Monster Hunter World is a game that a lot of PC gamers were looking forward to. While the game came out in January 2018 on consoles, it took almost six months until we see it on PC. Capcom claimed that it needed some extra time in order to offer an optimized product so here we are today with the PC version currently available. As such, it’s time to benchmark it and see how it performs on the PC platform.
For this PC Performance Analysis, we used an Intel i7 4930K (overclocked at 4.2Ghz) with 8GB RAM, AMD’s Radeon RX580 and RX Vega 64, and NVIDIA’s GTX980Ti, Windows 10 64-bit and the latest version of the GeForce and Catalyst drivers. We didn’t use the GTX690 as this is a really demanding game and there isn’t currently any SLI profile for it.
Capcom has added a respectful number of graphics settings. PC gamers can adjust the quality of textures, ambient occlusion, volume rendering, shadows, anti-aliasing, LOD bias, Max LOD level, anisotropic filtering, SH diffuse, dynamic range and they can enable/disable foliage sway, subsurface scattering, screen space reflections, water reflections and Z-prepass. There are also options for resolution scaling and framerate. Do note that in order to get a native resolution, you’ll have to use the “High” resolution scaling setting.
In order to find out how the game performs on a variety of CPUs, we simulated a dual-core and a quad-core CPU. For our CPU tests we used the hub area of the game that features a lot of NPCs. We also dropped our resolution to 720p and the resolution scaling to Low (but kept the Highest settings) so we could eliminate any possible GPU bottleneck.
Monster Hunter World is one of the few titles that takes advantage of more than four CPU cores/threads. Without Hyper Threading, our simulated dual-core was unable to run the game (due to extreme stuttering) and our simulated quad-core was able to offer a minimum of 60fps and an average of 64fps. When we enabled Hyper Threading, our simulated dual-core was able to run the game with a minimum of 52fps and an average of 56fps and our simulated quad-core skyrocketed to a minimum of 77fps and an average of 82fps. As for our six-core system, it was able to offer a minimum of 77fps and an average of 83fps (with or without Hyper Threading).
So while PC gamers with moderate CPUs will be able to enjoy the game with 60fps, they will require a high-end GPU in order to achieve something like that at 1080p and on the Highest settings. Monster Hunter World is one of the most demanding titles to date and on the Highest settings our GTX980Ti was unable to come close to a 60fps experience.
For our GPU tests we used the Forest area as it’s more GPU-bound. Our GTX980Ti was able to push a minimum of 46fps and an average of 56fps whereas our AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 was able to come close to a 60fps experience as it offered a minimum of 57fps and an average of 67fps.
In order to get a 60fps experience on our GTX980Ti, we had to lower some settings (or use the High preset). On High settings and at 1080p, we were able to get a minimum of 75fps and an average of 80fps. By lowering even further our settings, we were able to hit a bit higher framerates, though it’s worth noting that on both 720p+Highest settings and 1080p+Low settings our GTX980Ti was running the game better than the Radeon RX Vega 64. This is due to NVIDIA’s better optimized drivers (we’ve said numerous times that AMD’s drivers have a huge CPU overhead in DX11 and this is evident here too).
But what about higher resolutions? Well, our GTX980Ti was able to offer a console experience on 1440p and Highest settings whereas the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 was able to beat NVIDIA’s GPU by around 15fps. In 4K, the performance difference was lower (around 5fps). Suffice to say that PC gamers will have to lower their settings in order to achieve a somehow smooth experience at anything higher than 1080p (unless of course they have NVIDIA’s latest GPU, the GTX1080Ti).
What’s also worth noting is that the visual differences between the High and the Highest settings is minimal. As such, we strongly suggest using a mixture of High and Highest settings in order to achieve a smooth experience as some settings are really demanding on their highest values (without offering major visual improvements).
Graphics wise, we weren’t really impressed by what Monster Hunter World displays. It looks fine for the most part but most of the textures feel low-res (even when using the highest texture setting). Volume Rendering brings a really annoying blur effect (and to be honest we believe the game looks better without it), lip-syncing is mediocre and everything feels a bit dated. To put it simply, Monster Hunter World performs worse than Assassin’s Creed Origins and looks way way worse than it. And that is a bit disappointing.
All in all, the PC version of Monster Hunter World is not as optimized as we’d hoped, especially if we take into account the fact that Capcom decided to delay it almost half a year. The game requires a really powerful GPU, though the good news is that gamers can lower the settings in order to improve performance. Still, the visuals that are being displayed on screen do not really justify – at least in our opinion – these high GPU requirements. Moreover, the game suffers from mouse smoothing issues and the default key bindings can be a bit problematic (thankfully the game allows to re-bind all keys).
Enjoy!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
Those damn textures have been driving me nuts especially when the xb1x has better ones. Feels like yet another dirty money hatted “timed exclusive” move by microshaft (with their long history and win-lose warfare mindset) to desperately sell their weird mid ranged xb1x because they have to depend on 3rd parties without any good exclusives. PC will suddenly get another “we took longer for PC because we wanted to make the best it could be” update – even though these are all x86 hw. Except the 1st xb1 which is just some wtf x86 design.
Volumetric Rendering destroys performance and the game looks way worse with it on, wonder if it was just badly implemented.
Both anti-aliasing options are garbage and make the game look like is smeared in sheeet.
Some people claim rolling back drivers help. Haven’t tried it myself.
All in all not that impressive looking game, maybe reshade can help, but not really anything to be amazed about. Not near AC Origins or FFXV.
The creatures interaction is pretty cool though.
Hoping a proper PC patch with Hi Res Textures, Volumetric Rendering fixed and new AA options comes out, but I wont hold my breath!
Agreed, the game is not very well optimized at all. I was able to optimized it enough to get highish settings with a GTX 1080 at 1440p and get 60-80 fps in the forest area. I found that turning off volumetric rendering helped the most setting AO to medium. Also, turn off TAA and use SMAA injection with Reshade, as they seemed to have bundled motion blur with that setting (or the implementation is just really bad). I turned off a few other settings based off Digital Foundry’s video I think.
WARNING: TURN OFF TAA! That setting basically acts as motion blur as well, and the game looks way worse with it on. Just inject SMAA with Reshade instead.
this game looks like sh*t. I have honestly no idea why people would say Splinter Cell: Blacklist has bad graphics when World only looks marginally better than that game. Even worst in some aspects.
Anyone who complains about Blacklist graffics needs their eyes checked. That game looks beautiful to this day and it’s running ok Heavily Modified Unreal 2.5 Engine (which was a very controversial choice at the time). But none the less, Splinter Cell Blacklist lightening alone will put many of these newer games to shame.
its amazing that IGN said Blacklist had “Dated Visuals”
This game is unoptimized as Heck.
Oh yeah I forgot! DENUVO + Capcom shity port as always
I heard the only thing good going for it is the framepacing even at low framerate is decent,but the rest is subpar and the worst issue is that some effects like screespace refflections and textures quality are worse than the xbox one x version according to digital foundry.
Very bad job capcom and if this result of optimisation after several months then i dont want to imagine how the game performed if it launched alongside consoles.
Very amateurish port and i expect patches to fix and optimise further this game.
Untill then its a no buy for me
someone made a comment on this site that capcom doesn’t make badly optimized games 🙂
What they said is “some” textures fail to load in. Sounds like a bug. The shadow draw distance on Xbox one X is lower than PC’s lowest setting but in their testing they had it set to medium or high on PC. It runs at 30-40fps on Xbox one X. Go read some other sites.
apart the framerate and the shadow draw distance being better on pc(the framerate not by much) the pc port is bad i’ve seen worse port,but what is unforgivable is how demanding the game is when those graphics are nothing to write home about and the fact they delayed the pc port to make sure its a good port.
trust me i followed this pc port since the beta there was an occuring crashing issue that was fixed at least but not having the option to exit mid quest and all aforementioned issues make it a bad pc port if it was released alongside the console launch in this state it would still be not good,but the delay to “polish” the pc version is a joke.
My biggest problem is lack of ultra wide support. I game on a 3440×1440 monitor and have been forced to play with black borders either side at standard 1440p.
I can’t comment on performance. With my 1080ti and a 100hz G-Sync monitor it’s as smooth as any other game I’ve played. My GPU is constantly at 99% though which is odd because like you say it doesn’t look that good.
I only commented here because I get annoyed at people talking about the Xbox one X version being superior. It isn’t. It stutters and runs at horrible framerates. It’s a poorly optimized game on ALL systems
There’s a mod to patch in 3440×1440 res. Granted, it’s a mod, and you have to run it every time you start the game, it’s totally worth it imo.
I had high hopes for this game since RE games as of late on PC have been very well done. Even the low budget SFV has been done on PC nice. Yet this game nope. Going to hold off on it till they patch the F out of it.
Thanks for your take on it.
Yeah, not touching this until a year passes and it’s made cheaper and actually optimized.
Capcom have already been rewarded though, and handsomely with it being sold for £50 digitally on Steam.
For me it runs like butter on my 1950x Threadripper, it sure does love dem logical cores 🙂
The game owns, I love it.
You realise tests have proven MHW is hitting GPU limits at 1080p way before it even taxes budget duel core i3’s. Your threadripper is giving you 0 benefit with this game
Another bad port?
Thanks a bunch NVIDIA
Xbox one X runs at 30-40fps at 1080p. Shadow distance is lower than pc’s lowest setting and it’s hard to get like for like settings. DF only test reference cards too. Seriously, how many people run at reference clock speeds?? You can closely match the Xbox one X, even beat it with a 1060/580 on MHW. That’s 30-40fps at 1080p
exactly… I see what your doing here but be prepared for the ignorant deluge of vitriol from people that have nothing better to do then complain about things they don’t understand.