this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2024

-36 points (24.3% liked)

Games

31804 readers

1270 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

-36

Is 4gb vram enough to run read dead redemtion 2? (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm planning to buy pc with rx 470 4gb and i5 3470, will I be able to rdr2 at least at low settings in 1080p 30 fps?

all 28 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

You could have asked this in one of your multiple Red Dead threads. I think at least a few of us would prefer one thread per game series. There is no need to have 3 Mafia threads and 3 Red Dead threads all within 24 hours of each other

As for your question I don't actually know. I know system requirements don't always mean shit, but it is a place to start, and get an idea of what the game will need

Edit: as with most of your questions, it is a quick search away to find an answer. If you actually engaged in any of the conversations I would be more inclined to post it for you. You seem more interested in asking questions than actually receiving any answers

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

But public forums = crowdsourced search engines

Don't you know?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

Look up the min requirements. Look at what it tells you.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Mods please ban this clown.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

I agree that OP could make more structured and elaborate threads, but I wouldn't call him a clown or spammer for that much.
Might I remind you that you can just ignore him if you don't want to see his threads? Like that those who wish to engage on those threads still can and you won't be bothered anymore.

If OP break a community rule or a site wide rule, we will ban him, after warning him, but not otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

But perhaps a good community rule would be to make threads that are conducive to discussion rather than single answers that can be found with a quick web search.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I do agree. I'll raise the question with the others mods and we'll decide on a new rule if necessary.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't know how to properly word this, and I hope you don't take it in a negative way. Is this not something you would want the entire communities opinion on? Just you and the mods going to decide what we want?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think this would be a first. So there is no real methodology in place right now.
But I'd really like to get the community involved for the decision making, that's something we'll discuss internally, but in my opinion I'd like for it to work as following :

The community, LW admin, or the mods express the need for new rules <- We are here
Internal discussion between mods, and, if needed, LW admins, to make sure the new or updated rule is conform to LW rules and what we wish to do with the community.
Once the draft of the new rule is done, we'd publish it as draft to get feedback.
Once most people agree on the new or updated rule, we will start enforce it, first with a bit of leniency, then more strictly.

What do you think about that ?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

That works for me. I really appreciate the transparency

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Anything "easily googleable" should be removed on site.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Fair enough. I didn't think a mod would actually see that comment haha. I'm impressed though!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I think a warning and a rule against spam would suffice for now

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

After ops reply to this, i agree

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

what did he do?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Read the other comment.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I bet it would probably work. You mentioned you're buying this, just make sure you're not getting ripped off. This isn't a very good system for gaming (considering how ridiculous system requirements for modern games are) so I hope your guy isn't trying to pass that off as such. You can get stuff like this really cheaply on ebay, especially if you have the patience to bargain hunt.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Yes, 4GB VRAM is enough to run it at 1080p.

Please just check the system requirements next time, unless you're facing special circumstances or have reason to believe the official specs are inaccurate. You can find them on the publisher's web site or the Steam Store page.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I played rdr2 on a 1060 3gb before I upgraded my card. I had to turn pretty much everything down to low except for texture quality, keep that high or at least medium cuz anything lower and it straight up becomes a ps2 game. Was able to get around 50 fps most of the time, up to 60 indoors and 30-40 in saint denis. Your 4gb card should get better performance than that due to higher vram tho.