• 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.

Rise of the Tomb Raider PC System Requirements (Official)

BasilZero

Member
At least I'll be able to play it minimum lol

By the time I get this game I'll more than likely will have a more powerful PC.

Cant wait :)!
 

Sn4ke_911

If I ever post something in Japanese which I don't understand, please BAN me.
Well i have a GTX 580 but i will still try and push my luck because i could play pretty much everything so far.
 
Brillo, the budget rig I'm building is comfortably above those requirements, so I'm hopeful I can run this at 60fps with roughly XO quality at least.
 

Kagari

Crystal Bearer
These specs are honestly lower than I expected. I just upgraded to a GTX 970 so I'm looking forward to testing it out with something newer.
 
Is there a detailed write-up on VXAO anywhere? Very interested to see how it stacks up versus HBAO+.

Is it possible to estimate the cost of VXAO compared to HBAO+ ?
The next Tomb Raider will have VXAO on PC.

Here's what I can find on the subject :
qUeMFow.png

69GOTUs.png

altho i think the top image is just regular ssao
 

Agent_4Seven

Tears of Nintendo
Crystal Dynamics has added a slew of awesome new Windows 10-specific features to the critically acclaimed game, including stunning 4K resolution support – and Rise of the Tomb Raider will be the first game ever to include cutting-edge VXAO technology, developed in partnership with NVIDIA.
Um... wha? Since F when 4K is exсlusive feature of W10? What are they smoking out there (?), looks like a really good stuff (^_^)

P.S. Pre-ordered btw. Can't wait to play the game. Probably will replay previous one before release.
 

FLAguy954

Junior Member
6azwpr7.jpg


Forward your question to Square Enix.

Rise of the Tomb Raider does include AMD technologies like Tressfx (or perhaps an heavily tweaked variant) and will in all likelyhood perform well on GCN but technically speaking this is a Geforce branded game.
It also had Nvidia's VXAO.

They are using TressFX.

I actually welcome this approach: devs using the best tech for individual aspects of a game (AMD tech via TressFX and Nvidia tech via VXAO) over going all-in with a vendor-specific tech (Gameworks).
 

donny2112

Member
On CPU and memory, I'm fine. However, my GPU is an HD7770 1GB, and the specs call for an HD7770 2GB. Do you think it'll lock me out or would it just be a lowered performance?
 

Paradicia

Member
They are using TressFX.

I actually welcome this approach: devs using the best tech for individual aspects of a game (AMD tech via TressFX and Nvidia tech via VXAO) over going all-in with a vendor-specific tech (Gameworks).

I hate how vendors are using these "exclusive" features for cards. Nvidia advertised having wave tessellation in Just Cause 3 and the water didn't even look on par to the likes of GTA V & Assassins Creed: Black Flag. It just goes to show how BS these features are and show that these "features" are just marketing lingo to get people to buy there super duper deluxe cards for one measly feature that won't affect your overall experience of the game.
 

UnrealEck

Member
Can't wait to see how the game looks with VXAO compared to the AO used on XBox One.

On CPU and memory, I'm fine. However, my GPU is an HD7770 1GB, and the specs call for an HD7770 2GB. Do you think it'll lock me out or would it just be a lowered performance?

Lower performance.
 

Kezen

Banned
Hey wait. Are you playing right now?
Is there a hidden dx12 setting somewhere? Please say yes.

That's the EVGA guy playing this at 4K.
https://twitter.com/EVGA_JacobF

No DX12 support but that was already pretty much confirmed since the press release did not mention it at all.

FXAA only as AA option is not great, but well... I guess there is always the downsampling option.
That's the only bad news, the same inconsistent AA used on Xbox One.
 

Kezen

Banned
He posted this too.

maxed out in 4K

CYC-Q6mUwAA3bLo.jpg:orig

That picture is not exactly informative hence why I ignored it.

-------------------------------------------------
I don't expect the PC version to be an improvement over the Xbone sku in absolutely every area. So it should be very easy on the hardware at 1080p, only Nvidia's VXAO could end up really taxing.
 

Kezen

Banned
Something worth stipulating : FXAA in Tomb Raider 2013 was actually MLAA, not Nvidia's FXAA.
GKf6z6c.jpg


Could be the same case here.
 

Adry9

Member
Do you guys think activating the Pure Hair or whatever it's called now will be "affordable"? It was a huge performance dip in TR 2013 but now that it was optimized for the One maybe not.
 

Kezen

Banned
Do you guys think activating the Pure Hair or whatever it's called now will be "affordable"? It was a huge performance dip in TR 2013 but now that it was optimized for the One maybe not.

You answered your own question.

It runs on Xbone, how could it be demanding ? It's in all likelyhood the same algorithm.
Tressfx 1.0 has been affordable for a while, I don't remember my 770 struggling much at all with it on and that was in 2013.
 

patapuf

Member
Those options look decent. Only FXAA (or MLAA aparently) is a tad disappointing but one can always downsample.

You answered your own question.

It runs on Xbone, how could it be demanding ? It's in all likelyhood the same algorithm.
Tressfx 1.0 has been affordable for a while, I don't remember my 770 struggling much at all with it on and that was in 2013.

Didn't they make it affordable by simulating less stuff than the original iteration? I read something about there being fewer individual strands.
 

Kezen

Banned
Those options look decent. Only FXAA (or MLAA aparently) is a tad disappointing but one can always downsample.



Didn't they make it affordable by simulating less stuff than the original iteration? I read something about there being fewer individual strands.

I distinctively remember Tressfx 1.0 featuring only one LOD, with Tressfx 2 and 3 multiple LODs are used. The strands of hair are made thicker to make up for the loss of individual strands.

iL3283p.jpg
 

Locuza

Member
Didn't they make it affordable by simulating less stuff than the original iteration? I read something about there being fewer individual strands.
TressFX 2.0 improved a lot upon the first version.

LOD, Vertex-Shader vs. Geometry Shader for extruding segments.
After all AMD claimed x2 performance improvement.
http://www.hardwareluxx.de/images/stories/newsbilder/aschilling/2013/apu14-tressfx-7.jpg

TressFX 3.0 and PureHair further improve all the things.
The hair is now clustered, with master and slave strands.
This way you can decrease the simulation cost.

They did a lot for better performance, but also improved the visuals.
So we will see where the net-result will stand.
 

patapuf

Member
I distinctively remember Tressfx 1.0 featuring only one LOD, with Tressfx 2 and 3 multiple LODs are used. The strands of hair are made thicker to make up for the loss of individual strands.

TressFX 2.0 improved a lot upon the first version.

LOD, Vertex-Shader vs. Geometry Shader for extruding segments.
After all AMD claimed x2 performance improvement.
http://www.hardwareluxx.de/images/stories/newsbilder/aschilling/2013/apu14-tressfx-7.jpg

TressFX 3.0 and PureHair further improve all the things.
The hair is now clustered, with master and slave strands.
This way you can decrease the simulation cost.

They did a lot for better performance, but also improved the visuals.
So we will see where the net-result will stand.

Thanks for the explanations guys.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
Well tomb raider 2013 was a mess when it launched and it took them some time to get it fixed, more than little time i have to say so im not super exited about them handling the port

On PC? I don't recall that. Maybe with Tress FX applied, but that was an unoptimized tech to begin with, so they would need AMD to optimize their rendering code first.

What i do recall is their work on TR for PS3 and PS4 being stellar. The PC ports can't be as bad as you claim, especially based on performance benchmarks i've seen.
 

Adry9

Member
You answered your own question.

It runs on Xbone, how could it be demanding ? It's in all likelyhood the same algorithm.
Tressfx 1.0 has been affordable for a while, I don't remember my 770 struggling much at all with it on and that was in 2013.
I remember playing TR 2013 on my 7950 and not being able to turn it on whilst maintaining 60 fps. But it looks promising now.

Well tomb raider 2013 was a mess when it launched and it took them some time to get it fixed, more than little time i have to say so im not super exited about them handling the port

My only concern is that Square Enix might have rushed them to get the game out earlier. I don't know if the port was already done or if there were plans to release it a a later date.
 

Harlequin

Member
I distinctively remember Tressfx 1.0 featuring only one LOD, with Tressfx 2 and 3 multiple LODs are used. The strands of hair are made thicker to make up for the loss of individual strands.

iL3283p.jpg

Yup. This is most likely also the reason for why the cutscenes were rendered in a lower resolution on the Xbone - they needed a higher number of hair strands for the close-up shots. Will be interesting to see how they've handled it in the PC version. From the options menu screen it doesn't look like we'll be able to customise how many strands are shown... would be nice to get the option to have the cutscenes' close-up LOD at all times during gameplay, though.
 
Cool down, guys, will still have "cutting-edge VXAO technology" whatever it means.

PS - also someone forget how nixxes fuck up initial ports of Tomb Raider (some missing effects) or Deus Ex:HR (heavy stuttering). Yeah, they fix it eventually (but much later)
I played both of those on day one at max settings and they were both fine for me.
 

dEvAnGeL

Member
On PC? I don't recall that. Maybe with Tress FX applied, but that was an unoptimized tech to begin with, so they would need AMD to optimize their rendering code first.

What i do recall is their work on TR for PS3 and PS4 being stellar. The PC ports can't be as bad as you claim, especially based on performance benchmarks i've seen.
Im talking about the game not being optimized when it came out, it ran bad on AMD but it was terrible on Nvidia, game did got fixed but it took them quite a few patches, dont know about tress fx because it looked terrible so i stuck with the regular hair
 

Locuza

Member
TR2013 was a bit buggy for PC.
For Nvidia there were problems with TressFX.
For everbody there was an Tessellation and SSAA bug, if both are activated:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sn5_F1Mg18&hd=1

TressFX looked not really good.
It was floating and very "active".

They improved and fixed the things, new driver from Nvidia came in.

Overall I would say it was a very good port, but the launch wasn't silky smooth in every regard.
 
TR 2013 was really well optimised

I'm not a tech wizard when it comes to these things, but this seems true. It ran like a charm on my humble i5 + GTX 760 setup. Smooth as butter at 1080p60, although TressFX didn't always play along nicely.

I have hopes for this port.
 
id expect the new tressfx to have less of a performance impact than nvidias voxel ambient just going off history but you never know
 
Top Bottom