Deus Ex Mankind Divided - first official benchmark review - official disappointment

SighTurtle said:
Hey, unless they screw up the DX12 patch, you'll only have to wait about say 2-3 weeks before seeing performance stabilize.
Click to expand...


I'll gladly label myself a skeptic until I see the improvements. Either way, waiting won't kill me.
 
thesmokingman said:
Are you not reading the user comments in this thread? Performance is not great on low/middle tier cards.

They promised DX12 form day one. Now they are saying in a later patch. Ok...? And you're arguing that its complete?
Click to expand...

I didn't know getting good performance on low end and mid level hardware is a basic human right now.
Sorry if you have low end hardware you can't play this game, that's just how the cookie crumbles.
I wish every game would miss only this much of their pre-release promises. Yes I'm thinking no man's lies now.
And it's not like they lied about it either. They said prior to release that DX12 will come later. Everyone can judge for themselves if that's something they can't live without. Especially after seeing benchmarks.
Or are you suggesting that we'd have been better off if they delayed the entire game with another month so they can ship it with dx12? I don't give a crap about dx12, I'm perfectly fine with the game as is.
 
M76 said:
I didn't know getting good performance on low end and mid level hardware is a basic human right now.
Sorry if you have low end hardware you can't play this game, that's just how the cookie crumbles.
I wish every game would miss only this much of their pre-release promises. Yes I'm thinking no man's lies now.
And it's not like they lied about it either. They said prior to release that DX12 will come later. Everyone can judge for themselves if that's something they can't live without. Especially after seeing benchmarks.
Or are you suggesting that we'd have been better off if they delayed the entire game with another month so they can ship it with dx12? I don't give a crap about dx12, I'm perfectly fine with the game as is.
Click to expand...
I regularly hold off on buying games to let the first few patches sort things out. For this game I didn't because reviews were positive and no major issues were reported. But if DX12 is that big of a feature and you don't want to play the game without it (I would suggest it's NOT going to be a huge deal, but that's your decision as the consumer) then hold off a few months. I don't think this is something to get worked up over.
 
Just want to point out that Bit-Tech only used 30 seconds of the 90 second benchmark.

"Deus Ex: Mankind Divided has a built-in benchmark hidden in the Extras menu. It's about 90 seconds long but we benchmark only the first 30 seconds of it as this contains the most stressful part and we found it to be representative of the whole. We repeat each run until a consistent result is obtained – usually twice since it's such a reliable benchmark. We record the results using FRAPS, and report the average and minimum frame rates. We found that your experience in-game will typically be with frame rates actually a little higher than the average frame rate from the benchmark, but even so it's the minimum frame rate that we focus on and that you should really take into consideration because it's in the most challenging parts of the game that you'll really feel the slowdowns, and it's no good having a sub-par experience in the heat of battle."

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided Benchmarked: What Do You Need To Run It?​
 
chiablo said:
It's completely unplayable on a 770. With everything turned to low, ~25fps was about the most stable framerate I could get at 2560x1080, and even then geometry was disappearing. I would see clutter floating throughout the environment, because the tables weren't rendering.
Click to expand...

I remember when I was on Intel integrated graphics and so many games were out of my reach, no matter how low I set them. While I'm sure dx12 patch will improve performance a bit you should think seriously about a refund.
 
Last edited:
chiablo said:
It's completely unplayable on a 770. With everything turned to low, ~25fps was about the most stable framerate I could get at 2560x1080, and even then geometry was disappearing. I would see clutter floating throughout the environment, because the tables weren't rendering.
Click to expand...
That sounds like either a bug in the game or a problem with your PC. What drivers are you running?
 
Its ok guys its not the graphics that matter :rolleyes: medium settings should be ok for everybody,isn't the story more important than the graphics?
 
cageymaru said:
Joker redid his performance review for the RX 480 and GTX 1060 because his video yesterday had different numbers from other websites. He walks down the streets of Prague towards the end.

Click to expand...


That's a marked flip flop and some interesting in game points. CPU utilization is lower on the rx which is itself opposite world, nevermind the fps. He needed to show the rx temp just to be even on both. The cpu on the rx run average was lower which supports the usage reading. Hmm...
 
Florin22xxl said:
Its ok guys its not the graphics that matter :rolleyes: medium settings should be ok for everybody,isn't the story more important than the graphics?
Click to expand...

That's what I loved about Human Revolution, the graphics weren't that great for the time, but the story more than made up for it. I got lost in that story and gameplay, I was fully sucked in.
 
Rizen said:
Personally I think it's hard to show how good games like this look in still screenshots. A lot of the post-processing looks awesome in motion but if you have a still screenshot you can nitpick little things and details. Even YouTube compresses video down enough that it's hard to get a feel for how the game actually looks.
Click to expand...
Agree completely. In all honesty the character models don't look much better than Human Revolution, but the amount of little details in the environment everywhere is stellar. Combined with all the lighting and soft particle effect this game is actually pretty impressive looking. Once the mesh problems are sorted out I'd dare say this is one of the best looking games out right now.
trandoanhung1991 said:
I dunno. IMO Batman Arkham Knight looks a lot better than this, and seem to run better also, lol.


Click to expand...

Arkham Knight looks pretty good, but it definitely doesn't run better than Mankind Divided. The frametime delta in MD is minuscule compared to AK, and low framerates still feel very smooth on the current generation of hardware. Arkham Knight will still hit the floor in terms of framerate, and even though it can hit higher raw framerate it doesn't feel as smooth.
Deders said:
Just want to point out that Bit-Tech only used 30 seconds of the 90 second benchmark.

"Deus Ex: Mankind Divided has a built-in benchmark hidden in the Extras menu. It's about 90 seconds long but we benchmark only the first 30 seconds of it as this contains the most stressful part and we found it to be representative of the whole. We repeat each run until a consistent result is obtained – usually twice since it's such a reliable benchmark. We record the results using FRAPS, and report the average and minimum frame rates. We found that your experience in-game will typically be with frame rates actually a little higher than the average frame rate from the benchmark, but even so it's the minimum frame rate that we focus on and that you should really take into consideration because it's in the most challenging parts of the game that you'll really feel the slowdowns, and it's no good having a sub-par experience in the heat of battle."

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided Benchmarked: What Do You Need To Run It?​
Click to expand...
This is what you get when you're trying to beat everyone else to press on new releases. The low effort put in here has skewed the bystander opinion in a negative way. The benchmark in this game is in no way representative of most of the gameplay I've experienced so far.
 
chiablo said:
It's completely unplayable on a 770. With everything turned to low, ~25fps was about the most stable framerate I could get at 2560x1080, and even then geometry was disappearing. I would see clutter floating throughout the environment, because the tables weren't rendering.
Click to expand...

A 770 has no business trying to run this game at 2560x1080.
 
The old days of picking up a game on disk/cd/dvd which required no major fixes and where patches added substantial free content are long gone; I attribute that to the limited spread of the Internet at the time.

Kickstarter, Greenlight, Day 1 patches, DLC, shark cards, quest compasses, handholding, no physical media, release now fix later etc is the modern trend.

They don't even pass on the savings from the lack of physical content despite having to download 30GB's or more at our own time & expense.


If you must have the DX12 update to enjoy the game the best thing to do is to refrain from purchasing until the game receives the said update - should it ever receive it.

Most other issues should be sorted by then - it'll likely be on sale/discounted too!


I would've thought that it doesn't beat the original Deus Ex <3 (but that was a special time with games like System Shock, Thief 1 & 2; thanks to Looking Glass devs)

As long as doesn't suck like Invisible War and it's roughly on par/exceeds Human Revolution it should be well worth a playthrough.

I wouldn't bet against a Directors Cut version appearing at some later date.
 
Last edited:
mwnn said:
The old days of picking up a game on disk/cd/dvd which required no major fixes and where patches added substantial free content are long gone; I attribute that to the limited spread of the Internet at the time.

Kickstarter, Greenlight, Day 1 patches, DLC, shark cards, quest compasses, handholding, no physical media, release now fix later etc is the modern trend.

They don't even pass on the savings from the lack of physical content despite having to download 30GB's or more at our own time & expense.
Click to expand...

While I'm sure profit is greater with dlcs and microtransactions something to be aware of is the increasing costs of game development and marketing. Prices for AAA games remain at $60 but costs are increasing. It is a tough pill to shallow through but the market has changed.
 
Brent_Justice said:
That's what I loved about Human Revolution, the graphics weren't that great for the time, but the story more than made up for it. I got lost in that story and gameplay, I was fully sucked in.
Click to expand...

That's the way I felt about it too. I found the gameplay and getting immersed in the different environments to be the biggest factor. It gave me that feeling of moving through an alternate Blade Runner universe.

I just want to move through it with decent FPS...
 
mwnn said:
The old days of picking up a game on disk/cd/dvd which required no major fixes and where patches added substantial free content are long gone; I attribute that to the limited spread of the Internet at the time.

Kickstarter, Greenlight, Day 1 patches, DLC, shark cards, quest compasses, handholding, no physical media, release now fix later etc is the modern trend.

They don't even pass on the savings from the lack of physical content despite having to download 30GB's or more at our own time & expense.


If you must have the DX12 update to enjoy the game the best thing to do is to refrain from purchasing until the game receives the said update - should it ever receive it.

Most other issues should be sorted by then - it'll likely be on sale/discounted too!


I would've thought that it doesn't beat the original Deus Ex <3 (but that was a special time with games like System Shock, Thief 1 & 2; thanks to Looking Glass devs)

As long as doesn't suck like Invisible War and it's roughly on par/exceeds Human Revolution it should be well worth a playthrough.

I wouldn't bet against a Directors Cut version appearing at some later date.
Click to expand...

I personally have no problems with 30GB downloads or day 1 patches (I don't see how day 1 patches are that big of a deal for digital). Due to the timezone difference, MD was available for play at 11pm, which is quite late, so I tend to just continue playing what I was playing, set steam to download it overnight and have it ready to go next day when I come back to work. If it isn't ready by the time I want to play, I can easily go play something else until it is finished.

I also don't have data usage limits (no ISPs here have any sort of limits, lest they want to lose their business to dozens others that don't, or to the very popular mobile 4G unlimited mobile data plans that everyone and their grandma has).

Besides, if physical copies WERE available, I would still choose digital as I want English language, not Chinese. It would cost me an arm and a leg to have physical copies shipped over here.

But now that I missed the pre-order bonuses (I decided not to pre-order MD because I do not have the HW to run it), chances are I will have to wait for the Director's cut to get those bonuses, or those Day one editions, if they are still available when I visit US later on in the year.
 
Ieldra said:
No I haven't been told that numerous times because I know full well it's theoretical. The NV cards perform better per tflop, they are more shader efficient. Which is something we have been saying in the other thread. Same in AotS.

The Fury X is 33% faster yet only 22% more performant (according to TPU).

The 1080 is 41% faster and 36% more performant (according to TPU)
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that you are trying too hard at this point to prove even though fury x is faster it is not faster and not living up to its potential. Did this just become news? Do we not all know already that amd architecture is in efficient unless shaders are fully utilized and that doesn't happen until async and shader intrinsic come in to play where it performs up to its Tflop number? I mean why try so hard to prove something and swing it around when we all know its been proven already. Why beat a dead horse when we know AMD architecture does not perform to its theoretical throughput under dx11. Any point of beating this down everyones throat over and over?

Point is it is performing faster in dx11 which it rarely does. It just makes it seem like you are hellbent on proving a point to some how prove despite its performing faster it is not peforming as it should. Which makes me SMH.
 
Rizen said:
That sounds like either a bug in the game or a problem with your PC. What drivers are you running?
Click to expand...

I found out my problem... The dumbasses at Square Enix made MSAA at 2x by default, and even if you drop graphics settings to low, MSAA setting isn't affected. Now I'm running fine.
 
G-Sync Monitor and 1080 and I maintain 40fps to 60fps at Ultra settings (no MSAA) at 3440 x 1440. I have overclocked both the GPU and CPU though. Game runs perfectly and looks amazing. I have been loving it, this rush to call it a disappointment is pretty upsetting.
 
I'm on a factory OC'd 1080, these are my settings to get the game to stay around 60+ FPS. The game does look good, I didn't expect to be able to run it cranked, that rarely seems to happen with new AAA games and new GPUs.

I need to dig around to see which setting has the greatest impact, I could probably lower screenspace reflections and bump up something else like ambient occlusion.

1.PNG
2.PNG
 
djoye said:
I'm on a factory OC'd 1080, these are my settings to get the game to stay around 60+ FPS. The game does look good, I didn't expect to be able to run it cranked, that rarely seems to happen with new AAA games and new GPUs.

I need to dig around to see which setting has the greatest impact, I could probably lower screenspace reflections and bump up something else like ambient occlusion.

View attachment 7205 View attachment 7206
Click to expand...

Why are you triple buffering at 1440p 144hz lol, that's never gonna work well
 
I haven't looked too deeply into steam reviews, why are the steam reviews so negative about this game? Plot or the tech of the game?

Or just the general trend of negativity that has been hitting steam of late? I noticed FO4 got degraded to mixed
 
chenw said:
I haven't looked too deeply into steam reviews, why are the steam reviews so negative about this game? Plot or the tech of the game?

Or just the general trend of negativity that has been hitting steam of late? I noticed FO4 got degraded to mixed
Click to expand...

They just wanted to wait 6 months or so so the review is accurate. Most of the recent negative posters have over 50 hours in the game.

FO4 cratered after release because the game sucks unless you like playing a post-apocalyptic version of The Sims.

There is no depth to your character, no karma, and no real conversation tree. just chose the same four generic arrow keys to half-ass your r way through every conversation.

And yeah, they improved the FPS combat a bit, but I've gotten distracvted by Doom, which has WAY better combat.
 
Last edited:
OK, that explains the FO4 afterward cratering.

what caused MD's upfront cratering?
 
chenw said:
I haven't looked too deeply into steam reviews, why are the steam reviews so negative about this game? Plot or the tech of the game?

Or just the general trend of negativity that has been hitting steam of late? I noticed FO4 got degraded to mixed
Click to expand...

You nailed it with the general trend.

defaultluser said:
Perhaps it's a shitty game, not helped by the heavy system requirements? I have no idea, never been a deus ex fan.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have heavy requirements. A 1060 can run this game on high 1080p with 60fps without any issue.. That's a 200$ card. Is that bad????

The problem is they left super sampling on in the High preset.. Just a minor error u can turn off.
 
defaultluser said:
Perhaps it's a shitty game, not helped by the heavy system requirements? I have no idea, never been a deus ex fan.
Click to expand...

That's what I am asking, whether it's because is shitty (or specifically, in what way, there are a 100 ways a game can be shitty) or just a victim of trend.
 
chenw said:
That's what I am asking, whether it's because is shitty (or specifically, in what way, there are a 100 ways a game can be shitty) or just a victim of trend.
Click to expand...

There seem to be a lot of complaints about game-play bugs, one-time-use enhancements for preorer people, and a raft of people complaining about micro-transactions. Sounds like a potentially good game a few months form now after they fix the bugs? Most of the complaints on metacritic are not about the story line..

But this happens with every new game: the initial flood of reviews is either positive or negative depending on how marketing handled the release and how buggy the release was, and afterwards it takes awhile for the real game's score to be ascertained.
 
Dion said:
You nailed it with the general trend.



It doesn't have heavy requirements. A 1060 can run this game on high 1080p with 60fps without any issue.. That's a 200$ card. Is that bad????

The problem is they left super sampling on in the High preset.. Just a minor error u can turn off.
Click to expand...
What? You mean super sampling as in SSAA? This game does not have that and uses MSAA. And MSAA is NOT on by default on any preset.
 
misterbobby said:
What? You mean super sampling as in SSAA? This game does not have that and uses MSAA. And MSAA is NOT on by default on any preset.
Click to expand...

Hmm I thought it was on by default.. my mistake.. But it is a form of supersampling.. I wasn't wrong about that. This game runs fine and great.
 
Coming as someone who's only put 9 hours in, I have to say I've loved the combat and choices given to you in the game. I understand the FO4 hate, I wasn't impressed there either. But this game looks way better and the combat is way more satisfying than FO4. Maybe I'll change my mind after 50 more hours of gameplay, who knows.
 
I didn't mind FO4 as it was a sandbox game that allowed me to be an item hoarder (it's a problem I have with RPG's, I have compulsion to loot everything and make lots of things that I might never need, like stocking up on 10's of thousands of Fusion cells). I spent a lot of time managing settlements and didn't mind it at all.

Although I am pretty sure I am completely spoiled on HR at this point, I still want to go back and finish it. Being spoilt is one thing, but it's quite another to finally put it into context of the game.
 
misterbobby said:
What? You mean super sampling as in SSAA? This game does not have that and uses MSAA. And MSAA is NOT on by default on any preset.
Click to expand...

Yet I've read many times that MSAA is on by default when you set it to ultra. (maybe even high)

Don't have the game though but apparently there are other issues, such as some shadows being gone compared to the console versions :
Problème d'ombre sur PC - Deus Ex Mankind Divided : plongée dans le Dawn Engine - Actus jeux - Gamekult
and
Végétation et ombre inexistante - Deus Ex Mankind Divided : plongée dans le Dawn Engine - Actus jeux - Gamekult
(sorry, French site, but you can just look at the pictures)
 
kalston said:
Yet I've read many times that MSAA is on by default when you set it to ultra. (maybe even high)

Don't have the game though but apparently there are other issues, such as some shadows being gone compared to the console versions :
Problème d'ombre sur PC - Deus Ex Mankind Divided : plongée dans le Dawn Engine - Actus jeux - Gamekult
and
Végétation et ombre inexistante - Deus Ex Mankind Divided : plongée dans le Dawn Engine - Actus jeux - Gamekult
(sorry, French site, but you can just look at the pictures)
Click to expand...

Yeah I read that MSAA was on by default at high preset onwards, ultra shadows and ambient occlusion are bugged, CHS is bugged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top