Similar to the last game we looked at, Lords of the Fallen, Assassin's Creed: Unity has had a bit of a rocky start with bugs and other issues needing to be ironed out. It also happens to be a very demanding game to run – at maximum quality, it will basically chew up any GPU you throw at it and spit out crispy bits of silicon. And it's not just GPUs that get eaten, as CPU power can have a substantial impact as well. Finally, and this is not necessarily correlated with the other items in this list, Assassin's Creed: Unity (ACU) is an NVIDIA "The Way It's Meant To Be Played" title, and it's also one of the notable games for NVIDIA's GameWorks toolset – ACU includes support for HBAO+, TXAA, PCSS, Tessellation (coming in a future patch), and now MFAA (which we looked at yesterday).

There's an interesting corollary to the above items that's worth getting out of the way: reviews of Assassin's Creed: Unity have so far been rather lackluster, with an overall average Metacritic score currently sitting at 70%. That's not particularly good for a series that has otherwise had good reviews – e.g. the last game, Black Flag, has an average score of 84%. Perhaps more telling is that the current average user review at Metacritic is an abysmal 2.1. Looking at the comments and reviews makes it abundantly clear that ACU tends to run like a slug on a lot of systems.

I think part of the problem is the mistaken idea that many gamers have that they should be able to max out most settings on games. Assassin's Creed has never been a particularly light series in terms of requirements, though at lower detail settings it was usually playable on a wide selection of hardware. With ACU, the requirements have basically shot up, especially for higher quality settings; at the same time, the rendering quality even at Low is still quite good, and Medium is enough that most users should be content with the way it looks. But if you want to run at High, Very High, or Ultra quality, you'd better be packing some serious GPU heat. The other part of the problem is that the game was likely pushed out the door for the Christmas shopping season before it was fully baked, but that happens every year it seems.

There's another element to the Assassin's Creed: Unity launch worth pointing out; this is a multi-platform release, coming out simultaneously on PC, PS4, and Xbox One. By dropping support for the PS3 and Xbox 360, Ubisoft has opened the doors to much higher quality settings, but the requirements may also be too high for a lot of PCs. With the new generation of consoles now sporting 8GB RAM, we've seen a large jump in resource requirements for textures in particular. I mentioned in the Lords of the Fallen article that GPUs with less than 4GB VRAM may need to opt for lower quality settings; with ACU (at least in the current state of patch 1.2), you can drop the "may" from that statement and just go in knowing full well that GPUs with 2GB RAM are going to struggle at times.

Test System and Benchmarks
Comments Locked

122 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    If I had an FX rig, you can be sure I'd test at least one or two GPUs on it to see how it compares, but sadly I don't.
  • chizow - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    I thought that was what the i3 simulation was meant to mimic? ;)
  • Morawka - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    we need those big wide nvidia cards to come back. 512bit bus or even a 1024bit bus. My GTX 980 only chokes when i try to enable any form of AA on FC4 and AC: Unity. As long as AA is set to None or 2x MSAA, the games fun at 60FPS.
  • Notmyusualid - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    Great to see some mobile GPU numbers in there.

    Allows the rest of us to know what to expect from a title...

    Thanks.
  • eanazag - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    The game is a hardware thrasher from the numbers. I can understand seeing PC titles playing with low frame rates, but there's a problem if the consoles can't get the game over 30 FPS. That is a design failure since you can't upgrade consoles.
  • YazX_ - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    PCSS kills performance, im running the game everything on Ultra except PCSS is set to High with FXAA at WQHD (2560 x 1440) and getting 55 FPS avg with 970 GTX (1525/8Ghz), min FPS is like 40.

    switching to 2xMSAA with MFAA enabled gets me around 45 FPS avg and 30 Min, so i wonder how 970 SLI in your benches couldnt sustain 60 FPS on WQHD?!
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    Ultra is 4xMSAA with PCSS. You had a 10FPS drop just enabling 2xMSAA, and 4xMSAA would take another 10 or so FPS off, with PCSS accounting for an additional 10 (give or take).
  • Carfax - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    The main reason for the low performance is the use of MSAA. MSAA in this engine has a massive performance hit as the engine uses deferred rendering . Running the game on ultra settings with FXAA instead of MSAA would net you over 10 FPS easily.
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    Umm... MSAA on many games tends to exact a fairly decent performance hit, and the more complex the game the bigger the hit. FXAA is basically a 3% hit (vs. no AA) by comparison so yes it would be much faster.
  • Carfax - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link

    Exactly, so posting benchmarks of the game running at MSAA 4x isn't exactly an accurate representative of the kind of performance you can get out of the game, and arguably isn't even worth the massive performance hit as it just gives you a very slight IQ boost over FXAA. On my own machine, I'm playing at 1440p maxed settings with FXAA and I'm seeing 60 FPS on a regular basis with V-sync on. With V-sync off, I'm getting into the 70s..

    This is on a Gigabyte G1 GTX 970 SLI rig with a 4930K @ 4.3ghz driving them..

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now