| Page 26 of 101 |
|
|
 Posted: Fri, 22nd Feb 2008 22:41 Post subject: |
|
 |
| Sajuuk_Khar wrote: | | i really wonder if it will be as good as we all expect .... |
so go play it on 360. it will be the same rinse and repeat game it is there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 22nd Feb 2008 23:04 Post subject: |
|
|
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | | Sajuuk_Khar wrote: | | i really wonder if it will be as good as we all expect .... |
so go play it on 360. it will be the same rinse and repeat game it is there. |
Not everybody got a 360 though.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 18:31 Post subject: |
|
|
Assassins creed, updated requirements
Supported OS: Windows XP / Vista (only)
Processor: Dual core processor 2.6 GHz Intel Pentium D or AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ or better recommended)
RAM: 1 GB Windows XP / 2 GB Windows Vista
Video Card: 256 MB DirectX 10.0–compliant video card or DirectX 9.0–compliant card with Shader Model 3.0 or higher (see supported list)*
Sound Card: DirectX 9.0 or 10.0 compliant sound card (5.1 sound card recommended)
DirectX Version: DirectX 10.0 libraries (included on disc)
DVD-ROM: DVD-ROM dual-layer drive
Hard Drive Space: 8 GB
Peripherals Supported: Keyboard, mouse, optional controller (Xbox 360 Controller for Windows recommended)
*Supported Video Cards at Time of Release:
ATI RADEON X1600* / 1650*-1950 / HD 2000 / 3000 series
NVIDIA GeForce 6800* / 7 / 8 / 9 series
*PCI Express only supported
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 18:54 Post subject: |
|
|
That's normal, vista takes more ram when it boots and uses that ram on useless shit not funny at all, it is very, very, sad.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jar0
Posts: 376
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 18:59 Post subject: |
|
|
Before it was recommended 3GB for Vista.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 19:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Doesn't Vista use like 500-800 mb of ram alone?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 20:01 Post subject: |
|
|
*Supported Video Cards at Time of Release:
ATI RADEON X1600* / 1650*-1950 / HD 2000 / 3000 series
NVIDIA GeForce 6800* / 7 / 8 / 9 series
*PCI Express only supported
heh thats a new one. no support for AGP people
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 20:29 Post subject: |
|
|
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | *Supported Video Cards at Time of Release:
ATI RADEON X1600* / 1650*-1950 / HD 2000 / 3000 series
NVIDIA GeForce 6800* / 7 / 8 / 9 series
*PCI Express only supported
heh thats a new one. no support for AGP people |
o.0 that's...weird |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 20:36 Post subject: |
|
|
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH
wait what
cockcockcockcockcockcockcockcockcockcockcockcock
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karmeck
Posts: 3351
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 20:46 Post subject: |
|
|
will be nice to read all the whining on the official forums.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 20:46 Post subject: |
|
|
or maybe thats just for the people who have X1600s 1650s and GF 6800s
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 21:00 Post subject: |
|
|
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | | or maybe thats just for the people who have X1600s 1650s and GF 6800s |
They probably wouldn't have * at them if it wasn't.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73348
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 22:10 Post subject: |
|
|
Who carez if AGP isn't in? The thing is, even if they did support it, someone who has an AGP board, probably doesn't meet the rest of the requirements as it is.
And how the hell can they check if a card is AGP, unless checking specifically for that? As far as I know, DX (or OGL) doesn't make a distinction, and calls are the same for both ports.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 23:14 Post subject: |
|
|
I think all of us here have pcie right  I mean agp, I got rid of that 2 years ago.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 24th Feb 2008 23:18 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | Who carez if AGP isn't in? The thing is, even if they did support it, someone who has an AGP board, probably doesn't meet the rest of the requirements as it is.
And how the hell can they check if a card is AGP, unless checking specifically for that? As far as I know, DX (or OGL) doesn't make a distinction, and calls are the same for both ports. |
up until a month ago i met all those specs but still had a agp 7950GT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 25th Feb 2008 06:20 Post subject: |
|
|
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | | LeoNatan wrote: | Who carez if AGP isn't in? The thing is, even if they did support it, someone who has an AGP board, probably doesn't meet the rest of the requirements as it is.
And how the hell can they check if a card is AGP, unless checking specifically for that? As far as I know, DX (or OGL) doesn't make a distinction, and calls are the same for both ports. |
up until a month ago i met all those specs but still had a agp 7950GT |
Which would have met the requirements seeing as there is no asterisk next to the 7 series...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 25th Feb 2008 08:06 Post subject: ***** |
|
|
*****
Last edited by Areius on Fri, 19th Sep 2025 16:04; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 25th Feb 2008 15:37 Post subject: |
|
|
| epife wrote: | | |IcedFreon| wrote: | | LeoNatan wrote: | Who carez if AGP isn't in? The thing is, even if they did support it, someone who has an AGP board, probably doesn't meet the rest of the requirements as it is.
And how the hell can they check if a card is AGP, unless checking specifically for that? As far as I know, DX (or OGL) doesn't make a distinction, and calls are the same for both ports. |
up until a month ago i met all those specs but still had a agp 7950GT |
Which would have met the requirements seeing as there is no asterisk next to the 7 series... |
you clearly ignored or missed the point there |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bart1983
Posts: 1020
Location: Netherlands
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 25th Feb 2008 18:38 Post subject: |
|
|
You should really switch, if you have a newer card agp is choking it and it can never reach the speed it was designed for.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nakitu
Posts: 1144
Location: Croatia
|
| Posted: Mon, 25th Feb 2008 18:46 Post subject: |
|
|
| madmax17 wrote: | | You should really switch, if you have a newer card agp is choking it and it can never reach the speed it was designed for. |
What are you on about? There is no card on the market that can use full bandwith of agp 8x.Pci x was made because new cards need more power and agp cant cope with that. Pci x 2 is here ONLY because PCI x sill doesnt give enough power. GPU slots are becoming like CPU slots. Every new gen new slot so you can buy new board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 25th Feb 2008 18:53 Post subject: |
|
|
| Nakitu wrote: | | madmax17 wrote: | | You should really switch, if you have a newer card agp is choking it and it can never reach the speed it was designed for. |
What are you on about? There is no card on the market that can use full bandwith of agp 8x.Pci x was made because new cards need more power and agp cant cope with that. Pci x 2 is here ONLY because PCI x sill doesnt give enough power. GPU slots are becoming like CPU slots. Every new gen new slot so you can buy new board. |
uh....thats what he said..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nakitu
Posts: 1144
Location: Croatia
|
| Posted: Mon, 25th Feb 2008 19:01 Post subject: |
|
|
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | | Nakitu wrote: | | madmax17 wrote: | | You should really switch, if you have a newer card agp is choking it and it can never reach the speed it was designed for. |
What are you on about? There is no card on the market that can use full bandwith of agp 8x.Pci x was made because new cards need more power and agp cant cope with that. Pci x 2 is here ONLY because PCI x sill doesnt give enough power. GPU slots are becoming like CPU slots. Every new gen new slot so you can buy new board. |
uh....thats what he said..... |
No he said that agp doesnt have enough bandwith for new cards so they dont use their full potential which is wrong.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Feb 2008 00:24 Post subject: |
|
|
Assassin's Creed DX10 Confirmed
PCGH has confirmed that Assassin's Creed for the PC will indeed support DirectX10 although you won't see any big graphical differences between DX9. Here's more from Ubisoft's Technical Lead:
PCGH: When porting for the PC have you thought about integrating support for DirectX 10 into the engine? Will there be a version of Assassin's Creed that will utilize the new Vista API?
Here is a snippet from a lenghty interview with Charles Beauchemin, Technical Lead, Assassin's Creed PC.
PCGH: When porting for the PC have you thought about integrating support for DirectX 10 into the engine? Will there be a version of Assassin's Creed that will utilize the new Vista API?
Charles Beauchemin: Yes, Assassin's Creed supports DX10 as well as DX9.
PCGH: What are the technical advantages of that API?
Charles Beauchemin: DirectX 10 enables us to make fewer calls to the API to perform the same actions. Therefore, it will be possible for the drivers to make optimizations making the game faster without any change to the game engine. Since most of the DX10 drivers are still young, we can expect a lot of gain to come from the optimization of these drivers.
PCGH: Do you use advanced features of Direct X 10/Shader Model 4 like Geometry Shader, Virtual Texture Management etc.? Can you please give examples how they are utilized? In what way do these features improve or simplify the rendering process?
Charles Beauchemin: No. Most of the porting to DX10 involves optimizations of the existing calls, without any new content.
PCGH: Will the DX 10 visualization differ substantially from the graphics that are rendered with DX 9 hardware? What are the visuals that can only be rendered with shader model 4 hardware? Can you supply us with a visual proof via screenshot too?
Charles Beauchemin: No new content has been added to the DX10 version.
PCGH: How much of a performance hit will the improved optics of DX 10 incur? With all details maxed out is a typical first gen DX 10 card already running at its limits?
Charles Beauchemin: No performance hit occurs, since no improved optics are implemented. However, when running on Vista, DirectX 10 version speed will be much faster than its DirectX 9 counterpart (also running on Vista).
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,633655/News/Assassins_Creed_DX10_confirmed_faster_than_DX9/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Feb 2008 00:48 Post subject: |
|
|
wow i mean wow for the first time in history they tell the truth
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Feb 2008 10:59 Post subject: |
|
|
So it should go much faster on vista and if it isn't then 'the drivers are still young'  no more fucking excuses, sp is out on vista.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Feb 2008 11:12 Post subject: |
|
|
| |IcedFreon| wrote: | *Supported Video Cards at Time of Release:
ATI RADEON X1600* / 1650*-1950 / HD 2000 / 3000 series
NVIDIA GeForce 6800* / 7 / 8 / 9 series
*PCI Express only supported
heh thats a new one. no support for AGP people |
only for 6800, the others can be AGP, i guess
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 26 of 101 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
