Will DNF take advantage of quad cores?

[Steve]

So your average gaming machine by the sounds of it.

[rockmanekuzu8]

Originally Posted by George Broussard

It's a multicore engine. Graphic detail is a large part of why.

Originally Posted by George Broussard

Most people are on intel core duo machines, a couple gigs of ram and a 7950 or 8800 level video card.

Heck yes George!! This game is going to rock!! You rock dude, we can't wait for DNF and more media release!!

P.S. What can I say I'm just a God-Fearing Patriotic Duke fan

[alexgk]

Hmmmmmm.... my sys-characteristics are:
-Intel Core 2 Duo T5450
-3 GBs RAM
-ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT

Everything good, except for the video card

[RVD]

Interesting that they still use 7950 level cards.

[alexgk]

I now wonder how scalable the game will be....

[LarsBM]

Originally Posted by George Broussard

Most people are on intel core duo machines, a couple gigs of ram and a 7950 or 8800 level video card.

Does that mean it will run on a machine like that or is that just speculation?

[peoplessi]

It safe to assume that it will indeed run rather well on such system. Not maxed out, but it will be playable with slightly lower graphics. Since it is not something like Crysis that eats PC's for lunch and breakfast.

Since those are 1 year old quotes, they have likely added stuff that makes it bit tougher on machines.

[Kristian Joensen]

Peoplessi, the quote in LarsBM's post is what George said in this very thread. For me it is the last(or atleast one of, can't remember quite) post on the 1st page of this thread.

[peoplessi]

Didn't notice it, but then they've been running on similar hardware for a year.

[JobivanHiob]

a couple gigs of ram?
This means from 2 to 4 gigs.
But thats not a problem. You can get 4 gigs for the same price as 2 gigs one year ago.

[peoplessi]

The price I paid for my 2GB two years ago, you can get 16GB now

[JobivanHiob]

I wonder because I think WinXP only supports up to 2 gig and Vista up to 4? thats right? Do games run faster with 4 gig and more?

[peoplessi]

Well, it depends. If the game is designed to take advantage of 64-bit, then sure, it will benefit from more RAM. 2GB is minimum for modern gaming PC, for Vista 4GB is quite good amount. It is fluent, so is gaming. Everything runs smoother when you have enough RAM.

[RVD]

3) System Specs: They are going to be steep. DO NOT buy hardware for the game now!! If you do that, you're likely to be annoyed when it's actually released. When we have specific information as to what the requirements will be, you'll know. In the meantime, wait until it's done and see where things are then.

Just to remind everyone....

[Commando Nukem]

Originally Posted by RVD

Just to remind everyone....

I dont think we honestly need reminding...

I hope the specs are comparible to what George mentioned in his posting being "about what everyone has" at 3DR... Be nice to not have to upgrade.

[djmutey]

System Requirements

* Windows 98/ME/2000/XP
* Pentium II 350 or faster (recommended P III 500 or faster)
* 64 MB RAM, DirectX 8.1 compatible 8 MB 2xAGP enabled video accelerator or faster (recommended 32MB video accelerator)
* DirectX compatible sound card, DirectX 8.1 (included)
* 300 MB hard disk space, supports joysticks and game controllers and force feedback

haha I just had to put this. (Which duke game requires this?)

[Malgon]

Originally Posted by George Broussard

Most people are on intel core duo machines, a couple gigs of ram and a 7950 or 8800 level video card.

Sounds about normal for a decent gaming rig these days.

[LarsBM]

Originally Posted by peoplessi

It safe to assume that it will indeed run rather well on such system. Not maxed out, but it will be playable with slightly lower graphics. Since it is not something like Crysis that eats PC's for lunch and breakfast.

Great.

I know of course that this isnt any safe fact, but it's a hint at least.

[froggerdonkey]

Excellent that's what i'm on -e6750/4gb/8800gt. For the love of god please stay at this level!

[peoplessi]

What do you mean by that? I don't really get it, I think it is safe assume that it will indeed run on a modern gaming PC, and on the highend PCs as well. So I wouldn't worry about it too much, at this stage.

[hark]

Let's hope there'll be an option to dedicate two cores for realistically simulating Duke's testicles.

[LarsBM]

Originally Posted by peoplessi

What do you mean by that?

Well, very little is certain about anything here.

[Mr.Fibbles]

Originally Posted by hark

Let's hope there'll be an option to dedicate two cores for realistically simulating Duke's testicles.

What you do in your own time is your business, and no one needs to know about it. . .

[hark]

Instead of being able to shoot off someone's head in a headshot... think of the possibilities!

[LeadBullet]

This brings me back to the days when the big question was whether DNF would take advantage of the soon to be released Pentium 4s.

[Minty]

Originally Posted by JobivanHiob

I wonder because I think WinXP only supports up to 2 gig and Vista up to 4? thats right? Do games run faster with 4 gig and more?

For the 32-bit versions of XP and Vista, they support 3 gig of ram, you might see 3.25, but you wont get more than that. The 64-bit versions can support 4 gigs and a whole lot more.

[Roma Loom]

He probably meant that Win32 can allocate only 2Gb per application.

[Angilion]

Why are people speculating on the hardware requirements of a game that doesn't even have a release year, let alone a release date within the next month or so?

We don't know if DNF will be released, let alone when. There's no sign of an imminent release date. New hardware will almost certainly be out before DNF, especially new graphics cards.

This is DNF. There is no point speculating on hardware requirements for a game that's a byword for vapourware. Maybe it will be released. Maybe it won't. Maybe it will run fine with an A64X2, 2GB and a 7900GT. Maybe it will, in a year or more, need at least a quad-core Core 3 or whatever AMD come up with to succeed Phenom, 8GB of DDR4 and a GeForce 10800GT or Radeon 4870XT.

We have no idea. Some of us were speculating 10 years ago if our PCs would run DNF, thinking it would be released soon. Fool me once and all that.

[Xavier]

Well since DNF uses some version of the Unreal engine [last i checked], and the new Turok game uses the unreal engine maybe its requirements will be similar...

The new Turok Games requirements....

MINIMUM
2.4 GHz Intel® Pentium® 4 class or AMD® Athlon 3400+
1 GB RAM
18.0 GB hard drive space
128 MB DirectX® 9.0c-compatible, 3D video card
(nVidia® GeForce® 6600 or better, ATI® Radeon® X1300 or better,
excluding X1550)

RECOMMENDED
Pentium 4 class processor, 2 GHz or faster
2 GB RAM

Anyways i run turok on its maximum settings, w/ a AMD athlon 3000+ 2ghz [which is old and single core], 1GB RAM and an ati HD3650 512MB gddr3 gfx card [Costs @100$] and the game runs perfect with no problems ingame.

From the way the DNF teaser trailer looks Turok seems to have similar or better graphics, hopefully it dont need much more processing power cause i cant upgrade my processor, its socket 754 which they dont make anymore, and the athlon 3000+ is the best 754 gets... ill probably have a new computer before its out anyways, planning to get one soon .

[Commando Nukem]

Originally Posted by Angilion

Why are people speculating on the hardware requirements of a game that doesn't even have a release year, let alone a release date within the next month or so?

....

We have no idea. Some of us were speculating 10 years ago if our PCs would run DNF, thinking it would be released soon. Fool me once and all that.

Oh Come on... If you look at what we do know about DNF and its dev cycle you will see that now unlike before, the game is probably actually close. By close, I mean . Im not speculating on exact dates. We've seen enough activity recently to know that they're pretty far into development most likely. I'd go as far as to say probably farther then they have ever been over the course of the last 11 years.

Now, in my view, its the perfect time to ask, because George to the best of my knowledge has already said there will be No. More. Restarts.

With that in mind, that basically means that whatever they have "right now" is about what they might have in six months, to a year and a half down the line, whenever they finally do release it. They might take on a few more features here and there to continue with their polishing of the engine, but probably nothing that will greatly impact the performance (Unless you expect them to buy all new computers again too)

Why people have to have such a crab about the dev cycle is beyond me. I dont, and i've waited the same amount of time... and its not that im an "ignorant 3DR fanboy." I guess I just happen to understand the position of wanting to do something right and fun, not doing something to finish it and be done with it.

Beyond all that, who and what does it hurt to just DISCUSS it? Just passing around ideas about what might or could be... We dont know, thats the point. We can certainly speculate based on what we do know. This isn't release date speculation, its just talking about what DNF might possibly take advantadge of when the time comes.

Im curious to know what they think about it actually. Would it be worth it to implement Quad Core support, like so many other things, how does it weight against the time to do it vs what they have left to do...etc

This is what forums are for. Discussion.

[alexgk]

Originally Posted by Xavier

Well since DNF uses some version of the Unreal engine [last i checked], and the new Turok game uses the unreal engine maybe its requirements will be similar...

The Unreal engine version 3DR uses for DNF is so heavily modified, it can be called DNF engine.

[LarsBM]

Originally Posted by Commando Nukem

Oh Come on... If you look at what we do know about DNF and its dev cycle you will see that now unlike before, the game is probably actually close. By close, I mean . Im not speculating on exact dates. We've seen enough activity recently to know that they're pretty far into development most likely. I'd go as far as to say probably farther then they have ever been over the course of the last 11 years.

Now, in my view, its the perfect time to ask, because George to the best of my knowledge has already said there will be No. More. Restarts.

With that in mind, that basically means that whatever they have "right now" is about what they might have in six months, to a year and a half down the line, whenever they finally do release it. They might take on a few more features here and there to continue with their polishing of the engine, but probably nothing that will greatly impact the performance (Unless you expect them to buy all new computers again too)

Why people have to have such a crab about the dev cycle is beyond me. I dont, and i've waited the same amount of time... and its not that im an "ignorant 3DR fanboy." I guess I just happen to understand the position of wanting to do something right and fun, not doing something to finish it and be done with it.

Beyond all that, who and what does it hurt to just DISCUSS it? Just passing around ideas about what might or could be... We dont know, thats the point. We can certainly speculate based on what we do know. This isn't release date speculation, its just talking about what DNF might possibly take advantadge of when the time comes.

Im curious to know what they think about it actually. Would it be worth it to implement Quad Core support, like so many other things, how does it weight against the time to do it vs what they have left to do...etc

This is what forums are for. Discussion.

Signed and sealed. People need to lighten up, weve all been waiting for 11 years but you dont see me whining. Ok... at least not often...

[Nessus]

Originally Posted by George Broussard

It's a multicore engine. Graphic detail is a large part of why.

Interesting. How do the extra cores make use of graphic detail, I thought that was mainly a matter of the GPU?

[Everett]

Is DNF more so GPU or CPU based?

I'm getting a new PC soon. Probably a E8400 + 8800 GT/9600 GT, hope I can run the game smoothly.

Sorry if that line came off as stupid, bit worried of the requirements of this game.

[Angilion]

Originally Posted by Commando Nukem

Oh Come on... If you look at what we do know about DNF and its dev cycle you will see that now unlike before, the game is probably actually close. By close, I mean . Im not speculating on exact dates. We've seen enough activity recently to know that they're pretty far into development most likely. I'd go as far as to say probably farther then they have ever been over the course of the last 11 years.

Speculating about hardware requirements for a game that even the most optimistic people think is "probably quite close", "probably farther [in development] then [sic] they have ever been over the course of the last 11 years" isn't likely to be useful. Maybe for console versions, where people might speculate if DNF will become available on an existing console, but not on the ever-changing platform of PC hardware. It's pretty futile even on consoles, because anyone who's in a position to have hard information is keeping quiet.

Now, in my view, its the perfect time to ask, because George to the best of my knowledge has already said there will be No. More. Restarts.

And? Even if it's true, that isn't a release date, nor is it any information about the game itself.

With that in mind, that basically means that whatever they have "right now" is about what they might have in six months, to a year and a half down the line, whenever they finally do release it. They might take on a few more features here and there to continue with their polishing of the engine, but probably nothing that will greatly impact the performance (Unless you expect them to buy all new computers again too)

I wouldn't expect a cutting-edge game developer to remain with 2-3 year old PC hardware (the last stated specs for the PCs used at 3DR were from a year ago, weren't they?).

I'd hope that DNF, if it is released, would not just be geared towards running at its best on PC hardware 2-3 years behind current. Running adequately on it, yes.

But this is all speculation, because we hardly know anything.

Incidentally, I'm not faulting 3DR for that. Keeping as much as possible secret is good business. The people there would probably like to share more information about something they seem quite enthusiastic about.

Hmm...I wonder if they're getting a "making of" video ready, as an extra.

Why people have to have such a crab about the dev cycle is beyond me. I dont, and i've waited the same amount of time... and its not that im an "ignorant 3DR fanboy." I guess I just happen to understand the position of wanting to do something right and fun, not doing something to finish it and be done with it.

11 years for a game is not doing something right. It's doing quite a few things wrong.

My main concern is twofold:

i) That they will never finish because they will continue fiddling with it, adding extra stuff as hardware power increases enough to support it, incorporating new ideas as they come up with them (or read them on the forums about DNF - lots of ideas there), improving the efficiency of code and just generally twiddling with stuff to make it better...and maybe changing it back again because they can't decide if the new version actually is better than the old, on the numerous aspects of a game that are wholly subjective.

ii) That if it is released, it will be well behind the PC hardware because of the pace of development, and look a bit bland besides other games of the same time. That wouldn't bother me personally (DN3D with HRP is huge fun!) but it would make mass selling the game harder.

Beyond all that, who and what does it hurt to just DISCUSS it? Just passing around ideas about what might or could be... We dont know, thats the point. We can certainly speculate based on what we do know. This isn't release date speculation, its just talking about what DNF might possibly take advantadge of when the time comes.

It's hardware requirements speculation, which would hurt anyone who spends money based on it.

I didn't say it was harmful, though. Just a bit pointless. Maybe interesting, but pointless.

Im curious to know what they think about it actually. Would it be worth it to implement Quad Core support, like so many other things, how does it weight against the time to do it vs what they have left to do...etc

This is what forums are for. Discussion.

How much of it is parallel enough to make quad core useful anyway? Some degree of quad core support is inherent in Windows. Adding any more might undermine the release of the game if that release happens before the majority of home gaming PCs have quad core CPUs. For example, using a core or two specifically for extra gameworld physics (not just visual effects) would make the game significantly different on a PC with a quad core CPU.

[Angilion]

Originally Posted by Nessus

Interesting. How do the extra cores make use of graphic detail, I thought that was mainly a matter of the GPU?

A possible answer is that increasing graphics detail increases the complexity of the gameworld and thus the load on the CPU (as well as the GPU, for rendering it).

[Spardanian]

Ok, but try to guess what keyboard, mouse and sound card we will need.

[trucedAnimal]

I just hope it will take advantage of octuple-cores!!
i'm pretty sure there are gonna be octuple-core-GPUs when it's done.
The CPUs will probably have like 256 cores or so.

[Commando Nukem]

Originally Posted by Angilion

Speculating about hardware requirements for a game that...

Its useful because of two points (dont butcher my posts and ignore the correlations between paragraphs.) George has said they will not restart again, meaning, generally speaking what they have now is probably gonna be what they have about time for release. That is speculation, and its not harming anything.

Originally Posted by Angilion

And? Even if it's true, that isn't a release date, nor is it any information about the game itself.

I never said it was. This is why butchering someones post is a big mistake. You missed the general point. I was making it very clear that, that combined with other things; a mixture of quotes and things we do know about the current state of the game.

That it IS possible to get a general idea of system requirements. Besides, again, its not hurting anything to discuss it. Except when it comes to people who have a problem with the development in general, which you seem to do.

Originally Posted by Angilion

I wouldn't expect a cutting-edge game developer to remain with 2-3 year old PC hardware....

I would, if they were optimising the game for a broad range of systems.

Originally Posted by Angilion

I'd hope that DNF, if it is released, would not just be geared towards running at its best on PC hardware 2-3 years behind current. Running adequately on it, yes.

I would, it allows it to appeal to wider PC consumer base. The latest hardware does not have to be the primary focus of every game ever released. 90% of games do that, and it costs the consumer a lot of money.

Duke3D wasnt this way either. It was a very tempermental game by comparison to its oppnent, quake. Yet it generally beats quake in fun factor and all around style. This is what will likely happen with DNF.

Originally Posted by Angilion

But this is all speculation, because we ...

Yes, its speculation. Now you're getting it, but its speculation based on various shacknews quotes, articles, forum posts...etc made by George and Scott. You can make deductions based on facts, and information provided. It is the back bone of reasoning.

Originally Posted by Angilion

11 years for a game is not doing something right. It's doing quite a few things wrong.

Says who?

Quake 4, sucked. DooM3, dissappointed many. Unreal 3 has upset some too. Longer dev times and a little more care in the gameplay area might have helped avoid those "failings"

Rushing a game out because people are impatient is BAD, not taking your time to do things right. I've heard people say "Oh they should have just released the 2001 version" why? You dont know it was that good, and obviously 3DR either didnt have the capacity to realise what they wanted to, or what you saw was it (which is what we have been told) and as such there was still a long way off before that version was finished, by which time it might have been deemed outdated. So there you go, a conundrum.

Let me just say this, we do know quite a bit about why it has taken this long, and yet so many here seem to be too irrational to just accept it as fact.

They were understaffed in the begining, took on too many projects, and lacked the technoligy to create what they wanted. So, they handed off several projects to other people (Max Payne, Prey etc...) and hired more people to work on their primary focus, DNF. DNF itself will have had a standard development time once its released, because you cant in all fairness say to 3DR "It took you 11 years, so it better live up to 11 years of work. It sucks."

Originally Posted by Angilion

i) ...

ii) ...

1) Won't happen.

2) "Behind the PC hardware" ...? What is it with graphics whores? Thats not what Dukes appeal was. It was his style, attitude, interactivity and gameplay that made Duke Nukem so a hit. If you want to get stuck in the GOW and HALO3 LOLGFX!!! mentality then yeah, you'll probably be dissappointed because DNF will probably not push the Crysis end of the graphics spectrum. This is my opinion of course and im only basing this on what we've seen and been told.

Originally Posted by Angilion

It's hardware requirements speculation, which would hurt anyone who spends money based on it.

Originally Posted by Angilion

I didn't say it was harmful, though.

No, of course you didnt.

Originally Posted by Angilion

How much of it is parallel enough to make quad core useful anyway? Some degree of quad core support is inherent in Windows. Adding any more might undermine the release of the game if that release happens before the majority of home gaming PCs have quad core CPUs. For example, using a core or two specifically for extra gameworld physics (not just visual effects) would make the game significantly different on a PC with a quad core CPU.

This is true enough. It is unlikely to need it. Though having the capacity to expand the games performance to even higher FPS and graphics levels via an option would be great I think, for those who own the computers to do it. I think being more center of the playing field as far as PC requirements will help DNF, not hurt it.

[Kitsumi32]

Dude, when DNF is finally released it will support a 96-core system.