Why watch dogs want so high cpu?

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

Watch dogs cpu requirements min Core 2 Quad Q8400 2.66GHz recommendet Core i5-2500K 3.3GHz ultra Core i7-3770 4-Core 3.4GHz why this stupid game wants i7 for ultra? There are few more games that want i7 like bf 4 which ultra cpu need is Core i7-930 Quad 2.80GHz so why watch dogs want that powerfull cpu btw the graphics aren't that good tho so why?

JOOK-D · Apr 13, 2014

It's probably awfully optimised, and a straight console port. Hence why it would want the extra threads. We'll see.

I don't think an Ivy Bridge i7 will be necessary.

getochkn · Apr 13, 2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9yNUOA8RAk#t=44 that's not that good of graphics? And it's open world game with hundreds or thousands or people in it, all the world objects, that's a TON of stuff to keep track and process.

BF4 can have up to 64 players playing all at once, online, in real sync, with objects and bullets being tracked. Again, lots of CPU power needed for that.

Not sure what you expect an old PC to do, but it's not the things the above games do.

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

getochkn :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBGIi9VA_AI even if its a ps4 doesnt matter watch ac4 vs pc dont have a big difference even if the game graphic be like this still i7 ivy bridge cpu for ultra? Lol sure

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

getochkn :

Well my pc is 8 ram 1600mhz i5 3350p and soon gtx 770 but according to this req i cant play the game lol

getochkn · Apr 13, 2014

then go make a game that is better and more optimized yourself that can deliver all that on ultra on your I5 and tell me how you do.

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

getochkn :

Bf 4 and crysis 3 have better graphics than w dogs there is a game kingdom come deliverance that have graphics like bf4 and its open world in the trailer and gameplay you can see a masive armies 100 or more npc's so yeah and by your logic i need to throw 2000$ every year for the best cpu and gpu(even the gpu wont be the best) and maybe new mobo cause of the lga well excuse me that most of us aren't rich as you

getochkn · Apr 13, 2014

You think this http://www.computerandvideogames.com/458503/video-watch-dogs-trailer-shows-improved-pc-visuals/ is worse than BF4? LOL.

And I don't have a $2000 PC, my PC is in my rig and it clearly doesn't add up anywhere close to $2000.

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

getochkn :

I didn't say the graphics are shit just they aren't so good for the cpu req

paitjsu sadff · Apr 13, 2014

watch dogs will run 6 to 8 heavy threads in parallel and will have a lot of data to be processed by the CPU at the same time, welcome to REAL NEXT GEN GAMING GUYS !! I CAN'T WAIT !

vmN · Apr 13, 2014

No, it wont run 6-8 heavy threads, that would be devastating.

If the game was that memory-hungry as you described, it would need high frequency speed and low latency (because games need low latency) memory, which is also mostly unlikely.

Games are not good at running in parellel, processes like rendering have little to no lost of been spread to multiple cores.
Games require a decent CPI and fast and smart cache.

I5 are more than fine for watchdogs.

paitjsu sadff · Apr 13, 2014

vmN :

you talk like you we're the one in charge of the processing scheme for watch dog...what do you know about this really?
1st it has nothing to do with the speed of the memory, once the loading is done in the memory (ram) then the speed and latency of the memory has no effect what's o ever on the rendering process from the CPU and GPU...
2nd i don't see why games would not be ''good at running in parallel'' i think it should have always been done that way it's just that it's a little more work to get the physics proccessed on 2 different thread, having the shadows and floating points math done by other threads etc. but it is totaly doable and it is the way the new games will all be coded wheter you like it or not...i think that if ubisoft said the game will require a core i7 or FX 8 core CPU to run better at maximum settings THEN IT MAY BE BECAUSE IT WILL RUN BETTER ON A CPU THAT WILL BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE 6 OR 8 HEAVY THREADS ON DIFFERENT CORES...

vmN · Apr 13, 2014

First thing first. The processer needs to data from the memory before it can execute it, so if the process is memory-hungry it needs higher frequency memory, and games naturally needs low latency (This is also the major difference between workstation GPU and gamer GPU).

It was simple they way you described it.

You have misunderstood parellel when we are talking about processors.
It means that more processors are working on the same task.
Which is only beneficial for task where latency doesn't matter (rendering is a great example).
Games still rely heavily on a better CPI.

And even so (example ofc) nvidia says I need a 500w to run their titan, I could assure you I could run it on a 400w (I dont have a titan, but it was an example). They always overestimate things.

paitjsu sadff · Apr 13, 2014

vmN :

once the needed elements to run the game are loaded from the hard drive or SSD into the RAM memory the speed of the memory and latency has little to no effect on the rendering, this is why overclocking the RAM on a machine makes little to no effects on in-game performance...it has been tested already DDR2 800mhz vs DDR3 1600mhz the difference in games is less then 2 frames per seconds on a CPU bound scenario...

and it think YOU missunderstood how parallelised and mutlithreading is working in games, it does mean having processes done on different threads to distribute the loads on other available cores/threads, for example as i said having the physics and geometry done on one thread and the shadows and floating points math done on another seperate thread would get you twice the speed on a dual core cpu as opposed has having all those things done on one single core/thread...and this is the way new games will be coded to take advantage of the 8 slow cores of jaguar CPU's in modern gaming consoles..

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

vmN :

So will my i5 3350p do on high to ultra?

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

Btw does the cpu usage increase if i set the game to ultra cause ac4 on very low is 30-40 usage when i set it to high goes max to 60

vmN · Apr 13, 2014

Denis Stoikovski :

What is your GPU?

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

vmN :

Now is gt 640;d but next month gtx 770

vmN · Apr 13, 2014

paitjsu sadff :

No, once the data have arrived from the memory to the CPU, then its frequency and latency doesn't matter.

It still needs to transfer the data from the memory to the processor.

Reason why overclocking ram have little to no effect is because; Memory isn't the huge factor, and when you overclocks memorys frequency they latency will rise (so the performance will more or less balance out).

You clearly have misunderstood parellel and multi-threading.

Multi-threading is spitting up processes to multiple cores, whereof parellel is splitting up the task.

Rendering is great for parellel as it can be split to infinity amount of cores and doesn't rely on latency.
Games isn't great for parellel as it can only be split to a certain amount of processors before latency and other things will hurt performance.

vmN · Apr 13, 2014

Denis Stoikovski :

Should be fine on atleast high, wont predict on ultra, but it could be doable.

Denis Stoikovski · Apr 13, 2014

vmN :

Denis Stoikovski :

Should be fine on atleast high, wont predict on ultra, but it could be doable.

Yeah without shadows

paitjsu sadff · Apr 13, 2014

vmN :

makes sence, then i meant multi-threading, not parellel i thought it was the same in the end, future games will be more mutli-threaded then that's what i meant in that they will spread the load to different thread to run more processes at once and provide better physics and so on...also what about memory cache speed and latency on the CPU itself? i know the FX-83xx share L3 cache in pair of cores does that impact performance or since it's a huge 16mb chache pool in L2 and L3 cache it will be alright?

vmN · Apr 13, 2014

Well the cache is a totally different thing than RAM.

Cache is a huge subject on CPU.

L3 cache is shared between all the modules, whereof L2 is shared between the cores in the module and L1 is the cores own cache.

Cache can be critical, but there is so much to the subject of cache it would I could write an entire book.

Size is one thing, speed is another.

Example; One of the huge improvement from IV (SB) to haswell was the L1 cache speed.

Cache speed and latency are far from the only thing.

There is it's specialty, it's organization method, it's associativity, it's addressing method, it's addressing type, levels, identification schemes, it's assisting components, and much much more.

Elie Abou Issa · Apr 13, 2014

My answer to you is: SHUT UP AND WAIT FOR THE BENCHMARKS TO APPEAR ON THE INTERNET IN MAY 27 (ok maybe 28)

Anoos · Apr 13, 2014

If you guys too a look at Thief it recommends an i7 /8000 series AMD cpu and 4 gigs of ram . And for graphics it recommends a gtx 660 or higher . An i5 4670k and a 770 will get 70-90-100 fps on max settings. Take note that both Watch Dogs and Thief recommend similiar cpus and both are on next gen consoles which have 8 cores. To be honest it seems as if Ubisoft ia just pumping out either a horrible pc port or a game heavily optimized for consoles. Or it could just be Ubisoft hyping the game up by releasing insane specs. Trying to make the game look like its worth dropping 2k.

Why watch dogs want so high cpu?

Honorable

Dignified

Polypheme

Honorable

Honorable

Polypheme

Honorable

Polypheme

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Reputable

Reputable

Share this page