Forspoken PC Requirements Announced | RTX 4080 Recommended for 4K

[porina]

Have recent years distorted perception so much that a product actually being available is now being seen by some as a failure? It should be the norm.

 

Anyway, back to topic, I believe the PC version for Forspoken is out in a handful of hours. Then we can get some real reports on how it scales. There is already a DigitalFoundry video up for the PS5 version covering its graphical strengths and weaknesses, and a PC version is expected around a week from when the tester gets the game. 

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, porina said:

Have recent years distorted perception so much that a product actually being available is now being seen by some as a failure? It should be the norm.

 

Anyway, back to topic, I believe the PC version for Forspoken is out in a handful of hours. Then we can get some real reports on how it scales. There is already a DigitalFoundry video up for the PS5 version covering its graphical strengths and weaknesses, and a PC version is expected around a week from when the tester gets the game. 

Recent years?
no.

GPUs selling out inside their launch window is the norm, no one as far as I have seen are talking about the demand spike/supply failure of covid.

It's not distorted. There is always pent up demand when a new card launches(even when the industry as a whole slumps), and manufacturing at scale only just started so there isnt a warehouse of backlog made cards. So supply is "low". The only way for a product of this type to be WIDELY available at launch is there to be no demand for that product, or for some spreadsheet game, to delay the card a few quarters to build up stock... which also means you are spending money on warehouse for quarters on a product you are not moving for no real reason. 

Which the second one did not happen with the 4080 or 4070ti, they just didnt sell. It is a failure at its price because enough of the target audience baulked. 

[porina]

15 minutes ago, starsmine said:

Which the second one did not happen with the 4080 or 4070ti, they just didnt sell. It is a failure at its price because enough of the target audience baulked. 

With limits this is one seller in one country, it is the only source of sales data I'm aware of:

Quote

Following are the individual sales for each graphics card at Mindfactory:

GeForce RTX 4090: 1510 Units Sold

GeForce RTX 4080: 1625 Units Sold

GeForce RTX 4070 Ti: 1755 Units Sold

Radeon RX 7900 XTX: 1170 Units Sold

Radeon RX 7900 XT: 1865 Units Sold

https://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-amd-radeon-rx-7900-xt-are-the-best-selling-gpus-at-germanys-largest-retailer/

 

It isn't clear how WCCF got these numbers, or more precisely, what time period they represent. I'm assuming these are lifetime sales of each, so 4070Ti has been out shortest yet it is 2nd in units only to the 7900 XT. On a per-day basis it might be highest.

 

I find the XT vs XTX here curious, since the XT was universally panned in reviews given its drop in perf relative to XTX for a small MSRP difference. In UK I see the price gap between them over 20% (cheapest model of each), compared to the 10% MSRP difference, so I guess that brings the XT back into play. Alternatively is there a shortage of XTX?

 

Again I recognise this is one seller, in one country, and it probably does not represent worldwide averages. Still, someone out there is buying all the GPUs.

[porina]

I see there is a demo of this game on Steam. Downloading now. Indicating 34.5GB, so this will take a little time. Let's see how it scales!

 

Edit: plenty of negative reviews, mostly for gameplay but some about performance.

[Eaglerino]

i take it back this game is garbage lmao

[porina]

1 hour ago, Eaglerino said:

i take it back this game is garbage lmao

Technically, mechanically, or both?

 

I've done some testing with the demo. A screen at the starts says it is pre-release content, so maybe it was branched off before the release code?

 

My system relevant specs: 1440p 144 Hz display, 3070, 7920X (12 core Skylake-X), 64GB 3000 ram.

Updated to driver 528.24 which came out today, and mentioned Forespoken in the notes so seemed appropriate.

 

Straight into demo and to settings. Defaults on mine to 1440p borderless 60 fps limit. Increased this to 120 fps limit.

 

There are various presets. I only looked briefly at Standard, High, and Ultra. In all these presets it defaults to using FSR2 Quality. While still in the settings screen, I got:

 

Standard Preset

FSRS2 quality 70 fps

DLSS Quality 71 fps

Native 54 fps

 

High Preset

FSRS2 quality 67 fps

DLSS Quality 69 fps

Native 45 fps

 

So for nvidia cards, DLSS seems to give slightly better performance for "quality" scaling option. Perceived image quality is outside the scope of my test.

 

On ram usage, Win10 was idling at 5.7GB before I started the game, and it was around 13GB in game. At least so far I've not seen anything making more than 16GB needed.

 

At this point I started the game and it went through some kinda intro cutscene and dropped you in optional tutorial. Here is when things went downhill. Basically the game crashed soon after starting the tutorial. I had weird blackness where stuff should be before I got dumped back to desktop. Reloading immediately, nothing happened. Reboot and I was back in again. Game crashed again not long into tutorial. This time no weird graphics, it just stopped and dumped be at desktop after a moment.

 

Saw some comments elsewhere there may be problems with the latest driver. I rolled back to previous 528.02. Back in game, it was finally stable enough for me to complete the tutorial. I was running on Standard setting at this time. When I looked at the fps counter it was typically in the 80s or higher. I tried increasing to High preset. Didn't change much, either visually or in fps. I'd say most of the time it was 75-90+ fps, but when I annoyed some local wildlife I noticed the fps dropped to around 60fps in combat. CPU usage was constantly over 50%. Remember I'm on a 12 core, but as an older one clocks may be lower than newer CPUs. As a rough guess maybe it'll be comparable in total CPU power to something like a 5800X. At least the game seemed able to spread itself around all the cores/threads.

 

Why not try Ultra? 50 fps out of combat may be why. CPU usage dropped to around 30's %. Remember this is still with FSR2 Quality mode, and not native rendering.

 

At some point in all that messing around with settings, it crashed again. Maybe it isn't the driver after all and the demo just sucks, or there is something else.

 

I didn't try them, as the game has to soft restart itself if you apply it, but there were two settings for increase geometry or enhanced textures model memory and texture memory. At the settings I was messing with, I was close to the limit of vram on the 3070 so up to now didn't try them. This might be where the bigger VRAM GPUs come in.

 

Ignoring the crashes for now, it does seem a 3070 is able to give a 1440p 60+ fps experience on high preset, although there may be more demanding parts of the map I haven't reached yet that might say otherwise.

 

Edit: I can't run even with the older driver for more than several seconds after loading into the game world, but I did get a clue as I put hwinfo64 up. "Virtual Memory Committed" went up to 98GB. Something isn't right there. Might look more in morning. 

 

Edit 2: couldn't resist going in once more, and... now it didn't crash. 13GB physical, 21GB committed. 

[ewitte]

On 1/19/2023 at 10:00 AM, Montana One-Six said:

 

Only game that actually comes close to the 12 GB limit at 4K is FarCry6 afaik.

That is NOT the only game I had to lower textures on to not tank performance when I upgraded to 4k (3080-10GB).  Technically may be right for 12GB but 10GB is pushing it and 12GB isn't that much further off.  The new consoles are designed for 16GB it is just going to be more and more of an issue for people wanting better than console settings.

[ewitte]

14 hours ago, Eaglerino said:

i take it back this game is garbage lmao

I've only tried the demo (runs great on a 7950x with 4090), the most exciting thing is seeing directstorage in action.  

[Stahlmann]

Ever since i switched to 4K, i've been using High settings on most games instead of Ultra. In 90% of the games i play there is no real visible difference. But performance is typically a lot better.

 

People stop saying a game is unoptimized just because of high requirements. Optimization doesn't mean making the game look like a PS2 game just so it runs good on a 10 year old PC.

[Mark Kaine]

Demo requirements:  windows 10 "after November 2019 update"...

 

what the heck does that mean, they couldn't just say which version? 

[Levent]

3 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Demo requirements:  windows 10 "after November 2019 update"...

 

what the heck does that mean, they couldn't just say which version? 

Version syntax was always simple. Its "19" identifiying the year, then its "03" for first half of year then "09" for second half of year. They even made it simpler by only calling it "year" then H[alf] 1 or 2. So, you need 1909 or 19H2 update.

[Franck]

I don't understand the requirement vs what i see in the demo. On a 3080 Ti i get awefull fps on 4K and graphics are pretty close to the Witcher 3 with 4k texture pack so pretty 2015. I just recently noticed it was not designed for PC at first but event being a port it's usually not that bad. And i tough Hogwart Legacy requirement were nuts... boy was i wrong.

[Mark Kaine]

48 minutes ago, Franck said:

don't understand the requirement vs what i see in the demo. On a 3080 Ti i

ima explain it quickly.

you need a 4080 and 32 gig of ram not this outdated low performance stuff you have there...

 

i mean ITS RIGHT IN THE REQUIREMENTS lmao

 

also i may quote myself here =)

On 1/20/2023 at 5:42 AM, Mark Kaine said:

its a SE game, of course its gonna look ugly... 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Levent said:

Version syntax was always simple. Its "19" identifiying the year, then its "03" for first half of year then "09" for second half of year. They even made it simpler by only calling it "year" then H[alf] 1 or 2. So, you need 1909 or 19H2 update.

god damn...

 

just after i "rolled back"...

 

it really sucks too, i need this and 2004 version for several other games... but no... something about my current system/ install doesn't like that at all... last time v 2004 halfed my pcs performance just like that... went back to 1809 and everything as it should be... on 1909 performane was actually great tho, mind you, but no "mp4a" playback whatsoever... 

 

 

i already tried to "spoof" my version number, but SE didn't fall for it (and i think the program i used isnt even compatible with windows 10 or something... it did nothing apparently...)

[Vishera]

34 minutes ago, Franck said:

I don't understand the requirement vs what i see in the demo. On a 3080 Ti i get awefull fps on 4K and graphics are pretty close to the Witcher 3 with 4k texture pack so pretty 2015. I just recently noticed it was not designed for PC at first but event being a port it's usually not that bad. And i tough Hogwart Legacy requirement were nuts... boy was i wrong.

I just played the demo and it was awful.

Unoptimized mess, 30% GPU usage, 15% CPU usage (RAM and VRAM usage was fine thanks to my debloated Windows installation),

And in addition to that the the dialogue is very annoying, the protagonist of this game is probably the most annoying character in the history of video games,

In fact it was so annoying that i rage quit the demo 

If you can withstand the annoying protagonist and don't mind that only 30% of your GPU will be used then maybe it's worth to consider buying this game

Also the GPU runs at 2D mode clock speeds.

 

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X @ 4.65GHz all core

GTX 1660 @ 2085MHz/5000MHz

[porina]

1 hour ago, Franck said:

I don't understand the requirement vs what i see in the demo. On a 3080 Ti i get awefull fps on 4K and graphics are pretty close to the Witcher 3 with 4k texture pack so pretty 2015.

Settings? fps?

 

11 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Unoptimized mess, 30% GPU usage, 15% CPU usage (RAM and VRAM usage was fine thanks to my debloated Windows installation),

I'm curious, did the game put a fps limiter on for you by default? It was 60fps on mine.

 

11 minutes ago, Vishera said:

And in addition to that the the dialogue is very annoying, the protagonist of this game is probably the most annoying character in the history of video games,

In fact it was so annoying that i rage quit the demo 

I have no idea what's going but the male voice that is also there is more annoying.

 

I'd like to check out graphics more but I'm still getting crashes which no one else seems to be, so may be something about my system? I've gone back to latest driver version. No other games have any problems.

[ewitte]

1 hour ago, Franck said:

I don't understand the requirement vs what i see in the demo. On a 3080 Ti i get awefull fps on 4K and graphics are pretty close to the Witcher 3 with 4k texture pack so pretty 2015. I just recently noticed it was not designed for PC at first but event being a port it's usually not that bad. And i tough Hogwart Legacy requirement were nuts... boy was i wrong.

It is WAY smoother for me than the new Witcher 3 update.   I haven't been able to turn on my FPS meter but remembered this morning i can show the VRR framerate on the TV.  I'll try that in the morning to know exactly what I'm getting.

[ewitte]

4 minutes ago, porina said:

I'm curious, did the game put a fps limiter on for you by default? It was 60fps on mine.

The default for me in the demo was also 60.

[Vishera]

1 minute ago, porina said:

I'm curious, did the game put a fps limiter on for you by default? It was 60fps on mine.

No limiter, It's variable.

3 minutes ago, porina said:

I'd like to check out graphics more but I'm still getting crashes which no one else seems to be, so may be something about my system? I've gone back to latest driver version. No other games have any problems.

I just checked on Steam and it's a common issue,

Make sure that you are not running out of RAM/VRAM.

[porina]

13 minutes ago, Vishera said:

I just checked on Steam and it's a common issue,

Make sure that you are not running out of RAM/VRAM.

Where are you seeing this? I'm trying the Steam discussion section and after 8 pages I don't see any reports of crashing after the game starts and works for a time. Only saw some having trouble starting it at all.

 

VRAM may or may not be a factor, I'll try some things later. System ram is 64GB and if that is a problem, there are bigger problems.

[Mark Kaine]

29 minutes ago, Vishera said:

In fact it was so annoying that i rage quit the demo 

i did that in Far Cry 2 (not demo) unskippable cutscene was just too much for me ~

 

30 minutes ago, Vishera said:

don't mind that only 30% of your GPU

my fav game has less than that! (Fatal Frame 5)

 

but really i dont usually play SE games, i was only interested in the demo to check the performance and compare with my pc buddies (with same specs) currently im just laughing at the steam "reviews" ... "pre-order canceled!" like what do people expect?  most other SE games also performed poorly on launch and this is a "demo" ... they'll fix it eventually but it's never going to be "great". ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

[ewitte]

38 minutes ago, Vishera said:

If you can withstand the annoying protagonist and don't mind that only 30% of your GPU will be used then maybe it's worth to consider buying this game

I have one game I run at 4k max settings capped at 118fps.  If I pull the stats up it is like 1-2% CPU usage and 5% GPU.

[Vishera]

17 minutes ago, porina said:

Where are you seeing this? I'm trying the Steam discussion section and after 8 pages I don't see any reports of crashing after the game starts and works for a time. Only saw some having trouble starting it at all.

 

VRAM may or may not be a factor, I'll try some things later. System ram is 64GB and if that is a problem, there are bigger problems.

It's in a sub-forum:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1680880/discussions/1/

16 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

my fav game has less than that! (Fatal Frame 5)

 

but really i dont usually play SE games, i was only interested in the demo to check the performance and compare with my pc buddies (with same specs) currently im just laughing at the steam "reviews" ... "pre-order canceled!" like what do people expect?  most other SE games also performed poorly on launch and this is a "demo" ... they'll fix it eventually but it's never going to be "great". ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

As someone who plays a lot of Square Enix games i would say that none of their games were as badly optimized as Forspoken.

For example: LR FFXIII - It was a badly optimized port from the PS3 but at least the frame rate was mostly at 60 FP and in the end DXVK fixed it for me (Yes you can use it in Windows).

13 minutes ago, ewitte said:

I have one game I run at 4k max settings capped at 118fps.  If I pull the stats up it is like 1-2% CPU usage and 5% GPU.

I get 30% GPU usage without limiting the framerate.

[starsmine]

16 minutes ago, Vishera said:

It's in a sub-forum:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1680880/discussions/1/

As someone who plays a lot of Square Enix games i would say that none of their games were as badly optimized as Forspoken.

For example: LR FFXIII - It was a badly optimized port from the PS3 but at least the frame rate was mostly at 60 FP and in the end DXVK fixed it for me (Yes you can use it in Windows).

I get 30% GPU usage without limiting the framerate.

FFXIII engine is bad on PC. 
There is a reason square only used it on that trilogy and ffxiv 1.0, which also ran like shit. 

it was literally problems with the engine, not really a poorly optimized port.

[porina]

28 minutes ago, Vishera said:

It's in a sub-forum:

Shows you how much I look in Steam discussions, didn't know that was a thing. Still not sure what I'm seeing is what others are reporting as there are differences.

 

Anyway, I just went in, Standard preset, low VRAM options for both geometry and textures, so VRAM really shouldn't be a problem at all. Still crashed after a while. Usage was around 6.5GB just before crash as logged by GPU-Z. Gonna give up on it with this system, might try it on another later.

[Fendrick]

The game don't even look like it should require a 2060 max.