• 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.

Call of Duty: Ghosts on PC demands 6GB of RAM.. yet it uses <2GB

Prophet Steve

Member
Sep 16, 2009
12,968
0
0
Netherlands
I am not going to stand here and defend IW

Whether you think it needs 6GB of ram or not is not actually the point..

The problem is the steam forums is full of people saying "OMG I cant run the game" Cry Cry Cry

These are the same people that have chosen to ignore the min spec requirements that have been made public for over a month...

/sympathy off!
Well, it is reasonable to expect you can run the game well with 4GB of RAM. Normally I do not bother watching system requirements. Also there also is only one type of specifications named on the Steam page and normally when you do not meet the minimum requirements it does not lock you out of the game.

It's silly to artificially require the game to need 6GB of RAM, yet only use 2. However, if you're running a gaming PC and have less than 6GB of RAM these days, you're doing it wrong.
It is not that bad, especially when there are barely any 64 bit executabled available for games.
 

Riggs

Banned
Dec 29, 2011
9,723
0
0
Tampa, Florida
I'm a breath away from ebaying my 680 and putting the money towards a 290x or 780ti. Then I remember new consoles are coming and I want to have a good reason to play them, so maybe I'll just enjoy console versions for a bit.
Don't feel bad if you end up doing the console thing for a bit .... I don't think its worth upgrading right now for us. Thinking of waiting until 800 series myself, about to drop at least $300 or $400 on a new monitor so I can't go crazy.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,543
1,430
1,970
www.eurogamer.net
Hah sorry, ya your 560 should be fine man. My 680 only hurts in BF4 and Metro LL if I really abuse the settings. Thinking of getting another for SLI : ( My wallet hates me.
Interesting. Last Light didn't give me any problems. Metro 2033 is the one that I still cannot run smoothly. Last Light runs much better overall.

BF4, though, definitely isn't perfect. Dial back a few settings and it's a fairly solid 60, though, so it's hard to complain.
 

St3v3

Member
Sep 4, 2013
11,089
109
600
UK
It's silly to artificially require the game to need 6GB of RAM, yet only use 2. However, if you're running a gaming PC and have less than 6GB of RAM these days, you're doing it wrong.
4GB is still more than you need. I have 8GB personally but still, 4GB is fine for every game, apart from Ghosts apparently.
 

Riggs

Banned
Dec 29, 2011
9,723
0
0
Tampa, Florida
Interesting. Last Light didn't give me any problems. Metro 2033 is the one that I still cannot run smoothly. Last Light runs much better overall.

BF4, though, definitely isn't perfect. Dial back a few settings and it's a fairly solid 60, though, so it's hard to complain.
Ya LL isn't too bad, original Metro was unoptimized as hell. But I can still get bad frames in LL if I fuck around too hard in the settings, BF4 is fine at high. I can do ultra but bleh I rather have a steady 50-60 fps right now. Going to upgrade eventually anyway.

I'm a student, I couldn't get a new card even if I wanted to lol



He just wants to be acknowledged!
Screw that let's go rob something, I got my Feltzer all modded out.
 

Karak

Member
Jun 22, 2009
13,167
6
865
www.youtube.com
As we discussed a couple threads ago this is purely to mimic the porting and memory allocations that are available in the next gen consoles without having to do anything with the actual engine. It is a useless limit for sure.
 

Erasus

Member
Nov 7, 2009
4,742
0
0
Sweden
Is the exec 64-bit? If not it wont use more than 2GB anyway right?

Sounds like a wierd limit, did they just port their dev enviroment?
 

Megasoum

Banned
Aug 27, 2009
20,141
0
0
Montréal
Infinity Ward is the one that can't put controller support on their PC port too right? I always mix them up with Treyarch.

Shitty PC dev indeed.
 

Riggs

Banned
Dec 29, 2011
9,723
0
0
Tampa, Florida
What's most depressing is that they put in the minimal amount of effort and this will still sell shit tonnes regardless.

Man this is what really bothers me about CoD. The fact that it sells the way it does, and such minimal effort is put into the series these days, especially on PC. It's pretty amazing to have a cash cow like this, it won't last forever though. Hopefully no more then 5 more years.
 

SMZC

Member
Jan 10, 2008
1,666
0
0
This engine is just Black Ops II+, but they're trying to pretend like it's something more.
If anything, it would be Modern Warfare 3+. Infinity Ward and Treyarch don't seem to make use of each other's improvements to the engine, they kind of go their separate ways.
 

RooMHM

Member
Jan 23, 2010
3,843
0
0
Paris, France
Fuck console developpers. May their shit limits rot in hell.
The race for the worse keeps getting better and better. Regression is the new moto.
 

St3v3

Member
Sep 4, 2013
11,089
109
600
UK
If anything, it would be Modern Warfare 3+. Infinity Ward and Treyarch don't seem to make use of each other's improvements to the engine, they kind of go their separate ways.
For example Black Ops 2 had a fantastic anti cheat, but it seems IW didn't use it in Ghosts. A guy said it took him 15 minutes to adapt a MW2 hack to work in Ghosts.

IW are pretty awful when it comes to the PC, Treyarch are miles ahead, mostly due to PCDev giving a shit.
 

Zemm

Member
Oct 11, 2012
6,855
0
0
Can you not play it at all without atleast 6gb or is it just a warning. Either way it sounds like a fucking awful port.
 

demolitio

Member
Dec 5, 2008
6,988
0
0
Ohio, USA
Nice to see them finally go all out in screwing over their original community that supported COD.

Even the hardcore PC COD players should view IW as the second-tier developer for the franchise now and try to remain optimistic that Treyarch won't screw them over. As for me, I think I've finally moved on since I was only buying to play with some friends who I don't even see anymore so with that, I can forget about COD until it's ready to impress people again.

The sad thing is that no matter what IW does or doesn't do, the game will sell and get good reviews while those same reviewers bash other sequels as being too similar to the original when they usually have more differences than COD does each year...
 

Sir Abacus

Member
Apr 2, 2006
4,323
0
0
Wait wait wait wait wait. Hold on. This game and its 40 gig of an install costs $28 worth of SSD space on a 250GB 840 EVO and the complaint here is the measly RAM requirements?
 

mapla

Neo Member
Jun 1, 2013
64
0
0
In Guru3D you can see that the usage of VRAM in BF4 for example doesn't reach 2 GB with Ultra options, 1900x1200 and 4xMSAA. In fact, it reaches 1,5 GB.

That's all I'm saying...
 

St3v3

Member
Sep 4, 2013
11,089
109
600
UK
Wait wait wait wait wait. Hold on. This game and its 40 gig of an install costs $28 worth of SSD space on a 250GB 840 EVO and the complaint here is the measly RAM requirements?
The complaint is the game doesn't need 6GB of RAM, and there's no reason for IW to enforce it so aggressively.
 

RiffRaff

Banned
Jun 18, 2013
169
0
0
Wait wait wait wait wait. Hold on. This game and its 40 gig of an install costs $28 worth of SSD space on a 250GB 840 EVO and the complaint here is the measly RAM requirements?
The problem it's that the game demands 6gb of ram but it doesn't even use 2gb.
 

spindoctor

Member
Oct 21, 2010
7,055
0
590
The game won't even launch if you have less than 6gb? Is that error message a warning or does it block you from playing completely?
 

Sir Abacus

Member
Apr 2, 2006
4,323
0
0
The complaint is the game doesn't need 6GB of RAM, and there's no reason for IW to enforce it so aggressively.
The problem it's that the game demands 6gb of ram but it doesn't even use 2gb.
What about all the other stuff people run in the background chewing up RAM? Just having Chrome, Steam, Skype, Spotify and Teamspeak open and and my memory usage is at 5.86GB before I even start a game. If I close off Chrome before I start I end up at 3.27GB.
 

SMZC

Member
Jan 10, 2008
1,666
0
0
For example Black Ops 2 had a fantastic anti cheat, but it seems IW didn't use it in Ghosts. A guy said it took him 15 minutes to adapt a MW2 hack to work in Ghosts.

IW are pretty awful when it comes to the PC, Treyarch are miles ahead, mostly due to PCDev giving a shit.
On the other hand, Treyarch's games are still dogshit when it comes to netcode and hit detection, despite of IW nailing these down with MW2 already (at least on consoles).

I still remember when the old IW team, back when they were still with Activision, refused to hand over to Treyarch the MW2 engine with all of the improvements that it had over COD4's. Thus, for BO1's development, Treyarch was forced to improve upon COD4's engine on their own to get to some similar results as what was already done in the MW2 variation of the engine. I suspect this is an issue that is still going on with both teams, and that a lot of the bad blood is still there.
 

nOoblet16

Member
Feb 1, 2010
15,340
0
695
Liverpool
This is true.

The game also doesn't runs all that well. I've got a superclocked 780 and on max settings @1080p 2xTXAA it drops to low 40s whenever I look at an area like this.While something like BF4 MP, I can get a constant 60FPS at maximum settings and 4*MSAA @ 1080p


I mean Black Ops 2 looks miles ahead of this even though it's considerably inferior technically. The campaign is even worse. Also IW has absolutely terrible art, they simply don't know what makes a game looks good because this game lacks colours, every level looks to have the same TOD.
 

St3v3

Member
Sep 4, 2013
11,089
109
600
UK
What about all the other stuff people run in the background chewing up RAM? Just having Chrome, Steam, Skype, Spotify and Teamspeak open and and my memory usage is at 5.86GB before I even start a game. If I close off Chrome before I start I end up at 3.27GB.
What about every other game available that works just fine with 4GB?
 

Ferr986

Member
Oct 6, 2012
13,088
0
0
It's silly to artificially require the game to need 6GB of RAM, yet only use 2. However, if you're running a gaming PC and have less than 6GB of RAM these days, you're doing it wrong.

I dunno, Im not expert on PCs but right now Im playing FFXIV while listening to music and browsing some webs at the same time with Firefox. I have only 4GB and right now my usage shows 2,20 GB
 

kuYuri

Member
Mar 30, 2007
14,782
0
1,025
This is true.

The game also doesn't runs all that well. I've got a superclocked 780 and on max settings @1080p 2xTXAA it drops to low 40s whenever I look at an area like this.While something like BF4 MP, I can get a constant 60FPS at maximum settings and 4*MSAA @ 1080p




I mean Black Ops 2 looks miles ahead of this even though it's considerably inferior technically. The campaign is even worse. Also IW has absolutely terrible art, they simply don't know what makes a game looks good because this game lacks colours, every level looks to have the same TOD.
This screenshots looks bad. Do you have your Image Quality set to Native?
 

ambientmystic

Member
Dec 4, 2012
3,982
13
455
Malaysia
What about all the other stuff people run in the background chewing up RAM? Just having Chrome, Steam, Skype, Spotify and Teamspeak open and and my memory usage is at 5.86GB before I even start a game. If I close off Chrome before I start I end up at 3.27GB.
This.

The 6 GB RAM min req is just them covering their asses to account for people having a bazillion other background apps eating up RAM. They probably took that into account when making it the min req for RAM. Better be safe than sorry, same goes for the other games mandating nonsensical amounts of RAM at a minimum like Watch Dogs and ACIV

I'm one of those with a laptop from 2009 that probably can't even run this (DX10.1 only gfx card when games will mandata DX11 min from now on) even though I've got the prerequisite 2x4 GB RAM modules (which max it out), and before launching any game I've got at most only around 5-6 GB RAM free after Windows/Firefox/etc takes up the rest.

Also consider the fact that their mandating 64bit OSes as the minimum too (which uses more RAM by default as compared to the previous 32bit requirement, 7/8 x64 uses at least 1.3-1.5GB RAM on boot without anything running in the background), this shouldn't be much of a surprise. I've no doubt however, that there could be command line arguments that could be used to circumvent this artificial FATAL error message and run it on systems with less than 6GB RAM.
 

AndyBNV

Nvidia
Sep 26, 2012
1,232
0
0
That actually is pretty striking, is that Ghosts or something else?
It's an early tech demo of our GPU fur system from June 2013. The latest version will be integrated into Ghosts in a forthcoming patch, and it'll also be seen in The Witcher 3 sometime next year (the gif demo uses Witcher 3 assets and was originally presented by CD Projekt).
 

RiffRaff

Banned
Jun 18, 2013
169
0
0
What about all the other stuff people run in the background chewing up RAM? Just having Chrome, Steam, Skype, Spotify and Teamspeak open and and my memory usage is at 5.86GB before I even start a game. If I close off Chrome before I start I end up at 3.27GB.
I was at a friend's house last night, he was playing BF4, conquest large 64 players at 1920x1080 on an amd 960t, 4gb of ram and a 7850 with 2gb of vram, he had between 50 and 70 fps, never going lower than 50 and he was running teamspeak, firefox and skype on the background.

And you can't run COD:Dogs with less of 6gb?
 
May 22, 2011
7,255
0
0
What about all the other stuff people run in the background chewing up RAM? Just having Chrome, Steam, Skype, Spotify and Teamspeak open and and my memory usage is at 5.86GB before I even start a game. If I close off Chrome before I start I end up at 3.27GB.
How is that possible?! Why does your browser eat up 2.6GB of RAM????? Does Chrome even have a 64bit version to use more than 2GBs?
 

Zemm

Member
Oct 11, 2012
6,855
0
0
It prevents you from playing at all.
That's fucking incredible. Valve need to remove this from Steam or at a minimum put a massive warning on the store page. I can see a ton of refund requests happening because of this. Those minimum requirements have always been a guildline, not an actual "have this or you can't play at all".
 

RulkezX

Member
May 27, 2013
5,614
0
425
I only upgraded to 8GB recently and played the BF4 beta with everything maxed with 4GB.

Wtf were/are IW thinking.