i7-990x level cpu couldn't play because of AVX. That was really sad.

[偏我来时不逢春]

I'm using W3690=i7 990x,this cpu is great, gpu is Vega 64,most game can be handled. I'm just sad I couldn't play this game, And I wait this game for very long time, Sad

[Seamus]

"great"

You're using a nine year old xeon based on first gen core aka Westmere.

AVX was added in second gen core aka Sandy Bridge.

Your CPU is an almost decade old potato.

Stop taking advice from youtubers about "HOW TO BUILD AN AWESOME GAMING PC FOR CHEAP!".

[DrFujitsu]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Seamus:

"great"

You're using a nine year old xeon based on first gen core aka Westmere.

AVX was added in second gen core aka Sandy Bridge.

Your CPU is an almost decade old potato.

Stop taking advice from youtubers about "HOW TO BUILD AN AWESOME GAMING PC FOR CHEAP!".

I have an i7 970 CPU which is worse then what they have and came out Q3 2010, However my CPU still kicks ass in 2020, I've not found a game where I was CPU capped in the slightest, Apart from a few games where they ran physics calculations that probably would make any cpu crawl to it's knees, apart from the 600$ money grabbing attempts from intel crawl to their knees.. My only issue is GPU and if the game had support for non AVX CPUs I'm 100% sure I could easily run it on my system.

[Honshitsu]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Seamus:

Stop taking advice from youtubers about "HOW TO BUILD AN AWESOME GAMING PC FOR CHEAP!".

You know that CPU is still perfectly fine for gaming, right? I have a dual xeon system from the same era sitting behind me that cost >$5,000 at the time of purchase; though the DDR3 ECC RAM is slow and the CPU certainly isn't breaking any clock records (any more) it can still play most games at >60FPS on decent settings with a half-way decent GPU. Bonus points for workstation use.

It's also worth noting that even in 2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey had to release an AVX fix.

Yes, these older CPUs are certainly obsolete, but that doesn't mean unfit for use. I probably wouldn't recommend someone who's bargain hunting to get a CPU that old but only because you can find some relatively newer (but still old & used) ones for the same price.

inb4 anyone goes on about "salty guy still using decade old hardware", I'll let you know that I'm currently running a 3950x with 32GB 3800 C14... My old server processors are still more than sufficient for the vast majority of tasks.

AVX is more of an artificial limitation imposed by the inclusion of Denuvo, than a technical limitation within the game itself (AFAIK)

and even in 2020, there are CPUs released that don't support AVX (Pentium and Celeron lines, for example)

[Seamus]

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Seamus:

"great"

You're using a nine year old xeon based on first gen core aka Westmere.

AVX was added in second gen core aka Sandy Bridge.

Your CPU is an almost decade old potato.

Stop taking advice from youtubers about "HOW TO BUILD AN AWESOME GAMING PC FOR CHEAP!".

I have an i7 970 CPU which is worse then what they have and came out Q3 2010, However my CPU still kicks ass in 2020, I've not found a game where I was CPU capped in the slightest, Apart from a few games where they ran physics calculations that probably would make any cpu crawl to it's knees, apart from the 600$ money grabbing attempts from intel crawl to their knees.. My only issue is GPU and if the game had support for non AVX CPUs I'm 100% sure I could easily run it on my system.

Look. I get the frustration of having a game not work on your pc.

I was one of the people stuck on a Phenom II with no SSSE3 support when RE7 launched, and no SSE4.2 support when MGS5 launched.

I"ve been there.

Thing is, this clinging to outdated technology? This isn't new.

We saw the same thing with Windows XP when Vista or 7 was required for a game for the sake of DX10 or 11.

We've CONSTANTLY seen this every time a game has the gall to use SSSE3 or SSE4.2 with Phenom II users.

And now that the decade old AVX extensions are actually being used, we're seeing it again with people on pentiums and first gen core cpus.

Technology changes. It gets outdated and needs to be replaced. That's just how things go.

[DrFujitsu]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Seamus:

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

I have an i7 970 CPU which is worse then what they have and came out Q3 2010, However my CPU still kicks ass in 2020, I've not found a game where I was CPU capped in the slightest, Apart from a few games where they ran physics calculations that probably would make any cpu crawl to it's knees, apart from the 600$ money grabbing attempts from intel crawl to their knees.. My only issue is GPU and if the game had support for non AVX CPUs I'm 100% sure I could easily run it on my system.

Look. I get the frustration of having a game not work on your pc.

I was one of the people stuck on a Phenom II with no SSSE3 support when RE7 launched, and no SSE4.2 support when MGS5 launched.

I"ve been there.

Thing is, this clinging to outdated technology? This isn't new.

We saw the same thing with Windows XP when Vista or 7 was required for a game for the sake of DX10 or 11.

We've CONSTANTLY seen this every time a game has the gall to use SSSE3 or SSE4.2 with Phenom II users.

And now that the decade old AVX extensions are actually being used, we're seeing it again with people on pentiums and first gen core cpus.

Technology changes. It gets outdated and needs to be replaced. That's just how things go.

Your not wrong, Technology does change quite alot. However even windows 10 in 2020 has backwards compatibility for programs written for 32 bit architecture along with having windows 10 available for 32 bit cpus. I still feel that games even coming out in later years until 2025 should support the older technology even if it's a worse experience performance wise for the end-user.

[Seamus]

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Seamus:

Look. I get the frustration of having a game not work on your pc.

I was one of the people stuck on a Phenom II with no SSSE3 support when RE7 launched, and no SSE4.2 support when MGS5 launched.

I"ve been there.

Thing is, this clinging to outdated technology? This isn't new.

We saw the same thing with Windows XP when Vista or 7 was required for a game for the sake of DX10 or 11.

We've CONSTANTLY seen this every time a game has the gall to use SSSE3 or SSE4.2 with Phenom II users.

And now that the decade old AVX extensions are actually being used, we're seeing it again with people on pentiums and first gen core cpus.

Technology changes. It gets outdated and needs to be replaced. That's just how things go.

Your not wrong, Technology does change quite alot. However even windows 10 in 2020 has backwards compatibility for programs written for 32 bit architecture along with having windows 10 available for 32 bit cpus. I still feel that games even coming out in later years until 2025 should support the older technology even if it's a worse experience performance wise for the end-user.

AVX is a DECADE old.

Seriously.

You really want them to wait another five years before making it mandatory?

Why?

Part of PC gaming as a whole is knowing what your system is and isn't capable of.

I mean, Intel isn't helping this matter by refusing to put AVX on pentium chips(even the brand new Comet Lake based Pentium G6600 that came out in April doesn't have AVX... and that's the same architecture as stuff like the i7 10700k.) But, hobbling developers from things that can demonstrably actively improve the performance of engines?

No, I can't agree with that at all.

Side note, going by the digging into the executable done by another forum member, the AVX requirement seems to be the engine its self, not Denuvo.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Unplanned_Organism:

It would be, sure.

I can't unpack every label and so the AVX bits are in undefined sections of the code. And it's not necessarily covering 100% of the labelled functions within the exe. I looked into most references to audio and wouldn't find anything above SSE4.2, and the crashing occurs earlier anyway.

Disassembling the exe shows there are AVX bits within the mainprog/gamemainprog calls.
Manually verifying every subcall is not a reasonnable expectation, and without symbols for most of them, guess work.

So, yeah. I definitely can't agree with the complaints.

[trek554]

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Seamus:

"great"

You're using a nine year old xeon based on first gen core aka Westmere.

AVX was added in second gen core aka Sandy Bridge.

Your CPU is an almost decade old potato.

Stop taking advice from youtubers about "HOW TO BUILD AN AWESOME GAMING PC FOR CHEAP!".

I have an i7 970 CPU which is worse then what they have and came out Q3 2010, However my CPU still kicks ass in 2020, I've not found a game where I was CPU capped in the slightest, Apart from a few games where they ran physics calculations that probably would make any cpu crawl to it's knees, apart from the 600$ money grabbing attempts from intel crawl to their knees.. My only issue is GPU and if the game had support for non AVX CPUs I'm 100% sure I could easily run it on my system.

then you are delusional. I have a 4770k at 4.3, which is faster than your 970, in my other pc and it was getting fully pegged in some games even 2 or 3 years ago. it stood no chance of maintaining 60 fps in some games yet you make the ridiculous claim that your slower 970 does not hold back any games in the slightest? lol. your cpu is still okay but you are beyond clueless about hardware if you think it does not hold back some modern games. hell in Watch Dogs 2 my stock 9900k literally gets TWICE the minimum framerate as the oced 4770k got and averages around 30-50% higher depending on the area.

EDIT: yep dug up my old post showing 4770k at 4.3 getting 49 fps while stock 9900k getting 103 fps. and your cpu would be quite a bit slower than the 4770k.

https://hardforum.com/threads/2080s-cpu-or-2080-ti.1984972/#post-1044287178

[DrFujitsu]

Oprindeligt skrevet af trek554:

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

I have an i7 970 CPU which is worse then what they have and came out Q3 2010, However my CPU still kicks ass in 2020, I've not found a game where I was CPU capped in the slightest, Apart from a few games where they ran physics calculations that probably would make any cpu crawl to it's knees, apart from the 600$ money grabbing attempts from intel crawl to their knees.. My only issue is GPU and if the game had support for non AVX CPUs I'm 100% sure I could easily run it on my system.

then you are delusional. I have a 4770k at 4.3, which is faster than your 970, in my other pc and it was getting fully pegged in some games even 2 or 3 years ago. it stood no chance of maintaining 60 fps in some games yet you make the ridiculous claim that your slower 970 does not hold back any games in the slightest? lol. your cpu is still okay but you are beyond clueless about hardware if you think it does not hold back some modern games. hell in Watch Dogs 2 my stock 9900k literally gets TWICE the minimum framerate as the oced 4770k got and averages around 30-50% higher depending on the area.

EDIT: yep dug up my old post showing 4770k at 4.3 getting 49 fps while stock 9900k getting 103 fps. and your cpu would be quite a bit slower than the 4770k.

https://hardforum.com/threads/2080s-cpu-or-2080-ti.1984972/#post-1044287178

I'm aware where my limits are in my hardware, I'm bottlenecked by ♥♥♥♥♥♥ DDR3 ram along with a GTX 770 and a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ motherboard that has been through hell and back with bent pins from it's previous owner. From my perspective the i7 970 that I have has never been the bottleneck. I've played many games from Deus Ex Mankind divided, Final Fantasy 15, Ghost Recon Wildlands, And a few more games that I would still consider to be 'modern' yet I ran them all with no problems. The only bottleneck? My GPU. Also the 4700k you were comparing? It only has a difference of 300 for it's cpu mark score. The 9900k? It has a difference of 12000-13000 to both CPUs. (Numbers gotten from here, Take with grain of salt like always https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i7-970-vs-Intel-i7-4770K-vs-Intel-i9-9900K/840vs1919vs3334 )


Edit: Besides, My "kick ass" would be roughly 30-40 frames. It's different for everyone and perhaps that's where the misconception that I was declaring my GPU "Godly" was. It's far from "godly" and still pretty ♥♥♥♥.

[trek554]

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

Oprindeligt skrevet af trek554:

then you are delusional. I have a 4770k at 4.3, which is faster than your 970, in my other pc and it was getting fully pegged in some games even 2 or 3 years ago. it stood no chance of maintaining 60 fps in some games yet you make the ridiculous claim that your slower 970 does not hold back any games in the slightest? lol. your cpu is still okay but you are beyond clueless about hardware if you think it does not hold back some modern games. hell in Watch Dogs 2 my stock 9900k literally gets TWICE the minimum framerate as the oced 4770k got and averages around 30-50% higher depending on the area.

EDIT: yep dug up my old post showing 4770k at 4.3 getting 49 fps while stock 9900k getting 103 fps. and your cpu would be quite a bit slower than the 4770k.

https://hardforum.com/threads/2080s-cpu-or-2080-ti.1984972/#post-1044287178

I'm aware where my limits are in my hardware, I'm bottlenecked by ♥♥♥♥♥♥ DDR3 ram along with a GTX 770 and a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ motherboard that has been through hell and back with bent pins from it's previous owner. From my perspective the i7 970 that I have has never been the bottleneck. I've played many games from Deus Ex Mankind divided, Final Fantasy 15, Ghost Recon Wildlands, And a few more games that I would still consider to be 'modern' yet I ran them all with no problems. The only bottleneck? My GPU. Also the 4700k you were comparing? It only has a difference of 300 for it's cpu mark score. The 9900k? It has a difference of 12000-13000 to both CPUs. (Numbers gotten from here, Take with grain of salt like always https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i7-970-vs-Intel-i7-4770K-vs-Intel-i9-9900K/840vs1919vs3334 )

yeah your whole system is bit dated so your cpu does not stand out too bad. I was laughably held back in some games by an oced 4770k with a 1080 ti though. some Ubisoft open world games seem to be the worst for old cpus as they were about the only ones where I struggled to hold even 50 fps in areas with that old cpu.

[DrFujitsu]

Oprindeligt skrevet af trek554:

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

I'm aware where my limits are in my hardware, I'm bottlenecked by ♥♥♥♥♥♥ DDR3 ram along with a GTX 770 and a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ motherboard that has been through hell and back with bent pins from it's previous owner. From my perspective the i7 970 that I have has never been the bottleneck. I've played many games from Deus Ex Mankind divided, Final Fantasy 15, Ghost Recon Wildlands, And a few more games that I would still consider to be 'modern' yet I ran them all with no problems. The only bottleneck? My GPU. Also the 4700k you were comparing? It only has a difference of 300 for it's cpu mark score. The 9900k? It has a difference of 12000-13000 to both CPUs. (Numbers gotten from here, Take with grain of salt like always https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i7-970-vs-Intel-i7-4770K-vs-Intel-i9-9900K/840vs1919vs3334 )

yeah your whole system is bit dated so your cpu does not stand out too bad. I was laughably held back in some games by an oced 4770k with a 1080 ti though. some Ubisoft open world games seem to be the worst for old cpus as the were about the only ones where I struggled to hold even 50 fps in areas with that old cpu.

Yeah, I hope to replace my entire computer in the future, Currently trying to see if I can't save enough for a threadripper along with a GTX 1080 since my hobby is video editing and animation via Adobe After Effects. Also do you mind if I use the thing you posted in the future for explaining to people and showing people the obvious CPU bottleneck. I never have been able to find a good example of it as my system isn't bottlenecked obviously anywhere.

[Seamus]

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

Oprindeligt skrevet af trek554:

yeah your whole system is bit dated so your cpu does not stand out too bad. I was laughably held back in some games by an oced 4770k with a 1080 ti though. some Ubisoft open world games seem to be the worst for old cpus as the were about the only ones where I struggled to hold even 50 fps in areas with that old cpu.

Yeah, I hope to replace my entire computer in the future, Currently trying to see if I can't save enough for a threadripper along with a GTX 1080 since my hobby is video editing and animation via Adobe After Effects. Also do you mind if I use the thing you posted in the future for explaining to people and showing people the obvious CPU bottleneck. I never have been able to find a good example of it as my system isn't bottlenecked obviously anywhere.

Don't go with a threadripper. Go with one of the high core count ryzen 9's instead. Cheaper chip, cheaper platform, WAY fewer issues.

[DrFujitsu]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Seamus:

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

Yeah, I hope to replace my entire computer in the future, Currently trying to see if I can't save enough for a threadripper along with a GTX 1080 since my hobby is video editing and animation via Adobe After Effects. Also do you mind if I use the thing you posted in the future for explaining to people and showing people the obvious CPU bottleneck. I never have been able to find a good example of it as my system isn't bottlenecked obviously anywhere.

Don't go with a threadripper. Go with one of the high core count ryzen 9's instead. Cheaper chip, cheaper platform, WAY fewer issues.

Ah okay, Thanks for the advice!

[Seamus]

Oprindeligt skrevet af DrFujitsu:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Seamus:

Don't go with a threadripper. Go with one of the high core count ryzen 9's instead. Cheaper chip, cheaper platform, WAY fewer issues.

Ah okay, Thanks for the advice!

Yep.

I still intend on swapping my current 2700X for a 3800X for the increase in IPC. Or possibly a 4800X or whatever the equivalent is in the 4000 line if my X470 board will support it.

[Viper]

Old ♥♥♥♥ is old ♥♥♥♥. Doesn't have modern techs regardless. A 10 year old CPU needs to be replaced.

[Zer01neDev]

They probably use AVX on Death Stranding for Unload Workload on PS4's Weak CPU, and since its a Consoles Port...