• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Will Doom 3 spur a revival in the computer hardware industry?

XMan

Lifer
I read an interesting article by Kyle Bennett in an issue of CPU magazine where he opined that because Doom 3 is going to be such a huge step forward in gaming technology, we're going to be seeing framerates in the 20-30-40 range again. He feels this will spur overclocking as well as a lot of money for upgrades. Do you seriously think one game can do all that?
 
It's not really just "one" game, but the game engine behind it. I'm sure the Doom ]|[ engine will be powering games for a while just like the Quake3 engine has. Not sure about the general mass public, but I bet it would spur alot of upgrades from the hardcore gamer and overclocking set who see Doom ]|[ as the next big benchmark to brag about.
 
No.

There are many different reasons why I don't see a big boost for computer hardware coinciding with the release of DooM3. First off is the larger computer market. This year, ~100Million PCs will be sold(on the conservative end) while the most popular PC game in history has hit roughly twelve million over the course of its life(The Sims). The amount of units DooM3 is likely to sell will be well below that of the highes selling titles, it will likely be in the couple million sold range by the end of the year, although I could see it possibly pushing up as high as four million at the outside(although I can see it being in the ~1million range also). Compare the likely amount of gamers who will buy D3 versus the computer hardware market at large and they represent a very small percentage, at the absolute highest end you are talking about 5% of the market if the game does extremely well and every single gamer who purchases it upgrades their rig(which obviously won't happen).

Now spurring on overclocking I think will happen, but not because of a large portion of D3 players charging in. No, I think if 3% of DooM3 gamers take up OCing that should result in a minimum of 30,000(though that could be as high as 150K if the 3% were true) new OCers brought in to the community. To the hardcore OCers out there, a spike of that level is easily noticeable but can give the impression that this is a mass market issue when it is in fact a relatively minor bump.

I think DooM3 may encourage some 'dormant' overclockers to pick the habit up again, but the market isn't really the same as it once was. Looking back it wasn't unheard of to get a ~30%-50% OC using typical components on certain devices every once in a while. Some of the old 486 level chips(from the DooM1 era) and the Celery 300@450 springs quickly to mind. When you were moving from 30FPS-45FPS that was something worth noting, 20FPS-30FPS was even moreso. Today's CPUs, even those that are extremely overclockable, tend to hit 30% increase at best. That in itself would likely still be worth doing, but with DooM3 the bottleneck is going to be the vid card for anyone thinking about upping the details. On that front, the typical vid card overclock is in the 20% range or less. Moving from 30FPS-36FPS doesn't make a staggering difference. The parts aren't around that support the kind of overclocking that we saw in years past for the most part. Sure, there are some exceptions like some of the XP2100 chips, or some of the R300 core boards, but even those don't come close to the ~50% boost that we could get in years past(at least, ruling out exotic solutions).

DooM3 is going to be limited by shader op speed and stencil throughput on pretty much everyone's rig(when things are turned up of course). Upgrading to a R3x0 or NV3x core is going to land you the biggest performance boost, OCing the NV2X core would likely be next followed by a R3x0 OC. Considering that vid card OCing is fairly hit or miss(although a slight improvement can be had with improved cooling), I don't expect anything like what Kyle is talking about in that article(yes, I have read it). Sure, the OC community is likely to see a sizeable spike from dormant/new OCers, but not in comparison to the big picture.

Another aspect is Kyle's misunderstanding of what people will tollerate in terms of framerate. Goldeneye sold ~10Million units(still the best selling FPS ever) and ran in the mid 20s. Right now UnrealII is doing OK with the same type of framerate issues people are expecting from DooM3. 20-40FPS is considered playable by the overwhelming majority of people. Obviously it is horrendous for fast paced multi-player shooters, but for a plodding single player hybrid survival horror/shooter lows in the 20s and highs in the 40s is far from a major pain. Obviously higher framerates are better, but it won't be necessary for the gaming experience.

One tangent that DooM3 will reignite are the 'real game' bench lovers(those who can't stand 3DMark, but are still fond of benches). They are decent in numbers, and Carmack's engines always being them out of the wood work 😉
 
Id only upgrade when the majority of my games become too slow to play, not just over one 😱 🙂
 
Great post, BenSkywalker. Basically everything I was planning on saying. Thanks for doing the work for me. But to sum it up: are the businesses going to upgrade when Doom 3 hits? No. The schools? No. Your grandparents, parents, or the rest of the majority of the population? No. That leaves very little impact from us computer enthusiasts.
 
Yeah I doubt it in majority...the gamers will bring their systems up a notch (probably just a vid card r&r), but the majority have no idea how a machine should run.

I have upgraded so many people running 64MB still since when they started using windows everyone said more than 64MB was a waste of money....

I throw in a 128MB stick and they want to give me hundreds more since "My computer runs like it's in TURBO mode" hehe.

As long as backwards compatability is always kept we won't see a big revolution anytime soon.

Once Office type applications start to bog down, then you will see mass upgrades and computers really moving forward.
 
...up your opinion with so me tought of your own...


rolleye.gif
😛
 
Serious gamers will already have the necessary specs to run the game properly. Other people will be "oh cool Doom 3" and probably buy it. Then when it doesn't run properly on their computer they'll be complaining online with their problems. Then they'll find out they need a new computer (pretty much) and just sell doom 3 on ebay.
 
Not neccessarily a "revival," but more likely a spike in sales.

The size of the spike will correlate to the number of Doom3 units moved off the shelves. If the game tanks, I wouldn't expect the hardware industry to even blink. Fortunately, there are a couple big-budget titles coming out late this year/early next. Hopefully the hardware industry can feed off these high tech games.

I'd love to see nVidia or ATi start commercial spots with a side-by-side comparison between a "slow, ugly" looking game and the same game with graphics options set to maximum. I remember seeing a similar advertisement of the original Unreal flyby for 3dfx hardware.
 
Doom3 won't spark hardware purchases any more than other games that have sparked purchasing new equipment. Each game that comes out is generally a leap ahead the previous titles, needed newer hardware. Yes, Doom3 will be very intense on the system for 60fps, but UT2K3 based games can eat FPS like mad as well. Wait for some other engines like Crytek, we'll be itching for new upgrades with or without doom3.

vash
 
i would think that star wars galaxies will have a much bigger influence than doom3. just an opinion, but i think that the doom franchise is very limited in its appeal. I doubt galaxies will have requirements anywhere near doom3, but i think it has that wider appeal to get non-gamers gaming and ex-gamers gaming again. It mimics the sims in some respects as well, leading one to believe it has a shot to sell in similar quantities. Galaxies should run on most descent comps, but i think it has the potential to be one of those games that pulls people in and really makes them want to upgrade from a system that can play the game, to a system that can play the game well.

doom 3 might be more of a factor down the road, but i don't think it will have much more punch than quake 3 in terms of hardware maket effect.
 
If they say Doom 3 will run on a GF2, and it's mainly indoors, I don't see much more of a speed issue than with U2 at 1600x1200. DooM 3 will be the same speed, but probably a lower res. But if the graphics are that good, people wouldn't mind.

If they are aiming for it to run on lower spec machines though, and it is mainly indoors, and it is only a game, and it's only 1 game, I really doubt that the tech developers will pay that much attention to it.
Hell, Carmack is paying more attention to ATi and nVidia, not vice-versa, so he's working with what he has.
 
i would think that star wars galaxies will have a much bigger influence than doom3. just an opinion, but i think that the doom franchise is very limited in its appeal. I doubt galaxies will have requirements anywhere near doom3, but i think it has that wider appeal to get non-gamers gaming and ex-gamers gaming again. It mimics the sims in some respects as well, leading one to believe it has a shot to sell in similar quantities.

Don't count on SWG having a big impact. MMORPGs do not do well in marketshare terms. If they hit 600,000 subscribers they will surpass Evercrack(that's $6Million a month in revenue, 600K would be a smashing success for the genre). The Sims online struggled to hit 100,000 users over the course of a few months. And look at my handle before you think I'm underestimating the potential of the franchise 😉
 
No. I think Doom3 will run on a medium sized system by the time it comes out.

The reason buying? John Carmack is the 1337 of all game programmers. He programs efficiently, unlike most game programmers today. A lot of his previous projects ran better, took less memory, and were superior to other people's counterparts.
 
I've always felt that Kyle has a somewhat warped sense of reality when it comes to computer hardware, but that probably stems from his "Beavis & Butthead meets Jackass" approach to the industry. [ H ]OCP offers a good read, but I think most everyone agrees its in no way indicative of how the market will respond to changes in the industry. AT and its forum members are much more moderate IMO, but the majority of members are still guilty of market tunnel-vision (how many nVidia = 3Dfx posts have you seen in the last 6 months b/c people don't see the big picture?).

Anyways, as others have said, I don't think Doom 3 will have much of an impact immediately, but it will have significant ramifications in the future. Game devs and IHV's have already stated numerous times that future games will rely heavily on the GPU for DX9 features like shader and stencil ops. I'm still not certain whether or not this is a good thing, despite nVidia's full product line-up of DX9 parts and ATi's mid-to-high end DX9 offerings. If the majority of "killer app" games are based on the D3 engine or some other advanced DX9 engine, I don't think the entry-level low to mid-range parts available now (NV3X and R3X0) will have the mustard to run them. If anything, I'm worried that Doom3 will make PC gaming enthusiasts seriously consider buying an XBox or some other next-gen console if they haven't already. Needless to say, disappointment would be an understatement when people find out their shiny new DX9 card simply won't cut it in Doom3 and future titles based on its engine.

I've felt for some time now that games lag behind top-of-the-line hardware capabilities by as much as 6-12 months; the reason being game devs are forced to code for numerous platforms and GPUs and simply don't have the time and the resources to take full advantage of current hardware. Considering all the variables and platforms developers have to juggle, they do an amazing job, but its pretty clear there's a lot of untapped potential when you compare a PC game to a console game. It amazes me how cutting edge cross-platform games run smoother and look better on my XBox (with a modest GF3/GF4 hybrid and a P!!! 700) than on my PC (Splinter Cell, most notably), which is disappointing considering I've invested some serious cash to have a high-end gaming rig. Its good news that DX9 will be around for @ 2 years and that IHVs are shifting to longer product cycles, as this should give game developers more time to polish their games around existing hardware and API capabilities.

I'll still be into computer hardware and upgrading my rig, but I've also greatly expanded the scope of what I use my PC for. Its no longer primarily focused on gaming alone, as it would be hard to justify spending hundred (or thousands) a year upgrading it for the sole purpose of playing the latest and greatest games.

Chiz

Edit: A slight disclaimer; my expectations of acceptable performance or how a game should be run may vary greatly from yours. Anything less than a medium resolution (1024) and max details would be considered "not cutting it" IMO.
 
Originally posted by: chizow
Its good news that DX9 will be around for @ 2 years and that IHVs are shifting to longer product cycles, as this should give game developers more time to polish their games around existing hardware and API capabilities.
When DX9 was released, every DX8 video card didn't suddenly stop working. What's stopping PC developers from focusing heavily on a DX8-optimized title? You seem to forget that DirectX revisions are backwards compatible. The userbase for a particular DX revision is cumulative with future revisions.

1) Longer times between API revisions will make the transition from one revision to another that much more difficult.
2) Longer product cycles will slow the advancement of new features, since the market will be flooded with products that have the lesser featurset.

If you want a stable, non-volatile platform, buy a console.
 
If you want a stable, non-volatile platform, buy a console.
Good point.
But wheres the challenge?
Theres a sence of achievement when you finally get a troublesum game to run as you want it to.
 
People seem to be forgetting one thing:

Doom III won't do anything for the PC market, guaranteed, if it blows. 🙂

In order for it or any other game to have a shot at making people plunk down cash on parts, it has to be good - DAMN good.
 
Originally posted by: BoomAM
If you want a stable, non-volatile platform, buy a console.
Good point.
But wheres the challenge?
Theres a sence of achievement when you finally get a troublesum game to run as you want it to.

I wouldn't call a console any more stable than a pc. I mean first off you have your X-Box or PS2 Exculsive games (Even though some do change) and the selection of games and memory packs you need.

 


I have some info that suggests that Dell *may* be coming out with a "doom" branded PC when the time comes.

This is totally inside info (I'm the source for all practical purposes) and I'm not 100% sure this will take place but I do KNOW that it's being considered over at Dell.

For what it's worth.
 
Back
Top