FFXIV Hardware Requirements

[SubzeroDiabolos]

no point in having Windows 7 for me.

Wrong.

[Celeras]

Stupid shit going on this thread right now I'd like to clear up.

- Windows 7 is vastly superior to XP in every way. You're being left behind if you go back to XP. If you really have an issue with the 1GB~ idle ram 7 uses, spring for the 30 dollars and buy another stick... odds are you're using the cheap DDR2 variety if you have less than 4gb anyway. I don't recommend turning off that many services, most of them are there for a reason and 1GB of usage isn't unreasonable. I personally use 1.19gb idle out of my 8gb.

- FFXIV is not DX9 'only'. It's a DX9 framework, there's a huge difference. It allows the game to be backwards compatible with older systems on DX9 while at the same time allowing them to tack on optional DX10/11 features if they so chose. (Lets face it, it had to be this way from SE's standpoint with their largest customer base being FFXI players.) BFBC2 does this, Battleforge does this.. all newer games with some DX11 capability.

Case in point:

http://ffxiv.zam.com/story.html?story=22430

Shadows are also getting an overhaul. Using SSAO (Screen Space Ambient Occlusion), the developers say that shadows can change faithfully based on orientation, position and distance from various sources of light.

SSAO is largely a DX10 feature, though it 'technically' can be gimped/tweaked to function on DX9.. I doubt that's the route SE would chose to go. You'll most likely need DX10 to enable this (like you do for Battleforge's SSAO feature in the previous examples).

[Hyan]

So does that mean PS3 will use something else for it's shadows?

[AshTS]

Hyan, pretty sure Uncharted 2 used SSAO and a few upcoming PS3 games will have it. (LBP2 for sure)

[Squeaky]

The reason it uses so much ram idle is because it has auto-cache based on what programs you use the most.

XP is fine, and will be fine for FF14 by the looks of things, but there is no way in hell i would go back to XP I would rather buy 2-4 gb's more ram.

Windows 7 does more caching than XP does (at least from what I've seen). If you use linux a lot, you'll notice it does the same thing. Your total memory usage will always sit near the amount of RAM on your system, but you probably won't swap. Instead, it will cache commonly accessed portions of your disk (libraries and whatnot). Caching stuff in RAM is cheap, and clearing it out when you need to use that ram for other things isn't that expensive either.

As long as you don't swap, using more memory tends to be a good thing.

[Celeras]

Hyan, pretty sure Uncharted 2 used SSAO and a few upcoming PS3 games will have it. (LBP2 for sure)

Plenty of games have used it on ps3, but graphical features on the ps3 are completely irrelevant when talking about the pc version. Need to stop talking like they're related.

[Hyan]

So the PS3 version at least would most likely use the 'gimped' version?

[Lucavi]

Dunno if its right to call it "gimped", but yes, PS3 will always be inferior to PC. All consoles are. PCs have unlimited potential - consoles are limited the very second their designs are finished.

[Pergo]

Hey all, would like to hear some input on a potential buy for me... I recently got into the XIV trial and while I wasn't too optimistic about running the game smoothly, I was kinda shocked that I could barely run it at all... I had to force a shutdown after the intro CS.

I currently have an early '08 XPS laptop that's running Windows 7 32bit. Intel Core2 Duo 1.5Ghz, 4gb ram, Nvidia 8400m.

That being said, I'm looking to buy a new laptop (yes, it has to be a laptop, I don't want to be subjugated to having to do my gaming in one location/move a tower around). I'm well aware that I'm going to be paying more for less and thats fine... I have somewhat of a budget but I'd like to buy a system that can run XIV reliably and be a viable gaming system for at least the next 2-3 years.

If you don't mind, I'd like to post some stats I'm considering via a basic Dell/Alienware custom-session and I would appreciate your feedback on what I'm considering. I've kinda been out of the 'tech loop' for a few years now so I'm somewhat confused with whats best. I've skimmed through this thread, and amidst the arguments, I haven't really found the answers I'm looking for... so here we go

1) Processors: Intel Quad Core vs Intel i7 820QM vs 920XM. i7 are quad-cores right? What's the main difference and is an "extreme" processor worth the price hike?

2) GPU: Radeon Mobile 5870 vs Radeon CrossFireX 5870 vs Dual Radeon CrossfireX 4870. Whats crossfirex about? Are 2 lesser GPUs better than 1 better one?

Thanks in advance!

[Metafox]

I'm not an expert, but in case nobody else says much, here's what I know:

About the cpu, supposedly most games are more graphics-card-intensive than cpu-intensive, so bumping up the cpu speed might not have much of an impact on games. I found a decent comparison here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-...d.21684.0.html

About the graphics card, they do have the option to connect more than one. CrossFireX is ATI's name for their dual card stuff. Nvidia calls their dual card stuff "SLI." I guess when they say "CrossFireX 5870," they mean "dual CrossFireX 5870." There's kind of a nice chart here that supposedly compares the performance of various graphics cards:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...80,2621-6.html

Note that laptop cards aren't the same as the corresponding desktop cards. As for dual cards, they seem good but I've heard rumors about some kind of periodic lag or something (I think they called it something-jitter). I've also heard that not all games support dual-cards, though I would guess that most modern games, the ones that you'll need dual cards for, would support it.

[Hyan]

I'm not an expert, but in case nobody else says much, here's what I know:

About the cpu, supposedly most games are more graphics-card-intensive than cpu-intensive, so bumping up the cpu speed might not have much of an impact on games. I found a decent comparison here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-...d.21684.0.html

I found out that CPU actually has some impact on this game at least.

Ghostsix's and my rigs are almost identical, except my processor is weaker, and it was quite noticeable during the test. Looking at his vids he can get 30fps~ while recording without much trouble (very smooth), but I was stuck with maybe ~25fps most of the time.

Could be something else too (I hear some HD 5770's have unexplainable framerate hickups on some games, so could be that) but I kinda doubt it.

[kyosak]

Is this game supposed to make use of all 4 cores of a quad core processor?

[sruon]

Yeah it uses all of them.

[Gulkeeva]

I remember reading somewhere, ffxiv will be PC focus this time around not PS2 console focus... so if you want the eyecandy... you'll need the PC.

As for ram, if your upgrading... the more the better, its one of the cheapest/biggest upgrades you can have for a PC compared to cpu (unless you like oc'ing) and video card. You can get "good" ddr3 8gb for like almost $200 (if you get generic brand)

For something like ffxiv that will be using seamless zone transitions... I'm sure that will be using a decent amount of memory to have all those zones/players/mobs always loaded to be "instantly" appear, especially when it goes live and have few hundred/thousand people roaming in your near vicinity.

Also... the alpha wasn't it capped 30fps for testing purposes anyway, we probably won't know till beta just how much fps certain machines can churn out till then.

If you can fraps and stay 30fps in alpha though (while looking at alot npc/players), thats a good indication your machines doing good considering how cpu intensive fraps is.

[bluefan]

I remember reading somewhere, ffxiv will be PC focus this time around not PS2 console focus... so if you want the eyecandy... you'll need the PC.

As for ram, if your upgrading... the more the better, its one of the cheapest/biggest upgrades you can have for a PC compared to cpu (unless you like oc'ing) and video card. You can get "good" ddr3 8gb for like almost $200 (if you get generic brand)

For something like ffxiv that will be using seamless zone transitions... I'm sure that will be using a decent amount of memory to have all those zones/players/mobs always loaded to be "instantly" appear, especially when it goes live and have few hundred/thousand people roaming in your near vicinity.

Also... the alpha wasn't it capped 30fps for testing purposes anyway, we probably won't know till beta just how much fps certain machines can churn out till then.

If you can fraps and stay 30fps in alpha though (while looking at alot npc/players), thats a good indication your machines doing good considering how cpu intensive fraps is.

Although this is true to an extent, MMO loading also heavily depends on your hard drive. Invest in good RAM with tight timings while investing in a good solid hard drive. If you've got the cash, SSD or the newer generation Velociraptor is a must for PC gaming IMO.

[Gulkeeva]

Could always get... a Momentus XT

SSD + sata2 , near speed of a SSD, with the space of a sata for a low price (like $200ish for 500gb)

[Agito]

I'm worried here. Would my single Western Digital Caviar Black be a good enough HDD for FFXIV? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-319-_-Product I'm not worried about any of my other hardware.

[Sign]

Ok things are getting a little out of hand when people are worried their HDD isn't good enough to play a game.

Don't forget people, all these judgements are based off alpha code, it isn't really easy to judge what level of equipment is needed to reach peak performance until they have optimized their code. You definitely shouldn't be worried whether your HDD can handle it.

[bluefan]

Ok things are getting a little out of hand when people are worried their HDD isn't good enough to play a game.

Don't forget people, all these judgements are based off alpha code, it isn't really easy to judge what level of equipment is needed to reach peak performance until they have optimized their code. You definitely shouldn't be worried whether your HDD can handle it.

I was just responding to the whole seamless zone transitions comment. A 7200rpm will do fine, but SSDs and Velociraptors are just superior for MMO gaming in my experience. Difference in load times and overall smooth gameplay was noticeable to me.

[Waraji]

Ok things are getting a little out of hand when people are worried their HDD isn't good enough to play a game.

lol this shit made me laugh when I started reading people freaking out cuz of their HDD.

Related: fkin want to buy an SSD this weekend, was thinking even 2. One for OS other one for general programs maybe a game or two :d. Anyone recommend which one to buy for the OS W7 64bit, was gonna go for this one

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820211419

Anyone recommend otherwise, cuz the prices on these SSD's seem to fluctuate a lot between brands let alone read/write speeds, and some else I can't quite understand, maybe RAID support? Need a quick explanation on the differences, take this one for instance

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820183202

Lower write/read speeds than the Adata SSD, but this one supports RAID. Does that alone warrant a 20% price hike