Error message: "This game requires a CPU that supports F16C commands"

[Arvid]

I have an "Intel i7-3930".
CPU-World writes: "The CPU includes NO AVX2, F16C and FMA3 instructions"!
It's over 10 years old, but I've never had any problems with it!!!
The first part of Horizon also went great!
I'll probably have to give the game back!

[Nixxes_Community]

Originally posted by Juggernaut:

The game Horizon Forbidden West requires support for the AVX (Advanced Vector Extensions) instruction set. Your Intel Core i7-3820 processor, while supporting AVX, is not compatible with the version of AVX required for the game.

Explanation:

There are several versions of AVX: AVX, AVX2, AVX-512.

i7-3820 supports AVX only (the first version).
Horizon Forbidden West requires AVX2 (the second version).

This is incorrect. Horizon Forbidden West requires AVX (1) and F16C.

The Core i7-3820 supports AVX, but not F16C. Unfortunately, this CPU is not supported.

[NeHoMaR]

Originally posted by Swans:

Originally posted by NeHoMaR:

From the same place you are posting this, Steam.

And is not 5%, it's like 10% of people on Steam that can't run this game, I was just being conservative with the number because not everybody is interested or want to play it.
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam
At the end, click on "Other Settings". Bye.

Interesting. I guess that shows why there's no pressing business need for them to invest in a patch, as the potential extra sales numbers are so trivial for what is an 8.5bn unit game. At the very least it would be unlikely to be a MUST for near-term sprints, when they have defects impacting all players.

Perhaps when the more pressing issues are resolved they might.

First, it's unknown how hard or easy is to remove that requirement; Could go from reprogramming the entire game, to just uncheck a box and recompile the exe with an "invest" of one minute.

Second, 10% is a lot of money, 11 million dollars is a lot more than 10 million dollars.

Additionally, it's clear that most people with old CPUs are not just "poor" and live under a rock, they could have a PC with 16GB of RAM and a recent video card, and being able to play 99% of games, without ANY valid reason to upgrade.

[Alt0153]

Originally posted by NeHoMaR:

Originally posted by Swans:

Interesting. I guess that shows why there's no pressing business need for them to invest in a patch, as the potential extra sales numbers are so trivial for what is an 8.5bn unit game. At the very least it would be unlikely to be a MUST for near-term sprints, when they have defects impacting all players.

Perhaps when the more pressing issues are resolved they might.

First, it's unknown how hard or easy is to remove that requirement; Could go from reprogramming the entire game, to just uncheck a box and recompile the exe with an "invest" of one minute.

Second, 10% is a lot of money, 11 million dollars is a lot more than 10 million dollars.

Additionally it's clear that most people with old CPUs are not just "poor" that live under a rock, they could have a PC with 16GB of RAM and a recent video card, and being able to play 99% of games, without ANY valid reason to upgrade.

sure people who wont upgrade for newer hardware are also spending money on new releases..actually no i bet they play counter strike and rocket league on their old af parts

[NeHoMaR]

Originally posted by Alt0153:

Originally posted by NeHoMaR:

First, it's unknown how hard or easy is to remove that requirement; Could go from reprogramming the entire game, to just uncheck a box and recompile the exe with an "invest" of one minute.

Second, 10% is a lot of money, 11 million dollars is a lot more than 10 million dollars.

Additionally it's clear that most people with old CPUs are not just "poor" that live under a rock, they could have a PC with 16GB of RAM and a recent video card, and being able to play 99% of games, without ANY valid reason to upgrade.

sure people who wont upgrade for newer hardware are also spending money on new releases..actually no i bet they play counter strike and rocket league on their old af parts

Maybe you could start watching the profiles of some of the people "complaining" about this. Actually, I am pretty sure there are rich people with old CPUs, is not a matter of money, I have an old CPU overclocked with water cooling, I love my setup, is not cheap.

[Swans]

Originally posted by NeHoMaR:

Originally posted by Swans:

Interesting. I guess that shows why there's no pressing business need for them to invest in a patch, as the potential extra sales numbers are so trivial for what is an 8.5bn unit game. At the very least it would be unlikely to be a MUST for near-term sprints, when they have defects impacting all players.

Perhaps when the more pressing issues are resolved they might.

First, it's unknown how hard or easy is to remove that requirement; Could go from reprogramming the entire game, to just uncheck a box and recompile the exe with an "invest" of one minute.

Second, 10% is a lot of money, 11 million dollars is a lot more than 10 million dollars.

Additionally, it's clear that most people with old CPUs are not just "poor" and live under a rock, they could have a PC with 16GB of RAM and a recent video card, and being able to play 99% of games, without ANY valid reason to upgrade.

It will require extra code, to do the heavy-lifting that would have been carried out by the instruction set. In reality, it's probably not a large amount of coding effort, but it's change, and extra code to own, which increases risk and TCO in the developer's world. Performance will be impacted, due to the overhead of doing those things in code, we can't say how much by but it's a factor the dev will consider.

The developer may have some concerns around supportability. e.g., if they raise a support ticket with Microsoft because they cannot get some feature working correctly on Windows, we'll usually ask them to put it on a supported platform, to rule out issues arising through legacy config etc.

Now, this does not mean they won't countenance it, but because of how development teams work, it simply won't be a MUST requirement, at least for near-term sprints, because they have other fires to put out that impact ALL customers, whereas this impacts a trivial percentage of *potential* customers. Because only 10% of Steam users own these legacy CPUs, we know the they represent a tiny TAM, so their needs won't influence development particularly strongly in comparison to all the people with performance issues on supported solutions etc.

For all we know, it's in the backlog, but it will definitely not be a MUST requirement, for the above reasons. That's all I am saying.

[Tijger]

Originally posted by Swans:

Originally posted by NeHoMaR:

First, it's unknown how hard or easy is to remove that requirement; Could go from reprogramming the entire game, to just uncheck a box and recompile the exe with an "invest" of one minute.

Second, 10% is a lot of money, 11 million dollars is a lot more than 10 million dollars.

Additionally, it's clear that most people with old CPUs are not just "poor" and live under a rock, they could have a PC with 16GB of RAM and a recent video card, and being able to play 99% of games, without ANY valid reason to upgrade.

It will require extra code, to do the heavy-lifting that would have been carried out by the instruction set. In reality, it's probably not a large amount of coding effort, but it's change, and extra code to own, which increases risk and TCO in the developer's world. Performance will be impacted, due to the overhead of doing those things in code, we can't say how much by but it's a factor the dev will consider.

The developer may have some concerns around supportability. e.g., if they raise a support ticket with Microsoft because they cannot get some feature working correctly on Windows, we'll usually ask them to put it on a supported platform, to rule out issues arising through legacy config etc.

Now, this does not mean they won't countenance it, but because of how development teams work, it simply won't be a MUST requirement, at least for near-term sprints, because they have other fires to put out that impact ALL customers, whereas this impacts a trivial percentage of *potential* customers. Because only 10% of Steam users own these legacy CPUs, we know the they represent a tiny TAM, so their needs won't influence development particularly strongly in comparison to all the people with performance issues on supported solutions etc.

For all we know, it's in the backlog, but it will definitely not be a MUST requirement, for the above reasons. That's all I am saying.

We're talking about people with a cpu thats at least 13 years old yet want to play high end games released today.
I get that people cant or wont invest in a PC but they can buy a console for less money and not have any issues, there is simply no good reason for devs to stop using code features that have been in every PC cpu for the past 13 years.

[Swans]

Originally posted by Tijger:

Originally posted by Swans:

It will require extra code, to do the heavy-lifting that would have been carried out by the instruction set. In reality, it's probably not a large amount of coding effort, but it's change, and extra code to own, which increases risk and TCO in the developer's world. Performance will be impacted, due to the overhead of doing those things in code, we can't say how much by but it's a factor the dev will consider.

The developer may have some concerns around supportability. e.g., if they raise a support ticket with Microsoft because they cannot get some feature working correctly on Windows, we'll usually ask them to put it on a supported platform, to rule out issues arising through legacy config etc.

Now, this does not mean they won't countenance it, but because of how development teams work, it simply won't be a MUST requirement, at least for near-term sprints, because they have other fires to put out that impact ALL customers, whereas this impacts a trivial percentage of *potential* customers. Because only 10% of Steam users own these legacy CPUs, we know the they represent a tiny TAM, so their needs won't influence development particularly strongly in comparison to all the people with performance issues on supported solutions etc.

For all we know, it's in the backlog, but it will definitely not be a MUST requirement, for the above reasons. That's all I am saying.

We're talking about people with a cpu thats at least 13 years old yet want to play high end games released today.
I get that people cant or wont invest in a PC but they can buy a console for less money and not have any issues, there is simply no good reason for devs to stop using code features that have been in every PC cpu for the past 13 years.

I agree with you, there's no business case for it. But others think the world will go back in time 13 years. I'm just presenting the facts to those people.

They might get lucky, but they need to be realistic; even if the devs do want to cater for a sliver of the market, we can be certain it's not on their priority list.

[Praesi]

Dude, your CPU is from 2011. C´mon.....

[Harry.Taco]

Probably better to be a REAL gamer and bite the bullet. You KNOW its time for a PC upgrade.

[JinxTheWorld]

Originally posted by Harry.Taco:

Probably better to be a REAL gamer and bite the bullet. You KNOW its time for a PC upgrade.

Honestly from the looks of it, it would probably be best if OP stuck to console gaming.

[Darko88]

The solution is very easy, just look this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk-e6PEb3Tk

You will download a small file, put it inside you gamefolder, run it and the problem will be fix.

With my i7 2600k (at 4.7 ghz) and RX 5700XT the game run around 50-55 fps, and almost everything in max settings (in 2k ultrawide).

Why I need to spend hundred euro to update my system when it is still so good?

The same with Cyberpunk 2077, Kingdom Come deliverance, and The Witcher 3 (next gen, erverything setting to extreme+, and around 30 mods installed to improve more and more everything, and it run also 60 fps costant!

Of course one day I will update my cpu system, but still not now.

And about Horizon Forbitten West, the developers colden't fix this problem for old cpu?
You know the answer now!

[Darko88]

Originally posted by NeHoMaR:

Originally posted by Comburo:

New hardware? Any CPU less than a decade old supports it. You have a weird definition of "new".

Where you have been the last 30 years? 90% of games have something that makes you "need" to buy new hardware. Your new hardware will be "obsolete" in 1 year. Hardware companies even pay to game developers for this, lol.

I don't need to buy anything, I could just play 99% of existing and future games, and ignore Horizon.

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥! Even the old CPUs can make the games work very well, especially if they are also high resolution (from 2k up).
All those who make a speech like yours know very little about this.
For this specific case, the solution is there, and it is not to spend hundreds of euros just to solve this small problem that has already been solved with an unofficial "patch"!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk-e6PEb3Tk

This is the video, just download the 16MB file, put it in the game folder, and Woilà, the game works perfectly even without this "stupid" F16C.

I have an i7 2600k at 4.7GHz, and I turn all the games in 2K ultrawide almost everything at most, obviously I will lose a 10-15% of performance to the maximum, but this is not worth the money to update the whole system!

Before speaking, try to understand something more, or better yet if you have a direct experience.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

Originally posted by Darko88:

Originally posted by NeHoMaR:

Where you have been the last 30 years? 90% of games have something that makes you "need" to buy new hardware. Your new hardware will be "obsolete" in 1 year. Hardware companies even pay to game developers for this, lol.

I don't need to buy anything, I could just play 99% of existing and future games, and ignore Horizon.

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥! Even the old CPUs can make the games work very well, especially if they are also high resolution (from 2k up).
All those who make a speech like yours know very little about this.
For this specific case, the solution is there, and it is not to spend hundreds of euros just to solve this small problem that has already been solved with an unofficial "patch"!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk-e6peb3tk

This is the video, just download the 16MB file, put it in the game folder, and Woilà, the game works perfectly even without this "stupid" F16C.

I have an i7 2600k at 4.7GHz, and I turn all the games in 2K ultrawide almost everything at most, obviously I will lose a 10-15% of performance to the maximum, but this is not worth the money to update the whole system!

Before speaking, try to understand something more, or better yet if you have a direct experience.

You're not able to play this game at 2k max settings in UW on that setup with a mere 5700x...

And why do you even havew a 5700 with a 2600k? You have litterally bottlenecked yourself... lol

[Darko88]

Originally posted by owlmind:

Originally posted by Lord_Dracon:

We are in 2024. Upgrade your CPU.

Why would i? For the ONLY game on the market whos dev can't make good compatible code? Don't think so. I can play literally ANY PC game released up to this moment. Cyberpunk, Hogwarts, Baldurs Gate, Suicide Squad, whatever, all works just fine. This is the only game with devs arms and heads growing from their butts.

But they don't understand, they are used to spending hundreds of euro every time to update to have that 5% more performance or just to feel emotionally better.

I too have an i7 2600k at 4.7 GHz with a RX 5700 XT and I make us run practically everything always almost at maximum settings, in 2K ultrawide.

All those who comment may not even know that the resolution is raised and the less important is the strength of the CPU.

[Darko88]

Originally posted by Harry.Taco:

Probably better to be a REAL gamer and bite the bullet. You KNOW its time for a PC upgrade.

So for you a real player is the one who spends money? Not that he plays, perhaps by optimizing everything! You are really informed bad