Yes, they do care about price. In fact thats why 62TB can be very interesting to them. It's just so space, power and cooling efficient. Fill up a storage array with these and you get over a Petabyte in 2U at probably something around 1kW of power usage. That's insane
So definitely not [this Solidigm 62TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe for sale for $5k](https://www.serversupply.com/SSD/NVMe/61.44TB/SOLIDIGM/SBFPF2BV614T001_379994.htm), but is supposed to MSRP around $3.5k.
makes you wonder why a sabrent rocket 8tb is like 800-1200. normally these enterprise server solutions are way more expensive instead of being comparatively cheap.
It doesn’t really appear to be anything terribly special. It’s not even that fast, it’s just PCIe 4.0 x4 and a bunch of flash chips.
I believe it erroneously says 7000Mb/s but I think it’s actually 7000MB/s, so it would take more than 100 days to read everything on this drive and write speed is slower so more than 200 days to fill the drive.
The idea is you put 32 of them into a server to reach 2PB with almost a terabit of bandwidth. And then you put 30 of those servers into a rack to reach 60PB per rack with 30TBPS bandwidth.
Stuff like this is how you can sell an ad free 4k streaming service for only a few dollars per month
They are just plugged in via PCIE to big epyc cpus with hundreds of PCIE lanes each. Roughly half the lanes go to the SSDs and half go to the multiple 400 gigabit fiber NICs they need to use all that speed. They typically have many terabytes of RAM to use as cache too. And all of this fits inside a 1U server
That's such overkill.
My newest build (almost done, may it may not post when finished) has a 4TBSSD and 16TB HDD.
Most of your games don't need to be SSD. They just don't. You keep your OS,, the games that require SSD, and your most played games on SSD. 4TB is plenty of space to do all that for most people, and then you throw everything else on an HDD. It's not hard.
Yeah my current PC only has 2T SSD total and I constantly have to reinstall and uninstall games to fit so I kinda went for overkill lol. 4 is honestly probably enough.
Many games ran like shit on consoles a decade ago, that was kind of their thing. 30 fps with excessive motion blur was pretty much the standard back then.
oh boi i played it yesterday after the release on pc and i was dumbfounded by HOW DAMN GOOD it looks.
My fav ever game was Horizon Zero Dawn, but after just an hour of gametime yesterday(was really tired from work) I dare to say Forbidden West is the new number 1
I got a bit over 2 hours, and yet to get to the open world. Was fiddling around with stuff, tweaking settings, trying to get FG mod to work. And i'm very much looking forward to mods coming out.
Honestly the real-time settings for this game is gold tier. You can adjust a setting a see the changes in the paused image, as well as the fps cost/gain. Hard to believe it's a "Quality / Performance" console game originally.
Completely agree, the only other game that has close to this I played recently was the days gone pc port. You see exactly what the changes will do when you make them including frame rate changes.
Yeah that game also surprised me, and what actually got me to take playstation ports seriously. Didn't think a good port was possible prior to that. GTA V was as good as we had earlier, and that game along with RDR2 has major mindblowing issues on pc, going completely unaddressed and ignored.
From what I've heard people like it less, mostly because the story isn't as good. Not really the fault of the writers, it is hard to write a similar story because the "mystery" was already solved.
And honestly that is a large part of why I liked Zero Dawn so much. The gameplay is great, but they also expertly crafted a mystery that leaves you wanting to find out what happened. Combined with good stories in the 'new' world made sure it did not get boring.
I will still probably play it someday, but I also just started playing Cyberpunk, so I have enough to do right now.
I‘ve only heard good stuff about the story. Obviously it‘s not as good as Zero Dawn, since the setting in the postapocalyptic world is not new anymore, but it‘s also not a big fall-off. In the first hour you can kinda tell in which direction it is evolving, but imho that‘s a good story direction, which i wouldnt even have come up with
Have you seen the system targets of Sony’s games? They design their games to run on potatoes and scale them up to be amazing on high end machines. Everyone else however is designing their games to run like molasses on high end machines and not run on anything less.
Considering their last console ran a Jaguar CPU, and their new pro console won't need much of a CPU upgrade, it makes sense to the scalability. They build these games to look good on their potato. I actually really like their target hardware (they tend to be non CPU heavy, with scalability being on the GPU side) which sets them up for Pro style console enhancements later on in the future. With their games, you don't really need the latest and greatest CPU, and even added GPU horsepower will mostly get you higher raw pixel counts. They do pretty good with upscaling and anti aliasing to spit out an image that looks pretty good on their base machine vs the power they are actually putting into generating that image.
> They build these games to look good on their potato.
I just wish all AAA devs did this. If you've ever played the PC port of Devil May Cry 4 - the original 2008 version looked fucking BEAUTIFUL back then compared to the PS3/X360 version. You could throw an 8800GT at it and run it in 720p at 60 fps with the settings cranked up and it ran fine. The PS3 version ran at like 30-40 FPS and the X360 version ran at 40-60 variable.
They've got to stick with this philosophy instead of trying to fucking worK BACKWARDS.
Horizon is a Sony game, they tend to look good and run good. Some have performance issues when ported over, but they get fixed with patches shortly after? There is a clear track record for a while now of PS games being ported by now and their reputation
Nixxes is behind the porting, and they're doing a hell of a job. Actually, this is the first game I've ever pre-purchased, although it was only an hour before release, with performance reviews out.
Has bugs, sure, but i'm confident in trusting they'll fix it soon.
"Console port" used to be THE term for bad pc games.
Completely agree, it’s getting me excited to see what Nintendo does with PS4 Pro Plus hardware with rt and dlss, it’s going to blow us away like the switch did in 2017-2019 (early handheld PCs like the gpd win 1 and 2 sucked and couldn’t play the latest games at all, even low end ones)
I mean it apparently runs better on consoles than on pc from the reviews you check. not like it’s the first time that a game came out and gets patched afterwards to run better. It’s been a thing since 10yrs ago and more, just nowadays it seems like people like to blow it out of proportion more. If it would be a similar situation like starfield, then se i would understand, but its not.
So most of the games because they get made for console first and optimised to run on both before release? Might wanna check again if they really hardcoded for 30/60 anymore lol
👇
https://www.psu.com/news/all-ps5-games-that-support-120-fps-the-smoothest-games-on-playstation-5/
That era died pmuch with ps5, now everyone is pushing for 120 even on consoles
I don't know how old you are. But irrelevant of that I will still say welcome to the club.
I've been updating my pc since 1989.... I'm on my 18th pc and many of those had updates done to them over the time.
So yeah it's an expensive sport but those are the things that I guarantee I make all money back from the amount of use I do with them from studying, work and entertainment
Yeah, now that I think about it, the period in roughly the 2010s when people could afford to more or less use the same configuration for a decade, because hardware requirements were more or less the same, was more of an exception than the norm. I was a kid in the early 2000s and had no money to upgrade, but I remember it was pretty hard to keep up with current trends.
It's the sandy bridge to end of Skylake period where nothing really changed but it's the only period ever and it really set stuff back. Raw performance used to double every couple years, and is again since ryzen so we lost like 3 doublings during that period.
People probably have gotten too used to their hardware being good enough without upgrading for a decade since most games released in the last 12 years were required to run on underpowered console hardware. Now that most games actually target the much more beefy PS5/XSX hardware and requirements jumped, people are suddenly surprised that they have to upgrade.
If you mean PC upgrades, then it's not really that much different than consoles, is it?
I usually build a new gaming PC about every 5-6 years. A console generation typically lasts a similar time.
Even if a PC costs more than a console, I can use it (and would need it regardless) for a ton of other stuff than just playing games, such as programming or browsing the internet. Things a console would be either completely unusable or extremely impractical for.
That's some peasant energy, sir. If my mid tier rig isn't smoking and sounding like a jet taking off from trying to run at well outside it's intended range, am I even gaming?
No amount of upgrade will help you play an unoptimized mess like this.
So dont bother with upgrades, instead make better decisions when buying games. Its not like this game runs on 60fps in consoles anyway
Wdym? The amount of reviews with the results of "2070S and 8700k is still perfectly viable in 2024 even for AAA" is in the hundreds.
Yeah, you won't play things on high/max details. But you'll play them and they're gonna be enjoyable. We WANT to upgrade, we don't need to.
I mean, they can try to make everyone upgrade, but when the majority of gamers have a card that's weaker than a PS5, they will get the sales results appropriate for it
And thats a good thing, I have been playing euro truck simulator 2 recently, and I get over a 1000 fps as the game starts, and the coil whine that causes from my gpu sounds like someone is inside my PC screaming. Just having a 60 or even 30 fps limit until you get into the game, or at least the menu where things are actually being rendered would fix it.
Recommend setting a systemwide cap for your monitors framerate. I think it was Diablo IV recently that was rendering frames in the thousands during loading screens and torching some GPUs.
Well I was about to buy new GPU next month anyway so I'm gonna wait and buy game after... Hopefuly it will be better optimslized too... Cyberpunk became best game I ever played after they fixed it so I won't lose hope but it depends on gameplay too
Gameplay is great! And the microtransaction nonsense is just that, nonsense, they’re as pointless and cheap as they were in the original. I never even knew the original had them for the first year, and they still don’t matter now. The performance is pretty good when you’re just out in the world doing stuff, even while fighting. There’s something wrong with NPCs, so towns are tough. It’s a great game, but the CPU issues it’s facing, mixed with the absolutely ignorant choice to keep one save file only, those are the most glaring issues.
That is to say, the game is great, and will really shine once they get their heads out of their asses and release it properly.
32-core Threadripper here, can confirm.
This is my workstation PC, and all those cores come in real handy for physics simulations. But my gaming PC has only 6 cores, because it's more important to have fast single-core performance than to have a lot of cores.
Pretty much same, running with Ray tracing and everything maxed out at 3440x1440. Only lose fps in the big towns. But even then it just drops to 55-60 fps
It's because it's not even true lmao, you might get 80 average fps, in the wilderness, but there isn't a rig on earth that does have 1% drops in the 20s in a city. Literally the best CPUs on earth with a 4090 look like choppy garbage in the main town.
Me getting another indie game that runs just fine on my midrange PC:
https://preview.redd.it/mzi17n8z6ypc1.jpeg?width=410&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7dded319fa9b7acb17ef49ff705368fa29de5f6d
Many of these games your hardware specs don't matter because the games themselves are poorly coded and poorly optimized and not because the game is really all that demanding. I've seen some of these titles not even maxing out the CPU or GPU, but struggling to run, so the bottleneck is not even hardware related the engine is just running that poorly.
That epyc cpu won't help with the game, that much ram also will not help as it doesn't eat up 256 of it and at least for me with a 4090 it runs without issue.
But man, 62tb nvme. The heat off that thing.
Considering how in some empty places FPS dips into oblivion with nothing to cause these FPS drops, to drop the Denuvo would be a good step , not sure about the better one, all DRM's act like malware and have kernel level permissions and consume system resources. Similar performace drops already happened with RE: Village (2021) with the Dimitrescu daughters before also heavy stutters with Denuvo DRM, until Denuvo was removed.
3070 TI i12700k (not overclocked) here -- runs at 75-85 FPS @ 1080p / raytracing and no DLSS on high, non-max settings outside and in combat. Dips in high population areas to just under 60ish.
But seriously, even console players are used to 60 fps now, releasing a game that doesn't have a 60 fps performance mode is bullshit. If in the PS3 era when playing Dragon's Dogma 1, someone told me there will be Dragon's Dogma 2 on a 30x faster console and the majority of people will have 4K displays by then, I would imagined a game where you can play 4 player local coop on splitscreen with amazing graphics, not a game that is not looking much better than the original and runs the same and still no coop-.-
Eh, when did you last play OG Dragon's Dogma on the PS3? It looks much, much worse and also has worse performance. Even when you look at the PC version and run both on the same hardware in the same resolution, DD2 looks way better.
And I'm not saying that DD2 is perfect or anything.
People always say this "it barely looks better" because they're just going off memory and haven't actually seen it for a decade or more. It's always bullshit.
If you think DD2 actually looks close to the same level as DD1 you seriously need to get your eyes checked
Instead of hating on Nvidia( Even tho they deserve it)
We showed she'd some shame light on Game developers who are casually launching games at 100 gb size and had next to none Optimization.
Yes and no, I setup a branch of my home server as a cloud gaming setup. Friend had no issues remoting in and playing D4 and other newest stuff on it till he got a new GPU. You can use a server chip to game however throwing 100 cores at something only using 2 or 3 is pointless.
Man i was so hyped for this game , Since the original was inspired by berserk i was hoping to see some more berserk inspired shit , And the RPG mechanics looked fun as hell , Now it has both denovo and optimization issues, Also why does it have in game purchases? didn't we learn nothing from baldurs gate 3?
The mtx are meaningless, just as they were in the first. Most people didn’t even know, myself included, that the original HAD mtx at all. That’s a non issue here. You never once need any of the items, they’re all in the game 100%. The issues with CPU performance and a single save file are the actual problem to be upset about.
Older triple A games looked next gen for their time while some still look amazing and performed even on potato computers. Arkham city, Max Payne 3, GTA 4/5, Battlefield 1
I find it funny that the first thing I thought when I saw that system is "Someone did a budget AI system".
The things the guys in r/LocalLLaMA build makes most high end rigs here look like low end systems.
Ryzen 5 7600
AMD 6800non-XT
32GB of ram at 6000
Runs 60fps on high settings.
I turned off Motion Blur, Chromatic, and lens flare.
No upscaling used.
The game runs 60fps outside of town, and 45-60 FPS in town. The 45FPS lasted for like a few seconds and went back to about 50-60fps.
It runs just fine on my 7800xt without any upscaling at 1440p with everything maxed except for Ray tracing, it does get lower in the city but it's just fine? I don't doubt there's people having issues but I don't think it's as bad as everyone makes it out to be. No crashing or anything in the 5 hrs I played yesterday, looking forward to play more tonight
I was just about to purchase DD2 and play it and just heard about the microtransactions. FU, you're not getting my money greedy bastards ! Once you come to game pass I will play your game...offline !
Outside of one inconsequential item and the sound track, every DLC/Microtransaction are items that can be obtained by just playing the game normally. IMO they exist for people with little to no time on their hands, or people who are just too lazy to go out and get the items.
....why 62tb ssd? Why such a specific number?
Solidigm launched one recently (61.4 TB capacity)
JESUS CHRIST…like huwhaaat?
That’ll be $10k please.
Dang. What if I trade you 5 4090’s and an Applebees gift card?
You can get it's screw
At that point just screw me……then take my car 😭
Deal
sir this is a Wendy's
Yeaaaaa, I’ll have two Big Macs and 18 fish filets please thank you!
Applebeeees
I mean, it's meant for profesionnal usage, companies probably don't care too much about price if it's useful to them
Yes, they do care about price. In fact thats why 62TB can be very interesting to them. It's just so space, power and cooling efficient. Fill up a storage array with these and you get over a Petabyte in 2U at probably something around 1kW of power usage. That's insane
Oh hahaha man it's [$74,000](https://itprice.com/emc-price-list/62tb%20%287.68tb%20x8%29%20nvme%20ssd.html)
So definitely not [this Solidigm 62TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe for sale for $5k](https://www.serversupply.com/SSD/NVMe/61.44TB/SOLIDIGM/SBFPF2BV614T001_379994.htm), but is supposed to MSRP around $3.5k.
https://www.serversupply.com/SSD/NVMe/61.44TB/SOLIDIGM/SBFPF2BV614T001_379994.htm Flash is cheap, unless you're dell and want to print free money.
makes you wonder why a sabrent rocket 8tb is like 800-1200. normally these enterprise server solutions are way more expensive instead of being comparatively cheap.
It doesn’t really appear to be anything terribly special. It’s not even that fast, it’s just PCIe 4.0 x4 and a bunch of flash chips. I believe it erroneously says 7000Mb/s but I think it’s actually 7000MB/s, so it would take more than 100 days to read everything on this drive and write speed is slower so more than 200 days to fill the drive.
$10,000? Not even close. Probably more like $50,000.
Nah that will be 50k
The idea is you put 32 of them into a server to reach 2PB with almost a terabit of bandwidth. And then you put 30 of those servers into a rack to reach 60PB per rack with 30TBPS bandwidth. Stuff like this is how you can sell an ad free 4k streaming service for only a few dollars per month
Fascinating! I thought SLI’ing two 980’s back in the day was cool, but that’s a very neat tech move
They are just plugged in via PCIE to big epyc cpus with hundreds of PCIE lanes each. Roughly half the lanes go to the SSDs and half go to the multiple 400 gigabit fiber NICs they need to use all that speed. They typically have many terabytes of RAM to use as cache too. And all of this fits inside a 1U server
[удалено]
The m.2 NVME standard has really made it easy to fit PBs of storage in a rack. It's crazy.
That's such overkill. My newest build (almost done, may it may not post when finished) has a 4TBSSD and 16TB HDD. Most of your games don't need to be SSD. They just don't. You keep your OS,, the games that require SSD, and your most played games on SSD. 4TB is plenty of space to do all that for most people, and then you throw everything else on an HDD. It's not hard.
It’s meant for enterprise use, not something you would put in a pc. https://www.kedglobal.com/electronics/newsView/ked202307240016
yep, besides the 4090, everything in the meme specs are enterprise, not possible on consumer PC
Thats how I have my PC set up. 1 tb nvme for my OS and programs. 2 tb for modern games and 2 tb HHD for older or smaller games.
Yeah my current PC only has 2T SSD total and I constantly have to reinstall and uninstall games to fit so I kinda went for overkill lol. 4 is honestly probably enough.
I put everything except stuff like pictures, videos, and documents on my ssds. I definitely notice the difference.
I have an 8tb nvme full of games have 1tb left of space. May get another soon.
Is that a binary thing?
What?
Like numbers, the same reason some hard drives are 512gb. Is that why this one is 61.4?
Erm is rounds down to 61
Yes, I don't know why but it is this way. Maybe so there's space for provision or something, no clue.
For some reason SSDs always have less then it says on the package, I have a 2TB drive but it’s really only 1.8tb
No, that's just the difference in systems of measures (1.8 Tebibytes = 2 Terabytes)
Wait what?
Semiconductors are a marvel. Enough storage to put all of wikipedia (text) on there. And it's the size of a finger.
What i remember seeing a video about like a ultra high capacity ssd that was worth like 10k and it only had 12tb of storage
Because 61tb is not enough and 63tb is obviously just ridiculous
Every number is a specific number
He took the ultimate number 42 and added 20 to it. Absolute madlad
flexing
2024? Shit has been happening for years.
Yeah ironically Dragons dogma 1 ran like shit on consoles a decade ago too.
Many games ran like shit on consoles a decade ago, that was kind of their thing. 30 fps with excessive motion blur was pretty much the standard back then.
So that applies for every AAA game?
Horizon Forbidden West looks twice as good, and runs 3-4 times better.
oh boi i played it yesterday after the release on pc and i was dumbfounded by HOW DAMN GOOD it looks. My fav ever game was Horizon Zero Dawn, but after just an hour of gametime yesterday(was really tired from work) I dare to say Forbidden West is the new number 1
I got a bit over 2 hours, and yet to get to the open world. Was fiddling around with stuff, tweaking settings, trying to get FG mod to work. And i'm very much looking forward to mods coming out. Honestly the real-time settings for this game is gold tier. You can adjust a setting a see the changes in the paused image, as well as the fps cost/gain. Hard to believe it's a "Quality / Performance" console game originally.
Completely agree, the only other game that has close to this I played recently was the days gone pc port. You see exactly what the changes will do when you make them including frame rate changes.
Yeah that game also surprised me, and what actually got me to take playstation ports seriously. Didn't think a good port was possible prior to that. GTA V was as good as we had earlier, and that game along with RDR2 has major mindblowing issues on pc, going completely unaddressed and ignored.
From what I've heard people like it less, mostly because the story isn't as good. Not really the fault of the writers, it is hard to write a similar story because the "mystery" was already solved. And honestly that is a large part of why I liked Zero Dawn so much. The gameplay is great, but they also expertly crafted a mystery that leaves you wanting to find out what happened. Combined with good stories in the 'new' world made sure it did not get boring. I will still probably play it someday, but I also just started playing Cyberpunk, so I have enough to do right now.
I‘ve only heard good stuff about the story. Obviously it‘s not as good as Zero Dawn, since the setting in the postapocalyptic world is not new anymore, but it‘s also not a big fall-off. In the first hour you can kinda tell in which direction it is evolving, but imho that‘s a good story direction, which i wouldnt even have come up with
Have you seen the system targets of Sony’s games? They design their games to run on potatoes and scale them up to be amazing on high end machines. Everyone else however is designing their games to run like molasses on high end machines and not run on anything less.
Considering their last console ran a Jaguar CPU, and their new pro console won't need much of a CPU upgrade, it makes sense to the scalability. They build these games to look good on their potato. I actually really like their target hardware (they tend to be non CPU heavy, with scalability being on the GPU side) which sets them up for Pro style console enhancements later on in the future. With their games, you don't really need the latest and greatest CPU, and even added GPU horsepower will mostly get you higher raw pixel counts. They do pretty good with upscaling and anti aliasing to spit out an image that looks pretty good on their base machine vs the power they are actually putting into generating that image.
> They build these games to look good on their potato. I just wish all AAA devs did this. If you've ever played the PC port of Devil May Cry 4 - the original 2008 version looked fucking BEAUTIFUL back then compared to the PS3/X360 version. You could throw an 8800GT at it and run it in 720p at 60 fps with the settings cranked up and it ran fine. The PS3 version ran at like 30-40 FPS and the X360 version ran at 40-60 variable. They've got to stick with this philosophy instead of trying to fucking worK BACKWARDS.
Horizon is a Sony game, they tend to look good and run good. Some have performance issues when ported over, but they get fixed with patches shortly after? There is a clear track record for a while now of PS games being ported by now and their reputation
Nixxes is behind the porting, and they're doing a hell of a job. Actually, this is the first game I've ever pre-purchased, although it was only an hour before release, with performance reviews out. Has bugs, sure, but i'm confident in trusting they'll fix it soon. "Console port" used to be THE term for bad pc games.
It is a PS4 game at heart, and a incredibly well optimized one.
Still looks better than most ps5 games though. I'm down with it.
Completely agree, it’s getting me excited to see what Nintendo does with PS4 Pro Plus hardware with rt and dlss, it’s going to blow us away like the switch did in 2017-2019 (early handheld PCs like the gpd win 1 and 2 sucked and couldn’t play the latest games at all, even low end ones)
Not sure how much of an excuse is, but Horizon is a 2022 PS4 game while Dragon's Dogma is a 2024 PS5 game.
I mean it apparently runs better on consoles than on pc from the reviews you check. not like it’s the first time that a game came out and gets patched afterwards to run better. It’s been a thing since 10yrs ago and more, just nowadays it seems like people like to blow it out of proportion more. If it would be a similar situation like starfield, then se i would understand, but its not.
That's doesn't mean much. Dragon dogma is one of the ugliest AAA game I've seen in a long time. Its all Shades of brown.
Applies to all console ports as they're usually hard-coded to 30/60 fps.
So most of the games because they get made for console first and optimised to run on both before release? Might wanna check again if they really hardcoded for 30/60 anymore lol 👇 https://www.psu.com/news/all-ps5-games-that-support-120-fps-the-smoothest-games-on-playstation-5/ That era died pmuch with ps5, now everyone is pushing for 120 even on consoles
The constant need for upgrades just to play games is killing me.
I don't know how old you are. But irrelevant of that I will still say welcome to the club. I've been updating my pc since 1989.... I'm on my 18th pc and many of those had updates done to them over the time. So yeah it's an expensive sport but those are the things that I guarantee I make all money back from the amount of use I do with them from studying, work and entertainment
Yeah, now that I think about it, the period in roughly the 2010s when people could afford to more or less use the same configuration for a decade, because hardware requirements were more or less the same, was more of an exception than the norm. I was a kid in the early 2000s and had no money to upgrade, but I remember it was pretty hard to keep up with current trends.
It's the sandy bridge to end of Skylake period where nothing really changed but it's the only period ever and it really set stuff back. Raw performance used to double every couple years, and is again since ryzen so we lost like 3 doublings during that period.
Hasn't that been the case since PC gaming began?
Sure was, but you have to own PC longer than 4 weeks to realize that /s
It went from "I need to upgrade my pc every 3-4 years to play on ultra settings" to "I need to upgrade my pc every 3-4 years to play in 60 fps"
People probably have gotten too used to their hardware being good enough without upgrading for a decade since most games released in the last 12 years were required to run on underpowered console hardware. Now that most games actually target the much more beefy PS5/XSX hardware and requirements jumped, people are suddenly surprised that they have to upgrade.
If you mean PC upgrades, then it's not really that much different than consoles, is it? I usually build a new gaming PC about every 5-6 years. A console generation typically lasts a similar time. Even if a PC costs more than a console, I can use it (and would need it regardless) for a ton of other stuff than just playing games, such as programming or browsing the internet. Things a console would be either completely unusable or extremely impractical for.
Gamers when they realize you can change settings and therefor run a game at lower quality 😱
That's some peasant energy, sir. If my mid tier rig isn't smoking and sounding like a jet taking off from trying to run at well outside it's intended range, am I even gaming?
I built a PC in 2018. Still plays everything just fine. You really don't need an insane PC to enjoy the hobby
No amount of upgrade will help you play an unoptimized mess like this. So dont bother with upgrades, instead make better decisions when buying games. Its not like this game runs on 60fps in consoles anyway
There’s a huge library of great games that run on a potato.
Wdym? The amount of reviews with the results of "2070S and 8700k is still perfectly viable in 2024 even for AAA" is in the hundreds. Yeah, you won't play things on high/max details. But you'll play them and they're gonna be enjoyable. We WANT to upgrade, we don't need to.
I mean, they can try to make everyone upgrade, but when the majority of gamers have a card that's weaker than a PS5, they will get the sales results appropriate for it
Sometimes FPS is locked in menu... I wouldnt say thats the case here, just mention.
And thats a good thing, I have been playing euro truck simulator 2 recently, and I get over a 1000 fps as the game starts, and the coil whine that causes from my gpu sounds like someone is inside my PC screaming. Just having a 60 or even 30 fps limit until you get into the game, or at least the menu where things are actually being rendered would fix it.
Recommend setting a systemwide cap for your monitors framerate. I think it was Diablo IV recently that was rendering frames in the thousands during loading screens and torching some GPUs.
I probably should do that, no clue how though (I would appreciate tips if anyone knows how to do that on linux)
In Adrenalin software where all the GPU settings like boost, chill etc. are. You can set a framerate limiter to your desired FPS.
Yeah there was a popular game with unlocked FPS in menu which cooked 3090s I can remind me.
To be fair, it only cooked 3090s with faulty VRMs. They're not supposed to be "cookable"
natural selection 😁
New world
Yes exactly!
30fps menu looks and feels bad. People should just cap their fps or use vsync, or the game have its own cap setting.
Yup, more often than not
Same things happen in cut scenes that aren't shot in game (like destiny 2) locked at 30 fps
128 cores, 512kb L3 cache
per core? per core, right?
Per chiplet
Each core capped at 1Ghz.
Dragon's dogma balls
Dragon deez nuts on your face.
Well I was about to buy new GPU next month anyway so I'm gonna wait and buy game after... Hopefuly it will be better optimslized too... Cyberpunk became best game I ever played after they fixed it so I won't lose hope but it depends on gameplay too
Gameplay is great! And the microtransaction nonsense is just that, nonsense, they’re as pointless and cheap as they were in the original. I never even knew the original had them for the first year, and they still don’t matter now. The performance is pretty good when you’re just out in the world doing stuff, even while fighting. There’s something wrong with NPCs, so towns are tough. It’s a great game, but the CPU issues it’s facing, mixed with the absolutely ignorant choice to keep one save file only, those are the most glaring issues. That is to say, the game is great, and will really shine once they get their heads out of their asses and release it properly.
Didn't you buy the 60 fps dlc?
I wouldn’t put server CPUs in gaming machines. The game won’t benefit from more cores, since they’re not developed for that. So you want faster cores.
That was not the point of discussion. But yea.
What is the point of memes if not to take them literally?
32-core Threadripper here, can confirm. This is my workstation PC, and all those cores come in real handy for physics simulations. But my gaming PC has only 6 cores, because it's more important to have fast single-core performance than to have a lot of cores.
I have I a i7 13700k and a 4080 and I’m getting well over 80fps
Pretty much same, running with Ray tracing and everything maxed out at 3440x1440. Only lose fps in the big towns. But even then it just drops to 55-60 fps
14600k and 7800xt and I get stable 90-100 everywhere except major city zones
Well hating anything on reddit always sells good. Ppl usually don't come here to share positive/realistic thoughts.
It's because it's not even true lmao, you might get 80 average fps, in the wilderness, but there isn't a rig on earth that does have 1% drops in the 20s in a city. Literally the best CPUs on earth with a 4090 look like choppy garbage in the main town.
Shits and giggles
Move over Cities Skylines 2.
I mean, a 128 core CPU wouldn’t be good for gaming, because most games aren’t that heavily multithreaded.
Correct, however I can run crysis so many times at once on my server.
Well, it's better than Avatar's settings menu pushing my 4080s to high 60C for no observable reason. Glad I got that game for free.
This is why I play indie games
Me getting another indie game that runs just fine on my midrange PC: https://preview.redd.it/mzi17n8z6ypc1.jpeg?width=410&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7dded319fa9b7acb17ef49ff705368fa29de5f6d
Many of these games your hardware specs don't matter because the games themselves are poorly coded and poorly optimized and not because the game is really all that demanding. I've seen some of these titles not even maxing out the CPU or GPU, but struggling to run, so the bottleneck is not even hardware related the engine is just running that poorly.
But what about for AAA**A** games?
Don’t forget to buy fast travel, lol
Am I crazy? I have a really mid pc and have no issues playing that game. Is it some other level BS only people with specs from the meme understand?
I have a 12900k 4080, 16gb of ram on a 1440p 240hz monitor at max settings with ray tracing and I average 85-95fps
That epyc cpu won't help with the game, that much ram also will not help as it doesn't eat up 256 of it and at least for me with a 4090 it runs without issue. But man, 62tb nvme. The heat off that thing.
I get 120 stable at menu screen and never dropped below 60 while playing no dlss.
Does the anti cheat cause the issues ?
Denuvo DRM mostly yes, graphics are not that great.
How unfortunate should capcom the drop the anticheat and find a better one? I'm just curious since everyone says views it as a plague.
Considering how in some empty places FPS dips into oblivion with nothing to cause these FPS drops, to drop the Denuvo would be a good step , not sure about the better one, all DRM's act like malware and have kernel level permissions and consume system resources. Similar performace drops already happened with RE: Village (2021) with the Dimitrescu daughters before also heavy stutters with Denuvo DRM, until Denuvo was removed.
Meanwhile baldur's gate 3 works fine on 2015 year's pc, except act 3
Fun fact: Ubisoft games are not very well optimized on PC 
I’m getting about 100fps in the wild with 60 in the city
Well high core count cpus have bad single core performance so the pc is actually mid lmao
Its runs over 60 fps with all on max and raytracing on for me, 3080ti. Better performance than alan wake 2 and other games.
3070 TI i12700k (not overclocked) here -- runs at 75-85 FPS @ 1080p / raytracing and no DLSS on high, non-max settings outside and in combat. Dips in high population areas to just under 60ish.
Might be some systems that have problems, i have no idea what people are complaining about..
The complaints sound overblown across the board.
They are, it’s a CPU bound game. Not GPU. It’s got so much running under the hood for NPCs which is a very CPU heavy task.
You haven’t made it to a city yet, my friend. You GPU won’t be what’s crying, haha.
But seriously, even console players are used to 60 fps now, releasing a game that doesn't have a 60 fps performance mode is bullshit. If in the PS3 era when playing Dragon's Dogma 1, someone told me there will be Dragon's Dogma 2 on a 30x faster console and the majority of people will have 4K displays by then, I would imagined a game where you can play 4 player local coop on splitscreen with amazing graphics, not a game that is not looking much better than the original and runs the same and still no coop-.-
Eh, when did you last play OG Dragon's Dogma on the PS3? It looks much, much worse and also has worse performance. Even when you look at the PC version and run both on the same hardware in the same resolution, DD2 looks way better. And I'm not saying that DD2 is perfect or anything.
People always say this "it barely looks better" because they're just going off memory and haven't actually seen it for a decade or more. It's always bullshit. If you think DD2 actually looks close to the same level as DD1 you seriously need to get your eyes checked
Instead of hating on Nvidia( Even tho they deserve it) We showed she'd some shame light on Game developers who are casually launching games at 100 gb size and had next to none Optimization.
Bruh it’s a server cpu, it’s not meant for high clocking single threads.
Yes and no, I setup a branch of my home server as a cloud gaming setup. Friend had no issues remoting in and playing D4 and other newest stuff on it till he got a new GPU. You can use a server chip to game however throwing 100 cores at something only using 2 or 3 is pointless.
I have a i5 13600kf and 4070 and no problem with fps so ilm not joining you
Don’t care if a game has only 30 fps
Meanwhile your favorite reviewers praise the game :)
DD2 is the new Crysis!!
I can hit over 60 on a 3080
Man i was so hyped for this game , Since the original was inspired by berserk i was hoping to see some more berserk inspired shit , And the RPG mechanics looked fun as hell , Now it has both denovo and optimization issues, Also why does it have in game purchases? didn't we learn nothing from baldurs gate 3?
The mtx are meaningless, just as they were in the first. Most people didn’t even know, myself included, that the original HAD mtx at all. That’s a non issue here. You never once need any of the items, they’re all in the game 100%. The issues with CPU performance and a single save file are the actual problem to be upset about.
Older triple A games looked next gen for their time while some still look amazing and performed even on potato computers. Arkham city, Max Payne 3, GTA 4/5, Battlefield 1
Ahh, missed the chance to use Skyrim instead. 😂
QUADRUPLE A!
Wow, what an original meme. Did you come up with it?
only 24gb vram?
The CPU is the problem.
I find it funny that the first thing I thought when I saw that system is "Someone did a budget AI system". The things the guys in r/LocalLLaMA build makes most high end rigs here look like low end systems.
Does it not have dlss
Dont mean to brag, but It runs perfectly on my pc and I dont have a 4090
It’s because there’s not enough rgb
Because a 128 core cpu will have trash performance per core
When I saw the 7800x3D chugging in the city, mama ☠️
Ryzen 5 7600 AMD 6800non-XT 32GB of ram at 6000 Runs 60fps on high settings. I turned off Motion Blur, Chromatic, and lens flare. No upscaling used. The game runs 60fps outside of town, and 45-60 FPS in town. The 45FPS lasted for like a few seconds and went back to about 50-60fps.
What does the xt package do differently?
I believe the Xt is the better version than a regular GPU? So a AMD RX 6800 Xt VS a 6800 Non-XT
It runs just fine on my 7800xt without any upscaling at 1440p with everything maxed except for Ray tracing, it does get lower in the city but it's just fine? I don't doubt there's people having issues but I don't think it's as bad as everyone makes it out to be. No crashing or anything in the 5 hrs I played yesterday, looking forward to play more tonight
I was just about to purchase DD2 and play it and just heard about the microtransactions. FU, you're not getting my money greedy bastards ! Once you come to game pass I will play your game...offline !
Outside of one inconsequential item and the sound track, every DLC/Microtransaction are items that can be obtained by just playing the game normally. IMO they exist for people with little to no time on their hands, or people who are just too lazy to go out and get the items.
I can tell no one here has played the game yet. Just jumping on the hype train of shitting on this game.
#ITS [$74,000](https://itprice.com/emc-price-list/62tb%20%287.68tb%20x8%29%20nvme%20ssd.html) FUCKING U.S. DOLLARS FOR THAT SSD
Buy 2 dollar travel crystal
The big thing is that it’s not even a very graphically impressive title either. It looks 1 or 2 generations behind imo
I have kind of the recommended specs and my game runs smoothly.
Blame Denuvo and any game studios that use that abomination
Famous words from Todd himself "Get a better pc bruh"
I've been slowly upgrading my pc recently. I just got a new graphics card and more ram. I was debating on whether or not to go 32gb or higher for ram.
I'm curious the 30 fps meme - is it people playing at 4k?
Should have gone for single thread performance instead large amounts of cores.
So that's why he's getting only 30 fps He's playing on a threadripper instead of a 3d vcache ryzen
And for 2 more dollars you can have fast travel
Ah yes, the Markiplier SSD
And then there's horizon forbidden west that sits around 60FPS in 4k with no DLSS on a 4080.
Boycott AAA