Horizons minimum systems requirements

[Xious]

I haven't crossed over to Horizons yet and while looking at the Min Req's, it seems that my system is a bit behind.

My system handles normal ED with no problem though.

Currently, I have a dual core cpu and 4gb of ram. I'm ordering more memory but wondering if the cpu will handle Horizons.

What is different about Horizons that the specs are higher than ED?

[de Carabas]

Minimum spec for the base game is Quad Core, so I guess you are running everything on low detail?

Horizons needs more grunt for the rendering of the planet surfaces, so for sure the processor is going to be important and so too will the GPU. What graphics card have you got?

I've got a laptop that is an i5 3300 (or somethign like that) with a 1GB 940M nvidia chip and 8GB RAM. It runs the base game OK on lower detail but driving on planet surfaces makes the game unplayable.

[Xious]

The GPU is a Gforce 660 ti and the graphics are set to High with a few off the effects turned off. The game seems to run fine from what I can tell.

I'm checking to see if the mobo can accept an i5.

[thebs]

I haven't crossed over to Horizons yet and while looking at the Min Req's, it seems that my system is a bit behind.
My system handles normal ED with no problem though.
Currently, I have a dual core cpu and 4gb of ram. I'm ordering more memory but wondering if the cpu will handle Horizons.
What is different about Horizons that the specs are higher than ED?

Two big things with ED 2.x (Horizons) ...

1) Native Win64, which not only means it supports >>2GiB heap in the program itself, as Win32 programs can only use 2GiB heap (at least not without requiring a processor w/PAE and a major performance hit in HIMEM paging), but also there is more memory consumption than 32-bit. Very long story, involves a discussion of computer architecture, how pointers and other structures work, both platform and software-level.

They needed the increased, 'flat addressing' heap for ...

2) OpenGL 3.x, greatly increased textures and capability, as well as a GPU to render it all. While the GPU is usually the limiter, the CPU can be a bottleneck. So you'll likely want a true, quad-core to drive the GPU and I/O with 2 cores, and another 2 cores for other operations (other I/O, non-GPU threads, etc...). Again, not dual-core/quad-thread (2/4) i3, but recommended (4/4) i5, or (4/8) i7 CPU in most cases to drive the GPU, I/O and other compute, simultaneously. In fact, I usually disable multi-threading in a game system, so my (4/8) i7 is only (4/4), long story.

► Show Spoiler

Again, they went OpenGL 3.x for a reason. Like DirectX, and since the early '00s there's not much difference between DX/GL at the cutting-edge gaming level, both are just wrappers to the ATI or nVidia hardware calls that are later documented in the next DX or GL revision (DX being proprietary to Microsoft, GL having an ARB, architectural review board of vendors). But OpenGL is sometimes used over DirectX (usually high-end games with major budgets) because it runs on all platforms, like high-end, Linux-based workstation systems (which also powers nearly all consoles and set-tops) that everyone from console vendors to major game publishers to Hollywood has.

Lack of keeping up with OpenGL is part of the reason why MacOS X has lost a lot of this space to Linux over the past decade.

SIDE NOTE: OpenGL has always been faster than DirectX on NT-based Windows (i.e., NT5.0/2000, NT5.1/XP, NT6.0/Vista, NT6.1/7, et al.). DirectX only exists because 386Enhanced mode, which shunts the processor between Real86 and Protected386 and still used in DOS7/Win4 aka Windows 95/98/Me, absolutely hurts OpenGL performance significantly (the MCD, minimal OpenGL driver instead of the full ICD, used to minimize some of it). So Direct DOS Memory Map (DirectMM), later know as Direct2D, was the solution, follows by Direct3D which became the Direct[i]'X' set of technologies. OpenGL was based on IrisGL, SGI's UNIX, and was not only designed for POSIX (UNIX, Linux, etc...) systems, but Microsoft ensured NT was designed to perform optimally with OpenGL from Day 1. OpenGL was also designed to do everything, not just 3D, but 2D, widges, even remote display (OpenGL over X-Window 11, aka GLX).[/i]

With ED 1.x, I've used as low as an (4/4) i5-2500K (SandyBridge) and (~2.5Tflop, single precision) GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GiB GDDR5.
With ED 2.x, I've always had a (4/8) i7-4970K (Haswell) and a (~3.5Tflop, single precision) GeForce GTX 970 4GiB GDDR5, or better.
In fact, I upgraded to an (~5.6Tflop, single precision) GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GiB GDDR5 for VR.

I wouldn't recommend anything less than 4GiB GDDR5 in a GPU for ED 2.x, if not 6GiB GDDR5. At the same time, for VR and even 4K, it's not looking like more than 6GiB GDDR5 buys much, based on the 8GiB (GTX 1070) v. 6GiB (GTX 980 Ti) benchmarks though.

The GPU is a Gforce 660 ti and the graphics are set to High with a few off the effects turned off. The game seems to run fine from what I can tell. I'm checking to see if the mobo can accept an i5.

Why not just replace the mainboard? You're already going to drop US$200 on the i5. An updated mainboard is going to be <US$100 more. Many times, some retail outlets have US$20-40 off the bundle.

In fact, sometimes trying to buy an older i5 is more expensive than a newer one.

[smartroad]

I run Horizons on a Surface Pro 2 at low settings and it is very playable Even on planets. OK not blazing FPS but enough to play with

[de Carabas]

It's got to be said thebs, you know your stuff on hardware. Glad you do, because once again most of what you've written means nothing to me

[Loriath]

I run a GTX 650 normal, with a 6-8 year old i5-750 and it does fine in game. Planets tax it a little, and I only get around 30 in an SRV, but its still quite playable. Oh and 16GB of ram help

[Xebeth]

I play on a Quad core with 8GB ram, the only thing I did for Horizons was put in a GTX970 GPU, everything runs fine on mostly max settings and I get over 60fps on planets.

[Xious]

Actually, my other computer is already fully upgraded with an i5, 16gb ram, and Gforce 970. The problem is my daughter has laid claim to it.

Would it be a simple matter of swapping HDs? ... aside from reloading drivers...

[Relix Typhon]

I play on a Quad core with 8GB ram, the only thing I did for Horizons was put in a GTX970 GPU, everything runs fine on mostly max settings and I get over 60fps on planets.

How does it cope in a busy RES? I've got a hex core and GTX 980 and I get slight stuttering. I run on ultra but turn down shadows, this seems to help but I haven't properly tested yet