-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Maybe they're min-maxing on the "safe" side, but for 1080P @ High settings, even an i7-6700 feels high for recommended CPU.
If I had to guess, I bet they have really bad stuttering on the engine/shader cache side, and the high-ish CPU requirements are to try to sidestep it as much as possible.
If I had to guess, I bet they have really bad stuttering on the engine/shader cache side, and the high-ish CPU requirements are to try to sidestep it as much as possible.
Typically we had an option to play games in DX11 if there was an issue with the DX12 version.
But fewer and fewer games are giving us that option. Developers are going to DX12 and not doing a great job with the DX12 version. Nvidia/AMD can't bail them out because DX12 puts more power in the devs hands than DX11, and out of Nvidia/AMD's hands.
It's a new-gen exclusive developed on consoles with 8c/16t CPUs, you should be pleasantly surprised the minimum CPU isn't one of the i5-8400 or 8600.
That it's 4c/8t CPUs is a sign that if you don't meet that bar in 2022, you've finally reached the point where it's time to upgrade.
It's still a 7-year old quad core. At some point there is just literally no grounds to show bewilderment about ancient CPUs falling to obsolescence.
Did they accidentally use the horizontal pixel length for the first couple?
1280p? Do they mean 720?
1280p? Do they mean 720?
I kinda like CA in some games if it isn't super overdone. Doesn't bother me much here.
I'm still oddly interested in this game, it's just the whole stuttering thing on PC and thin gameplay mechanics in an icon filled open world that's holding me back. I think this would have worked better as a 8-10 hour game. Time is my most precious commodity and I really have to pick and choose when it comes to these open world things that take so much time to get through.
I've only just really started Elden Ring on PC because I spent near 80 hours on Horizon Forbidden West. Both these games are well worth investing time in. But open world games have to really suck me in, or I just don't bother due to the time investment needed.
I can much easier stomach imperfect games when they're shorter experiences.
I miss the olden days where I could buy a new 8 hour game every weekend and have a good experience. Now it takes a bloody month to finish one game, playing every day and binging on weekends.
I'm still oddly interested in this game, it's just the whole stuttering thing on PC and thin gameplay mechanics in an icon filled open world that's holding me back. I think this would have worked better as a 8-10 hour game. Time is my most precious commodity and I really have to pick and choose when it comes to these open world things that take so much time to get through.
I've only just really started Elden Ring on PC because I spent near 80 hours on Horizon Forbidden West. Both these games are well worth investing time in. But open world games have to really suck me in, or I just don't bother due to the time investment needed.
I can much easier stomach imperfect games when they're shorter experiences.
I miss the olden days where I could buy a new 8 hour game every weekend and have a good experience. Now it takes a bloody month to finish one game, playing every day and binging on weekends.
It's a good port feature wise, very good, but once again the shader demon strikes from the dark.
Just compile your fucking shaders at the start already.
Really does kinda feel like we're going back in time to the bad times of PC gaming again.
Even I, a very much a PC for everything not sony 1st party guy now regularly think about ps5 versions of multiplat games. hasn't happened in a decade but now all of a sudden I'm checking console game prices for all these multiplat games I'm interested in.
You know what? Fuck lamenting I can't afford a 3090 or 3080. I wouldn't even fucking want one anymore even if I could get one. What's the point?
Even I, a very much a PC for everything not sony 1st party guy now regularly think about ps5 versions of multiplat games. hasn't happened in a decade but now all of a sudden I'm checking console game prices for all these multiplat games I'm interested in.
You know what? Fuck lamenting I can't afford a 3090 or 3080. I wouldn't even fucking want one anymore even if I could get one. What's the point?
Yes please. My 5900X eats shader compilation for breakfast, but I can't do shit about shader stuttering :/
An i7 thats still powerful than than i5's one and two gens, that come later than it. Don't expect most to have the latest and recent CPUs.
Doesn't matter if the CPU itself is 7 years old. Its being listed in the minimum system requirements surely you understand the weirdness of requiring it. Seriously everybody doesn't live in the US to get the recent and powerful CPUs.. prices have gone up each gen and especially since, there's been chip shortage issues since 2-3 years.
With that said iam saying all of this when taking these requirements at face value..maybe they're being very conservative with them? Time will tell.
I understand the reality of people not upgrading often. But it's also reality that developers have never slowed down because of that.
When new consoles launch, a year or so later, the requirements take a leap; here we are. Bemoan the fact that it's time to upgrade, not that games are moving on to requiring more powerful hardware. The former I get, especially in today's hardware climate; the latter makes less sense, to question WHY a game developed for a more powerful hardware target suddenly has requirements you didn't expect.
GTX 1060 for 1280x720 and low settings should be just as telling. "Next-Gen" PC Requirements are here. Truth is our systems sleepwalked through the entirety of the last generation, and the first brick wall of a technology check is about to happen in real time over the course of 2022 as more new-gen exclusives drop.
Wait until the Starfield requirements hit. Oh Lord.
Oh that won't be a problem, the higher wattage (115W+) mobile 3060 is actually within 10-15% of the desktop version. If you're gaming at 1080p it should be trivial.
It's the GTX 1060 and quad cores being completely off of the table for which people need to start their preparations. Not that they won't play games at all, but it's going to look spooky when the 1070, 1660 Ti, or even the RTX 2060 moves into the minimum GPU slot in the hardware requirement releases.
Speaking of starfield i am optimistic that they won't be as high as this one. Bethesda Game Studio games have always been very decent to run on low to low-middle end systems. Fallout 3, TES V, Fallout 4, etc.
Here's what i expect for the minimum requirements
Some recent gen i5 CPU, 12GB of RAM, 1060/RX 480 or RX 580(4 or 6GB).
The only thing iam uncertain about is whether they'll recommend an SSD or not in the minimum requirements.
Last edited:
eh I dont know one of the strong roumers going around was bethasda couldnt get it to run on lastgen, likely a cpu bottleneck, so I would assume a decent cpu will be required.
Lets be honest, last gen console CPUs were not good and bethesda games haven't always been great on consoles.
The game probably was able to run on last gen consoles but would encounter crashes and errors and not enough power to load the whole world, etc. in my speculated opinion.
There are days where even my RTX 2080 and i7 9700k feel inadequate with some modern titles at 1440p, especially without DLSS, so I'm fully expecting the end of this generation/transition to next to put that rig out to pasture or just be hitting the minimum requirements.
If it weren't for my Legion 7 with the mobile RTX 3080 and 5900HX (and the Steam Deck to some extent), I'd probably be done with modern PC gaming within the next six years if these GPU prices never stabilize. Instead, because of laptops, I'm still in the high-end game for the long haul.
Never thought gaming laptops would be my savior, but here we are.
Runs well but the wonky controls make this look nearly unplayable on SD
The CPU disagreement aside, the thing about GPU requirements is, the Series S GPU still has to run everything right? That thing has a steroid injected 5500 XT-ish GPU.
Series S Specs
5500 XT Specs
Hell the 5500 XT has more cores and texture units, but the Series S is RDNA2.
As long as a game has to run on the Series S, today's midrange GPUs should survive playing games at 1080p. Forever.
I mean, now that I'm thinking this over, GWT lists the 5500 XT for minimum at 720p/30fps Low? What is the Series S going to to do? These specs are likely overblown, just like Elden Ring's were, unless the XSS is going to run this really poorly. I know the yadda yadda console optimization comes in here, but that only goes so far.
Well yeah by the end of the "end of this generation/transition to next" (2026?) the 2080 will be almost a decade old, it'd be well due for a replacement. I have a 9700K + RTX 2080 (200W TDP on the GPU) gaming laptop, the 2080 is going to easily last this entire generation, not playing at maximum settings at the highest resolutions, but it's still a monster.
Your AMD CPU does crush the 9700K, but is the mobile 3080 really more than 15% ahead of the desktop 2080? From my testing the mobile 3080 is 20% ahead of my 2080, and my GPU is 10% slower than the desktop 2080.
Would love Dictator to reach out to Epic on this wider issue. Sure devs can get around it with some customised work to pre-compile shaders during the title screen like we've recently seen with UE4 titles The Ascent and Psychonauts 2 after their respective optimisation patches, but by default this isn't how UE4 (or UE5) works. Hence why this issue keeps rearing its ugly head again and again.. and will only continue to do so more frequently as more devs move their development to UE.
Ideally UE4 should be compiling the shaders in the background for the given area, rather than waiting until the precise moment they actually need to be used! This is how RE engine works for example.
I would love DF to ask Epic directly what the issue seems to be. It would not only be nice to know why it is happening at all, but also just getting more press to talk about the issue will hopefully light a fire under the asses of Epic and/or publishers to stop releasing these broken games onto the market.
This also is something that has only really started to happen recently. Almost zero Unreal 4 games released previous to two years ago ever had this issue.
Last edited:
I think there are just more (AAA) UE4 games in recent years that means we're suffering the issue more. That and games are using more shaders than ever.
Thinking back to older UE4 games like PUBG, Ruiner, Observer, Fallen Order and Outer Worlds, they had the same issue.
It's been going since 2017 at least, and that was the year we first started seeing the bigger budget UE4 games releasing.
devs should just add a shader compaling as part of the instal process.
It shouldn't be part of the install proces, as shaders can and will get deleted during major driver updates.
This has been an issue with UE4 since like forever.
We got spoiled by how underwhelming last gen CPUs were. Eventually this gen older 4C/8T i7s aren't going to be enough for minimum either.
We got spoiled by how underwhelming last gen CPUs were. Eventually this gen older 4C/8T i7s aren't going to be enough for minimum either.
I didn't say it did, that's on the complaints about the minimum CPU requirements which is why I separated it from the UE4 sentence.
I'm surprised so many people are surprised about higher minimum specs. Especially on games that release only on current gen platforms. It's been more than a year since the PS5/Series consoles released. I know it's not easy or cheap to just buy new hardware, but it also shouldn't be surprising that games have moved beyond 2C/4T CPUs released in 2010.
He should ask the devs why they don't ask Epic for help instead. Epic has offices in Japan that exist for this very reason.
This is a dev issue not a UE4 issue.
I'm only at recommended 1080p specs. I really need to upgrade my computer if I want to be able to stay at 3440x1440. Prices in Sweden have started to go down to almost reasonable levels... Might be time soon.
Dammit, I just bought it on PC from GMG and used the code. Am I really going to need to just go back to only playing on console at this point until they start fixing this?
That's where I am at
I have basically abandoned my 3070 rig because of this issue.
potato squad reporting in
45fps with some hiccups, the epic scaling thing enabled
i5 2500, 1050ti, 24GB
pretty satisfied
45fps with some hiccups, the epic scaling thing enabled
i5 2500, 1050ti, 24GB
pretty satisfied
It's crazy that emulator can make this but we still got true games on pc with stutters.
That's not true. Shader compilation stutter, asset loading stutter and cleaning garbage collection stutters are present in bad programmed games for decades.
There are good programmers and bad programmers.
The problem that must be fixed before is how in the hell a game like Elder Rings in PC has good reviews?
if games with technical problems were killed in reviews and avoided by buyers, everything would be solved in one year.
In the end most games are simple read input => apply input => draw state loops and if any of the stages block then you get frame drops. Tools used to make games are usually quite primitive and games are just "amusement software". Nobody dies if rendering deadline can't be met thus architectures are not really designed to guarantee perfect frame delivery. It would only cost money and most? people don't really care too much.
Wouldn't be surprised if UE5 still has a dedicated rendering thread and so on.
Wouldn't be surprised if UE5 still has a dedicated rendering thread and so on.
"modern" emulators make cache on the fly so they stutter, that's why they are still far to a perfect way to play it.
Vulkan cache are less stuttery but still stutters.
We just need a precache, let's wait at the game start and call it a day.