to crash every 10 minutes is not the same thing as running solid without issues.

 

9 hours ago, Gforce said:

I can...limit the instructions they can use and limit the functional use by simply not giving them the full list of features they can use...

...Nvidia released updated beta drivers with updated API code, it went from V1 to V1.2, not a coincidence imho, more a signal they were being lazy and not bothering with old V1 code fixes

Again.....everything that you're saying here ignores the fact that it is the developer's job to understand these things and develop according to them.

 

You list these things as if they are excuses instead of known facts, and fail to explain why Rockstar didn't take them into account, why it didn't develop according to the known situation, and why Rockstar released a game that it knew before release was not working properly.

 

As I implied before: Out of the hundreds and hundreds of games that you've played, how many times have you seen a game suddenly develop a serious, obvious problem simply because you updated the GPU drivers--when your OS/etc. has not changed from the game's requirements? It could happen, but it's not what you'd call common.

 

I play old games on drivers that are many years newer, on an OS that didn't even exist at the time, without the kind of problems that would be rampant if drivers were as volatile and necessarily tailored directly for each game as you insist they are.

 

9 hours ago, Gforce said:

R* fixing GPU code for Nvidia, they can't really do much given that Nvidia has closed source code

"I think you'll find that some game devs are even fixing Nvidia and AMD's driver code as they push the limits of the driver feature sets to their limits..."

 

Look--I'm sure you want to move on from this discussion just as much as I do. While it's clear that you understand a lot about this subject, I simply do not agree with the general conclusion that you come to. It doesn't make any sense to me. I don't believe your logic holds up as evidence. Until you can provide some other type of evidence, perhaps it's best that one of us calls it 'Saint Diego' and the other calls it 'a whale's vagina'.

[Gforce]

12 hours ago, Dryspace said:

You're still saying the same thing: That it's not a developer's job to make sure his game works upon release. That there's literally nothing he can do at the end of the day. Just a blind man groping in the dark, hoping he lucks out and finds his way home...

 

Rockstar has two engines? "Dedicated" means dedicated. I didn't know they had a dedicated PC engine and a dedicated console engine. I thought it was just one engine, and further, I thought it was common knowledge that Rockstar is a console-focused developer. Their engine may be a lot more capable of producing a PC game than others, but it's not a dedicated PC game engine.

 

Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis? I can't know exactly what you mean by that, but I do know that failing to crash every 10 minutes is not the same thing as running solid without issues.

 

Again.....everything that you're saying here ignores the fact that it is the developer's job to understand these things and develop according to them.

 

You list these things as if they are excuses instead of known facts, and fail to explain why Rockstar didn't take them into account, why it didn't develop according to the known situation, and why Rockstar released a game that it knew before release was not working properly.

 

As I implied before: Out of the hundreds and hundreds of games that you've played, how many times have you seen a game suddenly develop a serious, obvious problem simply because you updated the GPU drivers--when your OS/etc. has not changed from the game's requirements? It could happen, but it's not what you'd call common.

 

I play old games on drivers that are many years newer, on an OS that didn't even exist at the time, without the kind of problems that would be rampant if drivers were as volatile and necessarily tailored directly for each game as you insist they are.

 

"I think you'll find that some game devs are even fixing Nvidia and AMD's driver code as they push the limits of the driver feature sets to their limits..."

 

Look--I'm sure you want to move on from this discussion just as much as I do. While it's clear that you understand a lot about this subject, I simply do not agree with the general conclusion that you come to. It doesn't make any sense to me. I don't believe your logic holds up as evidence. Until you can provide some other type of evidence, perhaps it's best that one of us calls it 'Saint Diego' and the other calls it 'a whale's vagina'.

It is the devs job to make sure a game works on release, also Nvidia's job to make sure their drivers work, the game could be developed for one driver and by the time they release the game, Nvidia has released a new one, and despite your utopian beliefs, it's not the same as the previous one because of innovations in code that has been added, and maybe they broke some functionality, not Rocket Science to understand that it's Nvida that keeps changing their drivers, before RDR2 is released, it's an ongoing thing with every game release not RDR2 that Nvidia is constantly changing Their drivers, fact.

Obviously R^ has 3 for RDR2, both consoles and PC, and only PC runs in multi-gpu, hence it's a dedicated engine because consoles are not the same hardware as PC, despite misguided beliefs, although they do usually share the same game data but modified archives, as we've found leftovers in those from previous games and platforms, especially in the renderware days

When you have a game that releases and it crashes for 10 weeks then suddenly runs without issue for 12hrs, that imho is a game running solid, might have some visual bugs, but it is running solid by comparison to the previous 10 weeks, maybe you forgot that having your game run without crashes is most important, it's not an indicator that the game was wrong if it crashes, it's indicative of an issues take time to resolve, in this instance Nvidia releasing updated Vulkan code fixed it.

Again, you're failing to acknowledge that the Vulkan api has a changed with 441.99, which made the game run stable, indicates the old Vulkan code wasn't working properly, and indicates calls into the api were correct, as R* changed nothing, you do understand that Khronos Group makes the api decisions on calls etc and that Vulkan is an industry standard that they ALL have to adhere to, if R* was wrong, then there would have been a update from R*, Nvidia is updating fixing it's own Vulkan code mistakes, all the driver releases in the last month indicate this

One possible scenario could be that R* has been using some of the 23 Vulkan V1 plugins that have just been merged into the main V1.2 update and only since Nvidia released a merged driver that R*'s code is now starting to work properly.

Nvidia's drivers have been known to be unstable for years causing endless problems to existing games that run fine and then suddenly crash, one hot fix later and it works again, something we've all seen, not sure why you keep insisting that Nvidia is not making mistakes, older games run on newer hardware because over time the OS code is improved

Finally, you keep harping on about Nvidia fixing everyone elses game code, you have 100 games that run like sh*t, Nvidia releases an update and all the games start running properly, and what happened was Nvidia fixed ALL of the code in those games, or do you think the problem was their driver code to begin with, obviously for you all the game code was wrong because Nvidia don't make mistakes right ?

and if Nvidia is fixing everyones code as you say they are, can you point to me to the evidence, because all the evidence on their forums so far shows that their drivers have been having endless issues recently ........................... but like you say, it's probably all those games that are having issues that are wrong because Nvidia releases perfect drivers ever time that ALL work perfectly every time, and if you have an issue, it's your game code that's to blame .................... really ?


I would have moved on, but you're like some kind of loved up ~Nvidia fanboy with this misguided Utopian belief that ALL games should run perfectly on day one and that there's no ecuse for it not to, you ignore the end user which for the most part is clueless at setting up a PC let alone maintaining it, the PC has billions of software/hardware combinations that can have issues, if all PC hardware was the same then your argumant would hold water, but it's not.

you still argue that Nvidia is fixing R*'s game code, can you prove that or are you just continuing to argue your point hoping I would back down, so let's end this one like you want, by you proving to all of us in here that Nvidia is fixing game devs code, show us the evidence.

I think it's fair to say the evidence is in the drivers, if Nvidia was fixing everyones game code within it's own drivers, the install size would run into hundreds of gigs ..............................


Edit: One thing that has dawned on me is this, in all this dicussion about the issue's I have been having, and throwing blame around at devs and gpu drivers, you can go through the steam forums, the Nvidia forums and this site, and the one thing you'll see lacking on the whole is ..................... crashing posts for RDR2, you'll see plenty of other common issues that lots of people are having but crashing seems to be limited to a few, kind of signifies that the crashes I was experiencing are in fact pretty rare, also my gpu setup is not very common, a pair of old 980ti's, not many of us left now, and if you go through the Nvidia driver release notes you'll notice that the RDR2 Vulkan crashing issues were documented and known issues with SLI setups by Nvidia in the driver I was using 441.87, I even showed a picture, and now with the newer driver it appears that a known RDR2 crashing on SLI bug documented by Nvidia has now been fixed ...................................... still want to argue it was not the Nvidia driver that fixed MY PROBLEMS, not everyone elses but mine with my SLI setup that is a known setup to have a crashing problem with RDR2.

remember what I said about us all having different PC setups and how there is no ONE size fits all.

Edited January 22, 2020 by Gforce

[Dryspace]

6 hours ago, Gforce said:

Obviously R^ has 3 for RDR2, both consoles and PC, and only PC runs in multi-gpu, hence it's a dedicated engine

 No. There is only one engine.

 

Quote

Again, you're failing to acknowledge that the Vulkan api has a changed with 441.99, which made the game run stable, indicates the old Vulkan code wasn't working properly, and indicates calls into the api were correct, as R* changed nothing

441.99 is a beta driver, that is the first to include certain Vulkan extensions. What does that have to do with what Rockstar was doing a year ago? Or three months ago?

 

Quote

if R* was wrong, then there would have been a update from R*

I have a problem with this logic.

 

Quote

One possible scenario could be that R* has been using some of the 23 Vulkan V1 plugins that have just been merged into the main V1.2 update and only since Nvidia released a merged driver that R*'s code is now starting to work properly.

This is what I mean when I refer to excuses: You are literally offering as an explanation, right here, that Rockstar developed for a base that didn't even exist yet, for which there was no driver--you're literally offering a scenario in which NVIDIA, whether intentionally or as a side effect, is fixing Rockstar's mistakes. Don't you understand what I mean when I say that it is the dev's job to know what it is developing for?

 

Quote

not sure why you keep insisting that Nvidia is not making mistakes

I never said that NVIDIA doesn't make mistakes. I asked for evidence that NVIDIA is responsible for the problems with Rockstar's game.

 

Quote

I would have moved on, but you're like some kind of loved up ~Nvidia fanboy with this misguided Utopian belief that ALL games should run perfectly on day one and that there's no ecuse for it not to

I really can't stand NVIDIA, not that that bears any importance to this discussion. I don't believe that all games should run perfectly on day one. That's a typical straw man.

 

I believe that games should have no serious, obvious problems on release. Games have always had bugs that developers didn't catch until after release, but it should not be standard and accepted that games release with serious issues known to the developer. In that case the dubious excuse of needing paying customers to fully test your game goes out the window.

 

Quote

you ignore the end user which for the most part is clueless at setting up a PC let alone maintaining it, the PC has billions of software/hardware combinations

There aren't billions of combinations, and no--the clueless end user has nothing to do with this. When I talk about problems with games, I am not talking about problems that are the fault of the user, such as non-supported hardware, outdated drivers, etc.

 

Quote

so let's end this one like you want, by you proving to all of us in here that Nvidia is fixing game devs code, show us the evidence.
I think it's fair to say the evidence is in the drivers, if Nvidia was fixing everyones game code within it's own drivers, the install size would run into hundreds of gigs ....

A workaround can be removed in a future driver after the dev fixes the issue, so it wouldn't need to accumulate to that extent. NVIDIA's drivers increase in size with almost every update, yet it's not adding new features every single update. As it is, the current drivers are almost five times larger than those of 10 years ago. From https://www.gamedev.net/forums/topic/666419-what-are-your-opinions-on-dx12vulkanmantle/#entry5215019

 

"Many years ago, I briefly worked at NVIDIA on the DirectX driver team (internship). This is Vista era, when a lot of people were busy with the DX10 transition, the hardware transition, and the OS/driver model transition. My job was to get games that were broken on Vista, dismantle them from the driver level, and figure out why they were broken. While I am not at all an expert on driver matters (and actually sucked at my job, to be honest), I did learn a lot about what games look like from the perspective of a driver and kernel.

 

The first lesson is: Nearly every game ships broken. We're talking major AAA titles from vendors who are everyday names in the industry. In some cases, we're talking about blatant violations of API rules - one D3D9 game never even called BeginFrame/EndFrame. Some are mistakes or oversights - one shipped bad shaders that heavily impacted performance on NV drivers. These things were day to day occurrences that went into a bug tracker. Then somebody would go in, find out what the game screwed up, and patch the driver to deal with it. There are lots of optional patches already in the driver that are simply toggled on or off as per-game settings, and then hacks that are more specific to games - up to and including total replacement of the shipping shaders with custom versions by the driver team. Ever wondered why nearly every major game release is accompanied by a matching driver release from AMD and/or NVIDIA? There you go."

 

Quote

Edit: One thing that has dawned on me is this, in all this dicussion about the issue's I have been having, and throwing blame around at devs and gpu drivers, you can go through the steam forums, the Nvidia forums and this site, and the one thing you'll see lacking on the whole is...crashing posts for RDR2...

Crashing has been an issue from the outset. But one thing that dawned on me is that you are talking about SLI specifically. I realize now that you mentioned it in your third post. Is SLI even officially supported for this game? If a developer does not specifically support SLI in a particular game, the GPU designer can attempt to get it working as efficiently as possible, but the failure to do so does not mean that the GPU designer has caused a problem.

 

If SLI is officially supported, and it worked fine on release, but stopped working properly only after an NVIDIA update and not after a Rockstar update--then I will admit that it very well could be the result of NVIDIA's error. But your initial post did not mention SLI--it only mentioned crashing--and that's what I responded to.

[T-ru]

lol What a intelligent battle takes place here, what a long articles ''Red Dead Redemption 2 Western Optimization  DLC"  

 

If a game is not optimized well, it's not optimized, no matter drivers, pilots, directX, directZ...  Windows, Doors, Vulcan, Lava....

 

R* always released their PC games for the future hardware (about ultra settings) and they always lie about recommended PC specs!

 

I hope for some performance update SOON!!!!!!  

[Gforce]

I genuinely can't be arsed reading all your post this time let alone quote it, all I will say is I saw the bit about not understanding until post 3 I had SLI, maybe look back at the post you quoted and you'll see the picture shows clearly in the OSD I'm on SLI, I assumed you realised that as all most people do these days is look at the pictures and ignore the text, but seems you went the other way

As for devs or drivers blame and who fixes what, I happen to know that R* has more than enough cash to have staff working with Nvidia if needed, they put a lot of work in both sides.
 

anyway,  my game runs fine for me with the exception of the water issue that's clear to see in the vid I posted, and I figured out what's the cause of it, no way for me to fix it myself, but I thought I'd give you something new to play with, and before I continue I should point out I'm on a dual boot Workstation with Win 10 Enterprise on Intel SSD Raid 0, Win 7 Ultimate on Samsung SSD Raid 0, RDR2 running from Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe

here's some screenshots with the water puzzle included for free

Win 10 Enterprise, Vulkan Multi-gpu (Water Problem) Nvidia 441.99


Win 10 Enterprise, Vulkan Single-gpu (No Water Problem) Nvidia 441.99


Win 10 Enterprise, DX 12 Single-gpu (No Water Problem) Nvidia 441.99


Win 7 Ultimate Vulkan Single-gpu (No Water Problem) Nvidia 441.41


RDR2 on Win 7 only supports Vulkan because there is no DX11

So, Same PC Hardware, same game files on the same SSD, Same cloud save game, same game settings, same VulkanRT1.1 redistributable (in the game folder, installed by R*), same game location, 2 different OS's, 2 different Nvidia drivers, both OS's fully up to date except the driver on Win 7.

The water problem is clearly nothing to do with new or old Vulkan as it was happening before 441.99 (in Vulkan Multi-GPU), so it's not that, and I'm actually the only person I have seen with this water issue, so is it

A. R* game code (Custom Vulkan Game Shaders)
B. Vulkan api
C. Nvidia Vulkan Multi-GPU-SLI code
D. Everyone else except Nvidia

So, who do we blame for this one ? ......................... answers in an email to [email protected]

I'll give you a clue, I also get the same occasional cutscene transition flicker in a few other games, especially Shadow of the Tomb Raider, even Nvidia acknowledged that one around the time of the 2nd RDR2 update, a few other games were on the same list.

As for SLI implementaion, from what I've read up with Vulkan Multi GPU it's as simple as flicking the WDDM/LDA switch in Windows and not needed with Linux, not sure if that's switched on by the game or by Windows itself when the SLI is set in NV control panel, and given that RDR2 on Vulkan with Win 7 does not have it turned on, SLI Multi-GPU does not work, nor does Direct X in any form, game shows DX12 but do not go near that, it crashes and locks the PC, it really should be locked in the menu to Vulkan but R* appear to have overlooked Win 7 completely and the only reason Vulkan works is because the game installed it on top of the Nvidia drivers, in Win 10 it might be turned on by default with Windows 10 in SLI mode,

Anyhooo, I'm now pretty much done with RDR2, with the exception of the water problem and occasional flickers with cutscene transitions, my game now runs a solid 60fps, I'm 2 playthroughs done in 430hrs so it's time to mod it, also time to finally go play the original RDR, and once I've finished giving that a hammering I'll be ripping the map out and prepping it up for adding all the missing bits to RDR2 and keeping it all to myself, because R* turned into backstabbing retards when it comes to modders releasing anything that people want to the point of sending the boys round to give em a talking to, some of us recognise so many of those R* easter eggs, some of them were even easter eggs in some mods !!! .................. "The Truth is Out There"  

Edited January 22, 2020 by Gforce
Typos

[Dryspace]

9 minutes ago, Gforce said:

I genuinely can't be arsed reading all your post this time let alone quote it

Youuuu S.O.B!

 

9 minutes ago, Gforce said:

I'm on a dual boot Workstation with Win 10 Enterprise on Intel SSD Raid 0, Win 7 Ultimate on Samsung SSD Raid 0, RDR2 running from Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe

Is Enterprise the "mission critical" Win10 version that eliminates most all of the controls normally forced on users? If I'm forced to use Win10, that's the one I want.

 

9 minutes ago, Gforce said:

here's some screenshots with the water puzzle included for free

I do appreciate free stuff, but I'm one of the few weirdos around here who diligently avoid any screenshots or videos of games we're really interested in playing. I like the feeling of going in blind and discovering something amazing for the first time. Technical info only for me.

 

Would you do me a favor and let me know what percentage of your VRAM the game is reporting as available under Win7? I assume that under Win10 it's around only 75%, i.e. ~25% reserved by Windows? I've verified that only 1.8% of my GPU's VRAM is reserved by Windows 7 at 1920x1080, and 2.4% at 3840x2160, which is only moderately more than the size of three frame buffers.

[Gforce]

26 minutes ago, Dryspace said:

Youuuu S.O.B!

 

Is Enterprise the "mission critical" Win10 version that eliminates most all of the controls normally forced on users? If I'm forced to use Win10, that's the one I want.

 

I do appreciate free stuff, but I'm one of the few weirdos around here who diligently avoid any screenshots or videos of games we're really interested in playing. I like the feeling of going in blind and discovering something amazing for the first time. Technical info only for me.

 

Would you do me a favor and let me know what percentage of your VRAM the game is reporting as available under Win7? I assume that under Win10 it's around only 75%, i.e. ~25% reserved by Windows? I've verified that only 1.8% of my GPU's VRAM is reserved by Windows 7 at 1920x1080, and 2.4% at 3840x2160, which is only moderately more than the size of three frame buffers.

Yep, that's me, been a long day, been up since 3am it's now just past 5pm so I'm ready for a nap

Win Enterprise is similar to Win 10, not sure which controls you mean being forced, if you mean all the dumbed down interface using pictures etc, sorry to tell you this but it's still there, but you can still create the godmode folder and setup any shortcuts from there, or if like me you like the quick access you can bring that back etc, you can kill a sh!t ton of unwanted garbage, and the silver bullet being the ability to kill automatic updates dead in it's tracks, you can go into scheduled tasks etc and destroy stuff in there along with ripping stuff from the registry, I've absolutely abused this installation since RDR2 kind of forced me into using it for SLI.

and given you like and asked for tech info, happy to help, but you're going to have to click the pretty pictures this time to read the numbers and do some maths, you'll probably enjoy the maths




gives you ingame numbers too via the OSD and some ingame settings .................... my poor poor 980ti being abused by R* in single GPU.

Side note, I grabbed myself a completely known legit 50 machine VLK for a lowly £80 that was surplus to requirements when I heard M$ were going balls deep on intrusion on Win 10 Pro as well as basic/home, and given they're never releasing another version I'll never need to buy another key, btw Enterprise is definity the way to go but I also hear that Win10 Education version has similar atribs.

[Nagru87]

where can i get that black jacket from last screen? thx :0

Edited January 22, 2020 by Nagru87

[ArthurMorgan00]

I just ordered me a RTX 2060 Super, does anyone know if it'll run atleast 60 fps? 

[gregorius11]

50 minutes ago, ArthurMorganRDR said:

I just ordered me a RTX 2060 Super, does anyone know if it'll run atleast 60 fps? 

On high settings at 1080p? If you have a decent CPU, yeah.

Edited January 22, 2020 by gregorius11

[Koltos]

2 hours ago, ArthurMorganRDR said:

I just ordered me a RTX 2060 Super, does anyone know if it'll run atleast 60 fps? 

I play on it in 4K with 30fps on almost all ultra settings.

 

In 1080p with good CPU will be 60-80 fps. 

 

 

 

[ArthurMorgan00]

2 hours ago, gregorius11 said:

On high settings at 1080p? If you have a decent CPU, yeah.

 

1 hour ago, Koltos said:

I play on it in 4K with 30fps on almost all ultra settings.

 

In 1080p with good CPU will be 60-80 fps. 

 

 

 

Thanks for the answers guys, i own a Ryzen 5 3600 btw

Happy to hear that i'll be able to play at 60 fps! 

[Ash_735]

On 1/21/2020 at 11:06 AM, Gforce said:

whenever games run badly these days the first thing people blame is a bad console port, R* has a dedicated PC game engine that's optimised for PC, they built it for GTAIV and have evolved it with Max Payne 3, LA Noire and GTAV and now RDR2

Just to do a correction here, the first iteration of RAGE was for Table Tennis, before that it was evolved from the Angel Game Engine. Grand Theft Auto IV (And Midnight Club LA + Episodes from Liberty City) use the second iteration. The third iteration was used for Max Payne 3, GTAV and GTAO. RDR1 used a branched off build from the second iteration and L.A.Noire doesn't use RAGE at all outside of its Social Club elements. RDR2/RDRO should be the fourth iteration of RAGE.

[Gforce]

Bloody hell, there's an old face

Thanks for the corrections

[Koltos]

I hate pop-up bushes or other textures in the game. Someone know why is it happening?

[The Prince Algie]

7 hours ago, Koltos said:

I hate pop-up bushes or other textures in the game. Someone know why is it happening?

Genius in Rockstar f*cked up the lod of object textures;vegetations and all kinds of shadows since the brilliant Dec update.Believe it or not,my game runs fine like hell when it first came out in Nov besides the constant activation errors,then after tons of update now my game has tons of graphical bugs

Edited January 23, 2020 by Abel Tesfaye