Watch Dogs PC Requirements Recommend 8 Core CPU

[gigastar]

Right, leaving this until totalbiscuit says whether or not its a playable PC version.

By the way, is there even a true 8-core processor on the market?

 

[Alfador_VII]

I'm still getting this, despite the weird processor recommendation, the Graphical recommendations seem rather low, only a mid-range GTX500 series? In that and everything other than CPU I easily exceed or match the recommended specs.

 

[ToastyMozart]

Right, leaving this until totalbiscuit says whether or not its a playable PC version.

By the way, is there even a true 8-core processor on the market?

There's a case to be made for the FX-83_0 series, which have 8 cores in 4 groups of 2 by the low level pipelining. (Would that be a 4x2-core?)

 

[Cerebrawl]

So much misunderstanding in this thread:

The requirements aren't 8 core, it's a quad that was almost but not quite top of the line 5 years ago. And the recommended spec was a middling offer with great price/performance ratio last year, a bang for your buck CPU. Also that recommended CPU is a quad not an octo, though each core is running 2 threads.

Even the recommended graphics card is a 3 year old middling price/performance bang for the buck card.

These aren't high specs if you've built a gaming rig in the last 3 years or so. My year old rig equals or beats every recommended spec(only equal on CPU because it's the one I have.)

 

[Tony2077]

i'm golden for everything except the gpu and the cpu

 

[Grabehn]

I usually don't even care about specs because they're mostly "look at our game, it'll look SO COOL" or "this game is badly implemented", the latter happening way too many times, sadly.

Let's just hope that for the people that want it, it's actually well implemented and it doesn't run like crap just cause, but with those specs being the minimum... The "Ultra everything" should look fine.

 

[EvilRoy]

We'll see. I'm above the minimum spec, but I sure as hell don't have an eight-core processor. The most recent Steam Hardware Survey suggests most people don't. Games really taking advantage of that kind of processor power still seem to mostly be few and far between. Hell, games that require a 64-bit OS are still a tiny minority.

It's hard for me to believe that they'll release a game that plays badly on hardware that's arguably superior to the console versions that are going to expect to be run at at least 30FPS at 1080p. That may be naive optimism; there have certainly been poor PC ports before. But the PC is less and less a platform that any player in the market can take for granted, and I have to imagine that Ubisoft has ambitions beyond that <5% that may have 8-core systems.

It could be a poor port, or it could be standard engineering paranoia. With the whole advent of more consumers actually understanding the technology that they own and/or use, engineers are getting more and more worried about the kinds of promises they're willing to make.

Usually specs for engineered products is whatever it actually needs to run plus twenty to thirty percent as an ass coverage maneuver. That's become more overt over time, as regular people are actually in a position of enough knowledge to call them on it. The idea is that it is harder to be sued for saying a product needs more juice to run than in reality, than the other way around

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Recommending a 8core 4GHz AMD CPU, when the consoles will be running a 8core 1.9Ghz AMD APU with 2 cores deddicated to the os

I think my calculator is broke, that doesnt seem to add up

 

[ryukage_sama]

Well, my 6-month old PC fits the bill, but I've yet to need the 8-core processing power for gaming. I monitor the CPU usage and only see it peak during loading screens, but that only lasts for a few seconds each time.

Hopefully Ubisoft won't disappoint in the gameplay department.

 

[thisbymaster]

8 GB of RAM? I will eat my hat if it uses more than 6 GB for the main exe.

 

[Racecarlock]

All this crap and it's just GTA with hacking stuff in it.

I'd like to assume PC gamers don't list off their PC specs like that douchebag who brags about his high horsepower car all the time, so what kind of marketing is this?

 

[Vault101]

Given the backlash over the graphical downgrade (which is what happens when you have 8 year old hardware) I wondered how the PC version would look

 

[Vault101]

All this crap and it's just GTA with hacking stuff in it.

I'd like to assume PC gamers don't list off their PC specs like that douchebag who brags about his high horsepower car all the time, so what kind of marketing is this?

....wut?

It's not marketing, it's something they actually need to know, when you play on a PC you need to keep track of its capabilities, even console gamers know that

 

[Vrach]

I laugh at this. Most games barey need two processors, the graphics card is what does the heavy lifting, to ask anything more then quad core is both extravagant, and a cheap cash in.

a) I'm pretty sure that most games these days are far heavier on the processor than the graphics card and by far at that.
b) That is a quad core CPU, it's just one with hyperthreading that someone in the article thought it'd be smart to call an eight core. And yes, there is a serious fucking difference between a quad core with hyperthreading and an actual eight core CPU.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Wait, are you guys complaining because game developers are finally figuring out multi threading?

It's more skepticism that Ubisoft of all companies figured it out, mainly because their last 'next gen' game ran like ass and was a poorly optimized mess.

 

[MercurySteam]

And what the title doesn't say is that the AMD FX-8350 X8 only actually has four modules and eight threads yet claims to be a octa-core and has terrible performance in single threaded programs while the i7-3770K has four cores and eight threads (eight virtual cores with Hyperthreading enabled) and will most likely outperform the FX-8350 by a mile. A if you want a 'true' 8 core CPU then the closest thing will be the Intel Extreme chips which have six cores and eight threads (12 virtual cores).

I'm thinking The Escapist should revise the title - Ubisoft is recommending the best chips from both AMD and Intel (excluding the Extreme chips) and one of them just happens to call itself an 8 core when it really isn't.

 

[Xan Krieger]

Waah waah no XP support.

That's actually my problem, it's why I can't play so many games I want to like Company of Heroes 2, ARMA 3, Assassin's Creed 4 Black Flag, and many others.

 

[Racecarlock]

All this crap and it's just GTA with hacking stuff in it.

I'd like to assume PC gamers don't list off their PC specs like that douchebag who brags about his high horsepower car all the time, so what kind of marketing is this?

....wut?

It's not marketing, it's something they actually need to know, when you play on a PC you need to keep track of its capabilities, even console gamers know that

Isn't it? Because I have seen a lot of PC users who like bragging about their hardware. I know that directly contradicts what I said before, but still. "This game has high specs and therefore it's totally next gen" is marketing, even though it's useful marketing.

 

[DoctorM]

4-8 cores, 6-8gb of RAM... and yet the video card requirements seem kind of soft.
What is that about?

 

[grigjd3]

Ok, the world realizes that "virtual cores" are basically bullshit, right? I mean, something like 95% of tasks cannot take advantage of virtual cores and the things that can take advantage of them would see a similar speed-up from a bus based coprocessor. Everyone should realize that they really just want a 4 core machine that happens to have hyperthreading. At most, they are using six "logical cores".

EDIT: Not that I am the least bit interested in this game.