What do you think the Witcher 3 will take to run ?

[Spjut]

Hardcore fans will always upgrade to play a game. Hell id software games back in the 90s used to drive millions of hardware upgrades by itself.

No company deems hardcore fans to be a group that's big enough on their own. And if one suddenly decides to do that, it's indeed like asking for losing money.

If we suppose the Xbox One version will run at 720p at minimum settings, that'd put the PC GPU requirements in the HD 7790 range.

At this point of time, that'd just be a stupid move. If they have any intention to turn a profit on the PC version, it'd have to scale back to the HD 5000 series.

 

[Techhog]

CD Projekt is one of the best in the business with how fairly and respectfully they treat customers and fans. I think it's just the unpleasant truth about the next gen consoles. I came within a sliver of ditching PC gaming for a PS4 to avoid the headaches and expense of PC gaming, but there is meaningfull tradeoffs both ways.

If you don't see why needed an $800 PC in order to play at even lowest settings would be a terrible business decision, I don't know what to think. A well-optimized game scales well from top to bottom.

 

[Attic]

The link I quoted earlier with console and PC performance should be taken with a grain of salt, that info is not from a dev as I originally wrote.

Though it lines up with what i'd expect given what i've seen and read about the game. Fairly fully realized world with extreme levels of detail, AI, and draw distance.

 

[Techhog]

Why? Is everyone supposed to cater to the lowest common denominator every single time? F that. CDPR is one of the few developers pushing the envelope, and people should welcome that.

You can push the envelope without excluding 90% of the market.

 

[I/O]

No company deems hardcore fans to be a group that's big enough on their own. And if one suddenly decides to do that, it's indeed like asking for losing money.

To some people it's not all about money LOL. CDPR seem to have developers that are in it for the love of the creation of art they are developing and in turn the market will respond and reward them accordingly.

If we suppose the Xbox One version will run at 720p at minimum settings, that'd put the PC GPU requirements in the HD 7790 range

That's not how it works. The game still has to be ported over to the PC and this causes many issues. Mantle is trying to change this but this is not a Mantle game.

At this point of time, that'd just be a stupid move. If they have any intention to turn a profit on the PC version, it'd have to scale back to the HD 5000 series.

Once again this is not how it works at all.

 

[Attic]

If you don't see why needed an $800 PC in order to play at even lowest settings would be a terrible business decision, I don't know what to think. A well-optimized game scales well from top to bottom.

Makes sense to me. A game to upgrade for *if* you want to push what it can deliver graphically.


Somebody has to push the envelope.

There's also some conflation going on here. TW3 can and probably will scale well from top to bottom, i'm not seeing anything that says or suggests it won't. Just because it is very demanding maxed out and will crush consoles when maxed out does not mean it will not scale well. I think a $100-$150 gpu at time of TW3 release will run it fine on low settings 1080P, likely with some medium options. I'd expect GTX 460 (1024sp) will run it min or a 6870/7770 level for AMD for min. Those are not impressive GPU's now. We'll see what comes with requirements closer to release.

Crysis 3 scaled extremely well, and looked decent on consoles. There is just the opportunity to really push hardware on some of these games with graphics fidelity to match. I expect TW3 will be similar.

 

[Techhog]

Makes sense to me. A game to upgrade for *if* you want to push what it can deliver graphically.


Somebody has to push the envelope.

There's also some conflation going on here. TW3 can and probably will scale well from top to bottom, i'm not seeing anything that says or suggests it won't. Just because it is very demanding maxed out and will crush consoles when maxed out does not mean it will not scale well.

Crysis 3 scaled extremely well, and looked decent on consoles. There is just the opportunity to really push hardware on some of these games with graphics fidelity to match.

7850 plays on lowest settings. That's not a good sign.

 

[Spjut]

You can push the envelope without excluding 90% of the market.

One can look at Battlefield 4. It supports DX10 through DX11.1 GPUs, scaling back all the way to the 8800GT and HD 3870.
In terms of CPU it's more punishing, the multiplayer is chugging on a Core 2 Duo but running ok on a Core 2 Quad.

Right now, I'm sure the HD 5870 will pass the minimum requirements for The Witcher 3. I'm more afraid of its CPU requirements.

 

[Attic]

7850 plays on lowest settings. That's not a good sign.

It's important we consider "low settings" relative.

TW3 at low settings being a match for TW2 at high settings, if true, fleshes out what we're talking about here.

Low settings can still be pretty dang good compared to a level of graphics fidelity roughly equal to what TW2 delivered at high.

Max settings can just be a new standard for graphics. (which Crysis 3 now holds)

 

[ragnar323]

Hardcore fans will always upgrade to play a game. Hell id software games back in the 90s used to drive millions of hardware upgrades by itself.

Yup. 486 SX to a 486 DX so I could run quake 1.... good times.

 

[I/O]

It's important we consider "low settings" relative.

TW3 at low settings being a match for TW2 at high settings, if true, fleshes out what we're talking about here.

Low settings can still be pretty dang good compared to a level of graphics fidelity roughly equal to what TW2 delivered at high.

Max settings can just be a new standard for graphics. (which Crysis 3 now holds)

Buying a PC to play on low setting and without AA LOL kind of mitigates the reason I like to game on PC which is because it can offer ... "enhanced visuals and better AA" while running at a higher and smoother framerate.

 

[I/O]

Yup. 486 SX to a 486 DX so I could run quake 1.... good times.

In the days when we had to run our machines with the side panel off just so our machines did not overheat and because they broke down so often LOL. Ah the golden age of PC gaming.

 

[RussianSensation]

Did anyone read this before?

"The creators of The Witcher 3: "Will the AMD users to enjoy the" advanced "PhysX-effects depends on the NVIDIA»

"In a recent interview, a leading developer of engine Polish studio CD Projekt RED Balazs Tyuryuk (Balázs Török) said that the new PhysX-effects in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt , a bit more realistic hair and fur, are now working on graphics cards AMD Radeon. However, if they appear in the final version of the game, do not know - it all depends on the decision of NVIDIA.

[UPDATE]

Nvidia contacted us about this article. It appears the hair and fur effects are not handled by PhysX. They are handled by DX11 via DirectCompute .
Source


--------

"NVIDIA DISABLES GPU PHYSX WHEN SECOND NON-NVIDIA GPU IS INSTALLED
Nvidia’s new 340.52 drivers (that enable the new SHIELD tablet features) have a feature that disable GPU PhysX in dual-GPU systems that have one non-Nvidia card, according to Nvidia’s own release notes for the drivers in question."

~ Bright side of news, July 31, 2014

 

[I/O]

Did anyone read this before?

"The creators of The Witcher 3: "Will the AMD users to enjoy the" advanced "PhysX-effects depends on the NVIDIA»

"In a recent interview, a leading developer of engine Polish studio CD Projekt RED Balazs Tyuryuk (Balázs Török) said that the new PhysX-effects in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt , a bit more realistic hair and fur, are now working on graphics cards AMD Radeon. However, if they appear in the final version of the game, do not know - it all depends on the decision of NVIDIA.

[UPDATE]

Nvidia contacted us about this article. It appears the hair and fur effects are not handled by PhysX. They are handled by DX11 via DirectCompute .
Source


--------

"NVIDIA DISABLES GPU PHYSX WHEN SECOND NON-NVIDIA GPU IS INSTALLED
Nvidia’s new 340.52 drivers (that enable the new SHIELD tablet features) have a feature that disable GPU PhysX in dual-GPU systems that have one non-Nvidia card, according to Nvidia’s own release notes for the drivers in question."

~ Bright side of news, July 31, 2014

AMD cards cannot run Advanced X87 GPU accelerated Physx. This is a vendor locked proprietary tech that belongs to nvidia only. CPU Physx which is not the same as advance hardware accelerated Physx can be run on any CPU or even APU.

 

[RussianSensation]

AMD cards cannot run Advanced X87 GPU accelerated Physx.

AMD cards can run PhysX perfectly fine. It's NV that purposely locks the cards from running PhysX since they purchased Ageia. There is nothing special about CUDA cores vs. Steam Processors that allows PhysX to work on one but not the other. Any modern GPU can run PhysX calculations since both NV and AMD manufacture GPGPUs that can run almost any code as long as you program for it. If AMD purchased Ageia and decided to lock NV, then you'd be claiming that NV cards cannot run PhysX...

-------------

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt – New Gameplay Footage To Be Revealed Next Week

 

[I/O]

AMD cards can run PhysX perfectly fine. It's NV that purposely locks the cards from running PhysX since they purchased Ageia. There is nothing special about CUDA cores vs. Steam Processors that allows PhysX to work on one but not the other. Any modern GPU can run PhysX calculations since both NV and AMD manufacture GPGPUs that can run almost any code as long as you program for it. If AMD purchased Ageia and decided to lock NV, then you'd be claiming that NV cards cannot run PhysX...

-------------

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt – New Gameplay Footage To Be Revealed Next Week

Proprietary only makes the end users the losers.

 

[Bateluer]

Given that the Xbox One is using a 2 year old 100 dollar GPU, a Radeon 7790, I'm fairly sure you'll be able to play Witcher 3 decently at some fairly modest PCs. It really doesn't take much GPU power to run a game at 720p30, which is likely where TW3 will be on the XB1.

I'm pretty confident my R9 290X will handle TW3 at 1440p, though I expect to watch the core temp get into the 90C range when I do.

 

[Malladine]

In the days when we had to run our machines with the side panel off just so our machines did not overheat and because they broke down so often LOL. Ah the golden age of PC gaming.

lol i actually remember doing that

 

[I/O]

lol i actually remember doing that

I think we all.

 

[I/O]

Given that the Xbox One is using a 2 year old 100 dollar GPU, a Radeon 7790, I'm fairly sure you'll be able to play Witcher 3 decently at some fairly modest PCs. It really doesn't take much GPU power to run a game at 720p30, which is likely where TW3 will be on the XB1.

I'm pretty confident my R9 290X will handle TW3 at 1440p, though I expect to watch the core temp get into the 90C range when I do.

Porting from console to PC means an equal amount of GPU power will not net the same results. It's not transparent.

 

[Deders]

Porting from console to PC means an equal amount of GPU power will not net the same results. It's not transparent.

Isn't it being written for the PC and ported to consoles?

 

[I/O]

Isn't it being written for the PC and ported to consoles?

I don't know if CDPR said anything about it. Typically the port from console to PC though.

 

[Deders]

The Witcher games have been PC centric so far

 

[I/O]

The Witcher games have been PC centric so far

The 1st Witcher was PC only and the best game so far IMHO. I am not sure about the second game really but if memory serves it launched on PC and consoles at the same time.

 

[Carfax83]

Some info from the devs about PhysX below. PhysX effects will work on both AMD and Nvidia cards but there will be additional details on Nvidia cards. The business reasons below are answered in another interview where Nvidia blocks AMD cards from having the same level of effects.

I think it's translated incorrectly or misinterpreted or something..

PhysX effects have long been capable of running on the CPU for quite some time.. Of course though the CPU isn't powerful enough to do some of the more advanced or particle intensive effects, but it really depends on the implementation and quality.

For example, turbulence is an advanced effect and is likely capable of running on a fast Core i7 CPU, as long as the amount of particles and quality of simulation are scaled back appropriately..

PhysX 3.3 has a new cloth solver that runs much faster than previous versions, so I don't think cloth physics will be a problem for the CPU in the Witcher 3. GPU accelerated PhysX may offer higher quality and a greater number of on screen simulations (all with much better performance of course), but the CPU should still be capable of simulating the main characters.

And then hair and fur uses DirectCompute, so that shouldn't be an issue..

The water simulation in the Witcher 3 is likely going to be GPU PhysX only, as fluid simulation is the most computationally intensive kind of game physics by far..