Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › PC Enthusiast-Fi (PC Gaming/Hardware/Software/Overclocking)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PC Enthusiast-Fi (PC Gaming/Hardware/Software/Overclocking) - Page 162

post #2416 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yazen View Post

Eidos made Tomb Raider.  Square Enix had originally announced that FFXV could run on any DirectX 11 capable hardware.  They later said that they would consider reworking the interface and controls for a PC release, given their was enough demand.  The later then stated the game would require a high end machine.  

Eidos did make it, however Eidos Interactive was acquired by Square Enix and now placed as a subsidiary of SE Europe before the announcement of the game, therefore making SE the forefront of TR's development. (Thanks Wikipedia!)

 

So, it requires DX11, huh? Well, my desktop obviously won't work as it is only DX9 compatible, but the HTPC should work it just fine. How does this spec sheet do?

  • Intel Xeon 1230 @ 3.3GHz
  • 16GB of RAM
  • nVidia GeForce GTX 600 Ti Boost

 

It handles Crysis and TR just fine, plus the low screen resolution of the display (1280x720 is readable, anywhere higher is too scrunched up) should be able to get me about 60-70fps in either game. Plus, I run it with default settings, so yeah, I guess FFXV should be no problem for this computer. biggrin.gif

post #2417 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

Eidos did make it, however Eidos Interactive was acquired by Square Enix and now placed as a subsidiary of SE Europe before the announcement of the game, therefore making SE the forefront of TR's development. (Thanks Wikipedia!)

So, it requires DX11, huh? Well, my desktop obviously won't work as it is only DX9 compatible, but the HTPC should work it just fine. How does this spec sheet do?
  • Intel Xeon 1230 @ 3.3GHz
  • 16GB of RAM
  • nVidia GeForce GTX 600 Ti Boost

It handles Crysis and TR just fine, plus the low screen resolution of the display (1280x720 is readable, anywhere higher is too scrunched up) should be able to get me about 60-70fps in either game. Plus, I run it with default settings, so yeah, I guess FFXV should be no problem for this computer. biggrin.gif
I remember the old TRs... Ahhhhh, nostalgia. Lol
post #2418 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

Eidos did make it, however Eidos Interactive was acquired by Square Enix and now placed as a subsidiary of SE Europe before the announcement of the game, therefore making SE the forefront of TR's development. (Thanks Wikipedia!)

 

So, it requires DX11, huh? Well, my desktop obviously won't work as it is only DX9 compatible, but the HTPC should work it just fine. How does this spec sheet do?

  • Intel Xeon 1230 @ 3.3GHz
  • 16GB of RAM
  • nVidia GeForce GTX 600 Ti Boost

 

It handles Crysis and TR just fine, plus the low screen resolution of the display (1280x720 is readable, anywhere higher is too scrunched up) should be able to get me about 60-70fps in either game. Plus, I run it with default settings, so yeah, I guess FFXV should be no problem for this computer. biggrin.gif

Eidos developed the game, Square Enix owns Eidos.  For me, these two are seperate entities biggrin.gif

I would not say Starcraft II was by Activision Blizzard lol, just Blizzard.

 

Who knows how clunky the engine would work on PC.  Although the Xbox One is based off DX11.1, I'm sure it has its own unique optimizations and independent technologies.

 

FFXIV is a perfect example.  When it first came out, I don't think it was playable on midrange hardware..

post #2419 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yazen View Post

Eidos developed the game, Square Enix owns Eidos.  For me, these two are seperate entities biggrin.gif

I would not say Starcraft II was by Activision Blizzard lol, just Blizzard.

 

Who knows how clunky the engine would work on PC.  Although the Xbox One is based off DX11.1, I'm sure it has its own unique optimizations and independent technologies.

 

FFXIV is a perfect example.  When it first came out, I don't think it was playable on midrange hardware..

I guess you're right. It does make more sense. XD

 

True, most console games are optimized for that console, so yes, it might have some extra bits that make it run faster. I just hope that it could run on the HTPC...

 

FFXIV looked pretty crappy during the first releases. It was so bad that SE even made a public apology to all players. I guess it just wasn't ready during those stages. Now they're back with a vengeance and teh new release looks quite promising. I might want to try it out.

post #2420 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

I guess you're right. It does make more sense. XD

 

True, most console games are optimized for that console, so yes, it might have some extra bits that make it run faster. I just hope that it could run on the HTPC...

 

FFXIV looked pretty crappy during the first releases. It was so bad that SE even made a public apology to all players. I guess it just wasn't ready during those stages. Now they're back with a vengeance and teh new release looks quite promising. I might want to try it out.

The new console certainly push midrange in terms of raw computational specifications..

I'm rooting for the PS4, as it must be using a Linux/BSD OS.  Would be awesome to have better AMD driver and OpenGL support biggrin.gif

 

Tired of the Windows/DirectX plague, cheers to a open source OS for gaming!  Hackstation 4 anyone?

 

EDIT:  Don't take me too seriously now :P

post #2421 of 6471

Reading all that stuff about FFnext...meh. I'm looking forward to the Homeworld 1+2 HD reboots from gearbox.

Also, 1TB ReRAM drives.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2013/08/06/crossbar/1

 

I expect it'll be highly priced and artificially limited in the consumer and office market so it doesn't obliterate RAM sales when it finally does get released.


Edited by Tangster - 8/7/13 at 2:16am
post #2422 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tangster View Post

Reading all that stuff about FFnext...meh. I'm looking forward to the Homeworld 1+2 HD reboots from gearbox.

Also, 1TB ReRAM drives.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2013/08/06/crossbar/1

 

I expect it'll be highly priced and artificially limited in the consumer and office market so it doesn't obliterate RAM sales when it finally does get released.

Wow...imagine an iPod Touch 5G with 1TB of storage...

 

Upon release, it should be quite costly, but maybe one day RAM will be obsolete.

post #2423 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

Wow...imagine an iPod Touch 5G with 1TB of storage...

Upon release, it should be quite costly, but maybe one day RAM will be obsolete.
That one day is a LONG way ahead of us. CPU caches are only several MBs, and sure, that number will grow, but we won't see that tech until the end of our lives.
post #2424 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibob4tacoz View Post

That one day is a LONG way ahead of us. CPU caches are only several MBs, and sure, that number will grow, but we won't see that tech until the end of our lives.

A 2TB tablet is already possible. Foremay T166 comes in either MLC or SLC chip types and a 2.5" form factor. If you've ever opened and SSD, you'll know that if they wanted they could easily cram the chips into a much smaller area than that. A 2TB tablet would probably only need to be as thick as the Microsoft Surface. Of course, it'd probably cost $$$$$$$$$.

 

As for 1TB ReRAM, I give it 10 to 15 years. Took SSD's roughly the same time to go from extremely expensive, niche, slower, ****tier versions of RAM drives used only in specific places where the data needed to be faster than a hard drive and very stable(like satellites and the space shuttle) to widespread cheap(ish) consumer storage.

post #2425 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tangster View Post

A 2TB tablet is already possible. Foremay T166 comes in either MLC or SLC chip types and a 2.5" form factor. If you've ever opened and SSD, you'll know that if they wanted they could easily cram the chips into a much smaller area than that. A 2TB tablet would probably only need to be as thick as the Microsoft Surface. Of course, it'd probably cost $$$$$$$$$.

 

As for 1TB ReRAM, I give it 10 to 15 years. Took SSD's roughly the same time to go from extremely expensive, niche, slower, ****tier versions of RAM drives used only in specific places where the data needed to be faster than a hard drive and very stable(like satellites and the space shuttle) to widespread cheap(ish) consumer storage.

10 to 15 years...well, in HVGC terms, that'd be about 2-3 generations of consoles before ReRAM becomes about as expensive as the SSDs we have now. Over that time, I will be able to see it, and maybe own one by that time. Only time will tell.

post #2426 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

10 to 15 years...well, in HVGC terms, that'd be about 2-3 generations of consoles before ReRAM becomes about as expensive as the SSDs we have now. Over that time, I will be able to see it, and maybe own one by that time. Only time will tell.

The first time I heard about SSD's was a review in a Custom PC magazine 5 years ago. They were around £400 to £5000 depending on if you went for the based 32GB model or a 64GB military and spaceflight certified TOTL model. Look at how far we've come in only 5 years, £400 will buy you two consumer 512GB drives that are an order of magnitude faster than the £5000 drive back then.

post #2427 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tangster View Post

The first time I heard about SSD's was a review in a Custom PC magazine 5 years ago. They were around £400 to £5000 depending on if you went for the based 32GB model or a 64GB military and spaceflight certified TOTL model. Look at how far we've come in only 5 years, £400 will buy you two consumer 512GB drives that are an order of magnitude faster than the £5000 drive back then.

Damn...we've come a long way now, haven't we?

post #2428 of 6471
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

Damn...we've come a long way now, haven't we?

no no no its all about the 512kb floppy disk compared to a 64gb micro sd card that are widely available today lol next year 128gb micro sd cards will probably be for sale to the masses

post #2429 of 6471
Thread Starter 

I'm downloading Payday 2 The Heist beta right now. It seems that if you have Payday 1, the devs are giving you access to the beta!

 

Many have said that it is truly an amazing game. One of DICE's former main people(BF3, BF BC2 etc) has went to work on Payday 2 which may deal with it.

post #2430 of 6471

I have no idea wtf is going on with my 7970, it usually runs no hotter than 68 c but a few days ago it started running at 73 c and I thought okay maybe it's just because it's starting to get really hot now that it's summer but just now it was running at 93 c!!!!!!!! WTF I was getting horrible artifacts on my screen too for the 3 minutes i was in game. and now as I'm typing this it is idling at 43 c so idk wtf is up with it. I guess I'm taking the heat sink off and seeing if something some how camp loose I have no idea how the hell it would I've owned it for less than a year.  My other temps are all good though and I was still getting the same FPS as I did at normal temps.  

 

EDIT: is using CPU paste on your gpu a bad idea? Pretty sure the whole extreme ice SUPER COOL TECHNOLOGY is just a marketing thing right lol


Edited by linglingjr - 8/8/13 at 8:34pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › PC Enthusiast-Fi (PC Gaming/Hardware/Software/Overclocking)