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
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
The above user has a setup that exceeds minimum, there no reason why they wouldn't be able to run the game smoothly given some compromises and tweaks to the settings. The game is in fact unoptimised and this is the reason why they are experiencing issues like that.
Again, it just goes to show that all you're doing here is screaming into a void based on some Google searches and no real education on the matter.
The answer is simple. Content first, then optimize. There's no other point to discussion, not that discussion has been happening on this thread. It looks like it's devolved to nothing but personal attacks and circular arguments.
eaZyNPC NASA PC:
--------------------------------------
Ryzen 9 7900x boosted clock to 5.7ghz 12 core processor 64gb l3 cache.
64 gb DDR5 5800 speed. Gen 5 nvme m.2 SSD
13gbps hardrive,
B650 Aorus Elite Ax mother board and a amd 7900xtx
--------------------------------------
CPU
Just a two year old 12 core budget cpu from 2022 - not even reaching 6ghz - and you call it godly? We seem to get into godly category rather easily these days. This is old tech already with better products released already. Intel has CPU's out with much better boost clocks and more cores to make it more useful for production too. If it must be from AMD i'd rather have 7950x (or X3D) but it's of course more costly than your CPU, which has less cores.
RAM
Just 64GB of RAM even that is low speed (under 6ghz) noname ram, with your boasting I honestly expected something better than this like at least 6000mhz low latency ram from a good brand. 128GB would have been more impressive to be honest. I am wondering why your RAM speed is 5800MHZ when I've only seen DDR5 sticks sold in 4800-5200-5600-6000 etc (400MHZ increments) speeds. Maybe you couldn't afford to buy faster ram sticks and in desperation you manually tuned it into 5800 or maybe your CPU can't handle faster ram?
STORAGE
You don't share how big SSD (noname brand for some reason) you have? Must be pretty small if you need to pair it with a HDD. it's good that it's fast because you probably end up transferring many games back and forth from that HDD. Anyways, I hope it's big enough to handle the coming maps.
MOTHERBOARD
You choose a MOBO that has a below mid range B650 chipset? Why not go with a mobo with at least a mid range B650e chipset or even x670/x670e? Again, not very godly here, I certainly expected something a little more with your levels of boasting than the second most cheapest choice of chipset possible for the AM5 socket.
CPU
AMD 7900xtx - It's smart that you went with a budget choice here as proper high end cards from Nvidia can be pretty expensive. I too have a budget card so I totally understand and agree with your decision, not everyone can afford need the best - you can fully enjoy gaming with a mid range / budget setup too!
PSU???
You didn't state what PSU you were using, which is probably the most important part for any experienced PC builder. I hope it's something reliable that can produce enough juice if you get a high end graphics card in the future. This is a wrong part to save money because if your PSU goes down it can take everything else down with it.
Your mid range/budget gaming rig could benefit if this game was more optimized (FSR3 support at least), which is why I wonder why you oppose the idea so much? I am guessing it's probably just to annoy others as much as possible.
You really should stop looking down on other people and if you can't due to your young age, at least ask your parents first to buy you are better PC. It's getting honestly quite embarrassing to read about you boasting about your setup like it was the best thing money can buy when in reality it's nothing that special.
I know that you seem to struggle with reading comprehension but I have already answered your questions in the quoted post.
Even though you've completely neglected to answer my simple question whilst posting several of your own, I will try to answer yours in a bit more detail.
Smoothly is subjective so I don't think that I can entertain you by giving exact figures, your experiences based on your own hardware will obviously vary from game to game. The point is that when you meet the minimum requirements for a game you should by all right, given some compromises and tweaks to settings, be able to run the game reasonably well. By reasonably well, you should expect to be running the game at minimum graphics settings without issue as this is the case for many titles on Steam.
What it does not mean is that your FPS is going to be horrible at the lowest possible settings, can you even point out any single game besides this one where that is actually the case?
Let's take Cyberpunk 2077 as test case, which mind you is widely known to be a badly optimised and graphically demanding game but it still runs quite smoothly with minimum specifications on low-med settings at 1080p and that isn't even the lowest resolution setting.
Take another look at the post that you were ranting about, whilst noting their specs:
Which clearly exceed the minimum requirements of the game but the user has stated that the game is still insanely laggy, no, matter, what, graphics, they, set.
You're been dropping bombs on them with irrelevant information and implying that they are trying to run the game at epic, but that isn't at all what they had originally stated. It does, not, appear to me that you have been able to comprehend the facts that were stated which simply reaffirms my first statement.
They are not the problem, their hardware is not the problem. The game is the problem, it is unoptimised.
Now sure, you can flip flop all you like about that:
And sureeee, rag on peoples setups all you want:
But for someone with so much non-existent evidence:
Your "supposed" rig *was* actually the on-a-budget option:
Just admit it, your parents bought you a potato:
And you actually have no job:
What you do have however, is proof that you're a winning joke:
You clearly have no clue that SSD's are not hard drives and you instruct others to go educate themselves? Perhaps you are nowhere nearly as educated yourself as you think.
May you never loose your passion for fighting the good fight against potato PC's and their owners - the shame that these poor folks have brought upon the PC master race with their rigs must be swept away brutally before it spreads further. I know it's tough and sometimes you think about quitting, but remember that with hard work and dedication to epic settings and high FPS you will surely achieve your noble goals one day.
But joke is on them: I still have fun...
I am glad if it made you laugh. I also wish all the best to you :)
Do you understand this considerably slows the process of development, and adds quite a bit of unnecessary work due to the number of repeat processes you'd have to do every time you added more content and maps?
I'm asking because that doesn't seem to be understood, and if it were, then one probably wouldn't ask for this thing now, before less than a quarter of the scheduled content is out.