Benchmark for Monster Hunter Wilds performance
Benchmark for Monster Hunter Wilds performance
If you set the frame rate to 60, performance on a weaker GPU will improve, providing consistent frame rates.
According to the DF video, achieving a completely steady 60 frames per second on a card like the 4060 remains challenging because of frame time fluctuations when adjusting the camera position. I don’t want this game, but if I could (and had a display with full VRR), I’d likely opt for a 40 or 45 fps limit to maintain stable frame rates on mid-range hardware.
4070 marks the minimum threshold where performance drops noticeably. That means the GPU processes just one frame every six milliseconds, while an unconstrained setup forces the CPU to add extra frames occasionally so the GPU can prepare ahead. This increases latency and consumes more resources. It doesn't handle sudden jumps between 'no action' and 'rush B' smoothly—everything becomes slower.
It depends on your setup and the display settings. On a standard 60Hz monitor without VRR, using a VRR monitor helps maintain smooth play. With a full-range VRR display, maintaining a consistent 40 fps won't cause frame drops—you'll see a steady 25ms frame timing. Most games benefit from a fixed 25ms update for smoother performance, even if it means occasional spikes near that time. Consistency matters more than slight fluctuations. I personally played Monster Hunter Rise at 30fps without noticeable impact, and it felt smooth. The difference between 40fps caps and locked 25ms updates is subtle but can matter in fast-paced games.
Doesn't really work, on my 3070 it still dropped to like 52-55 fps in some instances, so there's no "locking" ... Although everything on low it should probably work. (yes you could lock it 45, but to be frank I haven't seen a desktop monitor not micro stuttering like crazy if framerate is sub refresh rate, maybe if you limit the hz as well? Laptop monitors are built differently somehow, they usually smooth as hell, as long you're above 30 fps ) That's the thing though, I watched a lot of the benchmark videos... They all running maxed out usually, which is fine for a specific scenario, but it's also not realistic at all ... I generally have far better results, even people with like 4080s... Because I know which settings can and should be turned down as they don't even have a huge visual advantage but are utter framerate killers (looking at you "volumetric fog" - for example, also sub surface scattering etc, even though I let it on because avg was still over 60 anyway, iirc) <-- with regards to the 3070 (results somewhere above) but also in general, if you have struggling hardware... Especially Capcom is notorious for these "crysis style" settings...
DF's configuration for the test involved minimal textures, no ray tracing, and all other settings at "High" resolution with Balanced DLSS (internal 835p). It would have been valuable to observe whether adjustments could resolve the issue by lowering everything to its minimum.
I mean yeah, they showed the problem (I doubt it's the only problem) but they didn't really go into trying to fix it - there's already several performance mods out... MH WORLDS kinda needed them too... Performance was never great on that title. With mods it was nigh perfect and even looked better (in some instances) But I think the issue here is maybe they aren't loading the entire level into Vram like they did on World - not sure but I read something about that and for World the devs made a big deal out of it, now there's just silence... also not using MT Framework is just a bad idea... So yeah, while there are issues it seems they're very specific to this game - and mods might fix it (again) idk yet. PS: still, just turn on framegen... And profit? I think visually it may look pretty bad with framegen though, possibly.