CPU will matter. I guess you havnt read into the benefits of DX12 very much. One of DX12s core features is the GPU utlizing CPU multithreading for all its tasks to spread the workload for its different functions and split the same functions between cores as needed. Bottlenecking can also be a concern for huge video bandwidth if the cpu is not strong enough, as well as the unreal engine is very CPU intense, and i'm sure with going with dx12, they will optimize the game for multithreading support.
I've also tested the difference between i3 and i7s. I know this as i own a i7, i5, and i3 (8 pcs in my house and 4 laptops). The i3 and i7s are identical builds other than the processors within 200mhz of each other. Unoptimized games for multithreading support you wont see but a 10-15 fps difference really. in an optimized game i've seen as much as 20-40fps increase on the i7 build. You will see much less of a difference between the i5 to i7, buit theres still one there.
Currently i'm running a 4770k at 4.5ghz (have a setting for 5ghz but its pointless), 2 GTX 970s in SLI, 16gb ram, and a nice SSD. Lets hope 21:9 is supported as i'm running a 3440x1440 rez 34"ultrawide curve dell monitor.
Honestly it will be pretty epic to see dx12 used. with that we should see sli vram for both cards instead of just one! cannot wait to get in alpha and see how this goes. If i was to bet a 2500K or better, with 8 gigs of ram, and a 650 ti video card or better should run the game really well. On the low end of that probably med settings just fine.
Hieromonk said:Don't see how this is an issue.
Most people buy a new HOME computer every 5~6 years, because the standards change so much in the PC world. Notably, a 5-year old laptop is ancient, & nearly laughable compaired to one today. Pantheon itself.. (& subsequently Visionary Realms) doesn't have to worry about STANDARDS, because it is being built under a 64bit Windows 10 environment. The Unreal Engine supports DX12 and Win10.. do you?
YOU... have to worry about standards. (Is your machine DX12 compliant..??)
Understand, there is no more "optimization" for YOUR hardware... YOUR hardware speed doesn't matter, it is what features of current standards does YOUR hardware support. And whatever ones those happen to be, plug into the game and allow YOU to have them. If not, YOU have to upgrade to the latest standard... not the latest speeds.
Further more, no CPU will matter for Pantheon.. the difference between an i3 and an i7 are insignificant. What will matter will be your subsystems and are do they support the latest Win10 Standards.
If you have a killer i7 gaming rig with a $600 video card & gaming on Win7... won't be the same experience as a new $900 PC, gaming on Win10.
They will be different experience for both rigs. The more you support the latest standards, the less power you need to overcome them. Upon Pantheon's release any Win10 Complaint rig for $900 will do. (Don't be afraid to save $80/month, for a new rig in late 20017... right?)
If your pushing 4k, then you will need a better GPU to push those pixels.. as your video card is detrermined by what resolution you intend to game at. Pantheon or not, it helps to have insight into obtaining a rig that is compliant with the latest standards, more-so than pure speed and e-peen.
Pantheon will play fine on any PC in the last 3~5 years, that isn't abused. But do not take that to mean you'll enjoy all the features the Unreal Engine has to offer. After all.. a PC is a system.. & all those components (in that system) have to be working for the same goal. An uber expensive GPU won't matter, if the rest of the system doesn't support dx12, etc... there will be compromises to be had.
What is the fear here... that your old system will play Pantheon not like a new system..? (Don't you enherently know that already?)
Liav said:DarknessAngel said:unreal enginePantheon is being built using the Unity engine, not Unreal. Just figured I'd point that out.
I could be totally wrong but i thought i heard from a developer somwhere that Unity had a 64 player max limit on a server at a given time for online games? Is that just hogwash?
I remember working at CompUSA when EQ2 first came out and i used to build machines for people in the tech department. That game was designed for hardware that wasn't even yet on the market too. People would come in willing to drop $3000 on a new P.C. to play it and even then it just ran horrible. It took years for your average person to be able to play the game with decent looking graphics. I believe it was a main reason EQ2 never got as big as it could have. So good rule of thumb, build a game to be able to run on toaster with the option to be able to up it to high end settings but allowing both to be able to still have the same advatage of gameplay.
striderida1 said:Liav said:DarknessAngel said:unreal enginePantheon is being built using the Unity engine, not Unreal. Just figured I'd point that out.
I could be totally wrong but i thought i heard from a developer somwhere that Unity had a 64 player max limit on a server at a given time for online games? Is that just hogwash?
Unity's current built-in network code is designed for FPS games, 32-64 people. We're using a different MMO framework and they are also working on an MMO framework themselves.
Aradune said:striderida1 said:Liav said:DarknessAngel said:unreal enginePantheon is being built using the Unity engine, not Unreal. Just figured I'd point that out.
I could be totally wrong but i thought i heard from a developer somwhere that Unity had a 64 player max limit on a server at a given time for online games? Is that just hogwash?
Unity's current built-in network code is designed for FPS games, 32-64 people. We're using a different MMO framework and they are also working on an MMO framework themselves.
The beauty of Unity: the ability to mix and match the parts in order to build what you need.
Aradune said:striderida1 said:Liav said:DarknessAngel said:unreal enginePantheon is being built using the Unity engine, not Unreal. Just figured I'd point that out.
I could be totally wrong but i thought i heard from a developer somwhere that Unity had a 64 player max limit on a server at a given time for online games? Is that just hogwash?
Unity's current built-in network code is designed for FPS games, 32-64 people. We're using a different MMO framework and they are also working on an MMO framework themselves.
Unity has evolved from quiet awhile ago. they have expanded their networking code and networking options quiet a bit. Also really depends on what kind of network hardware and code (that the devs alter) running with the game itself.
Unity 5.1 made alot of changes for mmo infastructure from what i've read as well.
With major AAA mmos on the horizon with unity engine, theres no doubt that it can handle what this games putting out, the lead devs (Huge former MMO releases) have tons of experience and wouldnt cripple their game on an engine that wouldnt work. Crowfall, Pantheon, (pathfinder online, not AAA but i've been on with 500 people with no issues)
DarknessAngel said:CPU will matter. I guess you havnt read into the benefits of DX12 very much. One of DX12s core features is the GPU utlizing CPU multithreading for all its tasks to spread the workload for its different functions and split the same functions between cores as needed. Bottlenecking can also be a concern for huge video bandwidth if the cpu is not strong enough, as well as the unreal engine is very CPU intense, and i'm sure with going with dx12, they will optimize the game for multithreading support.
I've also tested the difference between i3 and i7s. I know this as i own a i7, i5, and i3 (8 pcs in my house and 4 laptops). The i3 and i7s are identical builds other than the processors within 200mhz of each other. Unoptimized games for multithreading support you wont see but a 10-15 fps difference really. in an optimized game i've seen as much as 20-40fps increase on the i7 build. You will see much less of a difference between the i5 to i7, buit theres still one there.
Currently i'm running a 4770k at 4.5ghz (have a setting for 5ghz but its pointless), 2 GTX 970s in SLI, 16gb ram, and a nice SSD. Lets hope 21:9 is supported as i'm running a 3440x1440 rez 34"ultrawide curve dell monitor.
Honestly it will be pretty epic to see dx12 used. with that we should see sli vram for both cards instead of just one! cannot wait to get in alpha and see how this goes. If i was to bet a 2500K or better, with 8 gigs of ram, and a 650 ti video card or better should run the game really well. On the low end of that probably med settings just fine.
Hieromonk said:Don't see how this is an issue.
Most people buy a new HOME computer every 5~6 years, because the standards change so much in the PC world. Notably, a 5-year old laptop is ancient, & nearly laughable compaired to one today. Pantheon itself.. (& subsequently Visionary Realms) doesn't have to worry about STANDARDS, because it is being built under a 64bit Windows 10 environment. The Unreal Engine supports DX12 and Win10.. do you?
YOU... have to worry about standards. (Is your machine DX12 compliant..??)
Understand, there is no more "optimization" for YOUR hardware... YOUR hardware speed doesn't matter, it is what features of current standards does YOUR hardware support. And whatever ones those happen to be, plug into the game and allow YOU to have them. If not, YOU have to upgrade to the latest standard... not the latest speeds.
Further more, no CPU will matter for Pantheon.. the difference between an i3 and an i7 are insignificant. What will matter will be your subsystems and are do they support the latest Win10 Standards.
If you have a killer i7 gaming rig with a $600 video card & gaming on Win7... won't be the same experience as a new $900 PC, gaming on Win10.
They will be different experience for both rigs. The more you support the latest standards, the less power you need to overcome them. Upon Pantheon's release any Win10 Complaint rig for $900 will do. (Don't be afraid to save $80/month, for a new rig in late 20017... right?)
If your pushing 4k, then you will need a better GPU to push those pixels.. as your video card is detrermined by what resolution you intend to game at. Pantheon or not, it helps to have insight into obtaining a rig that is compliant with the latest standards, more-so than pure speed and e-peen.
Pantheon will play fine on any PC in the last 3~5 years, that isn't abused. But do not take that to mean you'll enjoy all the features the Unreal Engine has to offer. After all.. a PC is a system.. & all those components (in that system) have to be working for the same goal. An uber expensive GPU won't matter, if the rest of the system doesn't support dx12, etc... there will be compromises to be had.
What is the fear here... that your old system will play Pantheon not like a new system..? (Don't you enherently know that already?)
Pantheon does not equal Battlefield.
I think you are trying to say that a CPU can make a difference, but have forgotten the scope and context of Pantheon and Unity. In which case, the actual CPU will not matter. Both will give you enough frames per second, given the right video card. And that Pantheon (Unity) will be more GPU demanding, than anything remotely CPU deemanding.
And, to my over-all point, that $80 more on a video card will give you more performance than $80 spent on upgrading your CPU. And that going from a i5 to an i7 won't even matter in most cases. There are long extensive threads on Anadtech and OC forums that delve into this. We all know and enherently understand a i7 is more powerful than a i5, just not going to matter here, is all.
I can say right now, running dx9 and dx11 builds of the game, that CPU isn't that important. That may well change with DX12 and when we cross that bridge, we'll report accordingly. That's why I am bit hesitant to discuss 'min specs' so early, because things *do* change. So like I said, please keep my post in context -- I'm letting you know what I am running the game with right now with no problems... what does that mean long term? Perhaps a lot, perhaps not so much. The primary message I was trying to convey was this: you won't need a top-end bad-ass gaming rig to enjoy Pantheon.
Anyways, you can see, therefore, why developers want to avoid 'min specs' discussions and other hardware issues/requirements for a long as possible :)
Aradune said:I can say right now, running dx9 and dx11 builds of the game, that CPU isn't that important. That may well change with DX12 and when we cross that bridge, we'll report accordingly. That's why I am bit hesitant to discuss 'min specs' so early, because things *do* change. So like I said, please keep my post in context -- I'm letting you know what I am running the game with right now with no problems... what does that mean long term? Perhaps a lot, perhaps not so much. The primary message I was trying to convey was this: you won't need a top-end bad-ass gaming rig to enjoy Pantheon.
Anyways, you can see, therefore, why developers want to avoid 'min specs' discussions and other hardware issues/requirements for a long as possible :)
You make a very valid point. I was not aware that dx9/11 was being run right now, makes alot of sense. I know in most dx 9/11 games 9/10 games run the same on my i5 2500k and my i7 4770k @ 4.5ghz. Well i wouldnt say the same but within 5-8 fps. very minimal. Thats 2 architectures behind and slower clock scores by a good margin. Hardly any games are truly coded to support multithreading, yet alone dx12. Video card upgrades have always made a more significant increase in FPS i've noticed.
SInce there will be upgrades to the engine, i'm sure its one of those things thats super hard to tell. Not to mention optimizations that are going to go in later on down the road. I'm sure as we reach beta we'll start to see true requirements. Thanks for reasoning, makes alot more sense now!
Aradune said:I've posted something like this before, but it bears repeating:
Pantheon is going to be a great looking game, but it is not going to be pushing graphics to the bleeding edge. One of several mistakes made with Vanguard was trying to be on the bleeding edge -- then, when circumstances forced the game to be launched early, we didn't have time to optimize and the system requirements we're ludicrously high. Most people who quit quit before level 2 -- they didn't even have time to decide whether they liked the game or not -- they just simply couldn't play because their systems couldn't handle it. We will *NOT* make that mistake again.
We also optimize every internal milestone (and sometimes even more frequently). We're not pushing off optmization to the end like I've seen in so many projects.
Here are the system specs of my machine, the one I develop on and playtest Pantheon on. On this system I am getting ~25-30fps at 1080p in our most graphically intensive zone (much higher in other zones):
Processors Information
----------------------Processor 1 ID = 0
Name Intel Core i5 4440
Codename Haswell
Specification Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4440 CPU @ 3.10GHz
Chipset
-------Northbridge Intel Haswell rev. 06
Graphic Interface PCI-Express
PCI-E Link Width x16
PCI-E Max Link Width x16
Memory Type DDR3
Memory Size 32 GBytes
Memory Frequency 800mhz (798.1 MHz (1:6))Storage
-------Drive 0
Type Fixed
Name Samsung SSD 840 EVO 500GB
Capacity 465.8 GB
SMART Support YesDrive 1
Type Fixed
Name Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB
Capacity 931.5 GB
SMART Support YesDrive 2
Name WDC WD1003FZEX-00MK2A0
Capacity 931.5 GB
SMART Support Yes
Display Adapters
----------------Display adapter 0
Name NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
Board Manufacturer GIGABYTE Technology
Revision A1
Memory size 2 GB
Memory type GDDR5
Software
--------Windows Version Microsoft Windows 10 (10.0) Home 64-bit (Build 10240)
DirectX Version 12.0--------------
Some notes:
1. You can see that it's an older CPU, and even when it was new, it wasn't top of the line. And until DX and graphics engines *truly* take advantage of multiple cores, gaming rigs really don't need i7s with a lot of cores. i5s are *fine*. Yes, someday this may change, but I don't see it changing for a while.
2. I have 32 gigs of memory, but to play Pantheon, 8g would be fine. The only reason I have 32 is that I am running Unity, Visual Studio, SQL SMS, Chrome, Outlook, and the Pantheon Client all at once. In fact, I had 16gigs for a while, and could run all of the above and more just fine -- I went to 32 recently because RAM is so cheap and it does help a bit.
3. My RAM is *slow*. 800mhz DDR3. So, again, you don't need the fastest CPU or RAM.
4. Storage: You won't need an SSD, but they are getting cheaper and cheaper, and by launch I think they will be the way to go -- it will make loading and zoning a lot faster.
5. I was running a 750TI for a long time and it's still fine for Pantheon. Upgrading to 960 is nice, but not essential... one of the reasons I did it is that I run high rez music out of the HDMI port on that card into a nice receiver/amp, allowing me to play 24bit/48khz+ multichannel music while I am working -- I have to have my music blasting while working on Pantheon! :) In any case, you can see that you don't need the top of the line graphics card either. I can say you *do* want your graphics card, whichever version it is, to have at least 2 gigs of graphics memory on it. We are using high rez textures and lots of them.
6. Windows 10 works great, but the game will work fine on Windows 7 and above. Currently we have builds using DX9 & DX11. Eventually, and likely by launch, we'll move to DX12 which we hope increases performance and allows to take advantage of high poly counts, etc.
In summary, no, you can't use some ancient dinosaur of a machine, but neither will you need an expensive bleeding edge gaming rig either.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Disclaimer: this post is meant to be informational and give a general idea to people as to what system specs might be, but this is *not* an official announcement of Pantheon's system requirements.
Wish i'd of read the whole thread before my initial reply, thats what i get for trying to be active on my favorite games forums at work lol! Didnt realize i dev posted earlier with clarification! I'm surprised at your build, i thought all developers would be using some insane hardware rigs. Its probably good to have some mid line machines to see how the game runs in all aspects though. Any plans for upgrading your machine? and will you all be optimizing the game for SLI use?
I'd like to necro this thread for a moment.
I understand that there are no specs listed for the game yet, and for obvious reason. It also appears that the various alpha stages are going to begin in the not too distant future (within months seems to be the prevailing thought.)
I'm sure there are a number of people out there like me who haven't upgraded their computers in some time, likely in years for many, and are planning on upgrading for Pantheon. I know I will be upgrading for my wife and me, both of whom will be playing.
My question is concerning how much information will people in various alpha stages be allowed to share regarding system performance. Obviously the game will not be performance optimized when testing begins, however a lot of people (aka me) are going to want to start comparing notes on performance of Intel vs AMD, do the extra cores of AMD help or does the higher single core performance of Intel win out, how much does memory speed and capacity make a difference, how much have loading times changed comparing HD to SSD, Radeon vs Nvidia, on and on.
For the purpose of system information gathering, will the NDA allow for discussions of raw system performance between, for example, those in pre-alpha and those in alpha?
I am someone who enjoys time to gather data and beat it to death and the sooner I can start gathering that data the happier I am, so I'm just trying to get a feel for what will be allowed as far as information sharing on system performance only.
Well, more and more applications take advantage of hyperthreading every day so i7s are a bit more future proof. My 4790k will perform better in the long run on a wider variety of applications than a 4690k, both due to higher single threaded performance, but also hyperthreading.
Some of us run higher refresh rates than 60Hz and need cutting edge CPUs to pump as many frames as possible. I'm using a 165Hz G-Sync monitor, so getting as many frames as possible below 165 is ideal for me in an MMO environment.
I don't know how Pantheon will perform on an i7 vs. an i5, but unless you're on a severe budget restriction, i7 is a no brainer.
Krixus said:
Are you doing streaming and content creation?
Prolly do some videos not streaming tho.
Aradune said:I can say right now, running dx9 and dx11 builds of the game, that CPU isn't that important. That may well change with DX12 and when we cross that bridge, we'll report accordingly. That's why I am bit hesitant to discuss 'min specs' so early, because things *do* change. So like I said, please keep my post in context -- I'm letting you know what I am running the game with right now with no problems... what does that mean long term? Perhaps a lot, perhaps not so much. The primary message I was trying to convey was this: you won't need a top-end bad-ass gaming rig to enjoy Pantheon.
Anyways, you can see, therefore, why developers want to avoid 'min specs' discussions and other hardware issues/requirements for a long as possible :)
I know this post is 1.5 years out of date now, but I hope that you guys choose an API and stick with it. Very rarely in computer gaming does shipping multi-API versions bode well for gamers. Neither version gets optimized well. I think we are at a point in time where you can say "we're only building a DX11 version" for Windows and optimize for DX11 rather than trying to do both.
According to the most recent Steam hardware survey, over 97% of their users are DX11 capable. http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/ I don't see a purpose to DX9 anymore.
Liav said:Well, more and more applications take advantage of hyperthreading every day so i7s are a bit more future proof. My 4790k will perform better in the long run on a wider variety of applications than a 4690k, both due to higher single threaded performance, but also hyperthreading.
Some of us run higher refresh rates than 60Hz and need cutting edge CPUs to pump as many frames as possible. I'm using a 165Hz G-Sync monitor, so getting as many frames as possible below 165 is ideal for me in an MMO environment.
I don't know how Pantheon will perform on an i7 vs. an i5, but unless you're on a severe budget restriction, i7 is a no brainer.
I'm not aware of any Unity based game that takes advantage of multiple/all cores. I don't imagine Pantheon will be any different. I seriously doubt the client will be multithreaded, from the Unity side of things.
Specifically, the Unity API is not thread safe. Not in 2009, not in 2015, not today (afaik).
Any dev update on how their older systems are running the games on win 10 and dx12?
Also curious if its going to be optimized for all the new AMD stuff that has come out. Only asking because most software is optimized for intel stuff and not how amd is currently making their new hardware.
