1300 animated combatants on Clayton's rig as shown in Dec 2021 livestream

Hi All,
For those that want to benchmark the achievable performance in December 2021.
@LieutenantToast has kindly clarified that Clayton's rig GPU is a RTX 3070.
Steven stating (the resolution as) "at 1080" was confused by some with "a 1080" (RTX 1080), a modern adaptation of the "four candles vs fork handles" comedy sketch.

Best Regards, Mack.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Nerror

Thanks for the clarification. The way Steven worded it was definitely like it was running on a 1080 GPU.
Any word on the CPU? Equally, if not more, important when it comes to many players.

McMackMuck

Now that I know LieutenantToast is leaving today I don't want to pm her a second question, her final day is going to be busy enough as it is.
@Nerror feel free to post a question topic for any of the CM team to resolve, Intrepid don't bite.

daveywavey

McMackMuck wrote: »

Now that I know LieutenantToast is leaving today I don't want to pm her a second question, her final day is going to be busy enough as it is.
@Nerror feel free to post a question topic for any of the CM team to resolve, Intrepid don't bite.

Go straight for the newbie!

Karthos

Wow, this basically makes this clip irrelevant to a huge majority of the player base and is major disinformation. People are going around thinking that their 1080 GPU is going to be able to run the game, when the implication is you will NEED a high end graphics card to run.

Whether this is an actual fact or not is irrelevant, the perception will be that people were lied to about what machine you will need to run the game. Many many content creators are making videos talking about how your low to mid tier computer can run AoC, when that may not be the case.

They need to do a real clarification of this, and take their lumps now, instead of letting the misinformation continue, and letting people make assumptions of malice in leu of an actual clarification that they misspoke. I don't think someone posting "i was told this by the CM" on the forums is going to cut it.

Atama

Karthos wrote: »

Wow, this basically makes this clip irrelevant to a huge majority of the player base and is major disinformation. People are going around thinking that their 1080 GPU is going to be able to run the game, when the implication is you will NEED a high end graphics card to run.

An Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti runs about $1,000. If Ashes of Creation can't run on that, the game will die. The number of players with the ability to go out and purchase a computer costing multiple thousands of dollars isn't even close to enough to sustain the subscriptions that Intrepid will need to keep the game alive.

I ran Alpha 1 on my GTX 1070 Ti with extremely high settings and it ran pretty smoothly. That is the game in an unoptimized state, so it should run even better at release. I think your concerns are ridiculous.

Okeydoke

Are used 1080 Ti's really selling for that much? I bought my 3080 for 9 something.

McMackMuck

@Atama
I'm really happy to hear that your GTX 1070 Ti ran smoothly, it gives a degree of confidence. A game can be made to run smoothly/faster by removing information from it's display processing, maybe players that are further away don't get drawn, etc. which could be a disadvantage in sieges.
In Alpha 2 and Beta it would be great if testers could post their GPU spec, resolution and lowest FPS in a player-dense siege situation. That would give a spread of results for everyone to see.
I'll be buying/building my rig when I know what GPU will perform adequately within my budget. Until then I've got plenty of time to squirrel away some funds.

maouw

A big question I have then is - how heavily was that simulation relying on DLSS?

If that was a major factor of the increased performance, then to see similar levels of performance across the playerbase, we're expecting the RTX GPUs to be the market standard (since GTX GPUs can't support DLSS)

Caww

If DLSS was relied upon to make the magic then AMD users are gonna be out in the cold. Adding support for two different types of render is going to most likely introduce issues/differences. There is an AMD open source approach;

"While Nvidia's DLSS works only on the company's most recent cards, FSR, being an open technology not dependent on dedicated hardware, can be used on any graphics card. And when we mean any, we really mean it. It can be used by any Radeon user, no matter if they're using a new card or an old card. It can even be used on Nvidia's older cards, like the GTX 10 series—if you're still rocking an old GPU, you can probably squeeze a little bit more life out of it using FSR."

The GTX1080 may still be viable, up to a point.

Nerror

McMackMuck wrote: »

@Atama
I'm really happy to hear that your GTX 1070 Ti ran smoothly, it gives a degree of confidence. A game can be made to run smoothly/faster by removing information from it's display processing, maybe players that are further away don't get drawn, etc. which could be a disadvantage in sieges.
In Alpha 2 and Beta it would be great if testers could post their GPU spec, resolution and lowest FPS in a player-dense siege situation. That would give a spread of results for everyone to see.
I'll be buying/building my rig when I know what GPU will perform adequately within my budget. Until then I've got plenty of time to squirrel away some funds.

For what it's worth, my GTX 1080 Ti ran on 4K resolution with around 200 players in a siege with an FPS between 30-60. CPU is a 8700K running at 5GHz. This was A1 before optimizations obviously.

Sathrago

Nerror wrote: »

McMackMuck wrote: »

@Atama
I'm really happy to hear that your GTX 1070 Ti ran smoothly, it gives a degree of confidence. A game can be made to run smoothly/faster by removing information from it's display processing, maybe players that are further away don't get drawn, etc. which could be a disadvantage in sieges.
In Alpha 2 and Beta it would be great if testers could post their GPU spec, resolution and lowest FPS in a player-dense siege situation. That would give a spread of results for everyone to see.
I'll be buying/building my rig when I know what GPU will perform adequately within my budget. Until then I've got plenty of time to squirrel away some funds.

For what it's worth, my GTX 1080 Ti ran on 4K resolution with around 200 players in a siege with an FPS between 30-60. CPU is a 8700K running at 5GHz. This was A1 before optimizations obviously.

So as someone who can't tell anything as far as the mechanical side of computers go, I would like to know if -any- optimization is -always- good, or could it only be good for certain setups? I ask because if that is the case your setup might be worse now rather than better regardless of the optimization since its not geared towards your particular setup.

Nerror

Sathrago wrote: »

Nerror wrote: »

McMackMuck wrote: »

@Atama
I'm really happy to hear that your GTX 1070 Ti ran smoothly, it gives a degree of confidence. A game can be made to run smoothly/faster by removing information from it's display processing, maybe players that are further away don't get drawn, etc. which could be a disadvantage in sieges.
In Alpha 2 and Beta it would be great if testers could post their GPU spec, resolution and lowest FPS in a player-dense siege situation. That would give a spread of results for everyone to see.
I'll be buying/building my rig when I know what GPU will perform adequately within my budget. Until then I've got plenty of time to squirrel away some funds.

For what it's worth, my GTX 1080 Ti ran on 4K resolution with around 200 players in a siege with an FPS between 30-60. CPU is a 8700K running at 5GHz. This was A1 before optimizations obviously.

So as someone who can't tell anything as far as the mechanical side of computers go, I would like to know if -any- optimization is -always- good, or could it only be good for certain setups? I ask because if that is the case your setup might be worse now rather than better regardless of the optimization since its not geared towards your particular setup.

I hope better, but I guess we'll see

I'll be playing A2 with this setup while I save up for a 5080 Ti and a new CPU for release

McMackMuck

I'm confident that before Beta is done, thanks to this community, I will know exactly what spec GPU I'll need.

Caww

I think the whole mining/supply-chain thing upset many developers plans for high-end graphics to be a major, must-have feature given how much GPUs cost now and the shortages/availability driving up price. There just isn't a mass population running the best/near best gear since you can't find exactly what you want to purchase and have to settle for a different spec rig than you would have pre-world falling apart.

Even before mining/supply-chain there was always a concern to allow a game to run on as many machines as possible for the widest player base, these days you can't count on a normal upgrade cycle anymore. Down the road we should be able to rig-up and hopefully AoC will accommodate better things given they are using UE5 but I doubt they want to get a reputation early on as being too gear-demanding to run smoothly, especially given the on-screen player counts anticipated.

Atama

Okeydoke wrote: »

Are used 1080 Ti's really selling for that much? I bought my 3080 for 9 something.

https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Gaming-GDDR5X-Technology/dp/B07QGGCR85/

That's pretty typical.

The cheapest I can find a 3080 for right now is $1,600, and that's for a used one. They can cost close to $2,500. It seems like you got an incredible deal wherever you got yours.

Caww

Atama wrote: »

https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Gaming-GDDR5X-Technology/dp/B07QGGCR85/

used 5 year year old tech, makes me cry

From nVidia website, back in the day:
"Featuring the most powerful and efficient hardware we've ever designed, the $699 GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is up to 35% faster than the GeForce GTX 1080..."

Atama

Caww wrote: »

used 5 year year old tech, makes me cry

That's the world we live in. Those cards are ridiculously expensive. It's a real challenge for developers... If you set your standards too high in terms of graphics, you will have a small pool of customers.

I can't wait for the crypto mining fad to end, or for technology to advance well enough to compensate. The general supply shortages we've faced worldwide due to the pandemic doesn't help either.

Karthos

Atama wrote: »

Karthos wrote: »

Wow, this basically makes this clip irrelevant to a huge majority of the player base and is major disinformation. People are going around thinking that their 1080 GPU is going to be able to run the game, when the implication is you will NEED a high end graphics card to run.

An Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti runs about $1,000. If Ashes of Creation can't run on that, the game will die. The number of players with the ability to go out and purchase a computer costing multiple thousands of dollars isn't even close to enough to sustain the subscriptions that Intrepid will need to keep the game alive.

I ran Alpha 1 on my GTX 1070 Ti with extremely high settings and it ran pretty smoothly. That is the game in an unoptimized state, so it should run even better at release. I think your concerns are ridiculous.

You think my concerns that people will take this out of context and run with it are ridiculous?

Have you stepped outside your little bubble and talked to people not in this community lately, because this is already happening...

Atama

Karthos wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

Karthos wrote: »

Wow, this basically makes this clip irrelevant to a huge majority of the player base and is major disinformation. People are going around thinking that their 1080 GPU is going to be able to run the game, when the implication is you will NEED a high end graphics card to run.

An Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti runs about $1,000. If Ashes of Creation can't run on that, the game will die. The number of players with the ability to go out and purchase a computer costing multiple thousands of dollars isn't even close to enough to sustain the subscriptions that Intrepid will need to keep the game alive.

I ran Alpha 1 on my GTX 1070 Ti with extremely high settings and it ran pretty smoothly. That is the game in an unoptimized state, so it should run even better at release. I think your concerns are ridiculous.

You think my concerns that people will take this out of context and run with it are ridiculous?

Have you stepped outside your little bubble and talked to people not in this community lately, because this is already happening...

You were suggesting that someone might need a video card that costs over $1,000 to run the game. That is ridiculous.

A 1080 GPU will run the game just fine.

Ozijak

Still people discussing this haha, thank you for the answer. Boggled my mind that a 1080 could run that display at 30 FPS.

Ultimately just a curiosity, still in early development. When we get close to finished game that has had optimisation iterations run over it we will have a better idea of the system required. Till then its all just eye candy & hope hahaha.

Child Item