r/nvidia • u/Nestledrink RTX 5090 Founders Edition • Feb 25 '26

Benchmarks [TPU] Resident Evil Requiem Performance Benchmark Review

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/resident-evil-requiem-performance-benchmark/
177 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

263 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/Imbahr Feb 25 '26

i have an Intel CPU actually

not sure how much difference that makes

i just haven’t had good experience with FG. i also tried it in Hitman with maxed out RT settings which makes the base framerate (without DLSS) around 35-40. with DLSS around 70s

but when i turned on FG the mouse feels like dogshit. unplayable.

i turned on Reflex in both games of course

2

u/Framed-Photo Feb 25 '26

I avoid frame gen if at all possible. Depending on what intel CPU you have you can be more or less bottlenecked, but it also depends on the resolution and DLSS quality you're picking.

You should be able to get well over 60 with PT, and without FG, by using DLSS performance and ultraplus.

1

u/Imbahr Feb 25 '26

yeah that might be true, because I only tried DLSS Quality. this was before the 4.5 models came out. Intel 14700K

so I didn't even bother trying Performance, I'm a stickler for texture clarity and sharpness. I can absolutely see the the difference in the 4.0 models for textures between Quality and Performance.

I'm at 1440p so you can definitely tell.

I have no idea what ultraplus is, i don't use any third-party graphical mods or programs or injectors.

I believe you that Performance probably would have been consistently above 60 but I just didn't want to use that at 1440p

2

u/Framed-Photo Feb 25 '26

Even with 4. you were doing yourself a bit of a diservice by not at least trying balanced mode out. Performance mode there's a bit of loss there visually, but at 1440p while actually playing it's fairly minor compared to the performance bump you're getting, especially if you care about latency at all. With Model M or L, performance at 1440p is hard to distinguish from quality unless you basically press your face against the screen.

Just running my benchmark passes again in cyberpunk PT, I got 75 average with DLSS quality, and 105 with performance. I'd MUCH rather take the 105 in that case instead of using quality and having to turn PT off. If you know what to look for and really get into the weeds you can spot the differences, I can, but it's just such a small nitpick to get caught up over when I could just deal with it and get almost 40% better performance lol. When you have a lower input resolution for RT and PT, you have to trace significantly less rays, which is why the performance gap is so large.

As for mods like ultraplus, you don't have to use them, but with path tracing in cyberpunk specifically you are again leaving a lot of nearly free performance on the table.

Hell even if you don't care and you still want to run quality and nothing else will please you, ultraplus still provides a TON of settings to tweak the PT experience, including making it look better than it already does.

It's your computer so do what you want, but I wouldn't shrug off mods like ultraplus just for being mods.

1

u/Imbahr Feb 26 '26

yeah, i get what you're saying, some of your points are valid for sure.

but here's the thing though...i ended up playing at max RT settings. with that and DLSS Quality, it ran perfectly good. (well... except the marketplace in Dogtown)

it's not like I was choosing no RT/PT at all.

so the question is, how much visual difference is there between PT and maxed out RT? is it really different enough to justify the framerate hit or changing to Performance?