wizardofid
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 12,629
- Reaction score
- 6,901
Fallout is minor, doom was much harsher on hardware, while both needed a quad core CPU, GPU wise, doom needed some thing with a little more punch.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Have you ever ordered a product online and received a fake knock-off?
Intel kills off 8th-gen desktop CPUs
- Thread starter Jamie McKane
- Start date
-
- Tags
- intel
Fallout is minor, doom was much harsher on hardware, while both needed a quad core CPU, GPU wise, doom needed some thing with a little more punch.
No no I am not saying its hard or needs powerful hardware - the game engine is buggy and inconsistent, and it causes random stutters through the game, usually just before a densely populated fight scene or like in New Vegas when you on the boarder between New vegas and the wasteland.
GTA V displayed similar issues, but as the game was patched and became more mature, it began running smoother.
I never said it's faster, I said that faster tech is not always needed.... it's always wanted but that's something else.
Nothing I don't have the patience to wait for.... nothing that actually needs to be faster in my life
You just want to push everyone on SSD's, not everyone needs one
Then explain the pop-in of textures? Or that all sounds used on a map are not necessarily all loaded when you load the map? etc Plently of games load assets after the fact, it's just not always noticeable..... otherwise people would start to need much more RAM than current games require. There is also the Civilization games that also never load all textures on map load with plenty of pop-in especially with slower GPU's.
Most of my micro stutters dissapeared as soon as I used a SSD, that some still occur is a secondary fact.
Fact is some games run better after a level has loaded when you use a SSD..... notice I said some games not all games.
Yout must have a very good GPU then because the middle of the map becomes unplayable on a HDD for me unless I feel like exiting the game every time I load..... which I actually had to do before I got a SSD.
Excessive small re-writes degrades a SSD faster than a HDD, which is why M$ turns it off in the first place.
Depends on the game and the workload, a easy way to cause stutter (and cause textures to load on the fly @wizardofid) on fallout 4 is to enable noclip and sprint.... the game actually kinda temporarily freezes sometimes. I know this because one way to get around the infinite loading bug I used was to do that instead of fast travel.... after a SSD this was no longer necessary.
True but with a SSD those are much less of a problem or even eliminated a lot of the time. Incidentally running FNV on a SSD with a poop-load of mods also increases stability compared to a HDD.
The creation engine is a buggy mess, looking at things people say about F76 they never fixed half of the problems.
In some ways the F4 version is even worse than FNV because I never had a infinite loading screen before.... even though others have reported it on previous versions. But just do a small search for F4 infinite loading and you get all sorts of tweaks and mods that claim to fix it but don't, the only thing that fixes it is a SSD..... I know..... I tried all the fixes.
I am not sure I am inclined to believe you - a SSD is not going to make a game more stable. People who update their games make them more stable.
So as a test, install the base versions(as of original launch day, so no mods, and no updates) and compare how each runs on a SSD and HDD.
Hardware cant fix fudgy code.
I am aware that F4 locks up on load screens frequently - on console. Although it is the same game, porting a game from one platform to another platform can bring about issues of its own that the parent platform never displayed or had.
If the game loads assets on the fly or for some reason requires a certain speed for certain assets yes having a slower HDD can translate into inferior performance. It's not that a SSD makes it more stable as much as that it compensates for optimized code. There are even cases where a "wrong" access speed crashed the program but that's rare.
So no the HW does not fix the code it just greases the execution sometimes.
Yeah.... my sympathies to anyone attempting to play a bethesda game on console....
Barbarian Conan
Executive Member
If you don't have as much RAM as they would like, they would load from the swap file. Back in the day of the red HDD lights and the krrr krrr noises of mechanical hard drives, you could clearly tell when your slowdowns were due to HDD access or something else.
I think that's part of the reason I over-compensate with RAM.
First bolded: You are opening a can of worms only 3 people(On this forum at least) may possibly be able to answer with certainty, and even then they would want to see Creations Source Code to see if it is possible.
Well it's hardly difficult.... either everything is already loaded or some of it loads after the initial load as is needed.....
The first game that actually advertised this was Dungeon Siege I believe which was literally constantly loading as you play. The load level was low so most PC's never took a performance hit.
Also with games as large as they are these days.... would people not start to need 32-64GB of RAM if some of these games never loaded anything on the fly? Does GTA not also basically never go to load screen if you stay outside? I would not actually know though since the last GTA I actually played was san andreas....
An efficient game engine is really good at garbage collection...
And dungeon siege had a relatively small world - I bet you could load that games entire map into a small block of memory and just have a series of events that cleared/allocated memory as characters died or spawned.
The issue of how the "camera" would work would be interesting to read up about.
wizardofid
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 12,629
- Reaction score
- 6,901
Lol oh yeah. huge problem with most games as development studio can't possibly support or test all hardware configurations, and especially if you use an in house engine. I don't think I have ever encountered issues with unreal or unity games.
Quite often issues are a result of hardware and driver issues.
But that said, Rambo assuming game assets gets loaded on the fly, is utter rubbish, games preloaded levels assets as needed into swap file, GPU memory and ram.Games assets these days due to the amount of GPU memory and ram load raw assets that has been created using special cache files for loading into the memory ect.
While you could technically run a game like rise of the tomb raider on 4 gig ram, you will require a larger swap files as things needs to be swapped out between system ram and swap file, which will result in poorer FPS whether you have a SSD or HDD making the game almost unplayable, as a result of not enough of the assets being loaded into memory not as a result of using an SSD or HDD.
Which is why games have min ram requirements and the more you have and faster the memory speed is the more of the assets can be loaded into ram memory. However games are high optimized in being able to delete or swap out data between ram and GPU memory and being able to dynamically load and unload data from memory as needed.
SSD or HDD only serves to load data to memory as needed and once loaded stands idle waiting for the next request, games like skyrim and fallout loads level areas in chunks into the memory and relies in instancing of assets meaning you can have one tree or one grass blade rendered and duplicate it a 1000 times but only cost the one render.
You could have a 300 teraflop SSD and your game will still have the exact same frame rate, as a game is dependant on ram, CPU and gpu, HDD or SSD only serves the function of loading to memory.
Barbarian Conan
Executive Member
Nope, I don't think I've seen a game use more than 10GB RAM.
Here's Escape From Tarkov, a beautiful game using only 10GB on ultra settings:
You forget all the other assets, textures and sounds being the largest. And the time the 1.3GB I think game came out where most had maybe 128MB RAM I think.....
Having no experience of that game I cannot comment.
I am forgetting about the other assets because I do not know how the system works, so I am not assuming.
Once would think that loading assets one the fly would be a logical solution, but to me it doesn't make reasonable sense to have a game call for assets mid render of a frame screams inefficiency.
Completely different execution compared to the creation engine, both engines are also known for relatively small levels though I don't know if that's solely a console consideration..... I have yet to see a worldspace in either engine to rival anything from the creation engine.
So in theory a game using 40GB in assets on a single level needs to load all of them before using them? Really?
Enter the creation engine hahaha though I admit this is an assumption since I fail to see how such a large game can be loaded into swap and RAM all at once.....
Every game engine has its flaws. - except CryEngine 2 actually