I haven’t heard many comments about this, so I’m wondering what people think about it? Personally, I thought the game looked pretty enough before, but now it looks completely gorgeous! And no performance loss either.
1 Like
Yes, this looks amazing and it is a great release. I think that I lost some frames with 1.4.1 though (it is hard to tell as other graphical settings might have changed). With a GTX 1080 and an i7-6700k, I manage to run the game at ultra settings with smaa 1x anti-aliasing, all lods set to the maximum and shadows lowered to “very high”: for the most part (except at night in cities) it runs smooth enough at a constant 30 fps (I have locked the game to this framerate and use a custom user.cfg file to balance threads on cpu cores). I also noticed that when you change the fov, graphical settings revert to high since patch 1.4 (in my case).
I have an FX8350 and a GTX 970 and I get 50-65 FPs in wilderness, and about 25 to 50 in towns depending on the location. I have textures and water at very high and the rest at high or medium. But I only have Lod at about 40%. I too use 1x anti-aliasing.
The impact of “ultra settings” on performance is huge, but Warhorse does inform us about that. I think that the greatest difference (in visuals) is when you look far away. Meteo/daytime effects and lights are also vastly improved. On the downside I believe that ultra settings may have some (bad) effects on ai too, probably due to the lack of resources (I am not 100% sure about that though). What are your fov and resolution?
Do you have som pics to show US the HD textures? And also Will those HD textures and sounds be released on consoles?
What about VRAM usage?
Exactly what about vram usage, I doubt with 4gb I’ll be able to use
I didn’t have any FPS drops after installing an HD pack, but it’s been a while since I played this game because of some bugs that weren’t letting me to proceed, so after I installed an HD Textures - nothing really changed for me. It would be nice if someone could make a comparisson video about it. (Maybe there’s one already, I should check)
UPD, yeah, here’s the one. As I’ve said - the changes are there, but they are not too significant.
1 Like
In 1080p the visual improvement is negligible with HD textures. Makes me want to upgrade to 4k screen. Bit I’m afraid my old 980ti would be spinning fans like crazy 
Guys what’s vram usage ? Max
I don’t remember where exactly, but I read somewhere (second hand) that a GTX 1080 was required for hd textures: this would mean 8 Gb vram and that seems plausible to me. I find that HD textures are a great improvement when you are looking at objects placed near where you stand. I will try to upload a few comparative screenshots when I have time, but there must already be plenty of them… Increasing the resolution brings -I think- the biggest visual improvement, even without a 4k screen (in my case 4k is out of reach due to framerate): I use Nvidia DSR (dynamic super resolution) technology to play at 1440p on my 1080p screen and it makes a real difference.
Edit: if Largejack uses HD textures with a GTX 970, this means that it works with 4 Gb VRAM of course.
I’m running an EVGA GTX 970 and using the HD Texture pack. There’s no performance degradation on my end.
If anything, the game seems to perform better with the new textures for me.
This is great: what are your settings otherwise?
If you use Nvidia dsr technology at 1440p, I am quite sure that your fans will stay at a reasonable speed 
Anialiasing-Off (I use Nvidia FXAA)
Object Quality-High
Game Effects-Low
Lighting-Medium
Particles-Medium
Physics-Low
Post Processing-Low
Shader-Low
Shadows-Low
Textures-Very High
Water-Low
Volume Effects Detail-Medium
Vegetation Detail-Low
SLIDERS
Object Distance-3/4
LOD Distance-1/2
Vegetation Draw Distance-1/2
Motion Blur-Off
These are my settings prior to installing the HD Textures and the game still runs good.
I haven’t had a chance to see if I can increase any of the settings yet.
Seems stupid to me that they don’t tell us the spec we need to use hd textures, they should tell us what each texture setting requires.
1 Like
I am running 4k with all ULTRA HIGH + HD TEX -AA (NONE) and the visuals are stunning.
Games like Fallout 4 and skyrim do not come close in visuals with or without 100s of visual mods on them.
1 Like
Bethesda engine is not for stunning visuals, it’s for huge world with hundreds of activities, different outcomes and the easies mod implementation to date. This is the worst comparison choice. You migh should compare it to Witcher 2 or 3 AND a bit of Dark Messiah game (which is very old, but i find KCD resembling it a lot)
1 Like
If you still want pictures the best I could find is from the german “Game Star”. Just scroll down a bit. You´ll find a picture with a slider and you can see a big difference between HD and non HD. https://www.gamestar.de/artikel/kingdom-come-deliverance-verdiente-absolution,3328127.html
I have the GTX980 and everything on very high. only light and particles are on high. The sliders for distance etc. are ca. 3/4 to the right. Before I had between 40 and 50 fps out of town and riding through Rattaje I had a drop to 30 fps. Now the game runs smoother - I don´t know the actual fps because i turned id of but I would say 50 - 60 fps. But the drop got bigger. It´s actually more a lag than a drop. While riding through Rataje I have ca. 30 - 40 fps but when I see textures loding in the distance it goes down to 10- 20 fps but just for half a second. Then they are back up again.