-
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.
Wolfenstein TNO and more than 4 cores
- Thread starter Dave3000
- Start date
Burpo
Diamond Member
They say it's well optimized & it doesn't seem too CPU hungry (E6600 Core 2 Duo works @ 100%).. but it wants 2gb Video RAM (1Gb minimum)
6 Core Xeon
Check your system here..
http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=64&game=Wolfenstein#systemRequirements
6 Core Xeon
Check your system here..
http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=64&game=Wolfenstein#systemRequirements
Last edited:
TerryMathews
Lifer
Why do they have Vsync on for benchmarking?
BrightCandle
Diamond Member
gamegpu.ru don't use vsync on, so this means the game is capped to 60hz.
Edit: IDTech 5 is a console game engine so its not surprising to find it capped.
Last edited:
n0x1ous
Platinum Member
I think idtech 5 is capped @ 60 unfortunately.
TerryMathews
Lifer
Well, I guess I can scratch this game off my list then.
BrightCandle
Diamond Member
Its not even the only problem, lots of texture pop, major performance problems on AMD GPUs as well. Basically its Rage part 2, I do wonder if it will also have horrible microstutter built in as well, no one has reviewed for that yet.
Same reason they use 2011-era 3.1GHz i3-2100's to benchmark 2014 games core loading... :biggrin: Just kidding, it appears to be capped to 60fps. So that's yet another bad port...
Judging by some Youtube videos you're not missing much. Gameplay looks to be yet another "overly cinematic railroad shooter trying to be a stealth RPG with trivial 'upgrade' skills that make virtually no impact on gameplay, with Dishonored style knife takedowns that are 10x more powerful than a rocket launcher" kind of game...
ninaholic37
Golden Member
Doom was capped at 35fps, that doesn't mean it wasn't a great game.
Yeah but that was on a 33MHz 486 with 4MB RAM and a 2MB S3 video card... :biggrin: Besides, you can now get 120Hz Doom @ 2560p with the Doomsday engine. :twisted:
shady28
Platinum Member
They say it's well optimized & it doesn't seem too CPU hungry (E6600 Core 2 Duo works @ 100%).. but it wants 2gb Video RAM (1Gb minimum)
6 Core Xeon
Check your system here..
http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=64&game=Wolfenstein#systemRequirements
Unless I'm missing something, that 2nd chart actually shows a 6 core 12 thread Xeon doing 1200% (ie all 12 threads at 100%)...
Edit: Nevermind, those aren't charts of usage it's some kind of "recommended" capability.
Last edited:
Nice coe load balance on the 6 core fx! Next gen consoles are lifting cpu optimizations
not surprising,
Rage was still a nightmare last time I tried it a year ago with my AMD card.
what I think is "wrong" is not to include a core i5 (or i7 with HT off) for those graphs, but actually I don't know if they are of any use.
for the performance test I wouldn't mind seeing older stuff, like PII X4, Nehalem and so on..
I was watching the giant bomb quick look on this game, it looks and feels a lot like RAGE quite nice in many points, but yes, it looks way to "slow" and cinematic for a Wolfenstein game, but I haven't really cared about the series in many years, maybe I'm wrong.
this game is mostly old gen, id tech5 was designed for PS3/360, and these are also the lead platforms for this game as far as I know.
these graphs are just very strange, compare the 8xxx to the 6xxx, not sure you can conclude much based on it.
DigDog
Lifer
Rage had the same, *unfixable* problem (which got fixed by RandomDudeOnYoutubeTM with a simple .ini fix) and yet we got to play the game properly.
id seems to have an habit of releasing unpolished games.
tbh i'm more interested in the DOOM beta; single player games don't really do it for me anymore.
RadiclDreamer
Diamond Member
Not really. Just because it shows load doesn't mean anything, and "load balance" means even less. A game that uses a single core will show nearly a perfect 50/50 load balance on a dual core machine... That's not the game being optimized, that's the windows scheduler at work.
frowertr
Golden Member
The frame rate cap doesn't bother me in the slightest. Hell, I always turn Vsync ON for the games I play anyway so I don't get screen tearing.
What bothers me is the $60 the publishers want to charge you. I don't own consoles so I don't expect to pay the console price. Secondly, releasing a game with graphic bugs for us AMD users is just shameful. If you are going to charge premium, then the work must also be of equal value.
I'll wait for the sale and subsequent patches that will fix the graphic problems. I just refuse to "reward" developers for poorly coded games with my hard earned dollars at these premium prices.
What bothers me is the $60 the publishers want to charge you. I don't own consoles so I don't expect to pay the console price. Secondly, releasing a game with graphic bugs for us AMD users is just shameful. If you are going to charge premium, then the work must also be of equal value.
I'll wait for the sale and subsequent patches that will fix the graphic problems. I just refuse to "reward" developers for poorly coded games with my hard earned dollars at these premium prices.
I'm about to put your curiosity to rest since that isn't what I said. I don't want every game to be MP, I want them priced accordingly though. I'd have no problems with this being SP only if it was priced right. It's not like this has anywhere near the scope of Skyrim for it to be priced up there with it. The content is not worth the asking price. It needs to be cheaper or it needs to have more content.