Rockstar says update your graphics drivers to fix Red Dead Redemption 2's PC problems

midian182

TechSpot Editor
Staff member

The internet is filled with user reports of RDR2 not launching and, even when it does, having sub-par performance. Addressing these complaints, Rockstar has created a ‘PC General Troubleshooting’ document for the game, which it claims can help resolve the launching and crashing issues.

The first suggestion is for Nvidia and AMD card owners to update their graphics drivers to the latest versions. Both companies released their new drivers optimized for RDR2 on Monday, so it stands to reason that many people won't haven’t updated yet -- Download: GeForce Drivers 441.12 and Radeon Adrenalin 19.11.1.

Other potential solutions include disabling any antivirus software running on a PC, updating the Rockstar Games Launcher (a new update is available), and clearing local Rockstar Games Launcher profile details.

Even if these actions allow the game to launch, many players are still experiencing stuttering and frame rate issues. RDR2 demands a monstrous rig to play at the highest settings; a RTX 2080 Ti can’t run it at 60 fps@4K with the graphics pushed up to Ultra.

If you haven’t bought Red Dead Redemption 2’s PC version yet, it might be sensible to wait until Rockstar issues a patch that addresses its problems.

In related news, Nvidia confirmed this week that the game doesn’t support real-time ray tracing. We’ve also seen several mods, including one that turns Arthur Morgan into the Joker.

Permalink to story.

 

Uncle Al

TS Evangelist
The issue with out of date drivers has existed since the first video cards appeared. It would seem to be common knowledge now days but with the number of "new" users entering the market each year it will continue, although you would think the video card makers would be a little more creative in their solutions BEFORE releasing the product .....
 
  • Like
Reactions: treetops
Other potential solutions include disabling any antivirus software running on a PC, updating the Rockstar Games Launcher (a new update is available), and clearing local Rockstar Games Launcher profile details.
I'm sorry, but What the Cornelius Fudge?!? Any issue where disabling your antivirus starter will supposedly fix it should be immediately tossed out a 10-story window. There's no excuse for that in this day & age.
 

TomSEA

TechSpot Chancellor
I pre-ordered the game and anxiously waiting to play it. But I'll wait another 2-3 days because I know how these big-game launches go. Let someone else find all the initial bugs that need to be fixed before getting a stable game play.
 

TomSEA

TechSpot Chancellor
I'm sorry, but What the Cornelius Fudge?!? Any issue where disabling your antivirus starter will supposedly fix it should be immediately tossed out a 10-story window. There's no excuse for that in this day & age.
Antivirus programs - especially Norton and McAffee - are notorious for screwing up programs, not just games. I consider them more insidious than any virus I could get because of their takeover of the registry.

Warning people to turn off their antivirus program goes with the territory of any big Triple-A game release and is not indicative of "bad game code."
 
  • Like
Reactions: treetops

IAMTHESTIG

TS Evangelist
If you're running anti-virus software on your PC, you shouldn't be using a PC.

That's a rough start for RDR2, but hopefully they'll get it all sorted out here in the next few weeks. I'll probably pick it up on a decent Steam sale.
 
Antivirus programs - especially Norton and McAffee - are notorious for screwing up programs, not just games. I consider them more insidious than any virus I could get because of their takeover of the registry.

Warning people to turn off their antivirus program goes with the territory of any big Triple-A game release and is not indicative of "bad game code."
Not every AV program is as invasive. But regardless of that, the purpose of AV software is to protect your PC from intrusion via Internet-based virusse...so why the crap should you have to turn off said protection in order to get a game that's connected to the Internet via its launcher to run on your PC? That'd be like LG or Samsung saying, "Make sure your WiFi doesn't have a password, or our newest smart TV won't be able to connect to your wireless network".
 

IAMTHESTIG

TS Evangelist
That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard, especially with all the holes windows defender has.
Heh... you're one of "them".

Unless your PC is fully exposed to the internet (and why would it be?), you don't need AV protection if you know what to avoid. I've never ran AV protection in the over 20 years of daily PC use in Windows and I've never had a virus or malware.

So if you're going to infected websites and opening infected emails, then sure you need AV protection - further proving my point that you shouldn't be using a PC because you don't know what the hell you are doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TomSEA

Manya3084

TS Booster
Can't get it to run on my HTPC. My main rig freaks out whenever I try and change graphics settings. You'd think with all the lines of coke the devs have been supplied, they'd be on the ball...
 

Evernessince

地獄らしい人間動物園
AMD cards are hardest hit with horrible frametimes.
Source: Gamers Nexus
Let me just start by linking the video you are referring to since you failed to do so


From what I see, the 5700 XT is beating the 1080 Ti

10:28 in the video

I know Nvidia doesn't care about the performance of it's older cards but that is just embarrassing. As a 1080 Ti owner I hope Nvidia fixes this and I really hope this is the only game where it is performing so poorly. Even the base 5700 gets close to the 1080 ti in this game.

FYI at no point did he say "AMD cards are hardest hit with horrible frametimes.", this is just a plain misleading statement. Given the 5700 and 5700 XT's performance that much is plain to see. Now at 15:52, he does point out the 390Xs and RX 580s poor performance at 1080p but then again he specifically stated multiple times throughout the video that even lower performance cards were removed for the charts to condense them. You can view even slower card's performance at 9:04. In addition, no GTX 1060 was tested. Those two AMD card don't appear to be under performing. In fact they may be slightly over performing given they tie the 980 Ti.

This concludes today's segment of debunking false or misleading statements on techspot.



 

hahahanoobs

TS Evangelist
Except that they didnt actually say that and actually were impressed with how close the 5700xt was to the 2070 super and how the 5700 somehow was matching the 1080ti.
You're right, they didn't say it, the chart did. The 5700 and 5700XT 1% and .1% were 35fps vs 50fps on the 2070S. Even the 2060S was higher than both AMD cards. You also used 1080p results at 10:28, not 1440p. Or are the 5700 and 5700XT 1080p only cards?

Time: 14:35
 
Last edited:

Christiaaan

TS Enthusiast
Heh... you're one of "them".

Unless your PC is fully exposed to the internet (and why would it be?), you don't need AV protection if you know what to avoid. I've never ran AV protection in the over 20 years of daily PC use in Windows and I've never had a virus or malware.

So if you're going to infected websites and opening infected emails, then sure you need AV protection - further proving my point that you shouldn't be using a PC because you don't know what the hell you are doing.
So you are basically just relying on your routers firewall? Yeah that's smart.
 

IAMTHESTIG

TS Evangelist
So you are basically just relying on your routers firewall? Yeah that's smart.
Correct. Besides, neither the router or firewall really have anything to do with modern viruses/malware. That pretty much all comes down to the software on the PC and the user behind it. It's the user and/or holes in the software that allow and technically request the malware to come in.
 
You're right, they didn't say it, the chart did. The 5700 and 5700XT 1% and .1% were 35fps vs 50fps on the 2070S. Even the 2060S was higher than both AMD cards. You also used 1080p results at 10:28, not 1440p. Or are the 5700 and 5700XT 1080p only cards?

Time: 14:35
Yup. The 0.1% FTs are poor for the Navi GPUs though the 1% times are OK. Note that the UV/OC Vega 56 does not have a shortage of 1% or 0.1% performance, I wonder then if this is a Navi driver issue which can be fixed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charles Olson

jbc029

TS Booster
You're right, they didn't say it, the chart did. The 5700 and 5700XT 1% and .1% were 35fps vs 50fps on the 2070S. Even the 2060S was higher than both AMD cards. You also used 1080p results at 10:28, not 1440p. Or are the 5700 and 5700XT 1080p only cards?

Time: 14:35
I appreciate that at that 14:35 timestamp, you hear Steve talking about how, normally, the 5700XT isn't indistinguishable from the 2070 Super and hopefully Nvidia can fix this in future driver updates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evernessince

Evernessince

地獄らしい人間動物園
You're right, they didn't say it, the chart did. The 5700 and 5700XT 1% and .1% were 35fps vs 50fps on the 2070S. Even the 2060S was higher than both AMD cards. You also used 1080p results at 10:28, not 1440p. Or are the 5700 and 5700XT 1080p only cards?

Time: 14:35
1. The 2060 Super looses to the RX 5700 XT at 1440p at the indicated 14:35 timestamp. It nets 44.2 1% lows while the RX 5700 XT gets 48.4 1% lows. In addition the 2060 Super gets an average of 65.8 FPS while the 5700 XT gets 76.7. The only category the 2060 super wins in is 0.1% lows and that's 39.8 vs 35.9. Both cards cost the same price so saying " Even the 2060S was higher than both AMD cards" is like saying "geez wiz Nvidia is actually competing at the same price?!". If the 5700 XT is beating a 1080 ti and scraping elbows with a 2070 super, that's it outpunching it's weightclass.

2. In this game, both the 2060 Super or 5700 XT dip under 60 FPS a fair amount at 1440p. Even if you don't have a 144 Hz monitor, it makes sense to lower the settings to get more frames on those cards. I can say I definitely wouldn't be running it on high with my 1080 Ti. Lowering those options may remove whatever bottleneck was keeping the 5700 and 5700 XT's score artificially low without decreasing resolution.

3. The 0.1% and 1% lows are more an anomaly for the 5700 and 5700 XT at 1440p. You don't see this issue at all at 1080p and you see that every card has it, including Nvidia's of course, at 4K.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Charles Olson