Go to bottom

Minimum PC requirements for 2009 PC demos?

category: general [glöplog]
Lots of people think that video is a good alternative. That's an interesting point. The role of real time would just be reduced to be the best video compression algorithm for demos, or is it more than this?
I like to know that the demo is running in realtime on my PC, it's kind of "alive", it adds sort of poetry. We could create demos using Max, Maya, Blender and code plugins for the FX. In that case, everyone would create high quality videos for any resolution and any platform. I admit that the added value of a demo compared to a video is very small (except from the lower file size and the “poetry” I talked about, but this must be a jazz musician way of thinking). Video games provide interactivity, which is a real good reason for using real time, but for demos, interactivity is low. Back in time, one goal of demos was to make the watcher think “god! My computer is not supposed to be that powerful, how did they do that?” then everyone loved you and naked girls were waiting for you on your door step. Ok, now girls prefer real TV stars and football players so maybe realtime is just crap. As said previously in this thread, that kind of challenge can still be found in 64k/4k demos, this is no more about performance, but size. Anyway, I don’t want to re-open the everlasting debate “what is a demo” , I ‘m pretty sure lots will just answer “don’t ask questions, be productive instead”, they might be right.
added on the 2009-03-09 12:59:24 by Soundy Soundy
My 1.5Ghz monocore can run some 720p videos, at 60hz if the bitrate is not too high.
added on the 2009-03-09 13:12:33 by xernobyl xernobyl
and it also can run blockparty's invitation perfectly well.
added on the 2009-03-09 13:13:20 by xernobyl xernobyl
this is a fucking stupid discussion.

i'd say let everyone make their demos for the hardware they intend to run it on -- and all you do to broaden the range of hardware it runs on is a potential plus (more happy ppl, more realtime viewers). it's up to you.
added on the 2009-03-09 13:56:23 by superplek superplek
GMA950 FTW!!!!111twelve
added on the 2009-03-09 14:51:51 by blala blala
neils: how about if people are wondering if their current pc will handle the coming BP demofest? that was actually the discussion ;)
added on the 2009-03-09 15:47:14 by psonice psonice
BP was mentioned in the discussion?
added on the 2009-03-09 15:51:28 by the_Ye-Ti the_Ye-Ti
probably not, but the title is saying "what pc do you think i need" rather than "make demos that work on p3 + intel gpu".
added on the 2009-03-09 16:09:45 by psonice psonice
regardless of the interpretation (I see now how it was more a 'consumer issue' yeah) it's still a useless topic of discussion

I mean per party it's known in advance what the compo PC is, you can expect stuff to work on that and if it doesn't on yours then well tough shit

upgrade, buy another brand, what fucking ever, WATCH THE VIDEO


and as for coders I stand by my aforementioned point
added on the 2009-03-09 16:43:49 by superplek superplek
it's just that it's monday you know..
added on the 2009-03-09 16:44:03 by superplek superplek
yeah, i agree fully for coders.

For people watching, surely a ps3 capable card is a bare minimum. A reasonable cpu + 2gb of ram is pretty standard (reasonable being at least 2ghz core 2 or so perhaps? That's pretty old now..)
added on the 2009-03-09 16:50:10 by psonice psonice
lol because it's true

recent 60fps h264 can bring even a 1.8 ghz to its knees

My kiosk is a perfect example of this. :)

Heck, normal capped.tv videos don't even run properly on my old celery laptop. :P Maybe I should consider changing encoding options around.

Anyway, demos for 2009: A 8800 and a dual-core proc > 2.0 GHz.
added on the 2009-03-09 17:00:31 by micksam7 micksam7
I agree with Niels!
added on the 2009-03-09 17:21:16 by pantaloon pantaloon
i'd say let everyone make their demos for the hardware they intend to run it on -- and all you do to broaden the range of hardware it runs on is a potential plus (more happy ppl, more realtime viewers). it's up to you. .

I agree with you! I just wondered what should be the hardware I intend my demo to run on, and I needed other people's opinion.

this is a fucking stupid discussion.

Thanks for being agressive. I just wanted to get opinions, I don't want to impose anything to anyone, I was just curious to know what hadware a typical demo watcher has.

added on the 2009-03-09 18:30:39 by Soundy Soundy
i guess the average joe has a average computer setup. ie. 1-2 year old gfx card. ie. shadermodel 3 :)

added on the 2009-03-09 19:24:14 by pantaloon pantaloon
In my opinion, the realtime aspect has very little relevance on platforms that are able to show the same thing from a video file in an equal quality. In the case of PC, whose hardware varies very much, I would even say that the realtimeness in normal, static, non-interactive demos SERVES NO PURPOSE WHATSOEVER, and even stinks very much like shallow-minded hardware fetishism that is devoid of any "scene spirit".
I actually have the same view. Making compo restrictions on hardware would probably not help, even if the modern pc demo varies insanely much in requirements.
added on the 2009-03-09 20:59:53 by quisten quisten
get a screen-capture in 1920x1080 of any demo uncompressed. Even on today's hardware you will have a hard time to stream it fast enough to play it at 72 or 80 or 120 fps.
Sure you could get a compressed version that will play flawlssly at a lower frame rate but it won't be exactly the same ;)
added on the 2009-03-09 22:08:00 by BarZoule BarZoule
imagine if we were stuck with old hardware... imagine BITS on C-64...... oohhhh nooo.
added on the 2009-03-09 22:09:23 by pantaloon pantaloon
imagine if we were stuck with latest hardware... imagine Edge of Disgrace on PC....... oohhhh nooo.
I juste bought a Core I7 920, 12Gig of Ram, a HD 4870 X2, 1tb hard drive, Blu-Ray/DVD, and I have a 1920X1200 24 inches screen, am I ok ?
added on the 2009-03-09 22:21:07 by ATH500 ATH500
I used to upgrade often.. but over the past few years, my GeForce 6600GT + AthlonX2 3800+ has held up very well... by far the longest I've ever been satisfied with the same hardware. With only very mild sacrifice in display settings (ie. putting resolution at 1024x768 for most demos now, or occasional ones at 800x600), I'm still largely satisfied. However, it is about time for an upgrade.. and it's certainly not what I would buy today.
added on the 2009-03-09 22:58:10 by bigcheese bigcheese
ath500: yeah, for at least 6 months :)

Seriously though, speed is less important than the GPU. With a slower box, it'll run slower but most likely watchable at least at lower res. With an older GPU, the latest stuff just won't run. A mid-range video card every 2-3 years is pretty easily affordable, unless you have a laptop. If you're getting a laptop, make sure it can play high quality videos if you want it to last more than a year or two ;)
added on the 2009-03-09 23:01:26 by psonice psonice
Participating in the destruction of the environment is pretty easily affordable, yeah.
I had sort of ignored the other comments here. I basically agree that I don't care much if it can run real-time anymore. Earlier today, I found myself thinking about the scripting that more and more artists are becoming familiar with (particularly in 3D software). If you've got a flexible language and you write code that determines the non-realtime frames of animation, you can in theory prototype most interesting scene-like effects you want to make. Making it realtime afterwards is then just a matter of optimization and scaling back if/when necessary. I'd like to see scripting and interoperability become more commonplace in art/effects someware.. and then EXE's would become more obsolete.
added on the 2009-03-10 00:31:05 by bigcheese bigcheese


Go to top