System requirements v.2 (The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt)
Do with the new laptop so bad at the Witcher?I have here, in principle, not the weakest beech (i7 4702 MQ 2.2 GHz, GeForce Gt 750MT 4 gig, 16 gigs of RAM), but playing on medium settings with memaksimalkan resolution that the picture was more or less smooth. But even so the game managed a couple of times hard to frisii, the system is heated be healthy. In the same GTA 5 all is good on almost maximum settings.
predator999
I have a TV 37 instead of the monitor. 1920x1080. Cope like. I slowed down to medium-low,when it was 4GB of memory. Opened Manager the memory is loaded on 99%. Well,it's only in Novigrad. Added a die 2GB - everything changed. But in the early days of the game as much as the grass had to remove
Well then the map sucks like the rest of the normal processor and 8 GB of RAM yet the game is more or less going to upgrade I won't. Jealous console gamers out there developed under their system requirements adjust, and pkashniki fixing their computers under the system requirements.
predator999
For 25K it's not OK is HS full and how to play with 15 fps? It even seems problematic, although they are accustomed to the standard 30 fps... but on a PC is generally not possible to play such FPSOs.
Bupycop
30 fps is the norm, build gaming PC for 350 dollars and then shut up some console shit !!
predator999
Shta??? On my very weak by today's standards, the computer (7 years old) and 30-35 stable on low settings
Bupycop
ahem, the only problem is that to the human eye enough 24 frames per second (then the picture will be smooth), 60 frames is more of a new advertising standard, but the image moves a bit more smoothly, but in fact if you run the game (without turning on the frame counter), zamochennuyu at a stable 30 FPS and say 60 FPS, about 70% of people will not see the difference if you put the two clips at 30 and 60 FPS, the difference will be a visible, but again, not all (about 40% of people even so don't see her), before, by the way (even 7-8 years ago) most of the games was with Locke at 30 frames, and iron usually never pulled anything and people didn't complain. 15 FPS it is by itself a wild lag everything is clear, but the picture in 30 stable frames looks not much worse than 60 stable frames and Yes let's say if you have FPS jumping much (say he is now 60, and then through the second 30, then 60, 45, 30, 60, 55), the jerking of the picture you will feel much more than if you Lok at 30 frames and they do not jump. Just as for me the kids these days believe that the more FPS the better, but now I ask this question is reasonable, what is the framerate better than 60 or let's say 200, and why?
Dmitriy_XAN
Totally agree!
All analogue TV channels, at least in Russia, coming with a frequency of 25 frames (FPS), and something no one ever complained about zatragivanija. Question: why no complaints? Answer: Yes, because everything is going smoothly. To figure TV often have a drawdown and it has bugs equipment the TV provider, which saves on qualitative technique. It is almost the same as in the moment in many games. The game was made, and it is the raw material-the raw material, but the urgent need to cut the loot, and then start each week to rivet patches, then these patches more patches. And if errorsyou sponsors what-nito iron firm, it is generally full Alles kaput.
Dmitriy_XAN
In terms of video, Yes, but when you play yourself and feel the lag, that is another matter. It is strange that the players say the same COP, want more fps, you should tell them that there is no difference, their eyes do not see the difference... And the 30 fps on consoles, who said that there is no subsidence? Once again the same with 30 fps, and may even fall to 15, then the eye notices the difference?) And on the PC from 60 to 30 is something mystical such drawdowns almost never happens, to 45 can still. 60 or 200, it depends on what game, but in any case, for me the more the better, the same drawdowns, can not be afraid, because even if the 200 will drop to 150, the difference just will not see and hardly feel it, and from 60 to 40 approximately, is already noticeable.
FinistEG
Once again, to watch videos and to play with such fps, two different things.
Dmitriy_XAN
but in fact if you run the game (without turning on the frame counter), zamochennuyu at a stable 30 FPS and say 60 FPS, about 70% of people will not see the difference
If the Witcher runs at 60 frames consistently, put a lock on 30 frames and you will see everything.
Bupycop... because even if the 200 will drop to 150 difference just will not see and hardly feel it..
Common misconception. In fact, the eye/brain adapts to a particular perception in a very wide limits and, almost constantly, BUT - just horse racing causes discomfort and does not matter the race or 60-45 200-150 - unpleasant necessity of adjustment
Givemethedust..if the Witcher runs at 60 frames consistently, put a lock on 30 frames and you will see everything.....
If people do not know about the current FPS and the one with transition is not happening in front of his eyes - 90% of the players will not notice the difference.
I'm not saying that 24 film frames- everything ;), this restriction, at the time, was primarily due to the technical capabilities of the instrument. But serious advantages over 50-60 30-40 - no. And the selection of stable, 30, or 60 jumping silly to even discuss
Old_Nick
If people do not know about the current FPS and the one with transition is not happening in front of his eyes - 90% of the players will not notice the difference.
Seriously? Unless the person in eyes did not see 60 FPS never. 30 FPS is seen even when you just look at what is happening, and even if you're part of it, you will immediately notice the difference.
But serious advantages over 50-60 30-40
30-20 you wanted to say? That is, if the consoles talking.
Old_Nick
In this case, a person not even 30 fps, and 15! 15 Carl! Then even by your scientific conclusions eye detects missing 9 fps from those 24 that the eye can see. Not going to throw an example video where the difference is visible, between 30 and 60 fps, he will find if there is a desire.
Dmitriy_XAN
if you run the game (without turning on the frame counter), zamochennuyu at a stable 30 FPS and say 60 FPS, about 70% of people will not see the difference if you put the two clips at 30 and 60 FPS, the difference will be a visible, but again not all
Your 70% of people are just blind? Claiming it's just never apparently did not play at stable 60 or 75 frames per second.
Personally, I very much feel the difference between 60 fps and 45 fps visually (regardless of whether the frame counter is enabled or not), and even at 30 frames stable I just starting to hurt my eyes and brain to burst. About 15-25 FPS, I generally keep quiet. It already smacks of masochism. 60 frames even sometimes dips to 45 t, still better than locked 30. As to 200 frames per second, I to date is not yet known monitors that can output the image on the screen with such frequency. The biggest -144 fps.
Bupycop
because even if you fall from 200 to 150, the difference just will not see and hardly feel it, and from 60 to 40 approximately, is already noticeable.
Because your monitor could display the image on the screen, a maximum rate of 60 frames per second, no matter how fast the GPU processes them. It is for this when you drop from 200 to 60 eye sees no difference, and 60 and below the difference is always noticeable.
Пруфhttp://www.progamer.ru/hardware/60-fps-games.htm
ZorbaBudda
Well, if you disable vertical sync, the fps will be above 60, and monitors are different, I have Monique on 144 Hertz.
Bupycop
Then you're in luck, I have Monique supports a maximum of 75. Well, in principle, in the Witcher I have none and never will be.
PS. But definitely think FPS not much happens, the more the better.
Let's say the PC I have is not very good(which by the way does not prevent me to sleep say the same of Far Cry 4 on high-medium settings) But the mother may monkey if I'm wrong - that my fellow gamers in this zloschastnom the Witcher this is not real over the muskrat even at the low resolution is so low as possible shows 12-14 fps I just don't understand. Optimization is bullshit and a link to the forum on the optimization of The Evil witchin and MK10 and if you can posovetuyte how to go with the above on the link I want them spit in his face. I half a year plavusa at Yubikov for their Unite, but these bastards gave me a reason to believe in the sanctity of Ubisoft!!! What I threw it all-tell me why Far Cry 4 without any lag on medium-high and the Witcher !!!Lowest!!! well, no actually, maybe I do not understand?
simple to steep bichner need a powerful video card performance is comparable with sly 680-770 or a modern top class 980 GeForce. and all the hate flying in 30фпс. even a lot of gigs on the GPU is not needed and in fact it is all the requirements of this game.
Saying that The Witcher 3 on the at least one figure demands two times more than Far Cry 4 on high average??? You know that this is complete nonsense???
Wait wait-one of the top Gi type 980-Force and 30Fps is what those blah were not wrong 30 fps for 40 thousand rubles??? All of you at the end of insane???!!!