Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review

Graphical Quality Comparison - Part 1

Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Demo Performance Review

Graphical Quality Comparison 

The Kingdom of Lucis is a beautiful place to be, even with the Empire of Nilfheim rampaging through the landscape. When maxed out Final Fantasy XV can be a real looker, with dense foliage, super high-resolution shadows and great use of Nvidia's GameWorks technologies. 

At the game's lowest preset, environments can look extraordinarily dull and monotone, with the lack of ambient occlusion and shadows making the game seem overly bright and devoid of contrast. The image slide below compared Low and Average (medium) settings, where the addition of higher resolution textures is visible on some nearby rocks and a larger amount of forested area. 

TAA, Temporal Anti-Aliasing is also lost at low settings, adding a lot of aliasing/jaggies into the mix, which is something that is particularly noticeable when seeing the game in motion when looking at hair textures (it isn't a pretty sight). 

Looking at these images it is clear why we recommend Average settings as the minimum that game should be played at, as otherwise, players will lose a lot of what makes the game's world appealing.  


(Low VS Average)

Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review  Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review

Moving onto the game's High preset we see that the game renders a lot more grass, with is both taller and fuller than its Average counterpart, we can also see more forested sections in the distance and the addition of a lot more rocks and other environmental details at the far side of the lake. 

At High settings, we can also see increased detail in the distant crystal formation as well as improved ambient occlusion in the rocks at Noctis' feet. 


(Average VS High)

Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review  Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review


When comparing the game's High and Highest Presets the most noticeable difference is the addition of a screen space reflection effect on the distant lake, as well as fuller trees and bushes in the medium distance. Increased detail in outlying areas is also visible, with more rocks, shrubbery and other details besides the road in the far distance. 


(High VS Highest)
  
Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review  Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review

 


Below is a screenshot where all GameWorks Effects are turned on, highlighting a huge upgrade in graphical quality. TurfWorks replaces the game's grass with a much more detailed mesh while HairWorks allows the fair on the Garula (big mammoth things).

Notice that HairWorks is not on Noctis or any of the other main characters, this effect is used sparingly on specific monsters and boss creatures, which means that the effect isn't going to be a huge factor within the game outside of specific encounters. 

VXAO doesn't have that much of an impact in this image visually, though we will see the performance hit this effect brings later. 


(Highest VS Highest + GameWorks)

Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review  Final Fantasy XV: Windows Edition PC Performance Review
  

«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next»

Most Recent Comments

08-03-2018, 15:43:39

Gambit2K
We already know this game is heavily promoted by nVidia and they have helped alot in it's developement. So for me personally this test isn't that interesting with the very limited GPU selection available. RX580 4 and 8 GB, Vega 64 and 56 is a must, otherwise I see no point in even looking.Quote

08-03-2018, 15:52:17

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gambit2K View Post
We already know this game is heavily promoted by nVidia and they have helped alot in it's developement. So for me personally this test isn't that interesting with the very limited GPU selection available. RX580 4 and 8 GB, Vega 64 and 56 is a must, otherwise I see no point in even looking.
We are working to get a Vega 56 on site for games test, big problem here is Denuvo, which will lock people out after a certain number of hardware changes, which is a real pain. This is why not many places do CPU testing as well as GPU testing.

The RX 580 is basically a higher clocked 480, the perf gap is relatively small there, as our RX 480 is a factory overclocked Strix model. As is the difference between the 4GB and 8GB versions, only VRM capacity and in some cases VRAM clocks are changes, so differences only occur when capacity limited or bandwidth limited.

Thanks for the input.Quote

08-03-2018, 16:17:30

Dicehunter
The game is pretty but from the few hours I've played so far I don't think it should command such a performance hit, A few optimisation patches are needed me thinks.Quote

08-03-2018, 17:22:58

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicehunter View Post
The game is pretty but from the few hours I've played so far I don't think it should command such a performance hit, A few optimisation patches are needed me thinks.
In densely forested areas the game can look phenomenal, though I do agree that some areas could have looked a lot better.Quote

08-03-2018, 19:31:58

RedSymphony
On page 4 in the (High vs Highest) comparison, it says 'Average Preset' in the top left and 'High Preset' in the top right of the slider image. Had me confused for a bit.Quote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.