Support NeoGAF

[kevboard]

Textures/assets. Diablo 4 will fill up your vram and then start grabbing system ram to store more for example. The game even warns that you need 32gb system ram for the ultra 4K texture setting.

that must be a massive jump in texture quality then.

because if a game suggests 16GB of system memory, usually it will maybe use 6~8 GB at most, and the 16GB is simply given as a requirement so that there's a big enough buffer zone there, that users will not run into issues while having programs running in the background, and of course because Windows uses a lot of it as well.

so if 16GB is recommended here for Medium, and 32GB is recommended for High, the game has to have either a ridiculously big jump in asset quality between these 2 settings. or their safety buffer for Medium is really damn small.

Cyberpunk 2077 I think uses at most 9GB of system memory on its absolutely maxed out settings and on Psycho RT.

and even 9GB of memory used by a game is usually not an issue if you have 16GB... at least if you don't run OBS, 2 game launchers, and 100 chrome tabs at the same time.


my bet is that they are overly cautious here, just so they don't get any bad feedback if someone does have issues.
and I bet that even fully maxed out, the game will run fine with 16GB

 

[DanielG165]

and I bet that even fully maxed out, the game will run fine with 16GB

Yeah, we won't be at a spot where most of even the most graphically intensive games will need more than 16GB of ram for a while yet. Unless the highest of high settings here are so significantly above that of the Series consoles, that it requires considerably more ram, I'm sure 16 will be just fine.

 

[Mister Wolf]

 

[Puscifer]

For Nvidia Ada owners willing to upscale and frame gen it, these can be helpful to see, too:

Something's REALLY off about these numbers

 

[Efren is G.O.A.T.]

Why? it will play it at decent settings with DLSS, it's still a beast

Because it feels like really not too long ago I could get much better advertised performance at 1440p. I'm not saying anything is out of the norm since everything moves so fast but it just feels like a 2by4 in the face when I see the system requirements these days. Feels like in the blink of an eye I went from 120fps@1440 to barely 60fps.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

This is definitely one of my biggest reasons for wanting to build a new computer setup once the 5000 series GPUs are out. Requirements don't seem crazy, but I hope the game feels polished out of the gates... I still remember the original game.

 

[Bojji]

This a joke? Why is the 4090 just 10% faster than the 4080S when it's supposed to be 20-30% faster?

It's 1fps faster at 1440p. WTF?

Something's REALLY off about these numbers

Looks to be CPU limited as fuck around 80FPS. Not a good sign at all...

 

[Gaiff]

Looks to be CPU limited as fuck around 80FPS. Not a good sign at all...

Even at 4K. 10% faster than 4080s? 50% faster than a 4070? It should be much higher than that.

UE5 too. This game has disastrous PC performance written all over it.

 

[Bojji]

Even at 4K. 10% faster than 4080s? 50% faster than a 4070? It should be much higher than that.

UE5 too. This game has disastrous PC performance written all over it.

Yep. They are testing with 7800X3D or 9800X3D? 14900k

Without frame gen this could be unplayable on many CPUs.

 

[Gen.Grievous]

Looks to be CPU limited as fuck around 80FPS. Not a good sign at all...

It's a bit weird they do not use a 9800X3D for these benchmarks. It would show the higher end cards in a better light I expect.

 

[Kupfer]

Will it run on the Deck?

 

[The Cockatrice]

Even at 4K. 10% faster than 4080s? 50% faster than a 4070? It should be much higher than that.

UE5 too. This game has disastrous PC performance written all over it.

It doesnt actually say, but maybe its RT performance? Perhaps the RT features are poorly implemented and its why the numbers are weird.

 

[hlm666]

Looks similar performance wise to wukong, just like that I bet not playing on max gets some big performance gains.

 

[Tomeru]

I'm just over the recommended yay!!!

 

[SolidQ]

Even at 4K. 10% faster than 4080s? 50% faster than a 4070?

4080 here almost double compare to 4070. So 50% believable

 

[Lootlord]

Looks to be CPU limited as fuck around 80FPS. Not a good sign at all...

This still does not explain how there is only a 1 FPS difference in 1440P between the 4080 and 4090.

 

[M1chl]

This still does not explain how there is only a 1 FPS difference in 1440P between the 4080 and 4090.

How so, if the CPU/IO is unable to feed the GPU, at more than X frames, it won't go higher. UE5 sadly isn't really strong on CPU side, you are very much limited by single core performance, given that one core is "main" and others are aux. UE5 is no ID Tech 7 sadly

 

[GymWolf]

How so, if the CPU/IO is unable to feed the GPU, at more than X frames, it won't go higher. UE5 sadly isn't really strong on CPU side, you are very much limited by single core performance, given that one core is "main" and others are aux. UE5 is no ID Tech 7 sadly

It also look much better than id tech 7, sadly.

Both indy and new doom are nowhere near the best ue5 games graphic wise.

 

[Gaiff]

4080 here almost double compare to 4070. So 50% believable.

How does this post make sense? The 4090 is over double the performance of the 4070 in this chart. Clearly, if it's only 50% faster, the difference is only half as big as it usually is.

 

[M1chl]

It also look much better than id tech 7, sadly.

Both indy and new doom are nowhere near the best ue5 games graphic wise.

True, but it was more of technical side of things about the core architecture. Graphically wise, UE5 is better

 

[Lootlord]

How so, if the CPU/IO is unable to feed the GPU, at more than X frames, it won't go higher. UE5 sadly isn't really strong on CPU side, you are very much limited by single core performance, given that one core is "main" and others are aux. UE5 is no ID Tech 7 sadly

How is it able to reach 85 FPS in 1080P when CPU-limited, but only 74 FPS at 1440P? That's not how a CPU-limit works. The 4080 and 4090 can't both be at like 74 FPS +-, if the CPU can handle at least 85 obviously.

About ID-tech, at least it runs buttery smooth unlike UE, there is no other engine that runs this smooth except Source i would say.

 

[SyberWolf]

Yep. They are testing with 7800X3D or 9800X3D? 14900k

Without frame gen this could be unplayable on many CPUs.

maybe they used that new shitty intel cpu

 

[SolidQ]

The 4090 is over double the performance of the 4070 in this chart.

As you said, more than double.
4080, also higher than 50% 20 vs 12ю it's 66.7%

 

[M1chl]

How is it able to reach 85 FPS in 1080P when CPU-limited, but only 74 FPS at 1440P? That's not how a CPU-limit works. The 4080 and 4090 can't both be at like 74 FPS +-, if the CPU can handle at least 85 obviously.

Didn't see that other graph, you are correct. I am on the phone currently. However it could be due to Nanite, which obviously is more demanding as the resolution grows.

 

[Bojji]

This still does not explain how there is only a 1 FPS difference in 1440P between the 4080 and 4090.

Yeah, this is weird.

maybe they used that new shitty intel cpu

I'm blind, they have 14900k mentioned on graphs.

 

[RagnarokIV]

Wonder how the 7900 XTX will handle it.

 

[Bojji]

Wonder how the 7900 XTX will handle it.

UE5 is usually good on AMD.

 

[BeardSpike]

I wonder where my Ryzen 5 7600+RX 6700xt will land with 32gb DDR5s 6000Mhz CL30 .

 

[Fess]

Epic 60+ fps on both my PCs, awesome

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Even at 4K. 10% faster than 4080s? 50% faster than a 4070? It should be much higher than that.

UE5 too. This game has disastrous PC performance written all over it.

As is tradition.

 

[Windle Poons]

I fit into the high bracket with my 5900X and 4090.

 

[rofif]

For Nvidia Ada owners willing to upscale and frame gen it, these can be helpful to see, too:

Lol what did I fucking tell you.... low system requirements MY ASS.
They are running it on 4090 sub 1080p with fucking lame frame generation and get 85fps.
Is it CPU limited? Frame gen is not cpu limited is it ?

 

[Gaiff]

Lol what did I fucking tell you.... low system requirements MY ASS.
They are running it on 4090 sub 1080p with fucking lame frame generation and get 85fps.
Is it CPU limited? Frame gen is not cpu limited is it ?

It's 85fps without frame generation and native 1080p. Flipping on DLSS3 toggles DLSS Quality+Frame Generation and the fps doubles as a result.

 

[rofif]

It's 85fps without frame generation and native 1080p. Flipping on DLSS3 toggles DLSS Quality+Frame Generation and the fps doubles as a result.

ah ok. I am a fucking idiot. This graph sucks ass.
Still seems more demanding that sys requirements no?

 

[Gaiff]

ah ok. I am a fucking idiot. This graph sucks ass.
Still seems more demanding that sys requirements no?

Yes, a lot more. The page says Epic settings, which I assume are max settings, and 4K need a 4080, but even a 4090 does not cut it. The official requirements probably include DLSS.

 

[Mister Wolf]

Looks like we are all going to be lowering those settings. Humble yourself before Stalker 2. Bend the knee.

 

[GudOlRub]

Pc masterracists realizing they might have to turn down a few settings to run at 60fps will never not be funny to me... Unless a game has path-tracing, changing between High and Ultra settings is pretty fucking unnoticeable nowadays unless you zoom in 400 times or play on a 70 inch TV.
Anywho, it's UE5 so it doesn't inspire much confidence but I will give them the benefit of the doubt for now, this apparent CPU heaviness may actually be warranted due to all the simulations the game might do in a huge open world, after all the first three games are pretty well known for their world being quite dynamic with or without player influence, so I will expect no less from this one.

 

[amigastar]

The devs just confirmed it, no Pre-Load on PC. Bummer considering the game is 150gb big.

 

[kevboard]

this apparent CPU heaviness may actually be warranted due to all the simulations the game might do in a huge open world

the game supposedly runs at 60fps on Series X...

if that laptop grade Zen2 can hit 60fps, I don't really think there's anything to worry about.
CPU requirements on these spec sheets are always far off and often even entirely nonsensical.

the fact that Medium at 1080p and High at 1440p suddenly makes a jump from not only a Zen2 to Zen3, but also from 16GB to 32GB of RAM only makes sense if the High present has heavy Raytracing and a ridiculous jump in asset quality.

I doubt that either is true here, so I assume these specs are not really anything to go by.

 

[xrnzaaas]

The devs just confirmed it, no Pre-Load on PC. Bummer considering the game is 150gb big.

What's interesting is that you can pre-load on Xbox even if you didn't buy the game or if you don't have Game Pass. Complete opposite to what PC folks are (not) getting.

So for example you can download now without waiting for a retail copy and having to download stuff that didn't fit on disc.

 

[drotahorror]

People getting banned on steam forums for giving out info the community manager on discord said.

DLSS or other upscalers required for those settings.

 

[ebevan91]

People getting banned on steam forums for giving out info the community manager on discord said.

DLSS or other upscalers required for those settings.

I hate that developers are using DLSS as a crutch.

 

[drotahorror]

Pc masterracists realizing

Oh man, you so clever!

 

[The Cockatrice]

People getting banned on steam forums for giving out info the community manager on discord said.

DLSS or other upscalers required for those settings.

they are banning people for calling them out on lies btw :: S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: Heart of Chornobyl General Discussions

devs shouldn't be banning people on forums for them being called out about lies about specs to play this game proof https://x.com/Pirat_Nation/status/1857103174965903652

steamcommunity.com

dev community manager responded in regards to the ban, but not the upscaling which means its true what the banned user said. Im still day one if it runs decent, dont care about its most likely poor RT implementation even tho DF will drool over it as if its Jesus coming back.

 

[Mozzarella]

Too heavy for me at the moment, 160GB is a lot.
Why is it so big? is there so much dialogue/audio and animations in the game?

 

[Subterranean]

Have we got a peep on when the review embargo will lift?

 

[xrnzaaas]

Have we got a peep on when the review embargo will lift?

I think someone said 2 hours before the game's launch.

All signs point to this being a problematic launch unfortunately, trying to hide potential negativity that would make people cancel their pre-orders.

 

[Lucifers Beard]

Eesh those Nvidia numbers sure are interesting. I'll be holding off until nearer the holiday to grab this anyway, I'm sure it would have had a bunch of patches by that point anyway.

I'm sure my 3080, 12700K and 32GB DDR4 will be just fine at 1440p high settings.

 

[MMaRsu]

I hate that developers are using DLSS as a crutch.

Why?

If it works it works.

 

[Lootlord]

if that laptop grade Zen2 can hit 60fps, I don't really think there's anything to worry about.

I wonder how big the gap between console settings and maxed out on PC is.
If a 14900K is limited to 85 FPS (Nvidia chart 1080P)) then it must be big, cause it's more than twice as fast as the console CPUs.
Also this isn't even with hardware lumen yet, which will be patched in later on PC.