PC gaming is more expensive than console, it's just the way it is.
Finally someone from PC Gaf manned up and said it.
PC gaming is more expensive than console, it's just the way it is.
According to one of the devs, those are not the official specs. The real specs will be revealed soon and will require less than these.
Finally someone from PC Gaf manned up and said it.
Finally someone from PC Gaf manned up and said it.
Finally someone from PC Gaf manned up and said it.
2 GB of VRAM won't be enough for the next generation. Even 4 GB won't cut it for those who want to go 4K. RAM is RAM - you can't fit 8 GB of data into 2 GB of RAM. It's clear as day.
4 CPU cores which have higher processing speed than 8 cores in new consoles (meaning all quad core Intel CPUs of today) will be enough however. You don't need to have 8 cores to run 8 threads, you just need to have enough processing power to run 2 threads on 1 core as fast as on 2 console CPU cores - and that's exactly what all Intel's quad cores are capable of.
Why would the specs be posted on Uplay with such detail, hardware examples at each performance level and all, only to be a mistake?
Doesn't make sense.
I imagine 4 GB will be fine if you just want to trounce consoles without necessarily going far above and beyond (IE you get a native 1080p 60 FPS on games that aren't one or either, and maybe pull 4K or at least 120 FPS on those that are), but if you want to be safe 8 GB IS best. Nevermind the late gen games, there's only so much you can do to prepare really as an 8800 GT can definitely outperform what we see on consoles period far as I can tell, but some of those games are barely acceptable on consoles as it is or the PC port automatically expects it can do more and so kills the 8800 GT anyway.2 GB of VRAM won't be enough for the next generation. Even 4 GB won't cut it for those who want to go 4K. RAM is RAM - you can't fit 8 GB of data into 2 GB of RAM. It's clear as day.
4 CPU cores which have higher processing speed than 8 cores in new consoles (meaning all quad core Intel CPUs of today) will be enough however. You don't need to have 8 cores to run 8 threads, you just need to have enough processing power to run 2 threads on 1 core as fast as on 2 console CPU cores - and that's exactly what all Intel's quad cores are capable of.
It's a stock Dell build. Can't OC it. Plus, I've been stuck with 3GB of RAM and 32bit Vista for the past six years. Going forward I'd at the very least have to buy some RAM and re-install Windows.
As for upgrading, I was thinking of going with an i5-3570k and a GTX 760. Might go up to Haswell though. Don't know how a mid-range GTX 700 series card stacks up against a high-range 600 series.
4 CPU cores which have higher processing speed than 8 cores in new consoles (meaning all quad core Intel CPUs of today) will be enough however. You don't need to have 8 cores to run 8 threads, you just need to have enough processing power to run 2 threads on 1 core as fast as on 2 console CPU cores - and that's exactly what all Intel's quad cores are capable of.
2 GB of VRAM won't be enough for the next generation. Even 4 GB won't cut it for those who want to go 4K. RAM is RAM - you can't fit 8 GB of data into 2 GB of RAM. It's clear as day.
4 CPU cores which have higher processing speed than 8 cores in new consoles (meaning all quad core Intel CPUs of today) will be enough however. You don't need to have 8 cores to run 8 threads, you just need to have enough processing power to run 2 threads on 1 core as fast as on 2 console CPU cores - and that's exactly what all Intel's quad cores are capable of.
Alright I'm getting confused. Isn't it only i7s that do this, and not i5s?
So 2GB VRAM(I have 3) won't be enough if you plan on gaming at 1920x1080 for the majority of this generation?
This would make sense in 4-5 years time, at the moment it sounds stupid, unless you mean current gen? Even then thats a bit of an over exaggeration.everyone says it .. but you can play the games in lower settings for much cheaper.
The thing console only gamers do not understand is the lower setting are still usually better than the console settings.
Can I barely run with this?
i7-3630QM @ 2.4 Ghz (3.4 Ghz with Turboboost)
nVidia GeForce GT 650M 2GB DDR3
8GB DDR3 RAM
The GT 650M DDR3 is well below the GTX 460. It holds about 60-65% of the latter's power, stock vs stock.
I wouldn't follow these lists very closely tbh. A 200 dollar mobo is overkill and prey on people with too much money and not enough sense. Asrock, Asus, and Msi make some excellent boards that support sli, cross fire that cost 70 to 80 dollars less. On top of that their recommended voltage for psus are a bit high which eat more into your budget. Which, of course you want to get a good name brand psu, but be realistic on how you want your build to be and check a couple of wattage websites. With a good psu you can get away with lower output. And don't buy OCZ anything!I am going to build a gaming PC around December. For the Ultra specifications, I assume I would need to spend $1500-$2000? I was comparing the specs to the list on http://www.logicalincrements.com/.
everyone says it .. but you can play the games in lower settings for much cheaper.
The thing console only gamers do not understand is the lower setting are still usually better than the console settings.
Of course not. Both new consoles can have as much as 5+ GBs of data which may all need to be on the 'fast' VRAM in PC split memory pools architecture. So even 4 GB may not be enough to handle straight console ports. Now, in a couple of years we'll have PC versions being improved by GPU/CPU vendors again and they'll likely to push past consoles memory requirements at that point. Also let's add 4k and 8k here. Anyone who thinks that even 6GB will be enough on PCs for the whole generation is kidding themselves. 3-4 maybe enough to handle first wave of the new gen multiplatform, in a year or two it'll be 6-8, then we'll inevitably come to 12-16. That's fucking PC people, it won't stop evolving because of consoles.So 2GB VRAM(I have 3) won't be enough if you plan on gaming at 1920x1080 for the majority of this generation?
I don't pay for PC hardware to play with console graphics. If I'd want that, I'd just buy me a console. So I don't understand why anyone would want to not go above and beyond consoles if he chooses to go with PC - that's like the whole point of this.I imagine 4 GB will be fine if you just want to trounce consoles without necessarily going far above and beyond (IE you get a native 1080p 60 FPS on games that aren't one or either, and maybe pull 4K or at least 120 FPS on those that are), but if you want to be safe 8 GB IS best. Nevermind the late gen games, there's only so much you can do to prepare really as an 8800 GT can definitely outperform what we see on consoles period far as I can tell, but some of those games are barely acceptable on consoles as it is or the PC port automatically expects it can do more and so kills the 8800 GT anyway.
As was said already, you can run as many threads on one core as you like. Generally a one core which runs two threads at the same speed as the same two threads are ran on two other cores is better because it'll run just one thread twice as fast and two threads at the same speed. All todays i5s and i7s have cores which are more than twice as fast as Jaguar cores of new consoles. Thus a quad core i5 should be just fine at running new consoles CPU code no matter of how much threads it consists.Alright I'm getting confused. Isn't it only i7s that do this, and not i5s?
Not so stealth brag post.My 5 best PC's STILL kick this games' asses spec requirements!
My "lowest powered modern gaming PC" is:
Core i5 2500k OC@4.7GHz (new OC, cooled with Corsair Hydro H100i water cooler, Shin Etsu paste)
SLI EVGA GTX 690's (8GB of VRAM btw, for games that support SLI)
Asus P8Z77-V Motherboard
32GBDDR3 GSkill ARES RAM @2400
LG Blu-Ray Writer
3x 2TB WD Blue 7200rpm 6Gb HDD
1x Corsair Force 256GB SSD
850watt Seasonic X PSU
I wouldn't follow these lists very closely tbh. A 200 dollar mobo is overkill and prey on people with too much money and not enough sense. Asrock, Asus, and Msi make some excellent boards that support sli, cross fire that cost 70 to 80 dollars less. On top of that their recommended voltage for psus are a bit high which eat more into your budget. Which, of course you want to get a good name brand psu, but be realistic on how you want your build to be and check a couple of wattage websites. With a good psu you can get away with lower output. And don't buy OCZ anything!
Edit:
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/itsthenew/saved/2vZE
Here's a Sub 1500 build with a 4gb 770 card, 16 gigs of ram, i7, win 8 and quality parts. For 60 dollars more you could get an overclockable CPU and a CPU cooler if you need it.
Of course not. Both new consoles can have as much as 5+ GBs of data which may all need to be on the 'fast' VRAM in PC split memory pools architecture. So even 4 GB may not be enough to handle straight console ports. Now, in a couple of years we'll have PC versions being improved by GPU/CPU vendors again and they'll likely to push past consoles memory requirements at that point. Also let's add 4k and 8k here. Anyone who thinks that even 6GB will be enough on PCs for the whole generation is kidding themselves. 3-4 maybe enough to handle first wave of the new gen multiplatform, in a year or two it'll be 6-8, then we'll inevitably come to 12-16. That's fucking PC people, it won't stop evolving because of consoles.
I see. Thank yo for the info. WIll definitely ask around here when I am about to build my PC in a month or so.
My 5 best PC's STILL kick this games' asses spec requirements!
My "lowest powered modern gaming PC" is:
Core i5 2500k OC@4.7GHz (new OC, cooled with Corsair Hydro H100i water cooler, Shin Etsu paste)
SLI EVGA GTX 690's (8GB of VRAM btw, for games that support SLI)
Asus P8Z77-V Motherboard
32GBDDR3 GSkill ARES RAM @2400
LG Blu-Ray Writer
3x 2TB WD Blue 7200rpm 6Gb HDD
1x Corsair Force 256GB SSD
850watt Seasonic X PSU
You can't add VRAM in SLI.
My 5 best PC's STILL kick this games' asses spec requirements!
My "lowest powered modern gaming PC" is:
Core i5 2500k OC@4.7GHz (new OC, cooled with Corsair Hydro H100i water cooler, Shin Etsu paste)
SLI EVGA GTX 690's (8GB of VRAM btw, for games that support SLI)
Asus P8Z77-V Motherboard
32GBDDR3 GSkill ARES RAM @2400
LG Blu-Ray Writer
3x 2TB WD Blue 7200rpm 6Gb HDD
1x Corsair Force 256GB SSD
850watt Seasonic X PSU
gtx 690's only have 2gb of effective ram right?
Sweet lord.. you have to list your top 4 if you're going to tease us like that. I have to see them.My 5 best PC's STILL kick this games' asses spec requirements!
My "lowest powered modern gaming PC" is:
Core i5 2500k OC@4.7GHz (new OC, cooled with Corsair Hydro H100i water cooler, Shin Etsu paste)
SLI EVGA GTX 690's (8GB of VRAM btw, for games that support SLI)
Asus P8Z77-V Motherboard
32GBDDR3 GSkill ARES RAM @2400
LG Blu-Ray Writer
3x 2TB WD Blue 7200rpm 6Gb HDD
1x Corsair Force 256GB SSD
850watt Seasonic X PSU
SLI (AFR specifically) mirrors memory. You only have 2GB framebuffer for your games.
It's about time my Core 2 Duo no longer passes the minimum requirement, time for upgrade. Glad I got the Wii U to tie me over before I build a new PC.
How in the hell is a PC with two 690s your lowest? Are you saying the 690 sli PC is the lowest maybe because of the CPU? i believe two 690s beat three titans.My 5 best PC's STILL kick this games' asses spec requirements!
My "lowest powered modern gaming PC" is:
Core i5 2500k OC@4.7GHz (new OC, cooled with Corsair Hydro H100i water cooler, Shin Etsu paste)
SLI EVGA GTX 690's (8GB of VRAM btw, for games that support SLI)
Asus P8Z77-V Motherboard
32GBDDR3 GSkill ARES RAM @2400
LG Blu-Ray Writer
3x 2TB WD Blue 7200rpm 6Gb HDD
1x Corsair Force 256GB SSD
850watt Seasonic X PSU