Red Dead Redemption PC Tech Review: The Best Way to Play the Cold Classic

Rockstar’s Red Dead Redemption has finally arrived on PC after being ported by British studio Double Eleven – but was it worth the 14-year wait? We tested the game extensively to find out, looking at how much RDR improves on the original console version and even how it performs on retro PCs.

Considering how much time has passed since the original release, an important aspect of this PC version is preservation. After all, the PC is a timeless platform where games can live forever, but first impressions of this port aren’t great. There are several layers of DRM here, requiring both a Steam login and a Rockstar launcher login, which is an odd requirement since the port doesn’t include the original multiplayer mode on either platform. I’m sure Steam will continue into the future, but the Rockstar launcher? I’m not so sure, and it complicates the game’s legacy.

Apart from this complaint, the game’s technical execution is of a high standard. There’s a good range of graphics options and a very fast shader pre-compilation stage – yes, it’s a DirectX 12 version. I think DX12 is perhaps too big for a game originally built for DX9, but there are no problems with shader compilation when playing, and the game usually runs smoothly.

Mouse and keyboard controls are generally good here as well, although the game is set up so that speeding up on foot or on horseback requires a quick press of the sprint button. This sprint button is shifted by default, so the first time you play the game you’ll likely get a pop-up with the ancient sticky keys – and I feel like it would make sense here to rebind the key or set it to work when held down rather than pressed . You can rebind the key yourself or disable the Sticky Keys feature in Windows, but this is still a strange solution. Aiming with the mouse is at least significantly better than the console equivalent, and I found it easy to aim and land shots that I would have struggled with on a controller.

The game’s graphical capabilities are the best aspect of this port, supporting custom resolutions, multiple aspect ratios, and frame rates up to 144fps. (There is a mod available that allows you to completely unlock the framerate, so I think it should be in the game by default – even if it comes with a warning that higher settings are untested and may cause problems.) Playing in Ultra Wide mode – it’s gorgeous, although cutscenes are rendered in 16:9 – understandable given the significant animation overhaul that will require wider aspect ratios. You can also play in 4:3, and the game’s aesthetic pairs well with a CRT if you have one handy. 8K is also possible, although given the limited resolution of textures and models, this largely only benefits from anti-aliasing.

In addition, there is a dynamic resolution system, multiple scaling options, frame generation and scalability to reduce settings from ultra to improve performance on older systems. We’ll talk about performance later, but almost any modern CPU and GPU can run this game at maximum without too much trouble. This means that the game is significantly better than the original console version, not only in terms of frame rate and resolution, but also in terms of draw distance. There are relatively few LOD transitions and much less pop-in, which is a smart choice given the rich CPU/GPU resources on most PCs. The only obvious place for further improvement is in the local shadow LODs with spot or spotlights similar to the console version, but that’s a minor quibble.

The port team has also done a great job of improving shadow quality, reducing artifacts, greater temporal stability, and better filtering, including strengthening contact shadows for a softer, more realistic look if you prefer. There are also higher quality post-processing effects, including image blur.

In terms of performance, the game runs at 4K 60fps on the low-end RTX 4060, while a PC with an RTX 4090 can run the game at native 8K resolution with DLAA at 80-110fps. The game is actually more limited by the CPU at ultra settings given the extremely long draw distance, so the modest Ryzen 5 3600 can sometimes drop below 60fps in cities where object density is highest. Frame rates are around 100fps in rural areas, and there’s always the option to reduce the LOD range below ultra or enable frame generation to keep frame rates consistently high. High performance processors such as Ryzen 7 9800X3D or 7800X3D run at frame rates more than double that of the Ryzen 5 3600, meaning an easy 120 fps in cities and over 200 in open areas.

Considering how well this game runs on modern hardware and how outdated it is from a technical standpoint, I thought it would be interesting to test it on PC hardware available around the same time as the original console version in 2010. I started with a GTX 570 with DirectX 12 support, but that doesn’t meet the game’s (arbitrary) 2GB framebuffer limit. I tried the GTX 670 next, but the Core 2 Duo E6600 took six minutes to get to the menus and another three minutes to get into the game, with disastrous frame rates. Upgrading to a Core 2 Quad Q6600 provided fast menus, but the game still struggled to provide any semblance of smoothness at 720p 30fps, with huge frame time spikes.

The CPU here is clearly lagging compared to console hardware of the same period, but perhaps this can be explained by too little system memory (4GB), too low PCIe speeds, or perhaps the older GPU just doesn’t like the modern DX12 implementation. Either way, while Red Dead Redemption came out on Xbox 360 and PS3, the PC port simply doesn’t cut it on modern PC hardware.

There are a few issues that you’ll notice on more modern hardware as well. The color rendering in the game is different from the console version, even though it is set to a limited color range like the console version, and I don’t understand why. Cutscenes on PC are also missing some sunlight and shadows, which seems like an obvious bug. The HDR implementation is also reported to be quite poor – perhaps this is a similar implementation of SDR in an HDR container that we saw in RDR2.

Considering it’s been 14 years, it’s also a little surprising to learn that the game costs $50. However, this relatively high asking price seems entirely justified considering the remaster hits the mark in terms of performance and graphical additions. The game goes beyond the console version and offers some good options for both high-end and low-end PC hardware. However, using Rockstar’s launcher seems like an unnecessary hurdle and a complication for future preservation efforts. There are also a few bugs that I hope will be fixed by the Double Eleven team. However, overall this is the best version of the game available and is worth playing if you love the series and/or missed the original release back in the day.