Dev blog: Update To Recommended Specification


(Nocobo) #21

very bad news.
Can I turn off all new effects for fps remained the same on my PC?

(Nocobo) #22

dangeons, enchant and very boost system requrements. Next step PayToWin and goodbye eve

(CCP Vertex) #23

You are correct in pointing out there are only a few Macs that meet the recommended specification, alas that is a product of Apples upgrade options. It’s worth emphasizing that the recommended specification is exactly that… recommended and no more. As we haven’t upgraded the recommended spec since 2013 it was time for us to run our performance base lines against modern hardware. If we don’t do this it results in our developers creating something beautiful, performance analysis is run and the scene is just too heavy because we’re running that analysis against hardware from 2013 or earlier.

We want to keep EVE feeling & looking new and the only way to do that is to push our visual capabilities and that requires us to not be limited to hardware from 2013. Once again this is only what we ‘recommend’ and not what we ‘require’ which is minimum specification.

The new environments will absolutely run on older hardware, depending on how old that hardware is you may need to decrease one of several of your graphic settings. We cannot test every single platform permutation which is why we have the minimum and recommended specification machines as our baseline tests. We of course keep an array of GPUs and other hardware in our lab for specific debugging but rarely do we run performance tests GPUs outside of the min/rec setup unless we’re hunting a specific drive issue.

I’m afraid providing a chart for the performance testing is not something we can oblige with mainly because there are too many variables being taken into account on what we classify as acceptable. I can however tell you that for Recommended specification the goal is to achieve at least 60fps with all settings on high, if the scene fails that we will investigate and make optimization tweaks. Now with that said, there are circumstances where this isn’t possible, EVE is a sandbox and we cannot support a the same frame rate in an empty scene versus a scene with 2,000 players. No game can do this.

I hope this gives you a bit better insight into what actually goes on during development and the challenges we face, we genuinely do plan for and conduct performance analysis and its a bit part of what the Audio & Graphics team does.

(Amarisen Gream) #24

Thank you for the feedback and not just leaving us in the dark.

I’ll start cleaning my couch looking for all the that lost change… :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

I look forward to the that dev blog. Might have to cancel all my accounts for real this time, as currently my hardware isn’t keeping up with EVE. Even when its just me an an alt in a combat site.
But once the RL wallet stops having a pack of vultures picking at it, I’ll be able to upgrade and join back in.


edit: and Apple’s WWDC is coming up, and there have been rumors of them releasing some cheaper (sub $1000) machines).

(Keelah Sor'gri) #25

Anyone recommending Win10 for anything needs to be taken outside and… well… I cant really say what needs to be done here.
But its not gonna be pleasant.

(Erethond) #26

Why are people treating recommended specs as if they were minimum requirements?
Most macs and older computers probably can run EVE fine even after the update, it just won’t be the most beautiful it could be. Given that 99% of the time, you are looking at some sort of panel (overview, inventory, chat, etc.) that has very basic graphics any ways, who cares?

Stop acting like it’s the end of the world if the space you don’t look at won’t be quite as good looking as it should be… It’ll still be fine for all intents and purposes if you tone down your graphics a bit because you chose a computer from the most restricted range of computers ever (Yes, macs are awesome for some things, but weighing those perks vs what you lose is exactly that, making a choice) or are a bit behind as far as a gaming computer is concerned.

Most likely, the game won’t look worse when the next update comes out. It just won’t look better because the computer won’t be able to make it look even better. Big deal… it’s just the same as if they did nothing, for which people would not have complained. After 5 years, it is about time to update recommended specs! As long as the minimum specs don’t interfere with too many people, no trouble. And if you have to upgrade your computer because it can’t run EVE anymore at all after this, well… you probably needed to upgrade it already for a while for essentially everything else a computer does.

First world problems…
goes back to playing EVE on his 8 years old Linux laptop

(Teinyhr) #27

CCP would better off to move to at least DX11 ASAP. It’s been out for almost a decade (officially released in 2009) and pretty much even the cheapest crappiest gaming laptop should handle that much by now, and have several times the general computing power of whatever 10+ year old potato machine someone is still playing EVE with, with Windows XP no doubt. Yeah I understand, computers are expensive, but seriously, you can get basic laptops for a couple of hundred euros even, and I’d figure they’d run EVE at least on minimum settings just OK.

(Jennifer Austin) #28

Wow CCP just shot a lot of people in the ass heck I only have a 1050 with 16 gigs of RAM my requirement 1060 I think you just killed yourself because a lot of people were still using a 960 or lower

(Qjuu) #29

Thanks for the update regarding the Mac platform! Now since Macs are officially supporting external GPUs, I think they could become much more viable for gaming finally. Good times :slight_smile:

Regarding Wine: As far as I know, the current Wine version used by the EVE client only supports DX9. Do you have any info about DX11 support for the Mac (via Wine or any other solution)?

Would be a pity to have full size exernal graphics card on the Mac and still not beeing able to enjoy the latest and greatest visual glory of EVE!

(CCP Vertex) #30

Note that this is a recommended specification change, not a minimum specification change. essentially nothing will change performance wise for anyone.

We are now recommending a higher specification which we will use against our baseline performance testing of features. This allows us to push the visuals a bit further.

The only time a ‘system specification’ change will affect people is when we make a minimum spec change, that means the minimum hardware requirements are changing. For example when we eventually remove DirectX9 support that will mean you need at least a DirectX11 card or above to run the game. Note: We are not making this change, this is just an example.

(CCP Vertex) #31

We will be updating to the latest version of Wine soon and we are aware of some efforts within the Wine community to support DX11. This is something that’s on our radar but I’m afraid I don’t have any specifics to share currently.

(Tipa Riot) #32

So that means, all those new visuals are totally optional and can be disabled?

(CCP Vertex) #33

We’d love to make the move to DX11 being the minimum specification, we are moving in that direction and I’ve been eluding to that for quite some time via dev blogs and public presentations but we’re still not quite there yet. There is some internal work that needs to be done but the biggest limiting factor currently is the number of players who are still using DX9. This has been trending downwards for years but we’d like it to get a bit further along before announcing a sunset.

(Rath Valent) #34

There are now eight generations of the Intel core CPU’s going back to 2010 so just saying i7 is a minimum really isn’t helpful without a bit more context. An i7 from 2012 is way less performant than today’s i7’s.

A more precise way to do this would be to say something like “Intel Nth generation Core i5 or i7 CPU” so the person who just got a shiny new i7 knows that they are good while a person with a 5 year old CPU will know they are outside the bullseye for premium performance.


(CCP Vertex) #35

As with any new visual we add to the game you have the option to lower your graphic settings to increase client performance, this option remains open to you.

Completing ‘disabling’ a visual is not something we will be doing as that has game play implications, when you cant see the thing that’s damaging you that can cause issues… :wink:

(CCP Vertex) #36

Rath: Thanks for the feedback, this was actually meant to be included in the description. I’ll update it now :slight_smile:

(Nana Skalski) #37

I have a question about innovation, when can we see planetary effects like polar caps and auroras? I have seen demo for aurora on some fanfest. I think also that we should get some updated high res textures for planets and moons. And a bit less blured stars in starfield. And complete removal of the cheap looking and fps hogging clouds that use old render technique of dumping a lot of 2d blurred images with transparency.

Also the fisheye effect in abyssal space is too much. Distorting without reason. I dont feel like it ads anything more than a “bad vision” effect.

(Hitomi Kawasaki) #38

I’m wondering whats the reasoning behind the 16GB Ram and NVIDIA 1060 recommended requirements? The majority of modern games will happily run on 8GB without major problems. Is this based on optimal date or more like if you have xx you will get a good fps? See:

as I understand it the more Ram available the more active windows are possible at once. Since Eve only requires one program to be open I really don’t see the need for more memory.

(Circumstantial Evidence) #39

Hitomi Kawasaki - looks like its part of a future plan:

(Rath Valent) #40

I would be totally OK with an EVE client that occupied more RAM in my system (maybe up to a configurable upper limit) if it delivered a better experience.

Maybe this will have to wait for a 64-bit version of the client though.