Gears of War Ultimate Edition. DX12 exclusive, requirements inside

MINIMUM SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
•OS: 64 bit Windows 10 – version 1511
•Processor: Intel Core i5 @ 2.7Ghz or AMD FX 6-core
•Memory: 8 GB RAM (2 GB VRAM)
•Graphics: Geforce GTX 650 Ti or Radeon R7 260x
•Hard Drive: 60 GB available space
•DirectX 12

RECOMMENDED SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS FOR 1920X1080P
•OS: 64 bit Windows 10 – version 1511
•Processor: Intel Core i5 @3.5GHz+ or AMD FX 8-core
•Memory: 16 GB RAM (4 GB VRAM)
•Graphics: GeForce GTX 970 or Radeon R9 290X
•Hard Drive: 60 GB available space
•DirectX 12

RECOMMENDED SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS FOR 4K
•OS: 64 bit Windows 10 – version 1511
•Processor: Intel Core i7 @ 4Ghz or AMD FX 8-core
•Memory: 16 GB RAM (6+ GB VRAM)
•Graphics: Geforce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon R9 390X
•Hard Drive: SSD + 60 GB available space
•DirectX 12

Seems that for 4k a 980Ti is the same as a 390x

Some other interesting notes is that a 6-core AMD CPU is equated to a low-clocked/older i5, and an i7@4GHz is equated to an AMD 8-core.

The game has the engine completely rewritten and it's a DX12 exclusive.

 

Very interesting... :gape:

 

Red is the answer....Fury X 4 GB VRAM is not enough for 4K in this game, DX12 is not helping at all.

Same in ROTTR very high for res >1440p needs 6 or more GB of VRAM.

Fury X owners must be very upset.

 

Lost interest awhile back to be honest. Was looking forward to headshoting again and do the superman, slide shot, laggy shots, no scope cover shot... those were the days. But it's taking too long to get the game out, and the win 10 req. is not helping either. More interesting games on the horizon, rather save money for a newer experience.

 

Was 390X 8GB ever faster than FuryX at 4K in any game?

 

4gb HBM is different.

 

nah... they'll live
Fury X shines at high resolutions, yet it comes with 4GB, while at the same time performance cards like R9 390 come with 8GB, figure that!

So buying Fury X over 980Ti, has always been more of a statement (and perhaps a gamble) than a rational buy anyway.


Also there is something exciting about having braking new tech like HBM,
same like 512 bit bus on Hawaii is kinda cool , despite not necessarily translating into more performance.

 

Dont know if HBM is different or not, but 4Gb HBM could be a huge backfire for AMD if they cant keep 1440p/4k gaming.

Im playing on 1440p so im not that worried after all, but last releases on 1440 and 4k are near those 4gb or above, im starting to wonder if i should sell my furyx when polaris is out and get something with more vram (HBM or not).

 

Yes, it's not 6GB GDDR5.

AMD can trade some of the HUGE HBM speed for time to compress data in less space.

In some games this will give HBM a big advantage over GDDR5 and in others a little to no advantage but never to the point to be able compress 6 GB of data in only 4 GB of real VRAM space.

Some resources can't be compressed fast enough or can't be compressed at all.

....until the games started asking for 6 GB VRAM to play them at 1440p very high quality (ROTTR) or to play them at 4K.

Shadow of Mordor Ultra HD texture pack and its need for 6 GB VRAM was something fancy when it was released but now the increased VRAM needs in recent games is a trend.

 

Only problem I see is some stupid developer making engine which fill 4GB of compressed vram space with textures.
Uncompressed BMP with resolution of 4096x4096 takes 48MB of space. Let's presume we have specular, shadow and bump map in addition to texture. so, it is like 192MB per 4096x4096 bad idea block. Only 20 of those would fit 4GB if we ignore all buffer space and stuff.

But with compression those textures end up being like 4~10MB in size that's 4~10 times reduction in space. So are we expecting game which uses 80~200 4096x4096 textures and its bump, specular, shadow maps at same time to render single frame (or be ready in case camera moves)?

And that still ignores, that bump, shadow and specular often end up being put into just one texture. Each in one R,G,B channel.

 

Fury have HBM Solution.
One can't compare HBM to old gen. GDDR
IMO :chainsaw:

 

People are simply overplaying HBM's meaning. 512GB/s memory bandwidth would be very nice , if the card would have memory controllers / cache that would actually be able to deliver that much. But truth is very different:

OclMemBench

500MHz (512GB/s) Test: ~375GB/s
545MHz (558GB/s) Test: ~400GB/s
600MHz (614GB/s] Test: ~440GB/s
666Mhz offers quick reboot

Default which should give 512GB/s in theory, offers true performance of 390X (384GB/s).

Anyway, that 4GB memory problem in general is easy to solve simply by dropping few memory hog settings, like MSAA. I very much doubt that recommended 4k settings is for ultra anyways, or for 60fps.

Or ofc you can always have everything maxed and end up like XCom2, which needs 10GB memory from video card at max settings @4K. Yeah, 8xMSAA at 4K really is needed. Fury X 4fps, 980Ti 6fps, Titan X massive 18 fps with those settings. Playable? -Err, No.

 

We are gonna need Pascal and Polaris to do 30fps in that game on 4k.

 

Its funny how they marketed DX12 to be lower-hardware friendly and now it will need Polaris and Pascal to run games. This is a second dx12 game with absurd system req.

Its DX11 all over again.

 

Might all so be that with dx11 it would run worse and have different requirements then. And that dx12 is making it possible to run something stupid on gear like Fury X and 980 ti.

Oh and that recommended for 4K is a new thing totally too. I would presume earlier recommended was never for so high res.

 

This is what hardware vendors said. But developers see it more like = more resources available = more complex scenes. Nothing wrong in that imho. Also there was never promise that slower gpu would run games with same speed than faster one with older API.

 

Its either downgrade to a 390, or drop settings like in Tombi

 

Just when i tought I would be able to play this game, my dreams have fallen to water.

 

I somehow managed to skip all of them. I was waiting for this to be honest to finally play them.

Even if that's the issue, how come they actually recommend a 390x? Can it maintain at least 30fps at 4k?

Do you happen to have a source for these numbers? If GDDR5 cards have similar efficiencies, then HBM is still massively faster in comparison, and nothing changes.

Having actually used DX12 for Dolphin, I really like it. I would look at the minimum requirements more if I were you. They will most likely give console parity, and the hardware requirements are absurdly small.

What did you have to do in Tomb Raider?

 

Why do you need very high textures in ROTTR? With the vulcan drivers i'm able to play the game smooth at 4K with high textures and it looks awesome. Much better than with very high textures at 1080p or 1440p.

I somehow doubt that this game doesn't have a texure quality option. Simply lower the texture quality a bit and you will still have sharper textures at 4K, than you would have at 1080p with maximum texture quality.

I really don't see the problem. Everybody that bought a fury, knew that the card only has 4GB of storage and now it's a problem that devolpers add in higher quality textures so that 6, 8 or even 12GB VRAM card users can make use of all the VRAM? Why wouldn't they give those people the ability to make use of everything they got?

If fury owners are angry, they should be angry at themselves. They bought a 4GB VRAM card. I'm not pissed that my r9 290 can't run very high textures in ROTTR. I didn't expect that the VRAM requirements would increase so fast, but i can live with it. My next cards will definitely have more VRAM.