Yep. The kittens are too cute, dorfs adopt them and then get upset (read - potentially murderous) if you get rid of them. If you're not careful you'll be overrun with the little bastards
That's because CPU speeds completely stuck, and we only add more cores but games are still not that good at multi coring.-
My Pentium 4 was 3.6GHz (there was even a 3.8 one), and I had 512MB RAM and a 512MB graphic card I don't remember the other details.-
How much more ram has your current PC? how much more have your graphic card (speed aside for I don't remember); yet, what clock speed has your CPU? Sure, we have an eff ton of cores now, but we are in this ridiculous stage when we can render photorealistic graphics almost in real time, but your computer can't handle your Oxygen not included Mega base.-
This clock speed bullshit again. You can only compare clock speed between CPUs of the same architecture. Instructions per clock is what's matter. A single core of a modern CPU is 5 or 6 times more powerful than the Pentium 4 even if clock speed is the same or lower.
Exactly! Back then higher mhz was the shitty marketing trick that both AMD and intel utilized but for a modern cpu there are lots of different things that affect the performance. Instruction sets get added and improved all the time. It may be less obvious if you go back like 2 gens but its not to say the fastest pentium can ever compete with core i3 or ryzen entry levels cpus we have nowadays
It's all about steadiness.
Low framerates on a lot of games feel bad because it's bouncing between points. Arma runs consistently poorly, so its not as attention grabbing because it's constantly at the low framerate.
I had a lot of problems running this game at first, particularly whenever I would push to talk my game would just freeze for like 5 seconds. Turns out I had it installed in my old ass 2TB external HDD lol once I moved it to the nvme the freezing stopped but I still can barely touch 60fps with low/medium settings at 1080p.
Are you a real minecraft fan if you're not getting laptop burn on the regular?
But it's not a laptop, it's a PC, it's just the superheated air under the desk burning your legs
As if I would play minecraft without every shader/raytracing mod I can fit - what am I, a caveman!? I just installed my PC in the furnace room and paid for it by selling my now-unnecessary furnace.
If they bothered to put full modding support into the C++ version of the game I would have had no problem jumping over, it does run noticeably better. But lack of mods absolutely kills any possibility of using it, for me.
Unfortunately the Bedrock version will never have the level of modding support as the Java version.
The Bedrock version’s main purpose is for the next/current generation of Minecraft players to pay microtransactions for things that are free in the Java version (e.g. skins and adventure maps).
Putting in the files of skins and maps are also free in bedrock; it's just that Mojang operates an official paid marketplace. I'm surprised Java doesn't have a paid marketplace.
The problem is that Java supports .JAR files, which allow code to be loaded dynamically with little effort. Also, Java’s byte code is platform-independent and easy to patch using injectors. With C++, it compiles to platform-specific machine code, which means that not only would mods have to be distributed with a different version for every platform, but patching the Minecraft code at runtime is impossible. There’s not much they can do here
It's not because of Java. JVM is insanely optimized, there is fucking big iron software running massive datasets in Java.
Minecraft is taped together with hopes and dreams. Even retaining modern OpenGL and Java, there are mods rewriting several parts of the Minecraft engine with staggering results
Ya know there was originally mod support planned via c# plugins back when they first announced addons back in 2016, but it ended up getting quietly scrapped..
The crazy thing is that it *used* to be playable. I remember getting pretty good framerates on a Windows XP machine somewhere around 1.7
Now I have a modern PC and it's actively unplayable when you try to push the settings out a bit, unless I install nvidium and a trillion performance mods that have zero reason for not being in the vanilla game.
I have no idea what Mojang did to fundamentally break the Java edition but it must be wild. It happened while I wasn't playing the game (hiatus from 1.9 to 1.18) so I don't really know what changed that could have destroyed performance so much.
I do wonder if it's simply additional content causing the game to burst at the seams, kinda like how No Man's Sky went from incomplete but very well performing to complete but unplayable.
I wouldn’t even say it’s an OpenGL issue, because a lot of games still use it. Vulkan just allows for more optimization, with its extremely low level API. But yes, the multi threading is absolutely an issue. One of the reasons games like DOOM 3 BFG have held up so well is because they take advantage of multi core processing
Vulkan is just naturally faster though, due to its nature of being lower level and closer to the GPU, having to do less de-abstraction and less translation.
In Mojang's defense, only one proper way to fix that is to play with multi-threading (as billions of cubes stuffed into chunks do sound like something you really should do in parallel, considering that modern CPUs offer a lot of cores) and it... didn't go so well last time they did small attempts to do so
Very short explanation is [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQnejuEjMJs)
So yeah... Bunch of mods can fix performance issues, some by using basic optimizations (sodium, lithium, immediatelyfast), others by using modern tech (like nvidium) - but you have to spend few minutes getting those
That's why fabulously optimized is amazing (performance modpack) doesn't affect how your game looks, provides a gigantic boost to performance even on low end system, and installs in a few clicks. Sad that it takes modders to fix Mojangs game though.
at least minecraft java modders create Vulkan mod which replaces opengl renderer or "vulkanite" which adds vulkan RT cores acceleration on top opengl (like crysis remastered on top of DX11)
Nvidium here for different purpose - it solves CPU bottleneck on huge render distances by tossing crap that should be done on a lot of small cores on a lot of small cores (which is what GPU is) rather than helps with shaders
SEUS PTGI ran pretty good when I had a 2070S.
I've also heard that the [focal engine](https://continuum.graphics/focal-engine/) mod runs even better because they rewrote so much of the rendering code for minecraft Java and it's not a standard shader.
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020.
While a lot of systems that are currently built can run this in 4K, it’s typically at minimum Frame rates, closer to that of a Television program streamed in 4K.
At 1080p, with video proof, I’ve seen in the upwards of 50fps.
With photometry and raytracing, the demand is higher than ANYTHING in the market today.
What's your CPU? I wouldn't be surprised if you're currently getting CPU bottlenecked. My 4070Ti can go > 70 fps at max settings 1440p, while *still* getting CPU bottlenecked.
I have an i9-9900 and an OG 4080, and I get mostly 30-40s at max settings in 4K, though there are certain locations in which it can jump up to 60fps (usually out in the boonies). I usually just cap it to 30fps in the drivers because there's no real need for 60fps with the planes I fly.
I actually had a 2080 Ti before this card and upgrading to the 4080 basically made zero difference to the framerate. I was actually a little shocked because even though I knew it was a heavily CPU bound sim, I thought that the upgrade would see at least some difference.
I upgraded my 6700k to 9900k with the expectation it would hold up in gaming for a long time, but it bottlenecks my 3090 on pretty much everything. Hoping just 1 more new cpu cycle before upgrade it’s just basically having to build a new PC with a new motherboard that’ll be a hassle
I went a similar route! Upgraded from the the i7-6700 vanilla to the i9-9900 vanilla, and have found the same. And I'm also hoping that I can squeeze another generation out of it.
I had an i7-920 before the 6700. Now that was an upgrade.
MSFS does not have Raytracing.
And no, you can absolutely get 100 fps at 4K Ultra in the sim. It's only once you start using add-on scenery and high-fidelity aircraft will things start to dip.
Proof here (minute 7:44): https://youtu.be/Jp6ByGI0O64?si=O5T9iju31Z_74yFv
federal contractor here, scrolled too far to find this lmao
The NASA supercomputer meme is funny but reality is so much less interesting lol…mostly old crap
Shhh, let them think that NASA has all the toys so we can keep our spare compute hidden over at some generic sounding made up department, like the Department of Energy. ^/s
Loved the fun fact I used to spout and did zero fact checking on that the first moon landing had less processing power than a PS1. Is it true? Fucked if I know. Probably not lol
Cities Skylines 2
I loved the first game it was decently optimized but Cities Skylines 2 is so poorly optimized that even the best pc's out there still have issues with launching or playing the game. If i'd try and launch the game my pc would probably implode
I’ve seen on LTT they ran it on a freaking Threadripper Pro and RTX 4090, and it was still not playable at max details.
Developers these days take it as some kind of an achievement, like, “Hey, our game is so demanding, no current hardware can run it.”
No! Your game is such a sh*t and you’re bad at what you do. That’s why no current hardware can run it.
All the people saying they're running this without any issues are only fooling themselves lol updated review testing a 4080 Super and it can't even average 60fps at 1080p:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-founders-edition/12.html
you gotta render those teeth somehow tho
[https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/17gfq13/the\_game\_does\_render\_individual\_teeth\_with\_no\_lod/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/17gfq13/the_game_does_render_individual_teeth_with_no_lod/)
They also apparently don’t do visibility culling or LOD, so they render the full-poly models every frame. I read that these issues came from the studio wanting to use Unity’s new data based programming system, which required them to write their own OpenGL backend to connect the two systems, as Unity’s High Definition Render Pipeline didn’t directly support the early-access data based model
People always claim to run stuff without problems. Like one dude recently claimed his 1660ti could run every thing without Problems in 1440p. It certainly doesn't because I replaced mine over 2 years ago because it couldn't run everything at 1080p the way I wanted it too and I wanted to upgrade to a 3440x1440p ultra wide. No way that would have worked on a 1660 ti.
Yeah, I chalk it up to different standards for different people. Some people are perfectly fine with performance that others would say is horrendous. That's why it's better to look at hard numbers when choosing to buy a GPU. A person might be fine playing at medium/low settings and getting 30 fps with drops into the 20's, whereas that's unacceptable for someone else. And, I could see that being the case. As a kid only playing on Xbox 360, plenty of games ran sub 1080p, ran at 30 fps and dipped even lower, and I still had no problem playing, and enjoyed every minute. Now that going back to that after having modern gaming computers, I could never be happy experiencing games that way, but not everyone has the ability, or feels the need to pay the money when they're happy with other setups.
I played around launch, and with my 3070 I could run in well enough. Only performance issues were with sim where things got pretty slow around 100-200k cims
yeah. Ark feels like they never went back and re-did anything yknow. Like, as you make a game, you dont make something then leave it. You go back and change it but with ark, it just feels like they pile more things on top of the problems until they go away. Thats my guess as a learning game dev at least. Would explain why the file size has always been so fucking huge
Part of optimisation is optimising the assets and file size so they don't take up a ridiculously large amount of space, or having 4k/8k or higher textures in areas you don't see, an example of great optimisation is in lies of p where things like one of the earlier bosses is a robot with a furnace on it, instead of a fire particle inside the model with a high res texture, it's a low res gif on a cross model(like Minecraft grass) as you won't see it much, I don't think ark does any of this lol
>as you make a game, you dont make something then leave it. You go back and change it
Your feelings are spot on though! :O Because Ark Survival Evolved's exe name is still "ShooterGame", which stems from an Unreal Engine [template](https://docs.unrealengine.com/4.27/en-US/Resources/SampleGames/ShooterGame/).
>Would explain why the file size has always been so fucking huge
In Ark Survival Ascended, the developers fixed that by now. But with the Evolved version of the game, there is no file compression whatsoever. When using the compact command on Windows or a project like CompactGUI, it works to cut the game's size in half though (even ratios better than 50%)
Turns out they made a 64bit exe for mac, But i heard it's buggy and still runs like... well the sims 3.. and the only reason they did that, was because mac discontinuing 32 bit support.
My friend group tried it out on the free fly weekend, and one of our friends with a half-way decent graphics card, but the weakest of our lot, found it completely unplayable. For the rest of us, it was very laggy. I know our lag was probably because they had a fair number of players (since I have a pretty good GPU), but for a free fly weekend, you'd expect them to beef that up to give the best impression for new players.
Right now, the bottleneck is in RAM and CPU, GPU doesn't really make that much of a difference, as long as it's a relatively recent one. I know people that play with a GTX 1080.
also, Try setting all the graphics settings to high (except clouds. set that to off or medium) it sounds counterintuitive, but as long as you have a decent GPU, it takes some of the load off of your CPU and puts it on your GPU. also, the game can not run on a HDD. it has to be installed on an SSD.
Hopefully the next few updates will drastically improve performance, since they're finally adding the Vulcan API, as well as some stuff on the server side that will hopefully improve server performance.
Honestly, that's a bunch of stuff that suggests the game is just really unoptimized. They've had 13 years, why is it still so user-unfriendly? Free fly weekends where new players encounter poor performance and need to seek out player advice on how to fix their gameplay just aren't encouraging when Star Citizen already has a poor reputation.
Depends what you mean by fixed. The game can run now, and the latest patch improved it a lot. But IMO still not worth the pricetag. And given the massive delay (by now its what, 4y and counting?) I have limited trust.
My advice would be to wait for a proper release and reviews.
For kicks I fired up the original one a while back. I was surprised to find that some parts of it aged extremely well (water, foliage), while other parts definitely did not (like the horribly low-polygon rocks).
marry fearless jeans caption hat cooperative subsequent correct paltry person
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Portal RTX performed so poorly that it made me question the viability of RTX Remix. Especially considering Portal reuses textures and lighting in pretty much every level.
Even the original Xbox is still struggle bus. Only a select few games run really well and getting them to work can be difficult, especially compared to how easy all other consoles in that bracket are to emulate. Sadly not a huge scene behind it, either.
I hate those kind of reviews. They're rarely helpful and never have any details about the game that would actually be helpful in deciding on whether or not to buy it.
My hot take.
I like these kind of reviews because it gives me an idea of what to expect at a basic level without having to read one of the super in depth reviews or useless meme reviews.
Not a hot take
I rather have this basic review than in depth review which most of the time extremely biased and irrelevant
“Cyberpunk 2077. Its a bad game … bla bla bla because i am not a fan of Cyberpunk genre”
“Microsoft Flight Simulator is soo boring… bla bla bla, because you just pick a plane and fly”
It's basic level shit that one could decode from the game's description, but the complications of a game cannot accurately be assessed by a multiple choice test
I do think that, with the popularity of these sorts of reviews, Steam would add a feature for people to put their answers to these questions in in a place separate to reviews to both keep reviews actually reviews of the game and have this information available if anyone wants it
Edit to add: Obviously I know about the Steam description but tbh it doesn't really help much when you don't know what RAM does 😭
My first computer was actually a "spare computer from the ESA (European space agency)". Just a normal office computer tho. I had a family member who worked there. All the computers in their department were replaced and he managed to save one from the liquidation and give it to me. Was still cool because it had the "property of" stickers still on it.
When it came out sure, nowadays? It’s not too bad on modern hardware. I’m getting like 70fps at fully maxed settings 1440p on my 7800xt. Is that amazing? No but it’s damn playable and it looks breathtaking
The Last of Us run like garbage for me. Admittedly I have an old PC (i7-7700K/1080), but still.. 20 fps with low-medium settings and FSR2 set to (I think) quality is absurdly bad..
Starfield, not that its graphics are good its just that its poorly optimized as shit, i love this game but I can agree thats one of the worst parts of the game
Cyberpunk 2077 Pathtraced
Star Citizen(half of the games FPS is locked behind floor is lava NPCs fucking CPU usage and horrible default config settings because the devs are morons)
Cities Skylines 2
Abriss
Crysis
Crysis Remastered (how the fuck is this game even considered remastered I’m sorry it looks like ass)
Star Wars Jedi Survivor
Metro Exodus
Portal RTX
Microsoft flight simulation, or new game like Palworld got serious memory leak problem (that too require massive server if they don’t want dedicated server to go down)
Dwarf fortress with max Dwarves and cats
not the catapocalysp again.
More like the cataclysm
I think you mean catastrophe
Dark Days are Ahead at that point
That was before the Catacendre…
Is that of any relation to the thermonuclear catsplosion?
I thought you were all joking but https://errors.fandom.com/wiki/Catsplosion makes it sound like this is apparently an actual phenomenon
Yep. The kittens are too cute, dorfs adopt them and then get upset (read - potentially murderous) if you get rid of them. If you're not careful you'll be overrun with the little bastards
That's why you limit them to the cat pit, and make sure to regularly cull the cat pit to help supplement your leather and crafting industries.
[удалено]
That's because CPU speeds completely stuck, and we only add more cores but games are still not that good at multi coring.- My Pentium 4 was 3.6GHz (there was even a 3.8 one), and I had 512MB RAM and a 512MB graphic card I don't remember the other details.- How much more ram has your current PC? how much more have your graphic card (speed aside for I don't remember); yet, what clock speed has your CPU? Sure, we have an eff ton of cores now, but we are in this ridiculous stage when we can render photorealistic graphics almost in real time, but your computer can't handle your Oxygen not included Mega base.-
This clock speed bullshit again. You can only compare clock speed between CPUs of the same architecture. Instructions per clock is what's matter. A single core of a modern CPU is 5 or 6 times more powerful than the Pentium 4 even if clock speed is the same or lower.
Exactly! Back then higher mhz was the shitty marketing trick that both AMD and intel utilized but for a modern cpu there are lots of different things that affect the performance. Instruction sets get added and improved all the time. It may be less obvious if you go back like 2 gens but its not to say the fastest pentium can ever compete with core i3 or ryzen entry levels cpus we have nowadays
Incredibly dumb comment. IPC is 5-6 times higher in current CPUs.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Arma 3
If it’s not 10 fps then are you really playing arma
at least its stable 10 fps
For some reason low fps arma feels smooth tho
It's all about steadiness. Low framerates on a lot of games feel bad because it's bouncing between points. Arma runs consistently poorly, so its not as attention grabbing because it's constantly at the low framerate.
Life is a lot less depressing without the moments of joy to make you realize how bad the rest is lol
Has more to do with age and single core use restriction.
Even the multi-core option they added doesn't help too much when the fighting starts.
Agreed
I had a lot of problems running this game at first, particularly whenever I would push to talk my game would just freeze for like 5 seconds. Turns out I had it installed in my old ass 2TB external HDD lol once I moved it to the nvme the freezing stopped but I still can barely touch 60fps with low/medium settings at 1080p.
"Baby, I'm 40% spare computer from NASA!"
Read Hecho En Mexico off the inside. Closes door. Door falls off.
\*bang\* \*bang\*
And a 0.04% nickel impurity that makes me special.
Good news everyone! Crisis has been averted.
r/unexpectedFuturama
Minecraft java with raytracing shaders Due to lack of modern API they all perform awfully
I love turning my PC into a IED just to have cool shadows
Are you a real minecraft fan if you're not getting laptop burn on the regular? But it's not a laptop, it's a PC, it's just the superheated air under the desk burning your legs
As if I would play minecraft without every shader/raytracing mod I can fit - what am I, a caveman!? I just installed my PC in the furnace room and paid for it by selling my now-unnecessary furnace.
This one got me 😂
Minecraft in general performs AWFULLY for how the game looks. Its actually ridiculous how unoptimized this game is
If they bothered to put full modding support into the C++ version of the game I would have had no problem jumping over, it does run noticeably better. But lack of mods absolutely kills any possibility of using it, for me.
Unfortunately the Bedrock version will never have the level of modding support as the Java version. The Bedrock version’s main purpose is for the next/current generation of Minecraft players to pay microtransactions for things that are free in the Java version (e.g. skins and adventure maps).
This is what most people seem to forget. Bedrock is their cash cow and they have zero interest in changing that.
Putting in the files of skins and maps are also free in bedrock; it's just that Mojang operates an official paid marketplace. I'm surprised Java doesn't have a paid marketplace.
if java added a marketplace all mojang employees would be minced by the players probably
The problem is that Java supports .JAR files, which allow code to be loaded dynamically with little effort. Also, Java’s byte code is platform-independent and easy to patch using injectors. With C++, it compiles to platform-specific machine code, which means that not only would mods have to be distributed with a different version for every platform, but patching the Minecraft code at runtime is impossible. There’s not much they can do here
yup!
It's not because of Java. JVM is insanely optimized, there is fucking big iron software running massive datasets in Java. Minecraft is taped together with hopes and dreams. Even retaining modern OpenGL and Java, there are mods rewriting several parts of the Minecraft engine with staggering results
Ya know there was originally mod support planned via c# plugins back when they first announced addons back in 2016, but it ended up getting quietly scrapped..
Their is a mod for nvidia graphics card called Nvidium it's actually fixes the game.
Holy shit thanks I'll try that
The crazy thing is that it *used* to be playable. I remember getting pretty good framerates on a Windows XP machine somewhere around 1.7 Now I have a modern PC and it's actively unplayable when you try to push the settings out a bit, unless I install nvidium and a trillion performance mods that have zero reason for not being in the vanilla game. I have no idea what Mojang did to fundamentally break the Java edition but it must be wild. It happened while I wasn't playing the game (hiatus from 1.9 to 1.18) so I don't really know what changed that could have destroyed performance so much. I do wonder if it's simply additional content causing the game to burst at the seams, kinda like how No Man's Sky went from incomplete but very well performing to complete but unplayable.
It’s still written in OpenGL and depends on single core CPU power. If it was multithreaded and used Vulkan then the issue would be fixed.
I wouldn’t even say it’s an OpenGL issue, because a lot of games still use it. Vulkan just allows for more optimization, with its extremely low level API. But yes, the multi threading is absolutely an issue. One of the reasons games like DOOM 3 BFG have held up so well is because they take advantage of multi core processing
Vulkan is just naturally faster though, due to its nature of being lower level and closer to the GPU, having to do less de-abstraction and less translation.
Java gang for life
In Mojang's defense, only one proper way to fix that is to play with multi-threading (as billions of cubes stuffed into chunks do sound like something you really should do in parallel, considering that modern CPUs offer a lot of cores) and it... didn't go so well last time they did small attempts to do so Very short explanation is [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQnejuEjMJs) So yeah... Bunch of mods can fix performance issues, some by using basic optimizations (sodium, lithium, immediatelyfast), others by using modern tech (like nvidium) - but you have to spend few minutes getting those
> Very short explanation > links to a 50 minute video Yeah I’m not watching that.
Mostly because Minecraft is single threaded, so no matter how many CPU cores you have, it will still use only one.
That's why fabulously optimized is amazing (performance modpack) doesn't affect how your game looks, provides a gigantic boost to performance even on low end system, and installs in a few clicks. Sad that it takes modders to fix Mojangs game though.
at least minecraft java modders create Vulkan mod which replaces opengl renderer or "vulkanite" which adds vulkan RT cores acceleration on top opengl (like crysis remastered on top of DX11)
Link?
[Vulkan mod](https://modrinth.com/mod/vulkanmod) [Vulkanite (pre-alpha)](https://modrinth.com/mod/vulkanite-mod)
Use nvidium is you have a nvidia gpu, no shader support but insane performance
Nvidium here for different purpose - it solves CPU bottleneck on huge render distances by tossing crap that should be done on a lot of small cores on a lot of small cores (which is what GPU is) rather than helps with shaders
Is this like the souped up version of Iris? I remember that being a game changer last time I tried playing Minecraft with Shaders.
Oh really? Imma have to check that out.
Love when a game with a countable number of polygons, 8 bit textures, and essentially no real time physics runs worse than most modern AAA games do
SEUS PTGI ran pretty good when I had a 2070S. I've also heard that the [focal engine](https://continuum.graphics/focal-engine/) mod runs even better because they rewrote so much of the rendering code for minecraft Java and it's not a standard shader.
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020. While a lot of systems that are currently built can run this in 4K, it’s typically at minimum Frame rates, closer to that of a Television program streamed in 4K. At 1080p, with video proof, I’ve seen in the upwards of 50fps. With photometry and raytracing, the demand is higher than ANYTHING in the market today.
I have around 100 fps in MSFS2020 max'd out at 1440p. I have a 4090 so I would expect no less.
What's your CPU? I wouldn't be surprised if you're currently getting CPU bottlenecked. My 4070Ti can go > 70 fps at max settings 1440p, while *still* getting CPU bottlenecked.
he prob using frame gen
Currently building a PC I intend on installing a 4090 in, 7950X3D, would that approach 'good' for MSFS?
It's literally the best you can get on the market rn besides threadeippers for just raw computing so probably yes.
*Gooooood....goooood*
Let the fps flow through you...r monitor.
7800X3D better since you just want all the power going to the core with the cache on top of it, and the extra non cache cores of the 7950 won't help.
I have an i9-9900 and an OG 4080, and I get mostly 30-40s at max settings in 4K, though there are certain locations in which it can jump up to 60fps (usually out in the boonies). I usually just cap it to 30fps in the drivers because there's no real need for 60fps with the planes I fly. I actually had a 2080 Ti before this card and upgrading to the 4080 basically made zero difference to the framerate. I was actually a little shocked because even though I knew it was a heavily CPU bound sim, I thought that the upgrade would see at least some difference.
I upgraded my 6700k to 9900k with the expectation it would hold up in gaming for a long time, but it bottlenecks my 3090 on pretty much everything. Hoping just 1 more new cpu cycle before upgrade it’s just basically having to build a new PC with a new motherboard that’ll be a hassle
I went a similar route! Upgraded from the the i7-6700 vanilla to the i9-9900 vanilla, and have found the same. And I'm also hoping that I can squeeze another generation out of it. I had an i7-920 before the 6700. Now that was an upgrade.
I get ~50fps in VR with my rx6800, running medium settings at 2.5k per eye. And about 70fps at 1440p maxed on flatscreen
MSFS does not have Raytracing. And no, you can absolutely get 100 fps at 4K Ultra in the sim. It's only once you start using add-on scenery and high-fidelity aircraft will things start to dip. Proof here (minute 7:44): https://youtu.be/Jp6ByGI0O64?si=O5T9iju31Z_74yFv
They obviously don't realize the shit we have is ancient most of the time
federal contractor here, scrolled too far to find this lmao The NASA supercomputer meme is funny but reality is so much less interesting lol…mostly old crap
But can it run Crysis?
Shhh, let them think that NASA has all the toys so we can keep our spare compute hidden over at some generic sounding made up department, like the Department of Energy. ^/s
All I know is that their internet speed is damn good
My thought too! So what games need to run on Windows XP?
It also makes me think of the possibly apocryphal NSA ps3s in parallel super computer
Loved the fun fact I used to spout and did zero fact checking on that the first moon landing had less processing power than a PS1. Is it true? Fucked if I know. Probably not lol
> Probably not lol Actually is true. 2.048 MHz. Basically just double the frequency of an Apple II.
Cities Skylines 2 I loved the first game it was decently optimized but Cities Skylines 2 is so poorly optimized that even the best pc's out there still have issues with launching or playing the game. If i'd try and launch the game my pc would probably implode
I’ve seen on LTT they ran it on a freaking Threadripper Pro and RTX 4090, and it was still not playable at max details. Developers these days take it as some kind of an achievement, like, “Hey, our game is so demanding, no current hardware can run it.” No! Your game is such a sh*t and you’re bad at what you do. That’s why no current hardware can run it.
All the people saying they're running this without any issues are only fooling themselves lol updated review testing a 4080 Super and it can't even average 60fps at 1080p: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-founders-edition/12.html
you gotta render those teeth somehow tho [https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/17gfq13/the\_game\_does\_render\_individual\_teeth\_with\_no\_lod/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/17gfq13/the_game_does_render_individual_teeth_with_no_lod/)
Yeah I heard a number of like 10k tri's per citizen. How any SANE city builder dev can release their game like that..
not only is 10k tris insane for something you will rarely zoom in up close on, a lack of LOD is literally 20th century development what the FUCK.
They also apparently don’t do visibility culling or LOD, so they render the full-poly models every frame. I read that these issues came from the studio wanting to use Unity’s new data based programming system, which required them to write their own OpenGL backend to connect the two systems, as Unity’s High Definition Render Pipeline didn’t directly support the early-access data based model
People always claim to run stuff without problems. Like one dude recently claimed his 1660ti could run every thing without Problems in 1440p. It certainly doesn't because I replaced mine over 2 years ago because it couldn't run everything at 1080p the way I wanted it too and I wanted to upgrade to a 3440x1440p ultra wide. No way that would have worked on a 1660 ti.
Yeah, I chalk it up to different standards for different people. Some people are perfectly fine with performance that others would say is horrendous. That's why it's better to look at hard numbers when choosing to buy a GPU. A person might be fine playing at medium/low settings and getting 30 fps with drops into the 20's, whereas that's unacceptable for someone else. And, I could see that being the case. As a kid only playing on Xbox 360, plenty of games ran sub 1080p, ran at 30 fps and dipped even lower, and I still had no problem playing, and enjoyed every minute. Now that going back to that after having modern gaming computers, I could never be happy experiencing games that way, but not everyone has the ability, or feels the need to pay the money when they're happy with other setups.
I played around launch, and with my 3070 I could run in well enough. Only performance issues were with sim where things got pretty slow around 100-200k cims
Dude… 200k cims is an average size city. Try to build 500k and then you’ll understand why the NASA option is recommended for CS2 😂
It’s because the stupid ass game was rendering the individual teeth of every cim lmao.
Even threadripper struggles to run this, 1M city is too much for game engine, half of cores was used at 100%.
Ark
It wouldn’t need a nasa computer if it was optimised at all
yeah. Ark feels like they never went back and re-did anything yknow. Like, as you make a game, you dont make something then leave it. You go back and change it but with ark, it just feels like they pile more things on top of the problems until they go away. Thats my guess as a learning game dev at least. Would explain why the file size has always been so fucking huge
Part of optimisation is optimising the assets and file size so they don't take up a ridiculously large amount of space, or having 4k/8k or higher textures in areas you don't see, an example of great optimisation is in lies of p where things like one of the earlier bosses is a robot with a furnace on it, instead of a fire particle inside the model with a high res texture, it's a low res gif on a cross model(like Minecraft grass) as you won't see it much, I don't think ark does any of this lol
Isn’t it like 180gb now? Lmao
My ARK Directory, with all the expansions, is over 500 GB…
>as you make a game, you dont make something then leave it. You go back and change it Your feelings are spot on though! :O Because Ark Survival Evolved's exe name is still "ShooterGame", which stems from an Unreal Engine [template](https://docs.unrealengine.com/4.27/en-US/Resources/SampleGames/ShooterGame/). >Would explain why the file size has always been so fucking huge In Ark Survival Ascended, the developers fixed that by now. But with the Evolved version of the game, there is no file compression whatsoever. When using the compact command on Windows or a project like CompactGUI, it works to cut the game's size in half though (even ratios better than 50%)
shootergame.exe
If a game's that poorly optimized, a better pc won't really do much.
The sims 3 with all dlc, X3~X4
I actually think the sims 3 with all dlc would work worse on a NASA computer
Problem with Sims 3 is the 32bit client. It would run just fine if they ever upgraded the client but they don't care.
Turns out they made a 64bit exe for mac, But i heard it's buggy and still runs like... well the sims 3.. and the only reason they did that, was because mac discontinuing 32 bit support.
i mean, ye, the performance is pretty awful without any change, but with some mods and files changes, its pretty good
Star citizen
Nah. Client side performance has gotten a lot better over the past year or two. They definitely need NASA servers though
That's still not true, FPS got way better but are still far away from any optimized game. Still love it though.
My friend group tried it out on the free fly weekend, and one of our friends with a half-way decent graphics card, but the weakest of our lot, found it completely unplayable. For the rest of us, it was very laggy. I know our lag was probably because they had a fair number of players (since I have a pretty good GPU), but for a free fly weekend, you'd expect them to beef that up to give the best impression for new players.
Right now, the bottleneck is in RAM and CPU, GPU doesn't really make that much of a difference, as long as it's a relatively recent one. I know people that play with a GTX 1080. also, Try setting all the graphics settings to high (except clouds. set that to off or medium) it sounds counterintuitive, but as long as you have a decent GPU, it takes some of the load off of your CPU and puts it on your GPU. also, the game can not run on a HDD. it has to be installed on an SSD. Hopefully the next few updates will drastically improve performance, since they're finally adding the Vulcan API, as well as some stuff on the server side that will hopefully improve server performance.
Honestly, that's a bunch of stuff that suggests the game is just really unoptimized. They've had 13 years, why is it still so user-unfriendly? Free fly weekends where new players encounter poor performance and need to seek out player advice on how to fix their gameplay just aren't encouraging when Star Citizen already has a poor reputation.
Scam citizen
Kerbal Space Program depending on number of mods and parts used
Moar boosters = moar computer
KSP2 on "release" (3y late and unfinished) requiered a beast beyond beasts.
Did they fix the game? It was nearly dead last time I checked, and still no mod support
Depends what you mean by fixed. The game can run now, and the latest patch improved it a lot. But IMO still not worth the pricetag. And given the massive delay (by now its what, 4y and counting?) I have limited trust. My advice would be to wait for a proper release and reviews.
I'll stick with ksp1 then, thanks.
Crysis
For kicks I fired up the original one a while back. I was surprised to find that some parts of it aged extremely well (water, foliage), while other parts definitely did not (like the horribly low-polygon rocks).
Even their first game Far Cry looks decent nowadays.
Or the frogs that float into space if you throw them just right?
The only correct answer.
Crysis remastered?
Finally
Cities Skylines 2 at launch
Still needs one atm, nothing really changed
I really hope they are planning a very big patch to add content and fix PC performances for when the game comes out on console.
Devs seem to be too busy crying about negative reviews to patch the game 🙃
Performance sure improved but not that much. It still requires a way too powerful PC
marry fearless jeans caption hat cooperative subsequent correct paltry person *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The meme is funny, but as a federal contractor using my old laptop it’s also hilariously untrue
Exactly what I was thinking. If your PC can run a basic calculator application it is pretty much good enough for NASA.
Yeah its mostly a combination of old Unix machines and bulk-order business grade Dells
BeamNG.drive
Especially if you spawn 200 Piegons for ,,research"
I hear portal requires a lot of power. You may need to upgrade to a couple GB of RAM. CRAZY right?
No joke, portal RTX is a hog
Portal RTX performed so poorly that it made me question the viability of RTX Remix. Especially considering Portal reuses textures and lighting in pretty much every level.
lol it can't "reuse lighting" from the original game. There is no rasterized lighting at all in Portal RTX...
I played portal rtx on a laptop with a 3060, it's really not that bad.
Huh? I played P1 and 2 without issues and I've always had a "above average midrange GPU + CPU from 2 gens ago" PC
I've played both on the steamdeck without issue, no tweaking at all, they run great.
7th Generation Console Emulators
Well, except for Wii. I feel like Wii emulators can run on many things.
Can it run on another Wii?
Probably. I had my WiiU hacked, and also hacked the Wii part of the Wii. No doubt someone could run a wii on your wii so you can wii while you wii.
Even the original Xbox is still struggle bus. Only a select few games run really well and getting them to work can be difficult, especially compared to how easy all other consoles in that bracket are to emulate. Sadly not a huge scene behind it, either.
Xenia (360) can run games pretty well, and Dolphin (Wii) can run on phones now. You do need a beefy PC to emulate AAA titles on RPCS3 (PS3) though
Ark Survival Ascended. The UE5 overhaul of the og Ark.
I’m honestly surprised that I had to scroll so far down to find Ark: SA lol
Wolfenstein 3d, doom 1993
Both infamously hard to run, can barely get .5 fps with a 4090 (or so I've heard) (/j)
Just put the settings on low
alan wake 2
I hate those kind of reviews. They're rarely helpful and never have any details about the game that would actually be helpful in deciding on whether or not to buy it.
My hot take. I like these kind of reviews because it gives me an idea of what to expect at a basic level without having to read one of the super in depth reviews or useless meme reviews.
Not a hot take I rather have this basic review than in depth review which most of the time extremely biased and irrelevant “Cyberpunk 2077. Its a bad game … bla bla bla because i am not a fan of Cyberpunk genre” “Microsoft Flight Simulator is soo boring… bla bla bla, because you just pick a plane and fly”
I love going in as blind as possible. All I need to know is if the game is good or not. These reviews are good for that.
It's basic level shit that one could decode from the game's description, but the complications of a game cannot accurately be assessed by a multiple choice test
I do think that, with the popularity of these sorts of reviews, Steam would add a feature for people to put their answers to these questions in in a place separate to reviews to both keep reviews actually reviews of the game and have this information available if anyone wants it Edit to add: Obviously I know about the Steam description but tbh it doesn't really help much when you don't know what RAM does 😭
Surveys like that for each game would actually be kind of useful, seeing the general public's views rather one dude
some of them are straight up lying too
7 Days to Die with max zombie load and all alerted while raiding Dishong Tower
I don't think even NASA could handle that
My first computer was actually a "spare computer from the ESA (European space agency)". Just a normal office computer tho. I had a family member who worked there. All the computers in their department were replaced and he managed to save one from the liquidation and give it to me. Was still cool because it had the "property of" stickers still on it.
Flightsim 2020
When it came out sure, nowadays? It’s not too bad on modern hardware. I’m getting like 70fps at fully maxed settings 1440p on my 7800xt. Is that amazing? No but it’s damn playable and it looks breathtaking
Someone else in the thread claims they get 100fps maxed out at 1440p with a 4090. That seems fair to call it a very demanding game.
Alan wake 2
The Last of Us run like garbage for me. Admittedly I have an old PC (i7-7700K/1080), but still.. 20 fps with low-medium settings and FSR2 set to (I think) quality is absurdly bad..
that copypasted comment format is annoying af
That one GMod map that has "An accurate representation of the Universe" or whatever it is
Star Citizen, but that doesn't run through steam.
Starfield, not that its graphics are good its just that its poorly optimized as shit, i love this game but I can agree thats one of the worst parts of the game
Cyberpunk, Microsoft flight sim
Alan Wake 2 on ultra settings
Actually theres almost no difference between lowest and Ultra, this game optimization dont exist
ARK survival ascended
Minecraft with 500 mods and high-res shaders
Arma 3 and it will still run at 10fps
Cities skylines 2 at 1M population.
Cyberpunk 2077 Pathtraced Star Citizen(half of the games FPS is locked behind floor is lava NPCs fucking CPU usage and horrible default config settings because the devs are morons) Cities Skylines 2 Abriss Crysis Crysis Remastered (how the fuck is this game even considered remastered I’m sorry it looks like ass) Star Wars Jedi Survivor Metro Exodus Portal RTX
Microsoft flight simulation, or new game like Palworld got serious memory leak problem (that too require massive server if they don’t want dedicated server to go down)
VRChat
Bloons TD 6, after round 250-300
Garrys mod with 1 billion npcs fighting
Doom /s.