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

Forums - Gaming - How the PS4 and Xbox have raised PC system requirement

Tagged games:

Jizz_Beard_thePirate on 10 February 2015
Chazore said:
Captain_Yuri said:
This article is pretty terrible and shows that the author doesn't know much about PC gaming in general... The reason why SoM required 6gbs of vram is because that is for Ultra textures for 4k resolution and SoM runs pretty well in 2gb video cards on high settings...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/shadow-of-mordor-performance,3996-3.html

And Ubisoft games have always been known to have bad porting when it comes to PC games, specially Unity. And for Far Cry 4, there is a fix in order to run ur games on a Dual Core CPU and it runs fine. And there are just so many other things wrong with this article like how they are using Alienware of all things to show PC gaming costs but every PC gamer knows that Alienware over prices everything

Not to say that the requirements havn't gone up but hes making it sound wayy worse than it really is


It doesn't help how this is an old article posted recently on here after the whole "DS II PS4 vs PC/360/PS3" thread and how IGN didn't mention PC and Xb1 were going to get the same version and then people started spouting over there and on YT that PC was ultimately weak compared to the PS4 and then we get an author of the article spreading the same kind of myhtical crap around, it doesn't surprise me as to why it's posted here and not under PC dicussion, heck I don't even know why the op wanted to dig up an old article since op isn't really coming from the PC space, last I checked it was the PS4 space based from profile info.

I'm also finding it hard to believe that current gens are apparently free of blame when it comes to ports considering their hardware is technically outdated and provided from a weaker manufacturer.

Mhmm, yea! I didn't actually notice that this article is a bit old now and it is a bit dated too. Shame really but I guess it is a bit expected since quite a few members of this site isn't very kind to PC gamers to say the least even though most PC gamers on this site love consoles



                  

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

Around the Network
sc94597 on 10 February 2015

This article is ridiculous. For 1080p 60fps that the consoles do 3GB of Vram and 6-8 Gb of system ram is plenty for any next gen game. Sure if you're looking to do 4k at ultra textures you might need 4Gb of Vram, but that is only if you want 4k with ultra textures. As for CPU's four threads is enough to play games at console quality. Dragon Age Inquisition is currently the game that requires the most cores to actually run decently. It runs find on i3's with two cores but four threads. Sure, you see performance gains with an i5's four cores or especially an i7's four cores and six-eight threads, but that isn't necessary.



sc94597 on 10 February 2015
Ruler said:
Captain_Yuri said:
This article is pretty terrible and shows that the author doesn't know much about PC gaming in general... The reason why SoM required 6gbs of vram is because that is for Ultra textures for 4k resolution and SoM runs pretty well in 2gb video cards on high settings...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/shadow-of-mordor-performance,3996-3.html

And Ubisoft games have always been known to have bad porting when it comes to PC games, specially Unity. And for Far Cry 4, there is a fix in order to run ur games on a Dual Core CPU and it runs fine. And there are just so many other things wrong with this article like how they are using Alienware of all things to show PC gaming costs but every PC gamer knows that Alienware over prices everything

Not to say that the requirements havn't gone up but hes making it sound wayy worse than it really is


Tomshardware used a 200 bucks corei5 @4.6ghz with 8 gigs of ram for shadow of mordor who requires at least an i5. You have to take the whole picture into considuration thats where the author is ultimaticly right.

 

I play shadows of morder on my two-threaded/two core Pentium G3258 fine (high/50-60 fps.) The processor sells for $50-60. So... 



Ruler on 10 February 2015
Chazore said:
Captain_Yuri said:
This article is pretty terrible and shows that the author doesn't know much about PC gaming in general... The reason why SoM required 6gbs of vram is because that is for Ultra textures for 4k resolution and SoM runs pretty well in 2gb video cards on high settings...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/shadow-of-mordor-performance,3996-3.html

And Ubisoft games have always been known to have bad porting when it comes to PC games, specially Unity. And for Far Cry 4, there is a fix in order to run ur games on a Dual Core CPU and it runs fine. And there are just so many other things wrong with this article like how they are using Alienware of all things to show PC gaming costs but every PC gamer knows that Alienware over prices everything

Not to say that the requirements havn't gone up but hes making it sound wayy worse than it really is


It doesn't help how this is an old article posted recently on here after the whole "DS II PS4 vs PC/360/PS3" thread and how IGN didn't mention PC and Xb1 were going to get the same version and then people started spouting over there and on YT that PC was ultimately weak compared to the PS4 and then we get an author of the article spreading the same kind of myhtical crap around, it doesn't surprise me as to why it's posted here and not under PC dicussion, heck I don't even know why the op wanted to dig up an old article since op isn't really coming from the PC space, last I checked it was the PS4 space based from profile info.

I'm also finding it hard to believe that current gens are apparently free of blame when it comes to ports considering their hardware is technically outdated and provided from a weaker manufacturer.

-I post it here because its about console discussion too

-i am a former pc gamer.

-so its not true that the evil within and other newer games require at least an i7 or equilant cpus with 4+ cores?

- 4 months is not old, this is not news but an interesting article 

- so youre blaming the others? but its fact that pcs were never good for optimisation. Why should devolopers spent the extra time figuring out how to run 8 core games for every 2 or 4 pc? You allready can see that in shadow of morder how they removed the nemesis system from ps3 and xbox 360 downgrading a gameplay element so these low core machines can run it. I dont think pc gamers would like it either



Why i left PC gaming

 

(2015) Question for PS4 owners: if the situation would be reverse? would you still play on PS4?

(2015) The "I don't care PS4 is the most powerful console" thread

Ruler on 10 February 2015
sc94597 said:
Ruler said:


Tomshardware used a 200 bucks corei5 @4.6ghz with 8 gigs of ram for shadow of mordor who requires at least an i5. You have to take the whole picture into considuration thats where the author is ultimaticly right.

 

I play shadows of morder on my two-threaded/two core Pentium G3258 fine (high/50-60 fps.) The processor sells for $50-60. So... 

Doubt it



Why i left PC gaming

 

(2015) Question for PS4 owners: if the situation would be reverse? would you still play on PS4?

(2015) The "I don't care PS4 is the most powerful console" thread

Around the Network
sc94597 on 10 February 2015
Ruler said:
sc94597 said:

I play shadows of morder on my two-threaded/two core Pentium G3258 fine (high/50-60 fps.) The processor sells for $50-60. So... 

Doubt it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puLvM8r9xHk

I have a r9 280x which runs the game at 50-60 fps and my G3258 is clocked at 4.6 Ghz now. 



Jizz_Beard_thePirate on 10 February 2015
Ruler said:
Captain_Yuri said:
This article is pretty terrible and shows that the author doesn't know much about PC gaming in general... The reason why SoM required 6gbs of vram is because that is for Ultra textures for 4k resolution and SoM runs pretty well in 2gb video cards on high settings...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/shadow-of-mordor-performance,3996-3.html

And Ubisoft games have always been known to have bad porting when it comes to PC games, specially Unity. And for Far Cry 4, there is a fix in order to run ur games on a Dual Core CPU and it runs fine. And there are just so many other things wrong with this article like how they are using Alienware of all things to show PC gaming costs but every PC gamer knows that Alienware over prices everything

Not to say that the requirements havn't gone up but hes making it sound wayy worse than it really is


Tomshardware used a 200 bucks corei5 @4.6ghz with 8 gigs of ram for shadow of mordor who requires at least an i5. You have to take the whole picture into considuration thats where the author is ultimaticly right.

And yes alienware is overpriced but it doesnt change the fact that they try to compete with next gen consoles and are marketing as such, same way with all these low budget builds by various articles and videos saying they can build the same future proof rig like a next gen console for the same money. I think its lying to costumers and people unintenial or not,

If you want a future proof rig that can handle console ports in the future you will need at least a quadcore with hyperthreading or better yet an 6 or 8 core and 8 gigs of ram as well a decent graphicscards with 2 gigs of ram. And by doing that you will spent more, somthing these people and alienware want to overshadow.

You do realize that the requirements for SoM is very skewed right? And not to mention that if u have an i5 2500k from 2011, you will be able to play every game in this generation without even thinking about upgrading anything soon... An i5 isn't as big of a deal as you think it is cause a lot of cpus that are under an i5 can run SoM very well

So as you can see there that SoM can run very well even with an i3 or AMD cards. So if an i3 without any bottlenecks can run SoM at ~100fps and a 280X can run it at 60fps in high quailty... You should be able to run SoM pretty easily...

And yes, you do have to spend more money on PCs and a PC that costs $400 won't have the same performance as a console that costs $400 at the sametime, you don't need like a $2000 pc to be able to run games nor will u need that in the future nor do you have to consistantly upgrade ur PC either unless u want a crazy amount of mods.

And seriously? At most, you will need an i5 2500k and you will be set for this generation, anything else is just extras and for mods... You do need an 8 core AMD cpu for the AMD side cause AMD cpus are aweful and they can't keep up even with an i5 or i3s in some cases.. And PCs had 8gbs of ram since forever... And a lot of GPUs have 2gbs of Vram and they had that for a while now too. Do the people that have a dual core and 4gbs of ram and 1gb gpu need to upgrade to play next gen games? Yes but do ps3/360 owners need to upgrade to play ps4/x1 games? Yes... And the upgrade isn't as harsh as u seem to believe it is



                  

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

sc94597 on 10 February 2015
Ruler said:
Chazore said:


It doesn't help how this is an old article posted recently on here after the whole "DS II PS4 vs PC/360/PS3" thread and how IGN didn't mention PC and Xb1 were going to get the same version and then people started spouting over there and on YT that PC was ultimately weak compared to the PS4 and then we get an author of the article spreading the same kind of myhtical crap around, it doesn't surprise me as to why it's posted here and not under PC dicussion, heck I don't even know why the op wanted to dig up an old article since op isn't really coming from the PC space, last I checked it was the PS4 space based from profile info.

I'm also finding it hard to believe that current gens are apparently free of blame when it comes to ports considering their hardware is technically outdated and provided from a weaker manufacturer.

 

-so its not true that the evil within and other newer games require at least an i7 or equilant cpus with 4+ cores?

No it isn't true. With my 2threaded cpu I can play The Evil Within at 30-40fps, high, 1080p. The only game that benefits from more threads as a requirement is Dragon Age Inquisition, and that is because it is horrendously optimized. Other games benefit from more threads but the fps differences are less than 10 fps.



nanarchy on 10 February 2015
sc94597 said:
Ruler said:

 

-so its not true that the evil within and other newer games require at least an i7 or equilant cpus with 4+ cores?

No it isn't true. With my 2threaded cpu I can play The Evil Within at 30-40fps, high, 1080p. The only game that benefits from more threads as a requirement is Dragon Age Inquisition, and that is because it is horrendously optimized. Other games benefit from more threads but the fps differences are less than 10 fps.

yep people are happily running the evil within on core i5's and even i3's, yes you definitely get a boost from having an i7 in a game like that but it isn't a requirement.



sc94597 on 10 February 2015

Anyway, PC gaming is much cheaper than it was fob the 6th ->7th gen.