Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I play DX11 and I recommend it to you.
2) For starters, I recommend setting the OS swap file size to FIXED SIZE 32 GB (this means that when setting ‘Custom Size’ -> ‘Initial Size’ and ‘Maximum size’ must be same -> 32768). The paging file must be on the SSD (system partition C:). It is advisable to have at least 32 GB of physical RAM.
Here, the problems will not be in Icarus, but in Unreal 4, on which the game is built, the thing is that this game engine loves a lot of RAM and, oddly enough, large swap files.
If you are playing on DX12 and you are starting to crash or have another problem, then be sure to put a 32GB swap file. Or try switching to DX11 (considerably less memory consumption).
First link from Google (do not download any files, just a picture for visual aid)
https://www.thewindowsclub.com/increase-page-file-size-virtual-memory-windows
The DX11 is recommended because of the Unreal engine 4 but.....DX12 is much better in detail, the game looks more realistic, the water and weather looks fantastic, the clouds are different, the model is better. If the player has the hardware and enough power to run DX12 well, there is no reason to use old DX11...at least not on our side after years we play in this game.
FOR AMD users....if you build a AMD PC take advantages from AMD Freesync, 144Hz + Monitor, Resize-BAR on...
The ‘auto size’ swapfile is far from ideal. The specified size will always work without errors until it overflows.
The term ‘old’ is inappropriate for DX11.
The resizable bar itself can cause problems, ranging from additional lags to crash and hung.
Yes the DX11 is old! DX12 is low level API, uses the hardware more effeciently. Yes, most of us have multicore CPU and we want to use what we paid for :} Intel said 4-cores are enough for a desktop PC 10 years ago and they said too, that Intel won't produce any CPU above these 4 cores, the i7 is enough for the high-end for the next decade too. Hahahah. So when they lost the battle against Ryzen , the only thing that remained was to start a battle with IPC and fooling customers, they are still on the top. Tick-tock-took. Refreshed the refreshed refresh. Intel was always the option no. 1, but not nowadays. Those who have been dictating for decades and fooling customers will one day be surprised that things can develop in a different way.
Resizable-Bar can produce noticeable increase in performance. By enabling it unlocks for the CPU the possibility to use the all the GPU frame buffer at once. This is built in feature for the PCIe. Who is able to use this, uses it, who decides to swich it off because it is not giving more perfomarmance...their choice to turn it off. The Resizable-BAR is agains Lag & Stutters and not to cause them. But right, who is experiencing negative effects = off. Above 4G decoding the same. DX12 should work better with Resizable-BAR ON + Above 4G decoding on.
Since 32GB Ram on high settings and more is not enough even for FullHd, and in the case of a large number of buildings even more so, I immediately recommended increasing the swapfile.
If someone does not want to change the settings for the game, then this is their right, but when Icarus crashes due to lack of Ram, then there will be no need to complain here that the game is unstable.
2) How did you come to this conclusion? Also how did you come to the conclusion that DX12 is a ‘low-level’ API? Is that what Wikipedia says? Is there any confirmation of this?
‘Low-level’ is the ability to take control of one device by another, the lower the API, the greater the control, while DX12 is not even capable of implementing a full-fledged Fullscreen, and what is there is nothing more than a simulation of ‘windows mode’.
Multi-core 3DRender ‘rests’ on the delay in interaction between cores, DX11 does not. And the core-to-core latency of many CPUs is quite high, especially Intel with its ‘energy-efficient’ cores; dual-chip CPUs; CPUs on laptops ‘strangled’ by reduced power consumption; and the trash that is installed on consoles for which DX12 was made.
Any normal PC CPU can easily handle it in one core (DX11), which will be confirmed by, for example, Baldur Gate 3 on DX11 in 4K resolution on RTX4090.
3) Resizable Bar is a ‘private’ technology that has no official guarantee of operability in any game project, as a result of which the so-called ‘white list’ arose a long time ago. I hope you know what it is.
In a huge number of games, increasing the size of the Resizable Bar led not only to a decrease in performance, but also to lags and crashes up to OS crashes. For example, in the same Red Dead Redemption 2 (this is easily seen through Google, there are still a lot of messages including on Reddit)