Immortals of Aveum Reportedly Cannot Run At Native 4K/60 FPS On NVIDIA RTX 4090

The newest entry from EA titled Immortals of Aveum, can barely maintain 30 FPS on the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 on low settings.

[phoenixwing]

Nowhere in that video does he mention the games performance. Am I missing something?

Also the game is poorly optimized on Nvidia gpus

[Number1TailzFan]

All UE5 games that I've seen are heavy on the hardware for some reason, whether it's poor optimisation or what, upscaling is required unless you have a decent/high end graphics card then you can play at 1080p/1440p native or 1440p/4k with DLSS. PS5 is barely holding on upscaling from 720p, Series S is upscaling from even lower resolution than that and at lower details.

[Bobertt]

It's a combination of poor optimization and UE5 just being too taxing for current gen GPUs. I remember the end of last year or early this year there was an indie dev trying out the new features on UE5 and he made a video for people to see. He built a forest area and was getting like 45fps at 4K on a 4090. Remnant 2 came out recently and it too gets 45-50fps at 4k on a 4090. But Remnant 2 does not look as good as the forest area that indie guy built and they said they built the game with Upscaling in mind. So i think that game is definitely not optimized as well.

[abstractel]

I got a 4090 and I maxed out everything and getting over 60fps everywhere at 4k. I think what may happen in some cases is that people forget about the CPU and I got a 13900KF. When developing for UE in general, you really need to pay attention to CPU usage.

Btw, Remnant II uses UE5 (except it doesn't use Lumen, just Nanite which IMO was a smart choice for their game) and it looks a lot better than this mess even if Remnant is not your type of game. We're still in early days of UE5 games actually releasing to the public. It'll get better, and FSR3 will help on consoles.

[Obscure_Observer]

"Also the game is poorly optimized on Nvidia gpus"

If you´re expecting *any* AAA game powered by UE5 featuring both Nanite and Lumen to hit native 4K resolution on any GPU available in the market today, you´re in for a major shock!

[Eonjay]

This is correct. Native has been dead for quite some time. The computational grunt needed to render these graphic rich UE5 titles absolutely necessitates an upscaler.

[Tapani]

Immortal of Aveum runs around 90-120fps at 4K DLSSQ + FG everything maxed out on 4090, including RT. And it looks equal to native 4K or better. Utilizing the latest DLSS3.5 dll file will also make it look even better.

[RonsonPL]

Saying 1440p-ish DLLSed to 4K looks as good as native is funny enough already, but adding frame generation there and to say it looks BETTER is the most funny BS I've read this month. You sir, are a natural jester.

[Tapani]

@RonsonPL
Oh really? The best in the industry, such as Digital Foundry, has said very similar things.

Reducing DLSS to 1440p upscaled to 4K is also factually incorrect, because it uses ultra high resolution images at 16K in the algorithm training per game, not only motion vectors. It has the data to make it look better than native. Additionally, DLSS3.5 SDK is being tested by many, and the tech looks even better than ever before, reducing artifacts and cleaning up the shimmering in foliage and fences. Better yet, the upscaled image from 1080p to 4K looks better in RT resolution (clear) vs 4K Native RT resolution (blurry). Anyone can google that in a second and see the results, they are undeniable.

On top of that, I have seen it with my own eyes on multiple titles which I own (Spiderman, Hogwarts Legacy, Ratchet & Clank, Cyberpunk) using 5800X3D + 4090 on a 65" mini-led TV at around 2m viewing distance. I'm a pixel peeper (both videophile and audiophile for 25+ years), have extremely good vision (tested last 4 months ago) and cannot genuinely distinguish 4K native vs DLSSQ + FG image in normal gameplay scenarios. Nor can anyone else, family or friends, I have had "blind tested" (they don't have a clue what these terms mean) the image differences at home.

Oh, and don't forget the massive performance increase of 2-4x fold, depending on the game and settings. Again, this is not an Nvidia marketing post, I use these technologies all the time when gaming.

So there you have it.

[Number1TailzFan]

It can run at 4k using DLSS Quality mode at 80-90FPS which I believe is actually 1440p upscaled, i think? The consoles according to DF are upscaling from just 720p and have dips as low as 40fps, at least on PS5.

https://youtu.be/FbJA-P3sRg...

[Destiny1080]

the PS5 is running with higher quality settings, which is bringing down the frame rate for the PS5 version, all could change after a patch

Digital Foundry
''While both PS5 and Xbox Series X use the same native resolutions, it's worth noting there is a sharper end result on PS5 overall in comparisons''

[--Onilink--]

The only difference in quality settings was in the menu for some reason. Everywhere else was basically identical, with a few more drops in the PS5 version (still unclear why) though neither version is that stable anyway

[Eonjay]

"It can run at 4k using DLSS Quality mode"

Anything can be scaled to any resolution. Clearly he is talking about native resolution.

[Ddavis7690]

This is what happens when you pay $1,500 for a GPU that can't support half the gaming industry in 4K. I'm rocking a 1080ti and it's still kicking ass.

[Number1TailzFan]

End of the day it's the only GPU that can play at 4k DLSS upscaling from 1440p or native 1440p at 80+fps. It's either that or you get something decently priced like a 6700 XT and play at 1080p. Either option is still better than the consoles.

[Stanjara]

It's the only card worth getting today.
Probably why you are still on the 1080ti because everything up to 3090 is a waste of money.

4060 is a joke price wise.

To really push beyond consoles your best performance per dolar is 4090.
Sad but true.

[Ddavis7690]

I play games because i enjoy games. The 1080ti is still the best card for the price and on FB marketplace you can find it for +-$125 and that’s a steal considering a 3060 is still $350-$400 new. Not to mention I only have a 1080p monitor and I can still play Elden Ring at 75fps in 1080 at maximum. If you just enjoy gaming then a 1080ti is perfect.

[GoodGuy09]

Good lord devs are horrible with optimizations nowadays lol. They want to just rely on ai scaling now. I typically dislike using dlss or fsr as it makes picture quality look blurry for me compared to the more crisp native resolution. As long as I can get 1440p 60, I'd prefer just the native resolution without AA nor Ai tech.

[andy85]

4K is still really unnecessary to me unless you're playing on a large TV. Isn't worth the FPS sacrifice. Just run 1440p. Jesus I played FFXVI and even with drops to 720 it looked gorgeous on my monitor 😂

[Snookies12]

1440p is the best way to play with smoother FPS in the 60-120 range. Of course, if you can crank it up to 4k you definitely should. But honestly, the difference isn't too striking unless you're rocking a TV over 60-70 inches.

[specialguest]

That's a misconception that you have to play on a large tv. What matters is the distance from your eyes to the screen. That's where screen size matters. The average viewing distance sitting on your desk chair to your PC monitor is between 1.5 to 2 ft away which doesn't require a large tv to see the 4k res in all of its glory. For optimal 4k res viewing at 1.5 ft away, it's a 27" screen. At 2 ft away, it's 32" screen.

[Number1TailzFan]

Your comment is accurate, except the viewing distances which should be a bit further away. You need full view of the screen without having to move your eyes too much, and certainly not your head, if you're playing multiplayer games that might need faster reflexes.

[specialguest]

@Number1TailzFan

I have an ultrawide monitor that is as tall as a 27" monitor but wider. Even at ultrawide it's still not big enough for me to even have to move my head. I sit at about 1.5 ft away

[RonsonPL]

Why not 1080p or 720p? If you say other game looked OK at 720p then surely people paying 2000$ for a graphics card will agree and be happy playing games at that resolutions.
PS. 1080p is actually max you can play to mainain 60fps on RTX 4080. If someone wanted to play at 120, then 4090 is not even enough for 1080p.
And it's not game's fault. It's Unreal Crapgine. Overhyped, super heavy crap that has no place in games and no benefits for games or gamers. Just for the devs and publishers.
480p on a console in 2023 for 50-60fps
800-900p on 2000$ top-of-the-line 4090p for 120fps or 1440p or even lower for 60, in a game that doesn't even have superimpressive visuals.
It focused on all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons. Saying that Unreal Engine is nextgen while it cannot even run games at 120fps on best PC tech in the world, is like saying Toyota Yaris is a supercar cause it has tuned exhaust.
I'd like to tell the devs this:
If your "super fancy tech" has no chance of runningat maintained 120fps on hardware that will be released within next 3 years, without dropping to laughable res like 900p, you're doing it WRONG.

[Good-Smurf]

What went wrong here?
The Matrix Awakens runs at much higher fidelity and resolution and it doesn't look like soupy mess on consoles either.
I don't want to sound harsh on dev but this scream skill issue right here and lack of care to optimize their game.

[LightofDarkness]

UE5 was designed with upscalers in mind, especially when lumen and nanite are employed. All these videos decrying the state of “optimisation” are a bit foolish when they’ve been saying it for years. Designing around upscaling is a form of optimisation.
Plus, running the latest games on the greatest hardware has almost always resulted in around this level of “just about 60fps” on the strongest hardware at whatever the target resolution of the day is.

[StarkR3ality]

I mean, this is the issue with Dev anyway, instead of prioritising 60fps or good image quality, they push lighting, and other things. It's disappointing that games earlier in the console gen had better image quality now. Seriously go back and play forbidden west, gears 5, Ragnarok, miles morales and rift apart. The image quality is pin sharp.

For the order in this list of priority. Performance>Resolution>g raphics. Devs at the min are doing it the opposite way round and it shows.

[Rimeskeem]

I am struggling to run it at 1080P/60fps while streaming on a 3080 lol