By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

Welp. 



Around the Network

F*ck crypto mining, but that guy is full of BS. If you want to play new games, or even games launched in the past couple of years, on PC, you need more than 4GB of VRAM even to play at 1080p.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

"What kind of GPU's can we expect to buy in 2021?"

Is that some kind of trick question?.

None of them of course, because miners and scalpers lol. We're in for another fucked year of GPU shortages.

Last edited by Chazore - on 02 January 2021

Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

JEMC said:

So, I'm thinking of giving the new Assassin's Creed games a try, starting with Origins (of course), and I'm wondering, are the two story DLCs worth the 6 € of difference between the standard edition (11.99 €) and the gold editon (17.99 €)?

I liked both DLCs. However, the first one isn't that great except for minor lore additions, and it has some annoying-to-navigate terrain. It's quite decent but worse than the base game, I think. The second one offers much more content that also has higher quality, but it's also quite disconnected from the base game. If you like the base game, 6 € isn't too bad for the DLCs I'd say, but of course it also depends on whether you care about the percentage increase (50 %) of the absolute amount (6 €). I would personally have been more than happy to pay just 6 € for the DLCs but then again, I've played every major Assassin's Creed game out there so there's that.

JEMC said:

F*ck crypto mining, but that guy is full of BS. If you want to play new games, or even games launched in the past couple of years, on PC, you need more than 4GB of VRAM even to play at 1080p.

I didn't have a problem playing Total War: Three Kingdoms on my GTX 770 with 2 GB of VRAM (at 1080p). It's not all that great, but I don't think I even had to play on the lowest settings. I'm sure there are more demanding games as well and you probably can't run all modern games with an outdated GPU, but there are certainly even some recent high-profile games that run just fine on outdated cards.



Me with a Strix 3080



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

Around the Network
Captain_Yuri said:

Me with a Strix 3080

Where ye be living, Yuri?. Totally not going to swipe that 3080 or anythin. 



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Zkuq said:
JEMC said:

So, I'm thinking of giving the new Assassin's Creed games a try, starting with Origins (of course), and I'm wondering, are the two story DLCs worth the 6 € of difference between the standard edition (11.99 €) and the gold editon (17.99 €)?

I liked both DLCs. However, the first one isn't that great except for minor lore additions, and it has some annoying-to-navigate terrain. It's quite decent but worse than the base game, I think. The second one offers much more content that also has higher quality, but it's also quite disconnected from the base game. If you like the base game, 6 € isn't too bad for the DLCs I'd say, but of course it also depends on whether you care about the percentage increase (50 %) of the absolute amount (6 €). I would personally have been more than happy to pay just 6 € for the DLCs but then again, I've played every major Assassin's Creed game out there so there's that.

Thanks for your comment. The thing is that I either get the gold edition now with the DLCs or I just won't be getting them because they will cost more either alone or with the Season Pass.

And you've played all of them? Wow. I stopped caring about that franchise after AC 3 killed it for me. And while I played Black Flag later, and enjoyed it, the games that followed never picked my attention. But then came the pause (a well deserved and necessary pause) and they came back with what looked like a new formula with Origins and the games that came after. And so here I am, jumping on it again.

Zkuq said:
JEMC said:

F*ck crypto mining, but that guy is full of BS. If you want to play new games, or even games launched in the past couple of years, on PC, you need more than 4GB of VRAM even to play at 1080p.

I didn't have a problem playing Total War: Three Kingdoms on my GTX 770 with 2 GB of VRAM (at 1080p). It's not all that great, but I don't think I even had to play on the lowest settings. I'm sure there are more demanding games as well and you probably can't run all modern games with an outdated GPU, but there are certainly even some recent high-profile games that run just fine on outdated cards.

Ok, maybe more than 4Gb is not mandatory for every recent game, but if you look at the requirements of most games, you'll agree with me that if you're buying a GPU right now, 4GB is not a good investment.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

JEMC said:
Zkuq said:

I liked both DLCs. However, the first one isn't that great except for minor lore additions, and it has some annoying-to-navigate terrain. It's quite decent but worse than the base game, I think. The second one offers much more content that also has higher quality, but it's also quite disconnected from the base game. If you like the base game, 6 € isn't too bad for the DLCs I'd say, but of course it also depends on whether you care about the percentage increase (50 %) of the absolute amount (6 €). I would personally have been more than happy to pay just 6 € for the DLCs but then again, I've played every major Assassin's Creed game out there so there's that.

Thanks for your comment. The thing is that I either get the gold edition now with the DLCs or I just won't be getting them because they will cost more either alone or with the Season Pass.

And you've played all of them? Wow. I stopped caring about that franchise after AC 3 killed it for me. And while I played Black Flag later, and enjoyed it, the games that followed never picked my attention. But then came the pause (a well deserved and necessary pause) and they came back with what looked like a new formula with Origins and the games that came after. And so here I am, jumping on it again.

Yeah. Unlike most, I'm interested in the modern day story as well, and I really like the historical settings. And I've also been hoping for the series to get better, but it took until Origins for it to actually happen. I actually didn't mind AC3 at all, but starting from Black Flag, I felt like the series went downhill (and in some ways, starting from AC2). Unity was a glimmer of hope with some neat ideas, but I don't think any game had annoyed be like Unity with some of its design choices... But personally I feel like Origins got so much right that the series has been on the right track ever since, and I feel like with Valhalla we're finally roughly where the series should have been from the start. Anyway, I think that leaves about three games I didn't really like all that much (and even they were OK), but I've liked the rest. I can definitely see why people got fed up with the series though!

JEMC said:
Zkuq said:

I didn't have a problem playing Total War: Three Kingdoms on my GTX 770 with 2 GB of VRAM (at 1080p). It's not all that great, but I don't think I even had to play on the lowest settings. I'm sure there are more demanding games as well and you probably can't run all modern games with an outdated GPU, but there are certainly even some recent high-profile games that run just fine on outdated cards.

Ok, maybe more than 4Gb is not mandatory for every recent game, but if you look at the requirements of most games, you'll agree with me that if you're buying a GPU right now, 4GB is not a good investment.

To be honest, I've only been looking at GPU requirements themselves, and even that just occasionally because I tend to get games years after release anyway (mostly because digital purchases are worth less to me for several reasons, but also because of my outdated card). I think GTX 770 has finally started falling out of minimum requirements only in 2019 or 2020 (so I finally upgraded to to a GTX 970 temporarily until I can actually get a proper new card for a decent price). Judging by the fall of GTX 770 though, 4 GB does indeed not seem like a great investment in the long term.



All good. My most played game of 2020 uses like 600 mb of vram.



I feel like I'm the odd one here. I actually preferred Creed being more like Creed 1-2, where you were basically sneaking around and climbing a lot. Getting info from certain targets and tracking them down felt fun to me vs what we have today, where it's mostly just open combat, and CPU heavy cities, where the Ai mostly don't do much (not like old Creed AI was much, but still). I more or less gave up after Origins, mostly because the series to me stopped being about what the first 2 games were, and the change in style of play also put me off as well (that and their PC ports with forced DRM and console parity just put me right off these days).



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"