PC's Assassin Creed Official System Requirements: 2GB of RAM

Discussion in 'Beyond3D News' started by B3D News, Jan 22, 2008.

  1. B3D News

    B3D News Beyond3D News
    Regular

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    Messages:
    440
    Likes Received:
    1
    <p>When a rumour started spreading down the Internet tubes about Assassin's Creed requiring 2GB of system ram, seemingly everyone jeered. Well, now it's official. Move over Crysis, you don't look so tough anymore.</p>Read the full news item
     
  2. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    That's just stupid. Why even bother at all with a port if your requirements are higher than what's required for Crysis?
     
  3. cbone

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Columbia, MO
    Is a 2GB requirement that big a deal? They're practically giving DDR2 away now. If you can afford a game, you can afford to have 2GB in your system.

    Needing 12GB to install the game is what has my eyebrow raised.
     
  4. AlBran

    AlBran Ferro-Fibrous
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    20,645
    Likes Received:
    5,753
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    I wouldn't be surprised if the long load times on consoles are spent decompressing. hm...
     
  5. Tim Murray

    Tim Murray the Windom Earle of mobile SOCs
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    3,278
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Mountain View, CA
    But the long load times are so great! "Whee, I'm chasing my tail!"
     
  6. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    Huh? 12GB of hard drive space isn't much at all. It's only a big deal if you were one of those very unwise people who bought a WD Raptor. 2GB is a very big deal because its the MINIMUM requirement, not the recommend or even "you'll get average performanace." It's the minimum and that's just out right scarey. The game doesn't even offer anything outstanding for that memory space either. I have 2GB of memory right now and upgrading to 4GB really has no benefit at all for me besides this game. I think many other people are thinking the same.
     
  7. Thorburn

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    I'd recommend at least 4GiB to anyone, especially with memory prices what they are at the moment.

    I run 8GiB DDR2-800 (OCZ set of 4 DIMMs, cost me £150, can get it for £120 or so now) and Vista x64, applications such as Photoshop CS3 absolutely fly.
     
  8. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    No game out there requires more than 2GB, most don't even need that. So I don't see at all the point of having 4GB unless for other reasons (which are very few except for professional applications). Also, many of us have had are memory for over a year, such as me. I bought my 2GB when it was at a cost of $230 for just it. I've yet to find a single reason to upgrade beyond that. Nothing on my computer runs out of memory, the closest I've come was Hellgate: London on max details and with a slight memory leak. I'm glad you run 8GB though, even though I bet you've never tipped over 4GB in real usage.
     
  9. AlBran

    AlBran Ferro-Fibrous
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    20,645
    Likes Received:
    5,753
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    They must be dumping the entire world into memory and not bothering with streaming of any sort. :???:

    IIRC, WinXP only behaves properly up to 3GiB of RAM?
     
  10. Thorburn

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    Vista does love to cache, right now I have 20MiB of physical memory 'free'. The more memory you have the more application data it'll draw in. You may not think you need more, but having tried it you won't want to go back.

    One of the other big gains (for me) is I'm teaching myself various server applications so since I don't have room for half a dozen (built) systems in here I run a virtualised network with VMWare.

    Running multiple VM's off one hard drive with virtual memory enabled on the guest OS means you get massive disk thrashing and terrible performance, this way I simply allocate each client VM 512MiB of physical memory and disable their virtual memory. The virtualised server gets 1GiB and virtual memory.
     
  11. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    Which is a professional application that extremely few use. I'd love to know who you recommend 4GB to, maybe these days because its so dirt cheap but relative to the amounts you actually need 4GB is way more than 95% of the gaming market needs.
     
  12. Thorburn

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    Windows XP (and Vista) x86 will function fine in systems with >3GiB of RAM, but you can only address around 3-3.5GiB.

    XP and Vista x64 works fine with more and I believe WoW64 allows EACH 32-bit application to use the full 32-bit allowance, rather than having to share between 32-bit apps. (That was my understanding at least)
     
  13. Thorburn

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    I'd personally recommend 4GiB to anyone building a new PC, it costs very little at present and brings about nice usability improvements in Vista.

    You might not see the difference in canned benchmarks, but you'll see it in greater caching from the OS and reduced loading times.

    To me 2GiB is the entry level now, there is no excuse to have anything less.
     
  14. cbone

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Columbia, MO
    I noted the 12GB requirement because the game didn't require any hard drive (or hard drive space, for that matter) at all to play on the 360. Just seems odd that it calls for all that space when I doubt that the textures/sound/video are going to be any better than on the 360.

    We'll have to wait and see what happens. I doubt that the game would be a slideshow with 2GB, but super awesome with 3. It doesn't say DON'T EVEN TRY PLAYING THIS WITH 2 GIGS! Besides, who doesn't have at least 2GB in their rig?
     
  15. Skrying

    Skrying S K R Y I N G
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    61
    Right oh... I've used a 4GB system multiple times in Vista, no difference.
     
  16. Thorburn

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    Well then you are either incredibly imperceptive or the system was lacking in other areas. Either way it sounds like you shouldn't worry about playing Assassins Creed, it won't be a good fit for you.

    Anyway, should we go back to talking about the game?
     
  17. pjbliverpool

    pjbliverpool B3D Scallywag
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,583
    Likes Received:
    703
    Location:
    Guess...
    The issue for me is less the fear of people not being able to run the game (since as you say, 2GB is pretty common these days). Its more about what it says for the port. As a console game this absoltely should not requirement 2GB as a minimum to run and from the sounds of it, spill over into 4GB.

    Unless the PC version see's some major advantages because of this requirement then it bodes ill IMO. Shame, as I am seriously thinking about picking up the PC version.
     
  18. Thorburn

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    Just noticed one thing

    Spot the interesting bit :)
     
  19. AlBran

    AlBran Ferro-Fibrous
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    20,645
    Likes Received:
    5,753
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    Geforce 9 is upon us! :runaway:

    and uh...X1300 & 2GB mem requirement....
     
  20. Richard

    Richard Mord's imaginary friend
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,508
    Likes Received:
    40
    Location:
    PT, EU
    Thank you. Guys, the point is not whether 2GB is cheap enough, right enough or whether people should upgrade "cuz...". The point is that neither the XBOX nor the PS3 versions of the game use more than 512MB of memory. Even if you account for the texture memory duplication in the PC and that Windows does uses a fair bit of memory for itself... well, let's do the math:

    These minimum system requirements describe a 256MB video card so let's overshoot this and say 256MB of system ram is duplicated; so for argument's sake we can simply ignore the PC's local video card memory. Now let's also assume Windows XP is using 300, no, 400 MB of memory just to run explorer and whatever applications MS wants to keep running at all times come hell or high water.

    So, the PC version of the game requires 1600 - 1700 megabytes of the stuff, while the XBOX/PS3 versions have less than 1/3? Don't forget the fact that the PS3 even has less "system" memory available because of the split. And this is the MINIMUM requirement, i.e. probably not even running at the same quality as the console versions.

    Worse still, someone will correct me but, I'm not aware that the PC version has any (noticeable) quality improvements over the console version that might require more memory so I can only assume the recommended 3GB is the required amount to enjoy the same quality level as the console versions so you're now entering the 6-times-as-much-memory-required-as-the-consoles-land which is mind-boggling.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...