Hogwarts Legacy is a very demanding game. But a good game.

[Fendrick]

I have a 5800X, 32GB RAM and a RX 6900 XT, I can run the game on Ultra at 1440P no problem, I choose to run with AMD FSR2 to cut on power draw and keep fan noise down.

I want to note though that if you have less than 6900 - 6800 XT then I bet all of my money you are going to be running into stuttering, game crashes etc, this game was pulling 15.7GB Vram on my 6900 XT and using 21GB of system RAM.

 

I have a 165hz monitor and if I cap to 144, I usually sit around 85-110 FPS in hogwarts, this area is very demanding on the CPU and memory subsystem. No doubt my performance is helped by having 3733mhz memory.

 

How is anyone else finding it?

[SupaKomputa]

21GB ram for a 3rd person game? wow.

not into harry potter, waiting for discount season.

[Fendrick]

5 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

21GB ram for a 3rd person game? wow.

not into harry potter, waiting for discount season.

We are finally moving onwards from last gen into the next gen and games are becoming way harder to run as a side effect, welcome to progression.

 

I am sure there will be a new driver release from Team Red and Green and also game updates.

[NemesisPrime_691]

12 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

21GB ram for a 3rd person game? wow.

not into harry potter, waiting for discount season.

What has type of view got to do with RAM utilization?

 

Anyways, yeah, it is a pretty demanding game. I would say weirdly demanding since I hit heavy CPU bottleneck if I go below High settings on my laptop Legion 5 Pro, with RTX 3070 and Ryzen 5 5800H with 32GB RAM at 1080p and the view is blurry too. Hence a mix of High-Ultra at 1440p with DLSS quality on a 1080p monitor looks perfectly good with some sacrifice to textures due to 8GB VRAM.

 

Edit: As for the game itself, I have spent around 12 hours on this game since I bought it Saturday and this is the most amount of time I have ever spent on a newly purchased game in just a small number of days. It really is a pretty detailed game in terms of lore and content and can't wait to get back from work today to play again.

[manikyath]

i'm probably not gonna buy it because BOY YEE system requirements...

 

i do have the distinct feeling the majority of people potentially interested into a hogwarts-oriented game do not have a computer with 32GB RAM, and a $1000+ graphics card.

[Fendrick]

1 minute ago, manikyath said:

i'm probably not gonna buy it because BOY YEE system requirements...

 

i do have the distinct feeling the majority of people potentially interested into a hogwarts-oriented game do not have a computer with 32GB RAM, and a $1000+ graphics card.

I would advise people to compare settings in visuals, Techpowerups review covers it, the visual difference is not astoundingly huge between settings, clearly if you have the hardware then you may as well push for the best but it should not be an expectation nor something to rely upon, I would still happily play this game on low since it is a good game afterall.

[Fendrick]

Video about CPU performance and the crippling effect of running RT regardless of GPU.

 

 

I want to add that Nvidia has notoriously had higher driver overheard with newer RTX cards so my CPU performance if you run an Nvidia GPU will not be apples to apples due to driver differences.

 

 

[DoctorNick]

35 minutes ago, Fendrick said:

We are finally moving onwards from last gen into the next gen and games are becoming way harder to run as a side effect, welcome to progression.

 

I am sure there will be a new driver release from Team Red and Green and also game updates.

Amazing that the game is so hard to play. Graphics not even that great imo. Surely it's not just poorly optimized?

[Fendrick]

2 minutes ago, DoctorNick said:

Amazing that the game is so hard to play. Graphics not even that great imo. Surely it's not just poorly optimized?

No GPU drivers, game has no updates yet.

[DoctorNick]

1 minute ago, Fendrick said:

No GPU drivers, game has no updates yet.

que? Edit: oh I understand. Sorry for my loading time. Yes might work better after patches or driver updates

[ewitte]

39 minutes ago, DoctorNick said:

Amazing that the game is so hard to play. Graphics not even that great imo. Surely it's not just poorly optimized?

Probably a little of both.  Demanding just because it is demanding.  Demanding for Denuvo.  Plus, there is no game or Nvidia patch yet.  With a bit of optimization.  

 

It's not that bad with the ini tweaks and replacing DLSS 2.3 with 2.5.  But I also have a 4090, 7950x and 64GB of RAM.  So far, I've left RT you can get quite a bit of CPU performance back turning that off.

[Mark Kaine]

demanding or badly optimized or both?

 

i still don't see how this looks different than a ps3 game other than slightly better textures... is that what people are surprised,  that textures need Vram?

2 hours ago, DoctorNick said:

Amazing that the game is so hard to play. Graphics not even that great imo. Surely it's not just poorly optimized?

hey, it worked for cyberpunk... glitchy mess, no gameplay to speak of, but uhh, my new 800 dollar nvidia gpu only gets 35fps so its probably  a good game?

 

(sorry just guessing here because i literally don't get it  it looks so bland/boring/awful)

 

ps: i agree, that ram/vram requirements go up is simply because devs are trying to ease people in going away from the decades old mantra that games don't need much ram... but this seems more like an artificial requirement here actually,  at least, as said I'm not seeing it, i would expect a "next gen" game to look next gen, not like a souped up ps360 game. 

 

Can i has deep down finally, Capcopom? *that* looked "next gen" to me.

 

I gotta say the only game that sorta looks next gen to me currently is SF6, it looks decidedly improved over the unreal garbage that was SF5, and also hogwarts or cyberpunk,  it looks different,  it looks fresh, it looks sharp.

 

(and its the closest we'll get to panta rei anytime soon, its MT frameworks, renamed to "RE engine")

 

 

[Fendrick]

Just now, Mark Kaine said:

demanding or badly optimized or both?

 

i still don't see how this looks different than a ps3 game other than slightly better textures... is that what people are surprised,  that textures need Vram?

hey, it worked for cyberpunk... glitchy mess, no gameplay to speak of, but uhh, my new 800 dollar nvidia gpu only gets 35fps so its probably  a good game?

 

(sorry just guessing here because i literally don't get it  it looks so bland/boring/awful)

 

PS3 games look far far far worse.

 

Also a 6 year development cycle on UE4, of course it will look somewhat dated, Skyrim did in 2011, still a great game.

[SupaKomputa]

3 hours ago, NemesisPrime_691 said:

What has type of view got to do with RAM utilization?

 

not the view, but the game type, usually single player games doesn't need that much ram.

The most i had was RDR2. High ram usage usually for simulation / managerial type games, where there can be infinite calculation happens at the same time.

[Tea-Sir]

My PC is packing a 5600X and a 6800 XT.

Everything at ultra setting @ 1440.

No FSR or Ray-traycing.

If I am in a less crowded area i get around 100-140 FPS. If crowded, it does dip to 50-60 FPS.

 

I generally see vram usage of 9 to 12 GB.

 

I have not had any crashes yet, a few stutters when the GPU renders a dense area, or if move a little too fast right after a loading screen.

 

Currently 12 hours in.

[Holmes108]

6 minutes ago, Tea-Sir said:

My PC is packing a 5600X and a 6800 XT.

Everything at ultra setting @ 1440.

No FSR or Ray-traycing.

If I am in a less crowded area i get around 100-140 FPS. If crowded, it does dip to 50-60 FPS.

 

I generally see vram usage of 9 to 12 GB.

 

I have not had any crashes yet, a few stutters when the GPU renders a dense area, or if move a little too fast right after a loading screen.

 

Currently 12 hours in.

 

That all sounds very reasonable.

[ewitte]

Maybe using that much RAM on machines will a lower amount of VRAM.  I haven't seen over about 12GB ram but I saw VRAM at 17-18GB once (process, 22GB total usage).

[Ebony Falcon]

1440p ultra 

dlss quality 

100 fps average in hogsmead running up and down the Main Street 

[Holmes108]

Ryzen 5600

2070 Super (8GB obviously)

16GB Ram

 

I'm able to run on 1440p High, no raytracing, DLSS Quality, and I get from about 70fps is the busier areas, up to 90-100 in less dense areas. Game looks great. 

 

I can run native, OR put on RT and still get 40-50 fps pretty consistently, but I don't find the visuals change enough to justify it. Especially turning off DLSS... I frankly couldn't tell the difference.

 

I don't care about, or know a thing about Harry Potter, but it seems like a VERY good game. My 11 year old daughter is obsessed with it. I haven't played yet, but I can tell it's a game I'd enjoy, regardless of being familiar with the source material. For those that love the books/movies, I can see this being an incredible experience.

[beace]

Ryzen 5 5600X

GTX 1080 8 GB

16 GB RAM

 

Over 60 FPS @ 1080p most of the time, with occasional dips that I couldn't bind to any particular place, event, or anything, really.

 

I love the graphics, but I really don't consider the game to be THAT demanding - it's probably either underoptimized, or has Denuvo hindering its performance.

 

Maybe some day we'll see a DRM-free release, at least without Denuvo, and with that, a much better performance. Although I kinda doubt WB could even think of such a release because of "muh profits taken by pirates" or whatever motivates publishers to go that route.

[Mark Kaine]

On 2/13/2023 at 1:24 PM, NemesisPrime_691 said:

What has type of view got to do with RAM utilization?

yh such a weird take when first person shooters are particularly made so the devs don't have to draw a character on screen,  all u get is a floating hand/gun lol.

 

Spoiler

actually why even show anything just make it blank screen, its more "immersive" and "realistic" that way /s

 

[Mark Kaine]

On 3/11/2023 at 4:13 PM, beace said:

but I really don't consider the game to be THAT demanding - it's probably either underoptimized,

actually doesn't it have pretty high ram requirements?  thats the opposite of underoptimized, it just means devs are finally moving away from a decade old mantra.

 

On 3/11/2023 at 4:13 PM, beace said:

I love the graphics

it draws a lot of things in screen,  but i find the artstyle boring and uninspiring, so it does nothing for me, not a game i see me ever playing, thats besides no one talks about the gameplay... that's all i need to know TBH,  gameplay is priority for me, i dont care about story or HP, boring as hell.

 

 

On 3/11/2023 at 4:13 PM, beace said:

Maybe some day we'll see a DRM-free release, at least without Denuvo

denuvo doesn't necessarily hinder performance,  i got examples where the performance actually got worse after denovu removal,  still rocking the denuvo version of RE3 remake (and i think RE2 remake too) for example. 

 

its also only an issue if you're actually cpu constraint, or its a particular bad implementation which can happen. 

 

 

 

 

[beace]

On 3/14/2023 at 3:44 PM, Mark Kaine said:

actually doesn't it have pretty high ram requirements?  thats the opposite of underoptimized, it just means devs are finally moving away from a decade old mantra.

I have over 50 hours of active gameplay, have beaten the main quest, and am yet to see anything that justifies that much RAM.

 

It's not just some mantra or belief or attempts to stay backwards compatible. If there was a good incentive to move towards increased RAM, we would see many do it already, much like the way it happened to ray tracing, i.e. games actually having GPUs that support the technology in their requirements.

 

Same for SSD in games that benefit from it in any real way, like BONELAB that leverages asset streaming.

 

On 3/14/2023 at 3:44 PM, Mark Kaine said:

it draws a lot of things in screen,  but i find the artstyle boring and uninspiring, so it does nothing for me, not a game i see me ever playing, thats besides no one talks about the gameplay... that's all i need to know TBH,  gameplay is priority for me, i dont care about story or HP, boring as hell.

I just like the details and colors. Feel warm and not washed out. I don't think it's anything special or remarkable, but it's really pleasant to my eyes in particular.

 

As for gameplay, I'm having a blast as a the universe fan, but I also really loved Control, so I guess the third-person magic combat is what clicks with me.

 

That said, the gameplay is not entirely unique either. I would call it a niche for people who like that kind of thing, with some puzzles, exploring, quests, and casual combat to do.

 

On 3/14/2023 at 3:44 PM, Mark Kaine said:

denuvo doesn't necessarily hinder performance,  i got examples where the performance actually got worse after denovu removal,  still rocking the denuvo version of RE3 remake (and i think RE2 remake too) for example. 

 

its also only an issue if you're actually cpu constraint, or its a particular bad implementation which can happen. 

There's more factors that I can think of, but at least in case with Hogwarts Legacy, Denuvo does seem to be hindering performance, if that video is of any evidence:

 

Again, I think we'll just never know unless we somehow get the official version of the game with Denuvo removed before it gets any updates that may affect the performance in a seemingly negative way like it did for Cyberpunk 2077 when some update fixed a bug that basically never enabled some high/ultra/psycho settings, making people think they're running the game maxed out while they actually were not.

[NemesisPrime_691]

On 4/29/2023 at 10:19 PM, Dean0919 said:

i5 10400F

32GB RAM

RTX 3080

 

Game performs poorly on my machine. Sometimes I have stable fps, but sometimes (usually in crowded area or outside) fps drops to 50 or even 40 with stutters and lags. I played with different settings in graphics, but nothing helps. Oh and it's without ray tracing. I don't even want to imagine what results I would get on ray tracing on lol.

You are getting heavily bottlenecked by the CPU, unless you are playing on a GPU bound resolution/settings such as 1440p/4K without DLSS, ultra settings.

 

That i5 is quite old now and cannot really keep up with the RTX 3080 in latest titles. Try lowering just the CPU bound settings such as population density, foliage and keep the rest of the settings on high to allow GPU utilization. At lower settings and lower res, you start becoming even more CPU bound, hence less FPS. 

 

And remember, Hogsmeade, is the CPU killer. I go from 70-80FPS to 40-50 in Hogsmeade on my RTX 3070 and Ryzen 7 5800H laptop at 1440p using DLSS quality.

 

Edit: Oh and Ray Tracing is trash in this game. No need to enable it, ever. It is buggy and causes all sorts of light leakage in indoor areas and doesn't even apply to water surfaces.