Lowest GPU that you're playing at

[orbops]

I was wondering if anyone is playing using a GPU lower than the min specs? If so, which GPU do you have?

[zaltocleotl[Banned@Paradox]]

RX570
72K population and 14-18FPS unless zoomed in then it can hit 20+fps.
Lots of jerking on scrolling and zooms in/out. Hard to play, but not unplayable.

[Estelyen]

For NVidia side, I just got a new graphics card but I started the game on my old GTX 1070. I had about 30 fps in HD resolution and about 15-20 in 4k.

It's a city builder, no need for quick reflexes. So while not being much eye candy, I wouldn't call those frame rates unplayable either.

[Foxy]

dunno if below specs but using a 6600 and play reasonably well at 30 fps with decent settings..... now i started bottlenecking the CPU after hitting 180k pop so i can play only at 1x speed

[orbops]

Tried it with Xbox game pass free month on my low end system. I have a GT 1030 and got a whopping 6 fps with every setting at low or disabled with just over 300 pop to start. It's giving me a good idea of the game mechanics. It's still playable in my opinion.

Now I have to decide when to upgrade my GPU since this is the only game that is stressing my system. Is it worth spending $250-$400 essentially to play CS2?

[Kevin]

I'm using a ARC A-380 with no issues. I don't know if its min spec since the specs are not listed for Intel.

I'm having no issues.

[DarthMalak]

Originally posted by Estelyen:

For NVidia side, I just got a new graphics card but I started the game on my old GTX 1070. I had about 30 fps in HD resolution and about 15-20 in 4k.

It's a city builder, no need for quick reflexes. So while not being much eye candy, I wouldn't call those frame rates unplayable either.

Tell that to the people who spent $2000 on a 4090 and are getting below 30 fps.... Or 3080's or 4080,ies.... etc... Unacceptable.... And people saying for this type of game you don't need 60 fps are just half blind I guess or don't have any feeling for the difference beetween 20 fps and 60 fps.

Many, many, many years ago when people in offices were still using those nice tube monitors I frequently came across a collegue who was working on something like 30hz even though the monitor was 100 hz... The whole screen was vibrating because it was underscanning... They didn't notice.

Maybe that also goes for a lot of people regarding framerates.. They just don't see or feel the difference.

[Creamy P1e Skwert]

Originally posted by DarthMalak:

Originally posted by Estelyen:

For NVidia side, I just got a new graphics card but I started the game on my old GTX 1070. I had about 30 fps in HD resolution and about 15-20 in 4k.

It's a city builder, no need for quick reflexes. So while not being much eye candy, I wouldn't call those frame rates unplayable either.

Tell that to the people who spent $2000 on a 4090 and are getting below 30 fps.... Or 3080's or 4080,ies.... etc... Unacceptable.... And people saying for this type of game you don't need 60 fps are just half blind I guess or don't have any feeling for the difference beetween 20 fps and 60 fps.

Many, many, many years ago when people in offices were still using those nice tube monitors I frequently came across a collegue who was working on something like 30hz even though the monitor was 100 hz... The whole screen was vibrating because it was underscanning... They didn't notice.

Maybe that also goes for a lot of people regarding framerates.. They just don't see or feel the difference.

Quit spreading lies. The game has been somewhat patched for frames. I'm getting 38 FPS on high settings for 1080p, I only have RTX 3060 TI, 16gb ram, Intel core i7 12700F. 27 FPS with 83k population.

I call absolute BS on your claim that RTX 4090 is having 30fps or below. Maybe on 4K Ultra settings with the highest possible graphics settings around 150k pop, at that point you're just becoming ungrateful.

[Cyn_Tax]

Intel i7 6700k paired with nvidia gtx1070.
Around 50fps on medium tweaked settings, 6k pop currently. I guess 10-20k pop will be my limit.

[Arran Chace]

Originally posted by DarthMalak:

Originally posted by Estelyen:

For NVidia side, I just got a new graphics card but I started the game on my old GTX 1070. I had about 30 fps in HD resolution and about 15-20 in 4k.

It's a city builder, no need for quick reflexes. So while not being much eye candy, I wouldn't call those frame rates unplayable either.

Tell that to the people who spent $2000 on a 4090 and are getting below 30 fps.... Or 3080's or 4080,ies.... etc... Unacceptable.... And people saying for this type of game you don't need 60 fps are just half blind I guess or don't have any feeling for the difference beetween 20 fps and 60 fps.

Many, many, many years ago when people in offices were still using those nice tube monitors I frequently came across a collegue who was working on something like 30hz even though the monitor was 100 hz... The whole screen was vibrating because it was underscanning... They didn't notice.

Maybe that also goes for a lot of people regarding framerates.. They just don't see or feel the difference.

I recently went from a Gigabyte GTX1080ti /oc to a Inno3D RTX4070ti and yeah my old GTX1080ti was a beast of a card that i think way way too good for its Generation of GPU's, it did reached its end of life in graphical department and started to have driver issues with newer games like Starfield and City Skylines, yet in FPS it could still keep up with modern games, but it started to show it age in textures what where bland in color, missing features, what i didn't really noticed till i upgraded to the 4070ti.

But compared to a game i play a lot (CP2077) difference are just to HUGE, going from 40-50ish FPS High Setting w/o RT/DLSS what looked like Medium Settings TBH but between Medium and High the card pushed the same 40/50ish FPS on 1080p, to now with the 4070ti 120+ FPS Ultra settings with RTon, DLSS on and on 1440p.
IF someone don't see or notice the difference, he/she must be visually impaired because the difference between cards is so frigging obvious and noticable, its not even funny.

And still, my old GTX1080ti is even today still for many gamers on a budget a upgrade

[Kevin]

Originally posted by DarthMalak:

Tell that to the people who spent $2000 on a 4090 and are getting below 30 fps....

I'm playing this game just fine with a $120 Arc A380.

[A Fat, Angry Serval]

I'm on an RTX 2070.

I actually read somewhere that the 20x0 RTX cards are actually more efficient than later cards when not using certain technologies implemented in later cards.