This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Why does COD Ghost require 6GB of RAM

#31JonWood007Posted 10/11/2013 2:24:59 PM(edited)
Orestes417 posted...
I love the smug dismissal of CoD, really I do. Series is damn good at what it sets out to do, it just does it a bit too often.


This. The thing it, a low potential game with good execution, that comes out with a remake every year.

Although tbqh the newer CODs are kind of lacking in quality, minus BO2.

Jon, the E8400 is a dual core. You can't expect next gen games running on 6 threads to run on a dual core. Are you thinking straight? You expected CPU minimum requirements to jump by 0.6GHz on the same CPU generation for the next gen consoles?

Do you hear yourself talk? The current consoles have more threading than an E8400 can handle in many situations. I don't think you realize just how much your CPU has aged. It was budget performance on release. It was never a performance part. Phenom II has some serious per core performance issues. I don't see where you're coming from.

BF4 will also run better on release.


So...games that look marginally better than what we have now should randomly require double the power simply because devs are too lazy to optimize? Are you listening to yourself?

The only reason the games use those threads is because theyre put on the new console. I really don't think these new games really NEED those threads, the devs are simply too lazy to code the game properly.

Basically, what we're seeing how are lazy console ports.

It was budget performance on release. It was never a performance part. Phenom II has some serious per core performance issues. I don't see where you're coming from.


No it wasn't. It was equal to the very expensive Q9000 series and at the time, was only 10% less than the i5s or so (although this has since changed).

Like, seriously, I was researching possibly getting a new build 4 months before the phenom IIs were released....their equivalents at the time literally cost as much as an i7 today.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 8 GB DDR3 | GTX 580 | 1 TB HDD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HDD | W7 | 1366x768
#32TheFeshPincePosted 10/11/2013 2:35:38 PM
Sergei_Dukanov posted...
the fish ai is probably whats hogging most of it.


This.
---
http://i.imgur.com/J0lvB6S.jpg | http://i.imgur.com/DoHj9yA.jpg | http://youtu.be/YXkx-PSwbG4
#33Bazooka_PenguinPosted 10/11/2013 2:39:21 PM
LostHisHardcore posted...
mega textures for the ten people with 4k displays that nvidia is pushing the tech of because they have nothing left now that everyone will be developing on AMD hardware for the next decade


DX 11.2 supports an equivalent to megatextures and only AMD offers cards that have hardware support for DX11.2 (though driver support for DX11.2 has yet to come).
---
Deth Pen
http://i.imgur.com/eMXgU.gif
#34ShebeskiiPosted 10/11/2013 3:45:48 PM
JonWood007 posted...
Orestes417 posted...
I love the smug dismissal of CoD, really I do. Series is damn good at what it sets out to do, it just does it a bit too often.


This. The thing it, a low potential game with good execution, that comes out with a remake every year.

Although tbqh the newer CODs are kind of lacking in quality, minus BO2.

Jon, the E8400 is a dual core. You can't expect next gen games running on 6 threads to run on a dual core. Are you thinking straight? You expected CPU minimum requirements to jump by 0.6GHz on the same CPU generation for the next gen consoles?

Do you hear yourself talk? The current consoles have more threading than an E8400 can handle in many situations. I don't think you realize just how much your CPU has aged. It was budget performance on release. It was never a performance part. Phenom II has some serious per core performance issues. I don't see where you're coming from.

BF4 will also run better on release.


So...games that look marginally better than what we have now should randomly require double the power simply because devs are too lazy to optimize? Are you listening to yourself?

The only reason the games use those threads is because theyre put on the new console. I really don't think these new games really NEED those threads, the devs are simply too lazy to code the game properly.

Basically, what we're seeing how are lazy console ports.

It was budget performance on release. It was never a performance part. Phenom II has some serious per core performance issues. I don't see where you're coming from.


No it wasn't. It was equal to the very expensive Q9000 series and at the time, was only 10% less than the i5s or so (although this has since changed).

Like, seriously, I was researching possibly getting a new build 4 months before the phenom IIs were released....their equivalents at the time literally cost as much as an i7 today.


No? Some things like animation and physics have gone up considerably. CPU load has changed drastically from the 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo minimum, and to be honest, that CPU hasn't been doing well for ages.

You're actually manufacturing a scenario here. Even the E8400 has been performing VERY poorly in new games as of late, and they aren't "next gen". This jump you're manufacturing doesn't exist. It's been a slow climb, and some games, like Ghosts and BF4, are experiencing engine changes. You don't even know how hard Ghosts will push PCs from a graphical perspective.

You made a bunch of assumptions about current CPU minimum requirements (which aren't true) and off that faulty premise, assume crappy ports.

Have you played BF3 with a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo online?
---
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens
#35JonWood007Posted 10/11/2013 6:31:41 PM(edited)
No? Some things like animation and physics have gone up considerably. CPU load has changed drastically from the 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo minimum, and to be honest, that CPU hasn't been doing well for ages.


Been doing fine in the FPS genre. I know you hate on it because you're into SC2, but honestly, outside of that and a few other select games, it runs just fine. Heck, the only FPS to date that's really caused problems aside from these "next gen" ones is planetside 2...which has the CPU calculations you'd expect from a heavy MMO. I kind of have to say that 20-30 FPS in a scenario with literally hundreds of players duking it out is acceptable, since it's not something that happens in other areas of the FPS genre. But then, going back to like, BF4, which looks more or less the same as BF3 except with a building collapsing, yeah. There's not much of an excuse for these absurd requirements.

Have you played BF3 with a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo online?


No, but I've played on a 1.4 GHz AMD quad core. It ran like BF4 does on my phenom II, but without the jitter.
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 8 GB DDR3 | GTX 580 | 1 TB HDD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HDD | W7 | 1366x768
#36clschneider1990Posted 10/11/2013 6:29:35 PM
Shebeskii posted...
JonWood007 posted...
Orestes417 posted...
I love the smug dismissal of CoD, really I do. Series is damn good at what it sets out to do, it just does it a bit too often.


This. The thing it, a low potential game with good execution, that comes out with a remake every year.

Although tbqh the newer CODs are kind of lacking in quality, minus BO2.

Jon, the E8400 is a dual core. You can't expect next gen games running on 6 threads to run on a dual core. Are you thinking straight? You expected CPU minimum requirements to jump by 0.6GHz on the same CPU generation for the next gen consoles?

Do you hear yourself talk? The current consoles have more threading than an E8400 can handle in many situations. I don't think you realize just how much your CPU has aged. It was budget performance on release. It was never a performance part. Phenom II has some serious per core performance issues. I don't see where you're coming from.

BF4 will also run better on release.


So...games that look marginally better than what we have now should randomly require double the power simply because devs are too lazy to optimize? Are you listening to yourself?

The only reason the games use those threads is because theyre put on the new console. I really don't think these new games really NEED those threads, the devs are simply too lazy to code the game properly.

Basically, what we're seeing how are lazy console ports.

It was budget performance on release. It was never a performance part. Phenom II has some serious per core performance issues. I don't see where you're coming from.


No it wasn't. It was equal to the very expensive Q9000 series and at the time, was only 10% less than the i5s or so (although this has since changed).

Like, seriously, I was researching possibly getting a new build 4 months before the phenom IIs were released....their equivalents at the time literally cost as much as an i7 today.


No? Some things like animation and physics have gone up considerably. CPU load has changed drastically from the 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo minimum, and to be honest, that CPU hasn't been doing well for ages.

You're actually manufacturing a scenario here. Even the E8400 has been performing VERY poorly in new games as of late, and they aren't "next gen". This jump you're manufacturing doesn't exist. It's been a slow climb, and some games, like Ghosts and BF4, are experiencing engine changes. You don't even know how hard Ghosts will push PCs from a graphical perspective.

You made a bunch of assumptions about current CPU minimum requirements (which aren't true) and off that faulty premise, assume crappy ports.

Have you played BF3 with a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo online?


I have. That is actually my CPU and I have an AMD Radon HD 2600 GPU and 4 GIGS of RAM

I didnt have any issues running the game. It ran fine for me when I played it
---
GT:EchoesOfMercy
#37JKatarnPosted 10/11/2013 7:07:33 PM
JonWood007 posted...
No? Some things like animation and physics have gone up considerably. CPU load has changed drastically from the 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo minimum, and to be honest, that CPU hasn't been doing well for ages.


Been doing fine in the FPS genre. I know you hate on it because you're into SC2, but honestly, outside of that and a few other select games, it runs just fine. Heck, the only FPS to date that's really caused problems aside from these "next gen" ones is planetside 2...which has the CPU calculations you'd expect from a heavy MMO. I kind of have to say that 20-30 FPS in a scenario with literally hundreds of players duking it out is acceptable, since it's not something that happens in other areas of the FPS genre. But then, going back to like, BF4, which looks more or less the same as BF3 except with a building collapsing, yeah. There's not much of an excuse for these absurd requirements.

Have you played BF3 with a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo online?


No, but I've played on a 1.4 GHz AMD quad core. It ran like BF4 does on my phenom II, but without the jitter.


Your definition of "just fine" may be quite different from most users around here. Even upgrading from a Core 2 Quad 9450 to my Current i7 I saw noticeable performance improvements (with same video card) with more than a few non-CPU bound games like Borderlands. A Dual core processor has been the absolute bare minimum to get the vast majority of games running this generation (and minimum requirements are just that - the bare minimum machine that will launch the game, it doesn't mean it will be very playable/enjoyable on that spec - the recommended requirements are usually the realistic minimum), so I don't know why you would expect a port meant to run on 8 core machines running a brand new engine to run just fine on your ancient dual-core processor (remember, the roots of the engine used in the CoD franchise prior to ghosts is the Quake III engine - first used in 1999).
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#38ShebeskiiPosted 10/11/2013 9:09:50 PM
JKatarn posted...
JonWood007 posted...
No? Some things like animation and physics have gone up considerably. CPU load has changed drastically from the 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo minimum, and to be honest, that CPU hasn't been doing well for ages.


Been doing fine in the FPS genre. I know you hate on it because you're into SC2, but honestly, outside of that and a few other select games, it runs just fine. Heck, the only FPS to date that's really caused problems aside from these "next gen" ones is planetside 2...which has the CPU calculations you'd expect from a heavy MMO. I kind of have to say that 20-30 FPS in a scenario with literally hundreds of players duking it out is acceptable, since it's not something that happens in other areas of the FPS genre. But then, going back to like, BF4, which looks more or less the same as BF3 except with a building collapsing, yeah. There's not much of an excuse for these absurd requirements.

Have you played BF3 with a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo online?


No, but I've played on a 1.4 GHz AMD quad core. It ran like BF4 does on my phenom II, but without the jitter.


Your definition of "just fine" may be quite different from most users around here. Even upgrading from a Core 2 Quad 9450 to my Current i7 I saw noticeable performance improvements (with same video card) with more than a few non-CPU bound games like Borderlands. A Dual core processor has been the absolute bare minimum to get the vast majority of games running this generation (and minimum requirements are just that - the bare minimum machine that will launch the game, it doesn't mean it will be very playable/enjoyable on that spec - the recommended requirements are usually the realistic minimum), so I don't know why you would expect a port meant to run on 8 core machines running a brand new engine to run just fine on your ancient dual-core processor (remember, the roots of the engine used in the CoD franchise prior to ghosts is the Quake III engine - first used in 1999).


This is my point. Maybe the requirements this time are more realistic? The 2.4GHz C2D requirement hasn't been a good experience for years. We don't know if a quad requirement is equivalent performance wise until we actually play the games. We all know requirements are usually all over the place. Let's stop jumping to conclusions.
---
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens