Assassin's Creed Odyssey Will Only Work on CPUs That Support AVX

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by Megalith, Oct 7, 2018.

  1. socK

    socK 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,651
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2004
    Irrelevant, it's missing a feature and is thus out of parity with what they want as a baseline.

    It's technical debt on the codebase and I wouldn't doubt they have a solid chunk of hand optimized and vectorized AVX code that needs a fallback. To which certain PC processors are the exception. Doesn't matter if they're faster, they simply lack the feature, and it's more code to maintain for it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
    Armenius and Red Falcon like this.
  2. horrorshow

    horrorshow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,584
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    In all honesty, I'd doubt AVX is used out of "laziness" and more likely an attempt to squeeze every last drop of power out of the ancient AMD-based consoles....

    Path of Exile also recently implemented AVX for something or other, but it's not a requirement.

    Am I disappointed I can't play? Certainly.

    Am I surprised? .... Not. Really....
     
    Red Falcon likes this.
  3. horrorshow

    horrorshow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,584
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    https://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1941337-Update-on-AVX-Support

    "Hey everyone,

    We’ve been actively monitoring player reports about PC crashes and want to take a moment to provide you with an update on this.

    First and foremost, we want to thank everyone who got in touch with us via the various channels to provide additional information. Thanks to your support, we were able to identify the common cause of a few instances of reported crashes: the impacted CPUs didn’t support AVX – more details below.

    We heard your feedback and are now actively working on a solution to extend the supported CPUs for our players to be able to run Assassin’s Creed Odyssey without AVX support, within the minimum requirements.
    As this is an ongoing process, we are not able to provide an ETA just yet, but rest assured this is a high priority for us and we will keep you updated on the progress."

    200.gif

    .... Gonna pop in the X3470 later this week. (prolly just OC it to 3.8-3.9ish)

    Andddd my birthday is in 10 days, so hopefully we get an update soon :)
     
    polonyc2 likes this.
  4. -=SOF=-WID99

    -=SOF=-WID99 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    220
    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2015
    and everyone with AXV will complain about the downgraded version in the patch ..that they made for people using old CPUS

    game seriously runs fine here with a decent CPU + gpu + ram

    you can see my benchmark here ..
    http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=06078633793578669131

    the game runs at 59 FPS most of the time on a 60 Hz screen

    my specs are in my profile
     
    Armenius likes this.
  5. Krazy925

    Krazy925 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,458
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    I’m still on X79 (sandy-e) so I guess the time of doom and gloom is nearing for this build as well.

    To be honest though it seems like a lot of people here fail to realize you can upgrade GPUs separate of CPUs.

    My 4.6 3930k doesn’t feel long in the tooth especially when I finally over locked my RAM and 980ti. What the fuck do I care though, I wasn’t gonna play the new AC anyways. I’ve got everyone back to the first on a backlog already.

    They made this decision easy.
     
  6. polonyc2

    polonyc2 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    16,316
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2004
    this always happens...I think Monster Hunter World and a few other AAA releases over the past few years were released without support for older CPU instruction sets and were immediately patched
     
  7. horrorshow

    horrorshow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,584
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    Reminds me of a scene from Frasier:

    - Martin asks Roz why there aren't more radio shows aimed at his generation:
    Roz: You don't spend it all on fast food and beer.
    Martin: Yes I do!
     
    Armenius likes this.
  8. haz_mat

    haz_mat Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    324
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2012
    So, early in development, someone switched on the AVX compile flag and now they can't turn it off without it blowing up?
     
    Burticus likes this.
  9. Rizen

    Rizen [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,204
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2000
    Old-scale Nehalem i7 systems are still pretty capable, yes, but I can tell you there was a noticeable improvement in frame times and minimum frame rates when I went from a 4.3GHz i7 930 to a 4.4GHz i7 4770K back in 2014. Not just in benchmarks, it was easily felt in the gameplay too. And that was 4 years ago.

    So while I agree that this is likely an arbitrary decision by the developer, you are really selling some of the processor advancements made in the last decade short. It's worth the upgrade to a newer platform these days.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  10. Burticus

    Burticus 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,823
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    I'm sure the missing tech could be virtualized with a patch... but why bother? If you're still gaming on an Pentium 4 or Athlon 2, it "might" be about time to go spend $200 and upgrade your rig.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  11. loki1944

    loki1944 n00b

    Messages:
    15
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2017
    That's fantastically inaccurate; Bloomfield is still quite capable when it comes to pc gaming. The only thing holding back Bloomfield is lack of pcie 3.0, which has a toll in certain games around GTX 1080 horsepower, but never to a point where it's tangibly noticeable.

    https://www.pcgamer.com/bloomfield-takes-on-skylake/

    AlDqfD7.png qjtop4d.jpg MznfRJQ.jpg XuPZOBB.jpg Rl47WFW-1.png
     

    Attached Files:

    GoldenTiger likes this.
  12. ZLoth

    ZLoth Gawd

    Messages:
    854
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    And there are a ton of good games available that are slightly older and do not use the AVX instruction set.

    I should also note that there are plenty of good games that are seven years or older which are still quite playable and enjoyable today, even if they require a little tweaking to get running. Try saying that about older games and consoles. In some cases, because of the improved graphics cards, higher-resolution monitors with higher refresh rates, and improved CPUs, I would suggest that some of then are better playable now than at release. There are exceptions of course (cough Stalin vs Martians cough).
     
    loki1944 likes this.
  13. Mmmmmmmmm nope.

    Jaguar is a very, very weak cpu core to begin with. It is a low-power branch, it doesn't hold a candle against a fully fledged i7, even such an old one.

    https://www.neogaf.com/threads/anan...-cpu-beats-amds-jaguar-in-performance.677101/

    58072.png

    According to hwbot.org, a i7 920 @ 2.8ghz scores 4.5 points.

    So... yeah. A Jaguar core is slow as fuck. And it should be, for it is a low power, low performance sku.
     
    Shadowed, Red Falcon and GoldenTiger like this.
  14. Red Falcon

    Red Falcon [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,852
    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    I think you misunderstood a bit - you aren't taking into account that the Jaguar in the consoles is an 8-core CPU, not a quad-core like the desktop/OEM variants like what you posted on Cinebench.
    So in Cinebench with what you posted, a quad-core Jaguar @ 1.5GHz scores 1.5 - let's match that up with the 8-core Jaguar @ 2.1GHz in the PS4 Pro:

    1.5 ÷ 2.1 = ~0.714
    1 - 0.714 = 0.286
    (so 2.1GHz is roughly 28.6% faster than 1.5GHz)


    1.286 x 1.50 = 1.929
    (so at 2.1GHz, a quad-core Jaguar would score roughly 1.929 on Cinebench)


    Now, we take that 1.929 Cinebench score and multiply it by 2, since we need to double the amount of cores from 4 to 8 to match the PS4 Pro's CPU:
    1.929 x 2 = 3.858


    So the overall score for an 8-core Jaguar @ 2.1GHz would be roughly 3.858.
    Let's compare that to the quad-core i7 920 @ 2.8GHz with a score of 4.5:


    4.5 ÷ 3.858 = ~1.16
    So roughly, the quad-core Intel i7 920 @ 2.8GHz is roughly 16% faster than the 8-core AMD Jaguar @ 2.1GHz in Cinebench.



    Hope that helps with the point I was trying to make! :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2018
    Armenius and GoldenTiger like this.
  15. horrorshow

    horrorshow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,584
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQkBvuFi1R2Ci684LVaFdClSyW2Q4lXdfQTq4jPDjHKmGZiZEozJA.jpg
     
    GoldenTiger and Red Falcon like this.
  16. loki1944

    loki1944 n00b

    Messages:
    15
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2017
    Cinebench is hardly gaming though.
     
  17. Red Falcon

    Red Falcon [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,852
    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Your point is...?
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2018
  18. Shadowed

    Shadowed Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    487
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2018
    It could be 32 cores, but Jaguar still sucks. Weak single threaded performance is the main reason so many games are stuck at 30fps on console.

    Ryzen in consoles cannot come soon enough.
     
    Red Falcon likes this.
  19. Red Falcon

    Red Falcon [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,852
    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    haha, I never try to defend the Jaguar CPU unless absolutely necessary, and I'm one the biggest proponents on here (with a few others) who have proven first-hand that the 8-core Jaguar in the current-gen consoles aren't enough to push them beyond 30fps in most AAA games - though as I have stated before, if the game is 2D or doesn't have much demand on the CPU like lower-end 3D games, the consoles can easily do 60fps at 4K resolutions, it just really depends on the game.
    I know what you are saying, though, and do agree, and I don't believe scaling outwards with more weak cores with SMP is going to help as much as continuing with 8-threads and either 4 Ryzen-based cores with SMT or 8 Ryzen-based cores (probably lower-clocked for TDP and heat envelope) without SMT - but that is just a guesstimate of the new consoles right now.
     
    Shadowed likes this.