MachineGames has just released a new update for the PC version of Indiana Jones and the Great Circle that adds support for DLSS 4. Thanks to this update, RTX50 series owners will be able to use DLSS 4 Multi-Frame Gen. Not only that but the update adds a new option for ray-traced shadows to include all light sources. So, time to benchmark this new update at both 4K and 8K resolutions.
For our benchmarks, I used an AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D with a Gigabyte Motherboard X670E AORUS MASTER, G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB 32GB DDR5 RAM at 6000Mhz and an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Founder’s Edition. I also used Windows 10 64-bit and the NVIDIA GeForce 572.47 WHQL driver.
Indiana Jones and the Great Circle does not have a built-in benchmark tool. So, for our tests, I used the start jungle area. This appears to be one of the most demanding areas in the game.
At Native 4K, the NVIDIA RTX 5090 pushes a minimum of 34FPS and an average of 41FPS. Then, by enabling DLSS 4 Quality Mode, we get close to a 60FPS experience. And that’s where Multi-Frame Gen comes in. With MFG X4, we were able to get over 160FPS at all times. Moreover, since our base framerate is really high, I did not notice any major input lag issues. Everything felt great.
At Native 8K, the NVIDIA RTX 5090 struggles to run the game. We’re talking about 11-13FPS. DLSS 4 Performance Mode can significantly improve performance, raising our framerate to 30FPS. Then, by using MFG X4, we can get to 100-120FPS.
Since Indiana Jones and the Great Circle is a slow-paced game, it’s actually playable at 8K. However, you WILL notice the extra input latency. Still, due to its slow-paced nature, it can be played. Visual artifacts are also minimal (except during quick camera movements).
My biggest gripe with MFG is the fact that it’s being disabled during cut-scenes. So, at 8K, you’ll be gaming at 100FPS and the cut-scenes will run at 30FPS. This is a big no-no for me.
And there you have it. To my surprise, Indiana Jones and the Great Circle is playable at 8K with MFG X4. It’s not the best way to experience the game. In my opinion, owners of the RTX 5090 should use MFG X4 at 4K with DLSS 4 Quality. That way, you’ll get a great image, high framerates, and responsive camera movement. Still, it’s fascinating witnessing a modern game running at 8K.
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
ah the cinematic 13 fps with some mumbo jumbo to 120.
16K where?
If the game can play fluently with FG, it really doesnt matter if its the "old" 2x or the 4x.
Question Is – how will it fare, with a 5070/ 5070Ti. Thats what I wants to know!
If you can't get a steady 60FPS at native 4K, don't even bother with the rest because it's all reliant on fake res and fake frames. It'll take an RTX 7090 to hit those kinds of numbers, so feel free to revisit 8K once that's out.
Yup. If you are showing 160 FPS at MFG 4x then that implies a 40 FPS base rate so your system will feel slightly worse than playing 40 FPS native
i don't believe the rtx 7090 will be able to beat 4k any time soon xD
lol yeah, probably not, because by the time that's out the next gen consoles will be out as well, which will be the baseline that developers will target, thereby raising PC hardware requirements for PC ports. But it would be interesting to revisit titles like indiana jones with new hardware.
the next gen of consoles won’t be anything special i bet 4k will still be a future feature for them instead of standard because almost everyone has 4k tvs , even the cheap polaroid ones…
We'll see. I think they're slated to release around 2028, which is like 8 years after the ps5 and xbox series s/x, so it should be a pretty big jump.
i bet the perfomance of those “new consoles” will have something like a … rtx 3070 /4070 , ps5 was basically a gtx 1080 with RTRT so…. a rtx 2070 , something like that
The ps5 pro is already 3070 level, so if I had to guess, one or both of the machines will get around RTX 4090 performance. Keep in mind that the 4090 will be six years old and two generations behind by the time they’re out, so it’s not entirely out of the realm of possibility.
3070? its far from it
ps2 to ps3 small jump , ps3 to ps4 ..even smaller , ps4 to ps5? can we even compare them?
What is your metric for comparing the consoles? Just basing on how the games look?
Also, what makes you think the ps5 pro is significantly behind the rtx 3070?
the ps3 was a rushed system , it was rumoured to get the mighty nvidia 7950 , ps4 was a basicaly a amd 7770 overcloked , the ps5 is basically a gtx 1080 with rtx … so a rtx 2070, the ps1 to ps2 THAT was a huge jump !
I see you misread my comment. I was referring to the ps5 pro being close to a 3070, not the base ps5.
As for the jump from PS2 to ps3, the CPU jump was huge while the gpu was moderate. From ps3 to ps4 the memory jump was massive. And from ps4 to ps5, the storage system got two generations ahead and the CPU is like 4x faster.
Ho sorry i didn’t see pro .. i don’t know the specs for the pro aren’t impressive , still very dependant on upscaling … i wish it wasn’t invented…
Indeed. Imagine paying out the rear end for a machine (that doesn’t even come with a disc drive!) that still produces blurry and noisy visuals and has performance issues in cpu-limited games. Waste of silicon.
True
This game has an atrocious VRAM footprint at 4k. I don't think they tweaked it any though, such a shame.
That's because instead of using a dynamic texture pool size based on your memory amount they include a slider so you can adjust it yourself otherwise it will try to allocate every last bit of VRAM on the highest settings. On my 12 GB card I lowered the Texture Pool Size to High and now it only uses about 10.1 GB with absolutely no difference in performance that I could tell other than it made the game faster because I wasn't overflowing my VRAM because originally it was allocating 11.5 GB
You'll see this in other game that set it automatically. On a 8GB card a game may use 7 GB but play the same game with the same settings on the same computer only with a new GPU with 12 GB the allocation will go to 10 GB because most memory management schemes on a GPU or system RAM see you have extra space they will allocate it instead of wasting it, at least to a point. For instance Windows memory management will see you have spare RAM and so they will allocate it to disk buffers and other temporary buffers to speed things up but in that case it doesn't show up as allocated. Unlike a lot of people I never manually set a Page file size because there hasn't been a need for that since Windows XP, just make sure you have plenty of space left on your drive (20%) and it will automatically expand the page file size as needed
Personally I like the manual allocation texture pool size because I can optimize it to use what my GPU can handle, not too much and not too little. Often times the automatic allocation misses the mark, for instance The Last of Us Part 1 when it first came out and several other Sony Studios games when they first came out, they would allocate more than they should and that led to VRAM overflow and the game hitting on system RAM which slows things down. Some games like Witcher 3 allow you to set pool sizes in one of the INI files in Config folder except they call it texture cache size
It feels the v RAM all right and then it stutters like crazy
Don't know why this game gets hate, but its fun and runs great even on my very long in the tooth 2080 TI. I am actually amazed it scales that well….. true I can't use path tracing, but regular looks ok in my book. Again, the game is surprisingly fun in spite of being tied to a movie franchise.
Gamers gonna hate. The game rules
its not about the game its about the trash upscaling
As opposed to what? Because afaik dlss is the best upscaler
ALL TYPES OF USPACCLING are pathetic ok? we have pcs developers work , we pay for their work , i don’t want to buy a game that relies solely on upscaling for “optimization” such as stalker 2 , that game is so heavy on trust with upscaling , if you disable it , the game looks as jagged as hell, the performance even in the lowest settings still has hiccups of low fps , on a “rtx 4080″ this is pathetic ! and people defend this devs , that had so much time to optimize , instead of making trailers with characters that do not appear in the game!
If people instead of defending could just make up some sense and say ” hei i don’t like unfinished products that are beyond broken and not optimized in the minimal way , that it NO MONEY FOR YOU” this devs would make the games finished ! Imagine if beton isn’t made mixing cement with sand and only sand … does that make sense ?? NO!
firstly it’s called Upscalling, secondly don’t blame the devs if you have a 4 years old GPU, just upgrade
i have a rtx 4080 (used would never give the retail money they asked for) so i know what im writing ok? just upgrade? are you rich? talk about someone who is going around accusing others of “stuff”
give me money rich privileged
you need help if you think upscaling is good ,really you need help
DLSS 4 Quality and sometimes even Balanced looks better than native TAA in almost every game because it removes the blurring you get from TAA and is noticeably crisper without being over sharpened .
I did an Override to enable DLAA in Witcher 3 (No RT because CPU threading is broken and nothing can fix that) and it looks like I'm running at 4K instead of 1440p. Witcher 3 never looked this crisp. The only anomaly I'm seeing is Ciri's shirt has some "sizzle" in motion but that could be because of the texture mod I'm using for her.
When upscaled starts looking even better than native then why is there a problem using it?
Define Native “TAA” temporal anti alias is what you consider ” native”? how can you say such thing ?? if you corrected and said “smaa” that looks better and looks far sharper i would shut my self off , but taa? hell to the no ! test Red dead redemption 2 with those types of anti alias and you will see how smaa x4/8 looks so sharp and better than any kind of upscaling , as i always say any form of upscaling is not a feature its a downgrade
Its about the use of upscaling and calling it a feature , very expensive cards that can't handle native resolutions in any form but reliable on upselling? that doesn't make sense right? everyone is tired of being exploited .