maneil99
Member
880 will be out by the end of the year or early next year so yea I expect it soon? I expect info at Computex.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Watch Dogs specs revealed - 8 core CPU recommended
- Thread starter pa22word
- Start date
880 will be out by the end of the year or early next year so yea I expect it soon? I expect info at Computex.
Here's Hoping 6-8Gb vram.
It's pretty much guaranteed since the 780Ti now comes with 6Gb
and the 800M series in current laptops have 6gb-8gb.
maneil99
Member
Yea I think 6gb is locked assuming they use the same bus size. Fingers crossed its GM110 instead of GM104. Either way will be faster then the 780 Ti.
Wait. Your Acid Titan... From steam. I hate you.
Windom Earle
Member
Wut?
dr_rus
Member
Prepare yourself for disappointment.
There won't be any consumer cards info until they'll be ready to sell the cards.
Let him believe, he's been sure it's coming out soon for ages.
Papacheeks
Banned
Know this is random, but I want to know if I'm ok with my current setup to run the game.
i5 2500k OC to 4.2ghz, 8 gb of 1333 at 7,7,7-21 timings. GTX 770 2GB OC edition, SAMSUNG 500GB ssd?
M y processor will be upgraded next year as the video card and ssd were this years, waiting for new maxwell line in 2015.
Can you run it still says my CPU is not recommended. But it doesn't take the Over Clock into consideration, they just show stock speed on their site which is 3.3ghz.
If I could get a confirmation that my current setup is fine to flay it at medium maybe close to high @ 1080p. Then I'll get pc version, if not looks like PS4 version for me.
i5 2500k OC to 4.2ghz, 8 gb of 1333 at 7,7,7-21 timings. GTX 770 2GB OC edition, SAMSUNG 500GB ssd?
M y processor will be upgraded next year as the video card and ssd were this years, waiting for new maxwell line in 2015.
Can you run it still says my CPU is not recommended. But it doesn't take the Over Clock into consideration, they just show stock speed on their site which is 3.3ghz.
If I could get a confirmation that my current setup is fine to flay it at medium maybe close to high @ 1080p. Then I'll get pc version, if not looks like PS4 version for me.
The system requirement is incorrect as there is no 8 core intel CPU. your rig should run the game fine on high settings @ 1080P
Brute forcing performance but I think people are just pissed that we are moving forward with specs and it's about time.
I've been telling people that have been building PCs last year that they shouldn't be using i5s and should be getting newer i7s, but everyone was saying that I was wrong and now here we are.
Maybe I was doing something wrong, then? Is there much of a performance difference between 4.0 and 4.5?
Wait until the game actually launches. i5s are going to have no issues. They're still the right choice for gaming.
Papacheeks
Banned
You are wrong because outside of RTS GAMES, no game currently even taxes the cpu, multithreaded games have still not come to fruition.
Exceptions maybe might be Metro:Last light, I think that taxes cpu and gpu (Not 100% sure on that).
Watch Dogs has a lot of Physx based effects going on with weather conditions, water, and cloth. But those will all be mostly handled by gpu, and npc's/AI by cpu.
That's how it's been anyway.
This just screams like most Assassins Creed games for PC, an UN-optimized port.
If my old GTX 570 was able to handle almost every game up till now, including the Un-optimized Titanfall, then it shows me Ubisoft isn't doing a great job on PC.
If you got look at BF4 and BF3 at ars tehcnica, GURU3D, or tomshardware, you'll see very little difference in FPS between CPU's.
It's still is right now a GPU based world in the PC arena. Until more developer's off load AI,NPC's among other's onto CPU's.
Papacheeks
Banned
Better ask yourself, what will Division/ArkhamKnight/AC Unity require.
WD is tame, it is still a crossgen game that had built-in capability to be scaled down to X360/PS3 level of hardware..
Unreal Engine is usually sourced well, and runs fairly optimized.
This is just from my experience playing previous unreal 3 based games though.
So could be a whole different ball game with Unreal Engine 4.
If sure the game will run I just doubt that it will run at max with proper 60fps and 1080 resolution, which is proper PC gaming.
60fps might've been a while ago, not any more. 120Hz+ is 'proper' PC gaming if you want to try and throw around that tag.
Anyway, I can't imagine anything other than an i5 being able to handle it all fine and achieve those levels. It's just more bollocks system requirements that'll end up being a load of guff.
lol i cringed
Pestilence11
Member
Maybe in the 1% club, especially going forward.
Oh man I didn't realize I was dealing with some one in the 120 club. My apologize sire.
'Anyway, I can't imagine anything other than an i5 being able to handle it all fine and achieve those levels.'
wat?
You're right it's still fairly niche now but like all new technologies it'll soon filter down to more reasonable price points.
I don't have a 120Hz panel.
Yeah I just re-read what I wrote. I meant to write something along the lines of I'd be surprised if an i5 couldn't produce those results. Brain fart moment.
It's Ubisoft, of course it's a shit pc port.
You are still wrong. If the FX-8350 is in recommended specs than an i5 will run it fine. It doesn't matter how heavily threaded it is. i5 and i7s use the same core (and core count), the difference being that i7s have hyperthreading (which wouldn't even give remotely the same performance gain as an actual additional core)
Seriously though this line of thinking needs to change with respect to where AMD and Intel processors are right now. At best, AMD's focus on parallelization over IPC will not make them pull ahead, It's merely making a wide gap a bit smaller.
No the difference is that a physical core cannot actually be split up any further without the overhead that hyperthreading entails. A physical core can only process one thing at a time so 'logical' threads are constantly switched back and forth, each being given time slots to use that core so to speak. Programatically 8 logical cores is actually very different from 8 physical cores.
A little off topic but both Nvidia AND AMD need to come out with their next gen cards. Both of these companies have been using largely the same goddamn architectures (with little evolution) for two+ years!
UnrealEck
Member
Better ask yourself, what will Division/ArkhamKnight/AC Unity require.
Er, similar to console specs? Perhaps a little higher would be a fair guess since those games will be running on the consoles too.
I wouldn't bet on similar. Ports of 360 and PS3 games required far more than those specs, the same will happen with current gen games.
Wow I think your part of the problem. I only upgrade after 4 years. Messing with settings won't kill you
Console specs does not equal PC Specs
ricardo_sousa11
Member
Yup...
prag16
Banned
Ps360 had arcane architectures. Not really the case this time. We shouldn't see as big of a gap.
UnrealEck
Member
They're comparable as I said. Seems we're about to go down the whole console optimisation and coding to the metal route with this subject.
I wouldn't bet on the same happening with current gen games.
Not only that but it's not down solely to the hardware.
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
No, what you described is preemptive multitasking. That isn't how Hyperthreading works.
Every Intel CPU since the original Pentium does superscalar execution. Meaning it can execute more than one instruction per clock cycle (IIRC Haswell can do 4). Typical instruction-level parallelism is much lower than 4 on average. (And in many cases a thread may have zero instructions ready to go, AKA it's stalled.) Meaning that in the average clock cycle, the CPU is only issuing a fraction of the instructions it could theoretically handle. Hyperthreading allows the CPU to execute instructions from two threads at the same time, to better fill up the execution resources that the CPU has available.
e.g. Thread A has 1 instruction ready to be executed this cycle. Thread B has 2 ready to be executed. With Hyperthreading, the CPU can grab all 3 instructions from both threads and execute them in the same cycle, whereas without Hyperthreading it would only be able to grab instructions from a single thread.
BTW just about every multi-threaded benchmark I've seen shows 3770k and 4770k beating AMD's 6 and 8-core CPUs.
I'm sure they'd love to but their suppliers aren't ready.
It'll be perfectly fine. It could easily outperform an 8350, just depends on how they tailor the game. Even in an N threaded game like Civ V an i5 can beat an 8350 even before overclocking
Dre_G_Writer
Member
there must be a typo on the specs.
Eek. My gaming PC has an i5-3570K, and being my first Intel PC after AMD for years, it felt like a hefty purchase. Bummer if it's getting long in the tooth already.
nkarafo
Member
This.
Just never take this stupid company seriously. Lets take a look at the minimum requirements for South Park: Stick Of Truth, shall we?
Core 2 Duo E4700 2.6GHz
GeForce GT 320 or Radeon HD 3830
Well, in reality, this game runs fine on a Pentium 4 3.0Ghz, with an ancient Geforce card that i'm sure its a bit inferior than the 7800 (i think its the 8600 something). Even on higher resolutions this game is pretty playable on that rig.
Its complete bullshit!!!
We got PC newbies running around like headless chickens for the past week because of these redic specs.
I can guarantee you, you will see possibly at most a ~3% difference in performance between your i5 and i7 counterpart, more likely non at all.
Will depend mostly on GPU, like most games now.
My 780 GTX, and i5 3570k, will run Watchdog at 1440P at atleast 45fps
I know. The severe delay of high yield, 20 nm chips is frustrating :/.
I could just see at the rate nvidia is moving with AMD following suit, that the 880 will release at a $1000 price point. They just keep stacking the prices.
And the Titan 2 releasing at 1500
and then the Titan Z2, releasing at 4000
KevKevinator
Neo Member
Have an FX-8350 and a 660 Ti, phew.
You're still wrong.
Pjsprojects
Member
so is my i5 2500k/GTX580/16GB rig going to run this bitch at 60fps?
Depends on your resolution. Might have to drop a setting or two, but I'd be surprised if you couldn't get it to 60 with most if not all settings at high/max.
That being said, it could also be terribly optimized and be impossible to run on anything under a Titan at 60 fps. We really don't know.
Ive got an i7-3770k and a ASUS Rog 7970 Matrix Platinum and 16gb ram - so well see how it works..
Assassins Creed 3 was running sometimes like 20 fps since the last patch - (AC 4 worked rather well with 40-60 fps (Everything on Ultra)) and that besides my rig was definitley over the Recommendet spec.
Ubisoft and ports... is like Valve and Releasedates...
Assassins Creed 3 was running sometimes like 20 fps since the last patch - (AC 4 worked rather well with 40-60 fps (Everything on Ultra)) and that besides my rig was definitley over the Recommendet spec.
Ubisoft and ports... is like Valve and Releasedates...
That and these days, they just don't do HUD/option adjustments for a mouse & keyboard.
With your lord and savior Blood Dragon being the exception?[/dogmajesuspic]