Performance or memory optimized terrain?

[player1 fanatic]

I need to improve performance, so instead of high, I'll use medium terrain settings.

But there are two options:
1) Medium (Performance-Optimized)
2) Medium (Memory-Optimized)

Which one is better for smoother gameplay if memory is not an issue (GTX 960M with 4GB VRAM)?

 

[geebo]

I would assume performance-optimized since memory isn't an issue for you. But it hasn't released in my zone yet.

I have the same graphic card. I'm curious what graphic issues are you having with the 960M? Thanks in advance.

 

[player1 fanatic]

Game works fine, no issues.

But I needed to reduce some settings to get acceptable frame rate in benchmark (that shows late game).

Started from Ultra/Ultra then customized to:
Terrain quality put to medium (performanse-optimized?)
Turned off High Resolution Geometry
Lowered Ambient Occulstion resolution to 1024x1024
Lowered shadow resolution to 4096x4096
Put MSAA to 4x

This gives around 35% performance boost and 25fps as lowest frame rate in late game benchmark, for 1080p resolution.

 

[geebo]

Wow, thanks for the insight! I'm am somewhat tech savvy but would of never knew all that to increase performance over 30% in the late game!

Did you take a big hit in graphic quality? I am hoping that I can produce fairly high graphic quality on terrain, leader screens not as important to me.

 

[player1 fanatic]

Its not really noticeable, as far as I see.

Also I haven't had any test with large water areas. Game benchmark does not have them, and I have yet to get to the point of game where I can test this.