PDA

View Full Version : AC 4 System Requirements Outed on GreenManGaming - Legit ?



BlastThyName
09-25-2013, 04:17 PM
http://www.greenmangaming.com/s/fr/en/pc/games/action/assassins-creed-iv-black-flag/

Assassin's Creed IV is available for pre orders on GMG and the system requirements are listed, I don't know if they are official though.


Minimum Requirements

Operating System: Windows Vista SP or Windows 7 SP1 or Windows 8 (both 32/64bit versions)
Processor: Intel Core2Quad Q8400 @ 2.6 GHz or AMD Athlon II X4 620 @ 2.6 GHz
RAM: 2GB for Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8
Video card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 260 or AMD Radeon HD 4870 (512MB VRAM with Shader Model 4.0 or higher)
DirectX: DirectX June 2010 Redistributable
Disk Space: 30 Gb
Sound: DirectX Compatible Sound Card with latest drivers
Peripherals: Windows-compatible keyboard and mouse required, optional controller
UPLAY client required to play.

Recommended Requirements

Operating System: Windows Vista SP2 or Windows 7 SP1 or Windows 8 (both 32/64bit versions)
Processor: Intel Core i5 2400S @ 2.5 GHz or AMD Phenom II x4 940 @ 3.0 GHz or better
RAM: 4GB or more
Video card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 470 or AMD Radeon HD 5850 (1024MB VRAM with Shader Model 5.0) or better

Supported video cards at the time of release:

Nvidia GeForce GTX 260 or better, GT400, GT500, GT600, GT700 series or AMD Radeon HD4870 or better, HD5000, HD6000, HD7000 series
Note: Latest GeForce drivers tested: 320.49 for all series. Latest Radeon drivers tested: 13.1 for Radeon HD4000, 13.4 for Radeon HD5000 and above. Laptop versions of these cards may work but are NOT officially supported.

I have to say I was expecting something higher for the recommended GPU. A GTX470 is not on the same level as a GTX660ti.

AherasSTRG
09-25-2013, 11:21 PM
Well, Nvidia would never recommend a series 4xx GPU for a 2013 game. So, I doubt this is legit. The recommended GPU is going to be "650 or higher". Mark my words...

BlastThyName
09-26-2013, 10:53 AM
Well, Nvidia would never recommend a series 4xx GPU for a 2013 game. So, I doubt this is legit. The recommended GPU is going to be "650 or higher". Mark my words...

I'm expecting a 660ti to be the recommended GPU. It should do for high settings/30fps more or less.

So yeah I think those requirements are weird....or the game is wonderfully optimized.

bolz87
09-26-2013, 11:37 AM
HD 5850 in recommended? trolololol

thekyle0
09-26-2013, 03:59 PM
.or the game is wonderfully optimized. l... O ... L ...

BlastThyName
09-26-2013, 05:01 PM
l... O ... L ...
A man can dream. But even with the best programmers I can't see a GTX470 maintaining a smooth 30fps at 1080p/high settings.

I don't know where GMG get their system requirements but that does not strike me as coming from Ubisoft themselves.

We shouldn't have to wait that long until they are released.

AherasSTRG
09-26-2013, 07:10 PM
A man can dream. But even with the best programmers I can't see a GTX470 maintaining a smooth 30fps at 1080p/high settings.

I don't know where GMG get their system requirements but that does not strike me as coming from Ubisoft themselves.

We shouldn't have to wait that long until they are released.

From the fact that a GTX 470 is as much power as a PS4 can offer. You will see soon enough that the recommended requirements are going to be really low... EDIT: Well, at least lower than what we would expect after hearing all the marketing behind the new consoles...

BlastThyName
09-26-2013, 08:06 PM
From the fact that a GTX 470 is as much power as a PS4 can offer. You will see soon enough that the recommended requirements are going to be really low... EDIT: Well, at least lower than what we would expect after hearing all the marketing behind the new consoles...

Consoles will punch way above their weight. The PS4 GPU is arguably stronger than a GTX 470, closer to a Radeon 7870.
And a 7870 will never, ever perform as well as a PS4 in multiplatform games.

You seem to forget that PC developpers don't have full access to the hardware unlike on consoles. The API gets in the way far too often to allow a similarly specc'd PC GPU to do what a PS4 can.
http://i.imgur.com/KubLh7m.jpg

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-inside-metro-last-light

ou just cannot compare consoles to PC directly. Consoles could do at least 2x what a comparable PC can due to the fixed platform and low-level access to hardware

You will need MUCH more than the PC equivalent of the consoles GPU to do just as well in multiplatform games. Of course high-end PCs will still retain a performance advantage but the comparison isn't fair at this point.
PC elitists like to downplay consoles with completely ludicrous arguments, I'm glad to be a PC gamer with no content whatsoever for the consoles.
This is thanks to those PS4 and Xbone that PC games will undergo a significant visual overhaul because no one is really interested in raising the bar graphically speaking in the PC space.
Crysis was the last hardware pusher to truly demonstrate what could only be achieved on high-end PCs, maybe Star Citizen will follow in its footsteps.

To get back to Black Flag, I expect the PS4 to be equal to the PC at max settings except for the Nvidia enhancements.

lukkianno
09-26-2013, 09:13 PM
Well guys i know many people judge the game based on how many fps they get when they are playing, but to me it is not nearly most important thing...for example, i played AC3 on ATI 6670HD and never had any major problems,guess it will be the same with this one (and i played on high details). I think that recommended configuration don't necessarily mean one you need for ultra settings...

AherasSTRG
09-27-2013, 12:46 AM
Consoles will punch way above their weight. The PS4 GPU is arguably stronger than a GTX 470, closer to a Radeon 7870.
And a 7870 will never, ever perform as well as a PS4 in multiplatform games.

You seem to forget that PC developpers don't have full access to the hardware unlike on consoles. The API gets in the way far too often to allow a similarly specc'd PC GPU to do what a PS4 can.
http://i.imgur.com/KubLh7m.jpg

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-inside-metro-last-light


You will need MUCH more than the PC equivalent of the consoles GPU to do just as well in multiplatform games. Of course high-end PCs will still retain a performance advantage but the comparison isn't fair at this point.
PC elitists like to downplay consoles with completely ludicrous arguments, I'm glad to be a PC gamer with no content whatsoever for the consoles.
This is thanks to those PS4 and Xbone that PC games will undergo a significant visual overhaul because no one is really interested in raising the bar graphically speaking in the PC space.
Crysis was the last hardware pusher to truly demonstrate what could only be achieved on high-end PCs, maybe Star Citizen will follow in its footsteps.

To get back to Black Flag, I expect the PS4 to be equal to the PC at max settings except for the Nvidia enhancements.

Although, mr Carmack is exaggerating a bit when stating 2x, you are saying it yourself. A casual gaming PC is already twice as powerful as a PS4 in terms of CPU, GPU and RAM.
-- No comment about the CPU of the PS4 (which btw is AMD manufactured, reverse engineering at its finest...)
-- GPU at 1.84 Tflops (again AMD manufactured...)
-- and finally the unified 8 gigabytes of memory (when did AMD learn to manufacture RAMs anyway?)... A casual PC has got 2 GBs for the GPU, several caches for the CPU and at least 8 GBs of RAM operating autonomously. Now, I know what you are gonna say: DDR5. DDR5 is only for the GPU, not for the part used by the RAM. And all Nvidia 7xx series GPUs already have GDDR5 memory on them.
And all this operating under 250W of power.
But, no point in argueing, the next-gen is just around the corner. I am confident that all PCs equipped with an Intel i5 and a series 7xx GPU will be able to outperform the PS4 without breaking a sweat.

BlastThyName
09-27-2013, 08:29 AM
You are missing the point. I'm very well aware of the PS4's specs and I was explicitely talking about a similarly specced PC to demonstrate the console's efficiency.
You are also forgetting to mention that the 8GB of GDDR5 are unified (accessible by the GPU and the CPU simultaneously), the asynchronic nature of the architecture and the numerous customizations brought to the GPU. The GPGPU side of the console has been overhauled and again you don't seem to grasp what low level access means in term of performance.
I trust Carmack and the 4A Games tech guy more than you that's for sure.

Which strenghtens my point : the PS4 is an incredibly well designed machine. It won't rival high-end hardware that cost as much as the PS4 itself but it will do very well in many instances.
You will need much more than a 1.84GPU in your PC to perform as well as the PS4 in multiplatform titles. A GTX760 won't cut it.

bolz87
09-27-2013, 09:54 AM
The point now is: today is 27 September and we don't know:

1) Precise release date
2) System Requirements

How long we have to wait? Another month Ubisoft?

AherasSTRG
09-27-2013, 12:47 PM
You are missing the point. I'm very well aware of the PS4's specs and I was explicitely talking about a similarly specced PC to demonstrate the console's efficiency.
You are also forgetting to mention that the 8GB of GDDR5 are unified (accessible by the GPU and the CPU simultaneously), the asynchronic nature of the architecture and the numerous customizations brought to the GPU. The GPGPU side of the console has been overhauled and again you don't seem to grasp what low level access means in term of performance.
I trust Carmack and the 4A Games tech guy more than you that's for sure.

Which strenghtens my point : the PS4 is an incredibly well designed machine. It won't rival high-end hardware that cost as much as the PS4 itself but it will do very well in many instances.
You will need much more than a 1.84GPU in your PC to perform as well as the PS4 in multiplatform titles. A GTX760 won't cut it.
I won't say anything more, apart from the fact that you ought to study some reports on bare metal programming and the performance boost over casual programming techniques. I 'll just pm you with a performance report once the PS4 is out. I will also insist on a 650 as recommended for AC4 and point out the fact that Battlefield 4 on the PS4 looks like the medium settings of a PC and that it is confirmed by DICE that a 7850 can nearly max the game on 1080p @ 60 FPS.
I also agree with Bolz, it's ballz to still be in the dark.
EDIT: Watch_Dogs to runs at 30FPS on consoles. 1080p still questionable. Nvidia confirms that the game is superior graphically on the PC and can be maxed out (apart from AA) @ constant 60FPS by all 7xx series GPUs.

BlastThyName
09-28-2013, 12:50 PM
I
EDIT: Watch_Dogs to runs at 30FPS on consoles. 1080p still questionable. Nvidia confirms that the game is superior graphically on the PC and can be maxed out (apart from AA) @ constant 60FPS by all 7xx series GPUs.

Nvidia never confirmed maxing out the game with a 7XX GPU. I already knew about the PC specific graphical enhancements.

But that was never my point : PS4>>>>>A pc with a 7870 GPU. :)
At equal spec the PS4 demolishes a PC, that was my point all along.

AherasSTRG
09-28-2013, 11:19 PM
A 760 won't cut it.
Let me get this straight: So, you are telling me that a PS4 is going to have better performance than a GTX 760 and therefore games like AC4, Watch Dogs and Battlefield 4 are going to run better graphically on a PS4? Oh, we are going to have so much fun these holidays... Angry costumers complaining about the false advertising of the next-gen, while they themselves were victims of Sony's marketing tricks.

BlastThyName
09-29-2013, 09:57 AM
Let me get this straight: So, you are telling me that a PS4 is going to have better performance than a GTX 760 and therefore games like AC4, Watch Dogs and Battlefield 4 are going to run better graphically on a PS4?.
Yup. I think a 760 grade GPU will play next-gen games as good as a PS4. Lower than that ? I would love to be wrong as many of my colleagues don't have a GPU as capable of this one.
I think it's a good start for next-gen but I want Maxwell to be a true leap over the 780. Like 50-60% more powerful in gaming situations.

With regard to next-gen vs PC I also wonder how GPGPU is going to work efficiently on PC.
http://de.slideshare.net/zlatan4177/gpgpu-algorithms-in-games
Unified memory + HSA is going to provide the PS4 with significant performance advantage compared to PCs.
Look at page 10 for example.

AherasSTRG
09-29-2013, 11:34 AM
With regard to next-gen vs PC I also wonder how GPGPU is going to work efficiently on PC.
http://de.slideshare.net/zlatan4177/gpgpu-algorithms-in-games
Unified memory + HSA is going to provide the PS4 with significant performance advantage compared to PCs.
Look at page 10 for example.
I am unfamiliar with the latency created when copying the CPU data to the GPU. Another article I found suggests that a process of facial recognition was completed 2.3 times faster than an equal standard architectured PC. Still, a facial recognition process heavily depends on the continuous communication of the CPU with the GPU. After thoroughly reading both articles, I believe we have no evidence pointing towards specific numbers or performances. I guess the only way to find out is to wait until the PS4's release. When was it again? 29th?

BlastThyName
09-29-2013, 11:54 AM
I am unfamiliar with the latency created when copying the CPU data to the GPU. Another article I found suggests that a process of facial recognition was completed 2.3 times faster than an equal standard architectured PC. Still, a facial recognition process heavily depends on the continuous communication of the CPU with the GPU. After thoroughly reading both articles, I believe we have no evidence pointing towards specific numbers or performances. I guess the only way to find out is to wait until the PS4's release. When was it again? 29th?

I don't have specific numbers either but it's clear that the memory setup of the PS4/Xbone is much more suited to GPGPU computation than what we have on gaming PCs currently.
Developpers I've spoken to told me the gap is going to be significant in that department, that the HSA has a huge advantage over gaming PCs in terms of efficiency and the PCE bottleneck is not overstated.
Next-gen games are going to make extensive use of GPGPU for gameplay purposes, how this is going to translate to PCs will be interesting to see.

Still, I don't think high-end PCs will have problems outperforming next-gen consoles, given how expensive they are they better do.

AherasSTRG
09-29-2013, 06:39 PM
I believe tomorrow is going to be the System Requirements reaveal along with the release date.

Zullivan1987
09-29-2013, 08:18 PM
http://www.greenmangaming.com/s/fr/en/pc/games/action/assassins-creed-iv-black-flag/

Assassin's Creed IV is available for pre orders on GMG and the system requirements are listed, I don't know if they are official though.

I have to say I was expecting something higher for the recommended GPU. A GTX470 is not on the same level as a GTX660ti.

Looks like fake

BlastThyName
09-29-2013, 09:02 PM
I believe tomorrow is going to be the System Requirements reaveal along with the release date.

I hope so, AC3 system requirements were revealed the 26th of September and the PC version of Black Flag should release in the same window.

Same goes for Watch_Dogs, I hope they will be honest, I hope they won't lie to soften the blow.

AherasSTRG
09-30-2013, 10:20 AM
to soften the blow.
Yeah, I realised that even if they announce something like GTX 650 for the recommended GPU, you'd say something like that. so I won't be able to post "I told you so".

AherasSTRG
09-30-2013, 10:22 AM
I hope so, AC3 system requirements were revealed the 26th of September and the PC version of Black Flag should release in the same window.

Same goes for Watch_Dogs, I hope they will be honest, I hope they won't lie to soften the blow.
I totally agree though. It's less than 2 months than the game's release. This is totally unprofessional.

BlastThyName
09-30-2013, 11:31 AM
Yeah, I realised that even if they announce something like GTX 650 for the recommended GPU, you'd say something like that. so I won't be able to post "I told you so".

I have a hard time imagining a GTX650 (even ti) running the game at high settings/1080p with a solid 30fps.
I would aim slightly higher than this even when we are only talking about recommended specs.


I totally agree though. It's less than 2 months than the game's release. This is totally unprofessional.
Calling it unprofessionnal is pushing it, there must be a good reason for the system requirements being revealed this late.

AherasSTRG
09-30-2013, 02:15 PM
Calling it unprofessionnal is pushing it, there must be a good reason for the system requirements being revealed this late.
Since the game is ready and we know that is going to be released before 2014, the only reason they have not yet announced release date and system requirements is a marketing and imo marketing is never a good reason.

TheLeoCrow
10-02-2013, 11:48 AM
They are legit since they are exactly the same as the official ones at the ubi store page

AherasSTRG
10-02-2013, 01:30 PM
Oh, he is right. Here's the link: http://shop.ubi.com/store/ubiemea/en_IE/pd/ThemeID.8605700/productID.288216100/Assassins_Creed%C2%AE_IV_Black_Flag%E2%84%A2_Uplay _Digital_Deluxe_Edition.html.
Hoho, a 470, who would have thought of that?
EDIT: Battlefield 4 system requirements were locked at a GTX 660. PS4 version is similar to the medium graphics of the PC version.
EDIT#2: Also, LeoCrow, are you from Ioannina?
EDIT#3: Making a thread in the Nvidia forums to make it certain. Although I believe we will have a gamespot article by tonight detailing the Requirements.

TheLeoCrow
10-02-2013, 02:14 PM
[...]
EDIT#2: Also, LeoCrow, are you from Ioannina?[...]

Yes, I am:)

On topic, I doubt any game that will have both old gen and next gen versions will have to really push the next gen consoles to their limits. sure the next gen versions will be superior to the old gen but still I doubt that games will be too demanding at first

AherasSTRG
10-02-2013, 02:22 PM
Yes, I am:)
Then add me in Uplay for some AC talk in greek ;).


On topic, I doubt any game that will have both old gen and next gen versions will have to really push the next gen consoles to their limits. sure the next gen versions will be superior to the old gen but still I doubt that games will be too demanding at first
I agree.

anik_lc
10-03-2013, 05:53 AM
Oh dear! 64bit OS only. Mine is 32bit. :( Also Dual Core Processor and 4GB RAM with 1GB Radeon HD 5670. Can I be able to run the game?

Secu12
10-03-2013, 12:24 PM
I never understood what recommended settings mean: will you be able to play the game at maximum settings or just decent?
What do you think about these specs? Are they good, demanding or how? I just bought a new computer after 5 years so I don't know how great these specs are.

AherasSTRG
10-03-2013, 01:34 PM
I never understood what recommended settings mean: will you be able to play the game at maximum settings or just decent?
What do you think about these specs? Are they good, demanding or how? I just bought a new computer after 5 years so I don't know how great these specs are.
It's pretty much what you'd expect from a game with the graphical quality of AC4. A GTX 470 is close to the performance of the GTX 650, which used to be a mid-end card, but I believe that now has moved to the low-end category with a price of 100 to 120 euros.
And the CPU is pretty much your standard desktop CPU.
However, only supporting 64-bit OSs is a stab in the heart for the low budget gamer...

BlastThyName
10-03-2013, 05:08 PM
I'm kind of disappointed that those requirements seem to be legit, I really wanted the game to be MUCH MORE demanding. :(

I hope my GTX770 will be pushed really hard.

bolz87
10-03-2013, 06:18 PM
The game WILL BE much more demanding, these requirements are dumb, don't expect to push AC4 at maximum with recommended

leTrollgon314
10-03-2013, 06:33 PM
Oh dear! 64bit OS only. Mine is 32bit. :( Also Dual Core Processor and 4GB RAM with 1GB Radeon HD 5670. Can I be able to run the game?

Yeah, kinda sucks...
Most of my clan members pre ordered ac4 andnearly half of my clan says now: WTF???

these system requirements are a bit "hard"... mostly that 32bit OSs are not supported!
i was able to play every game (even bf3 on medium settings) until now... and now ac4 not.... dats bad! very bad!

It's like Aheradrim said:


However, only supporting 64-bit OSs is a stab in the heart for the low budget gamer...

BlastThyName
10-03-2013, 08:06 PM
No one should be surprised that 32bits OS are no longer supported, I've been waiting for this to happen for YEARS.

Still disappointed that the game isn't DX11 only though. :(

Still, those requirements are nothing outrageous, any PC gamer should know that upgrading your hardware regularly is a necessity.


The game WILL BE much more demanding, these requirements are dumb, don't expect to push AC4 at maximum with recommended
We already know this, recommended specs are NEVER for max settings but ~high settings at 1080p/30fps.

leTrollgon314
10-03-2013, 08:58 PM
Yeah i know that, but i planed this for next year... not now!
I think the jump between the requirements of ac3 and ac4 is to high...

AherasSTRG
10-03-2013, 11:27 PM
I'm kind of disappointed that those requirements seem to be legit, I really wanted the game to be MUCH MORE demanding. :(
Seems like they are. Guess I was wrong about the GTX 650 after all. A GTX 470 is a bit lower in raw power than a GTX 650Ti. On benchmarking tests of recent games, the GTX 470 performs like a GTX 650. In comparison to a GTX 760, a GTX 760 is like SLI GTX 470, scoring double the frame rate in Tomb Raider, Hitman Absolution and Far Cry 3 than a single GTX 470. Of course, we cannot know for sure until we have the game running on our PCs. If Nvidia has done the same job with AC4 just like they did with Splinter Cell Blacklist, I believe a GTX 760 will easily take the ultra settings.


I hope my GTX770 will be pushed really hard.
Oh, don't worry, Watch Dogs "ultra" recommended settings got you covered... Remember that the PS4 version of Watch Dogs runs at 30 frames and looks like the PC's medium to high settings. But, really, I envy you a bit, man. I just couldn't afford the GTX 770, so I settled with the 760...

EDIT: Nevermind the second part. I saw that you posted that the Watch Dogs requirements posted were not the actual requirements. The Ubisoft representative says that they are lower than that. I hoped so. Watch Dogs seems like a game that deserves to be played on ultra and I want to have that luxury on my GTX 760 - Intel i5 3570 combo.

Secu12
10-04-2013, 11:12 AM
The first four games I played on low-medium settings, 1024x768 @ 25-35 fps; ACIII I played on low settings @ even 10 fps. I given my uplay account details to a friend to get me through a mission which caused a crash to desktop. Uplay messed up my save games and had to start from scratch ACIII after 40% game completion, and other numerous bugs. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the games, all of them.
Now I bought a new PC, i5 4440-gtx 760 combo worth 1000 euro, especially for this game. If I won't be able to play it on high settings (I don't care about TXAA, HBAO+, SSAO etc.) at 1920x1080 and 60 fps, I will f*ck off Ubisoft for the rest of my life.

AherasSTRG
10-04-2013, 11:36 AM
The first four games I played on low-medium settings, 1024x768 @ 25-35 fps; ACIII I played on low settings @ even 10 fps. I given my uplay account details to a friend to get me through a mission which caused a crash to desktop. Uplay messed up my save games and had to start from scratch ACIII after 40% game completion, and other numerous bugs. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the games, all of them.
Now I bought a new PC, i5 4440-gtx 760 combo worth 1000 euro, especially for this game. If I won't be able to play it on high settings (I don't care about TXAA, HBAO+, SSAO etc.) at 1920x1080 and 60 fps, I will f*ck off Ubisoft for the rest of my life.
Don't worry, man. You 'll play both AC4 and Watch Dogs on ultra settings constant 60 with FXAA, 45 to 60 with TXAA.

BlastThyName
10-04-2013, 01:44 PM
The first four games I played on low-medium settings, 1024x768 @ 25-35 fps; ACIII I played on low settings @ even 10 fps. I given my uplay account details to a friend to get me through a mission which caused a crash to desktop. Uplay messed up my save games and had to start from scratch ACIII after 40% game completion, and other numerous bugs. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the games, all of them.
Now I bought a new PC, i5 4440-gtx 760 combo worth 1000 euro, especially for this game. If I won't be able to play it on high settings (I don't care about TXAA, HBAO+, SSAO etc.) at 1920x1080 and 60 fps, I will f*ck off Ubisoft for the rest of my life.

If you don't care about high-end graphical features then you will be able to play on high but 60fps comes at a cost, don't be surprised if you have to tone down some settings to get there.
Besides one grand for a mid range machine is incredibly expensive, you must have got ripped off.

I build my PC myself, if I count everything I must have spent 700 euros in total.
And I have the following :
I7 3770
GTX770
16gb of RAM.

I'm ready.

AherasSTRG
10-04-2013, 09:43 PM
Yep. These are the actual AC4 System Requirements. Confirmed by Nvidia and Steam too. Watch Dogs' Requirements TBA soon (probably Monday <== just a guess).

GR_Magaki
10-04-2013, 09:55 PM
Yep. These are the actual AC4 System Requirements. Confirmed by Nvidia and Steam too. Watch Dogs' Requirements TBA soon (probably Monday <== just a guess).
I thought Watch dogs' requirements were announced 2 or 3 days ago.

AherasSTRG
10-05-2013, 07:03 AM
I thought Watch dogs' requirements were announced 2 or 3 days ago.
It was later confirmed by a Watch Dogs developer through twitter that these were not the actual requirements and that the real requirements would be revealed soon. The requirements shown in the pre-order page were generated by some error in the system. Χαιρετισμούς κιόλας.

AherasSTRG
10-05-2013, 07:10 AM
If you don't care about high-end graphical features then you will be able to play on high but 60fps comes at a cost, don't be surprised if you have to tone down some settings to get there.
With his setup, he will be able to play on Ultra. High is definitely constant 60 FPS.

BlastThyName
10-05-2013, 10:26 AM
With his setup, he will be able to play on Ultra. High is definitely constant 60 FPS.
I hope he will but I'd surprised.
A 760 is a mid range GPU. If you want max settings on a next-gen game you will need beeffier hardware IMO.

Besides, do you have a link where Nvidia confirms that those are the system requirements of AC4 ?
I'm surprised it hasn't been announced on the forums already.

Secu12
10-07-2013, 09:01 AM
I build my PC myself, if I count everything I must have spent 700 euros in total.
And I have the following :
I7 3770
GTX770
16gb of RAM.

I'm ready.

Here where I live, in Romania, the video card cost me around 270 euro, 150 euro the processor and other 150 euro was the monitor - these are the most expensive components of my rig. I am not very interested in playing it with 16x Anti-Aliasing, HBAO+ and other new features. For me, if all video settings will be on high and run the game in 1920x1080 @60 fps I will be glad. I am sure the game looks amazing without all those features.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 10:07 AM
Here where I live, in Romania, the video card cost me around 270 euro, 150 euro the processor and other 150 euro was the monitor - these are the most expensive components of my rig. I am not very interested in playing it with 16x Anti-Aliasing, HBAO+ and other new features. For me, if all video settings will be on high and run the game in 1920x1080 @60 fps I will be glad. I am sure the game looks amazing without all those features.
I really don't think you will get 60fps with a 760 at high settings. You will likely have to make compromises, live tone down some stuff to medium settings.

AherasSTRG
10-07-2013, 11:32 AM
I really don't think you will get 60fps with a 760 at high settings. You will likely have to make compromises, live tone down some stuff to medium settings.
Well, we really can't be sure, since the game is not yet released. However:

- Tomb Raider has a GTX 480 as a recommended GPU, which is 20% better than AC's GTX 470 and the Nvidia GTX 760 can handle the game on ultra settings / FXAA at constant 60 frames*. With SSAA x2 on, 50-60 frames and SSAA x4 on 45-55. Note that Tomb Raider is AMD optimized, unlike AC4.
- Battlefield 3 has got a GTX 560 as a recommended GPU, which is 15% better than a GTX 470 and the Nvidia GTX 760 can handle the game on ultra settings / full AA at constant 60 frames. Nvidia optimized game.
- Guild Wars 2 is a highly unoptimized MMO with a GTX 460 as a recommended GPU, which is 15% lower than the GTX 470. However, even the best cards struggle to hold performance in the mode, called World vs World. A GTX 760, even when there are literally hundreds of players on screen is struggling, but manages to maintain a solid 45 to 50 frames.
- Battlefield 4 has a GTX 660 as a recommended GPU, which is 35% better than a GTX 470 and a GTX 760 can run the BETA version of the game on ultra settings @ 50 frames. Final version of the game is expected to run at 10-15 higher frames for all setups.

I could go on and on, until I talk about all the demanding games I have in my library, like Hitman Absolution, Skyrim, Bioshock Infinite, Crysis 2 & 3, all these games have higher system requirements than those released for AC4. If a GTX 760 can run more demanding games on ultra settings without problems, I cannot understand why it couldn't run games with lower requirements on high settings.

*Benchmarks on the game give an average of 59,9 FPS.

Anykeyer
10-07-2013, 12:25 PM
The game WILL BE much more demanding, these requirements are dumb, don't expect to push AC4 at maximum with recommended
I dont think it will be much more demanding. I played PC demo using keybard and mouse, visuals are way better than AC3 but I didnt notice any fps drops. I dont know exact specs they had, was something like single GTX 770-780, not even Titan.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 12:27 PM
Well, we really can't be sure, since the game is not yet released. However:

- Tomb Raider has a GTX 480 as a recommended GPU, which is 20% better than AC's GTX 470 and the Nvidia GTX 760 can handle the game on ultra settings / FXAA at constant 60 frames*. With SSAA x2 on, 50-60 frames and SSAA x4 on 45-55. Note that Tomb Raider is AMD optimized, unlike AC4.
- Battlefield 3 has got a GTX 560 as a recommended GPU, which is 15% better than a GTX 470 and the Nvidia GTX 760 can handle the game on ultra settings / full AA at constant 60 frames. Nvidia optimized game.
- Guild Wars 2 is a highly unoptimized MMO with a GTX 460 as a recommended GPU, which is 15% lower than the GTX 470. However, even the best cards struggle to hold performance in the mode, called World vs World. A GTX 760, even when there are literally hundreds of players on screen is struggling, but manages to maintain a solid 45 to 50 frames.
- Battlefield 4 has a GTX 660 as a recommended GPU, which is 35% better than a GTX 470 and a GTX 760 can run the BETA version of the game on ultra settings @ 50 frames. Final version of the game is expected to run at 10-15 higher frames for all setups.

I could go on and on, until I talk about all the demanding games I have in my library, like Hitman Absolution, Skyrim, Bioshock Infinite, Crysis 2 & 3, all these games have higher system requirements than those released for AC4. If a GTX 760 can run more demanding games on ultra settings without problems, I cannot understand why it couldn't run games with lower requirements on high settings.

*Benchmarks on the game give an average of 59,9 FPS.

I work at a PC store, we have dozens of PCs and hundreds of games.
Please link the benchmarks.

Here is what I find on my end and it dovetails with what I've witnessed with my own eyes :
http://www.comptoir-hardware.com/articles/cartes-graphiques/21738-test-geforce-gtx-760.html?start=12
A GTX760 averages 26fps with SSAAx4.
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/900-20/benchmark-tomb-raider.html
It does not reach 60fps even with FXAA.
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5566/nvidia-geforce-gtx-760-2gb-video-card-review/index18.html (http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5566/nvidia-geforce-gtx-760-2g
b-video-card-review/index18.html)
42fps here.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61844-nvidia-gtx-760-2gb-review-6.html
44fps here.

So I don't think 60fps is achievable at high settings. I would like to be wrong though.
By the way :
http://www.geforce.com/sites/default/files-editorial/attachments/nvidia-geforce-gtx-battlebox-game-technology-v3.png
The graphical enhancements will fall under the "ultra" preset I assume.
PCSS will probably murder my framerate anyway.

AherasSTRG
10-07-2013, 03:44 PM
I work at a PC store, we have dozens of PCs and hundreds of games.
I am nearing my degree in computer engineering. Nice to meet you.

Please link the benchmarks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ij-si-ZAgQ0
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-nvidia-geforce-gtx-760-review
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvSqf-4KKyg


Here is what I find on my end and it dovetails with what I've witnessed with my own eyes :
http://www.comptoir-hardware.com/articles/cartes-graphiques/21738-test-geforce-gtx-760.html?start=12
A GTX760 averages 26fps with SSAAx4.
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/900-20/benchmark-tomb-raider.html
It does not reach 60fps even with FXAA.
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5566/nvidia-geforce-gtx-760-2gb-video-card-review/index18.html (http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5566/nvidia-geforce-gtx-760-2g
b-video-card-review/index18.html)
42fps here.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61844-nvidia-gtx-760-2gb-review-6.html
44fps here.
All the benchmarks you linked were at ULTIMATE settings and not ULTRA as I stated in my post. The difference between Ultra and Ultimate is TressFX, which is AMD technology and NOT Nvidia. Nvidia cards struggle greatly when it comes to TressFX, because obviously they are not cracked up for such a feature. In the following video, you can see a benchmark with TressFX on (ultimate settings) and then TressFX off (ultra settings). The difference is 26 more frames, with TrssFX off hitting 73 average FPS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHunHVDwOIE

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 03:56 PM
I am nearing my degree in computer engineering. Nice to meet you.
That's certainly not something I could have guessed by reading your posts. ;)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ij-si-ZAgQ0
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-nvidia-geforce-gtx-760-review
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvSqf-4KKyg
That does not tell much. The Eurogamer review strikes me as cursory.


All the benchmarks you linked were at ULTIMATE settings and not ULTRA as I stated in my post. The difference between Ultra and Ultimate is TressFX, which is AMD technology and NOT Nvidia. Nvidia cards struggle greatly when it comes to TressFX, because obviously they are not cracked up for such a feature. In the following video, you can see a benchmark with TressFX on (ultimate settings) and then TressFX off (ultra settings). The difference is 26 more frames, with TrssFX off hitting 73 average FPS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHunHVDwOIE
Indeed, that's my mistake. Ultimate = ultra in my mind.
With regards to TressFX, it's a nice effect but it's expensive even on the high-end AMD GPUs I've tested. A Radeon 7970 wasn't even ideal, but I take this is the API's fault.
OIT are difficult to do with DX11.

However, the Nvidia cards we put to the test did reasonably well (GTX 670 - Titans) but 60fps was almost impossible to maintain in most cases.
Next-week I will try with the new Radeon R7-R9, we should have 10-12 in stock.

To get back to the topic at hand I'm kind of disappointed by AC4's requirements. Sure I must be in a minority but I wanted the game to demand much more even for the recommended specs. At least we can kiss 32bits OSs goodbye and the focus on DX11 further increases my desire to play the game.
I have a few friends who were able to attend Gamescom 2013 and if they're not making anything up the PC (Nvidia rep told them so should be a thing of beauty, even to the extent of looking a fair bit better than any next-gen console versions.

AherasSTRG
10-07-2013, 04:10 PM
That's certainly not something I could have guessed by reading your posts. ;)

I am trying to give tangible examples, which I can maladminister better. I wouldn't like to try to explain how bare metal programming needs great expertise to design and manage so that it can produce a 20 to 25% increase in performance, how the utilisation of more RAM is actually detrimental for software design, how the performance of living room devices is affected by the consumed power or the effects of OS and hardware interaction, which can be both beneficial and malign. I know many things, but I currently have no specialisation, nor work experience, so I am trying to avoid giving arguments that I will end up not being able to fully support.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 04:18 PM
I am trying to give tangible examples, which I can maladminister better. I wouldn't like to try to explain how bare metal programming needs great expertise to design and manage so that it can produce a 20 to 25% increase in performance, how the utilisation of more RAM is actually detrimental for software design, how the performance of living room devices is affected by the consumed power or the effects of OS and hardware interaction, which can be both beneficial and malign. I know many things, but I currently have no specialisation, nor work experience, so I am trying to avoid giving arguments that I will end up not being able to fully support.
Computer engineering will open you many doors, I don't think finding a job will be of any difficulty for you.
Fields of application are numerous.

But that's off-topic as you've no doubt noticed.
The initial point being : a GTX 760 is a very capable card but some people are underestimating how costly 60fps can be even when not cranking everything to very high.
As I stated earlier I would very much like to be wrong since it would mean I could easily settle down for 30fps/max settings + FXAA.

AherasSTRG
10-07-2013, 04:18 PM
To get back to the topic at hand I'm kind of disappointed by AC4's requirements. Sure I must be in a minority but I wanted the game to demand much more even for the recommended specs. At least we can kiss 32bits OSs goodbye and the focus on DX11 further increases my desire to play the game.
I agree with these DX11 and 64bit OSs should have left a long time ago for 2 reasons:
1. It will help the developement of games and
2. I do not see a reason for Microsoft to make 32 bit versions. RAM prices are low these days.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 04:27 PM
I agree with these DX11 and 64bit OSs should have left a long time ago for 2 reasons:
1. It will help the developement of games and
2. I do not see a reason for Microsoft to make 32 bit versions. RAM prices are low these days.
This is not up to MS I think, they always adverised 64bit versions of their OSs to a greater extent.
I can't believe anyone is shocked to see that the support for 32bits is fading.

Same goes for DX11. It has been around since 2009 and Watch Dogs asks for a mid-range DX11 GPU from 2010...Hardly what I would call "insane".
PC folks should get used to it because those new consoles are a godsend, they are going to ramp up the level of visual fidelity significantly and the system requirements as a result.

Nothing concerning really, that's just the way it is. They may not be as powerful as the 360/PS3 in their time but they still are a true generational leap over the consoles we have now.
Without them there would little to no incentive to push graphics boundaries, the PC market on its own is just not profitable enough to enable this on a large scale.

x___Luffy___x
10-07-2013, 05:15 PM
i just hope the game is optimized properly this time around but I'm not sure if it will be since its the same team who optimized AC3. let,s just wait and see...

as for the people who think the recommended settings are too high, it was gonna happen with the coming of the next-gen consoles.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 05:22 PM
i just hope the game is optimized properly this time around but I'm not sure if it will be since its the same team who optimized AC3. let,s just wait and see..
Nope, WD PC is developped by the team at Montréal, not Kiev like AC4.


as for the people who think the recommended settings are too high, it was gonna happen with the coming of the next-gen consoles.
Yeah, and thank God for that.
It's shaping up to be even more demanding than Crysis 3. The minimum and recommended specs are notably higher.

Good.

Anykeyer
10-07-2013, 05:32 PM
Well, maybe its because Crysis lost it's visuals lead looooooong ago.

x___Luffy___x
10-07-2013, 05:32 PM
Nope, WD PC is developped by the team at Montréal, not Kiev like AC4.




i know that actually, my concern is only for AC 4 not WD.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 05:38 PM
i know that actually, my concern is only for AC 4 not WD.
Well, you know Nvidia is working with them (that wasn't the case with AC3) so there's hope that the PC version won't suffer from optimization issues.

Besides they must have more experience with the engine.

Yeah I'm grasping at straws, I really want the PC version to be good.

Anykeyer
10-07-2013, 05:42 PM
Nvidia is working with them (that wasn't the case with AC3)

Wrong, they did. Else you woudnt have TXAA or DX11 in AC3. Or this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-idCtsd8No vid

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 05:50 PM
Wrong, they did. Else you woudnt have TXAA or DX11 in AC3. Or this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-idCtsd8No vid
Wrong that was a marketing partnership, not a technical one.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/assassins-creed-iii-launches-on-the-pc-with-impressive-tech-and-txaa
They had no input on the DX11 mode, only TXAA was supported and even then it doesn't require any sort of deep knowledge since the engine already supports MSAA. AC3 wasn't a "TWIMTBP" game like AC4.
Nvidia didn't develop anything special for the PC version of AC3, Black Flag is another beast really.
They have a "technical" alliance this time.

So I'm correct.

x___Luffy___x
10-07-2013, 05:58 PM
Well, you know Nvidia is working with them (that wasn't the case with AC3) so there's hope that the PC version won't suffer from optimization issues.

Besides they must have more experience with the engine.

Yeah I'm grasping at straws, I really want the PC version to be good.

well i hope they do a decent job optimizing it. i actually didn't had problems with running AC3 at max settings.


Wrong, they did. Else you woudnt have TXAA or DX11 in AC3. Or this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-idCtsd8No vid

i think UBI teamed up with Nvidia this year only...

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 05:59 PM
i think UBI teamed up with Nvidia this year only...

Exactly. Splinter Cell Blacklist is an example of Nvidia developping technologies for a game. AC3 isn't.

We can expect great things for Black Flag visually.

x___Luffy___x
10-07-2013, 06:08 PM
so, officially they haven't released the specs yet, right ?

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 06:14 PM
so, officially they haven't released the specs yet, right ?

It has not been confirmed yet but they appear to be legit since they've been posted on Steam and GMG.

They're lower than I expected.

x___Luffy___x
10-07-2013, 06:20 PM
It has not been confirmed yet but they appear to be legit since they've been posted on Steam and GMG.

They're lower than I expected.

which one are you referring to, the ones in your first post in this thread ?

AherasSTRG
10-07-2013, 06:26 PM
which one are you referring to, the ones in your first post in this thread ?
Yes, he is referring to those.

x___Luffy___x
10-07-2013, 06:30 PM
Yes, he is referring to those.

ok, thanks. and it does seem low compared to the WD recommended settings on the official page. they actually seem too high to me.

Anykeyer
10-07-2013, 08:38 PM
Wrong that was a marketing partnership, not a technical one.


Funny, its like you know Ubisoft Ukraine devs personally. BTW there is no such thing as TWIMTBP anymore, Nvidia silently changed their developers relations program. And no, they dont write engines for developers. it was always about providing free hardware, access to nvidia's own test labs and tools (which DO include code samples). Ubisoft Urkaine did have access to all this during AC3 porting.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 08:42 PM
Funny, its like you know Ubisoft Ukraine devs personally. BTW there is no such thing as TWIMTBP anymore, Nvidia silently changed their developers relations program. And no, they dont write engines for developers. it was always about providing free hardware, access to nvidia's own test labs and tools (which DO include code samples). Ubisoft Urkaine did have access to all this during AC3 porting.

And you know this how ? Because back at Gamescom 2012 a Nvidia rep told me the game didn't have any Nvidia tech per se aside from TXAA, I asked if the game was a "TWIMTBP" title and he said no, he gave me the example of Borderlands 2 where Nvidia and Gearbox worked together and many levels.

Besides Nvidia's gaming program is alive and well, Blacklist and the next Batman features the Nvidia logo for instance, same goes for Watch Dogs and AC4 on their site.
http://www.geforce.com/games-applications/pc-games/batman-arkham-origins
http://watchdogs.ubi.com/watchdogs/fr-FR/home/index.aspx
There is a "Geforce GTX" logo at the bottom of the page.

That's not enough to back up the claim that AC3 was developped with Nvidia, at all. Unlike AC4, which is part of Ubi and Nvidia's "alliance" along with Watch Dogs.
Both should feature Nvidia tech (HBAO+, TXAA, PCSS) and supposedly Nvidia is helping ramping up numerous graphical effects.

Unfortunately, we can't rule out the possibility of yet another cursory port. :(

Anykeyer
10-07-2013, 08:55 PM
I didnt say they stopped dev support program, But again: they dont write engines for developers. Ubisoft Urkaine devs are making PC port, not some miraclous nvidia engine programmers team. But this time they actually did their homework. And basically AC4 uses the same AnvilNext AC3 did. In latest beta drivers HBAO+ can be forced for many old games. And PCSS isnt exactly some secret know-how either. Also logo isnt required, I belive that even AC1 was in program, and still it didnt feature any in-game logos.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 09:01 PM
I didnt say they stopped dev support program
You claimed Nvidia's gaming program wasn't a thing anymore. That's untrue, I wanted to correct that.
Nvidia takes PC gaming very seriously and they are more willing than ever to strike deals with AAA publishers.


But again: they dont write engines for developers. And basically AC4 uses the same AnvilNext AC3 did. In latest beta drivers HBAO+ can be forced for many old games. And PCSS isnt exactly some secret know-how either. Logo isnt required for a long time, I belive that even AC1 was in program, and still it didnt feature any in-game logos.
PCSS is an Nvidia technology, they're not anything else than another way of doing contact-hardening shadows but it shows the relationship at work between a developper and Nvidia.
AC1 wasn't part of Nvidia's program, neither was AC3 and yet the game was bundled with Geforce GPUs.

When a game is really developped in collaboration with Nvidia the logo is featured at the back of the box (Splinter Cell Blacklist, Metro Last Light, Borderlands 2, Batman Arkham City etc..).
Guess what you will find on the official Assassin's Creed site ? Yeah, a Nvidia logo.
http://assassinscreed.ubi.com/fr-fr/home/index.aspxhttp://static9.cdn.ubi.com/fr-FR/images/nvidia-logotcm24108391.png

Anykeyer
10-07-2013, 09:15 PM
Again, I didnt say Nvidia stopped their program, but they changed a lot of terms over the years. Absence of their logo does not mean anything. There was a funny story about AC 1 (which does not have NV logo on box or in game), TWIMTBP (AC 1 WAS in that program) and DX10.1, just google. Also the fact that nvidia dev site has PCSS tutorial does not mean its exclusive. They have tutorials for almost anything. Thats what they do, Teach and provide samples, as well as hardware and in some cases live support. PCSS can work on any modern GPU.

BlastThyName
10-07-2013, 09:25 PM
Again, I didnt say Nvidia stopped their program
You said :
BTW there is no such thing as TWIMTBP anymore
Sorry if I interpreted it as Nvidia stopping its program.


but they changed a lot of terms over the years. Absence of their logo does not mean anything. There was a funny story about AC 1 (which does not have NV logo on box or in game), TWIMTBP (AC 1 WAS in that program) and DX10.1, just google. Also the fact that nvidia dev site has PCSS tutorial does not mean its exclusive. They have tutorials for almost anything. Thats what they do, Teach and provide samples, as well as hardware and in some cases live support. PCSS can work on any modern GPU.
I'm aware that Nvidia ****ed up the DX10.1 path for AMD users back then. This is when PC gaming turns ugly.
It doesn't matter whether or not a feature is exclusive, I never implied as such, what matters is who brought it to the table, in that case, Nvidia. This is Nvidia tech no matter how you slice it.

Hence why my point still stands : Black Flag is developped in collaboration with Nvidia unlike AC3.
Nvidia had nothing to do with how DX11 was built in AC3, that's about to change with AC4 and Watch Dogs.
The collaboration is on a deeper level this time around.

Anykeyer
10-08-2013, 06:09 AM
Since none of us actually work for Ubisoft Urkaine you cant claim they collaborated more or less.
What is known for sure is that Ubisoft Urkaine works with nvidia ever since its forming. They test builds with nvidia and they use their tools to add something nvidia-spicific in each release. In ACR it was 3D Vision and Surround (both require some effort to support). In AC3 TXAA. In AC4 shadows.
Nvidia's gains from this program are obvious. They always have drivers ready for game's release day. Unlike AMD which failed fabulously with AC3.

BlastThyName
10-08-2013, 09:33 AM
Since none of us actually work for Ubisoft Urkaine you cant claim they collaborated more or less.
What is known for sure is that Ubisoft Urkaine works with nvidia ever since its forming. They test builds with nvidia and they use their tools to add something nvidia-spicific in each release. In ACR it was 3D Vision and Surround (both require some effort to support). In AC3 TXAA. In AC4 shadows.
Nvidia's gains from this program are obvious. They always have drivers ready for game's release day. Unlike AMD which failed fabulously with AC3.
Shadows aren't the only thing Nvidia and Ubisoft Kiev are working on if Geforce.com is to be trusted.
Tessellation, HBAO+ and "advanced Godrays" are there.

AherasSTRG
10-08-2013, 09:36 AM
Shadows aren't the only thing Nvidia and Ubisoft Kiev are working on if Geforce.com is to be trusted.
Tessellation, HBAO+ and "advanced Godrays" are there.
What is "advanced Godrays"? Is it the effect the light causes when coming through surfaces with different densities?

BlastThyName
10-08-2013, 09:44 AM
What is "advanced Godrays"? Is it the effect the light causes when coming through surfaces with different densities?
I don't know, the terminology is rather imprecise. Godrays are volumetric lights, perhaps they mean a higher precision model or something.