Now, after some updates that incremented the performance, stability and resource usage by the game, I got curious to know: does it actually work with 4GB? And if so, how well it performs?
Sure, I’m linking you my paypall wallet on private so you can get me the money to buy more RAM.
Jokes aside, don’t be silly. First of all, talking about games alone, there is plenty of products to enjoy with such setup. And second, if the game advertises itself being capable of running in 4GB setups it should do so, otherwise is misleading advertising.
There are still people around here having issues in online MP during loading of Castle age. I can only guess that the developers have reduced the amount of required memory by splitting up the age sprites that are loaded into memory. This did make it better except for users who are still on harddisk drives instead of SSD drives although they have 8 GB of internal memory. Probably the reason of numerous sync errors spotted in their logs before they crash. Having UHD (EGP) enabled probably makes it even worse. So there is still work and thinking to do for the developers. Maybe it’s faster and more efficient to load the sprite differences? At the moment it needs to swap large memory blobs at certain times.
it runs on 4gb, but not pretty well.
it is playable. in low resulotion, without uhd dlc and sadly most times not in ranked games.
but if you wanna enjoy the game with a high framerate, 8gb and a ssd drive is necessary. we upgraded a friends setup before christmas, and his benchmarkrating in aoe2
increased from around 600points to 1030 points. and the framerate is mostly around 50 fps in battles.
for the ram you can try on ebay, hardware parts for older systems are often very cheap there.
i don´t think it is false advertising, the developers doing a good job.
it is a hard balancing act between all the different setups from the aoe community.
some people here got highrated gaming maschines, some people a 10 year old notebook from a
grocery store (i had some years ago too :D)
I don’t believe it’s a inherent problem to running the game on a HDD. I do, paired with a rather modest hardware, and haven’t ever get this problem. The game engine sure have problems loading in heavy textures, but I think that fragmented drives on the user end may play a big roles on those issues as well. I’ve got a bunch of relates already saying that defrag the disk helped a lot.
Just to clarify, dear, I have no problems running the game. My hardware surpass, by a decent margin, the recommendend min. specs. I’m bringing this discussions because the game have been falsely promoting itself being ejoyable in hardwares that it is not capable of.
It isn’t. Not only because Microsoft never stated a SSD being necessary to run the game on good standards (just look at the recommended specifications), but also because this statement is plain wrong. I run the game on a HDD just fine, with “high framerates”, decent benchmark score, etc.
Well, if you propose a product to be playable on a minimum threshold stablished by yourself, and when the customer that attend this threshold buy the product just to know that they actually can’t play, it is, actually, false advertisement.
The game is indeed improving, as I stated on the original post already, but by the launch even some of the bulkyiest setups couldn’t get to play. If those can’t, imagine about the inferiors.
If it really does, could you provide something to support this? I created this topic exactly to get to see this.
The 4GB of RAM is just one element of a whole list of minimum requirements layed-out; when taken as a whole, you would, supposedly, meet the minimum requirements. Cherry-picking just the 4GB of RAM component as if it is a litmus test on whether the game will run fine is a little disingenuous or misleading.
Does your computer meet or exceed each and every element in this entire list of minimum requirements? If not, which ones don’t you meet or exceed, as they could be contributing factors in having less-than-stellar performance.
System Requirements
Minimum:
Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
OS: Windows 10 64bit
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Athlon 64x2 5600+
Memory: 4 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 420 or ATI™ Radeon™ HD 6850 or Intel® HD Graphics 4000 or better with 2 GB VRAM
DirectX: Version 11
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Storage: 30 GB available space
Additional Notes: 2GB of video memory + 4GB of system memory required
Recommended:
Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
OS: Windows 10 64bit
Processor: 2.4 Ghz i5 or greater or AMD equivalent
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics: Nvidia® GTX 650 or AMD HD 5850 or better
DirectX: Version 11
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Storage: 30 GB available space
And if you’re asking the question for other people and not yourself, as your later replies suggest the game works fine for you, then it is up to those other people to look at all their hardware and determine if they, themselves, meet all the minimum specs… without simply isolating the 4GB RAM requirememt.
Of course, Darkness. And sorry if this don’t came out as clear, but when I made the topic to talk about the memory specification alone it should be taken in consideration that the other components of a setup attend to the game threshold as well. It’s implied.
There is no meaning discussing about a requirement if we pair pieces that don’t attend this requirement in the discussion. This would be another discussion.
And just to clarify even more: I choose specifically the RAM to talk about because I’ve seen numerous reports about hardwares that exceeds/attend the minimum requirements while having 4GB, and such setups couldn’t get to run the game properly. This is kinda of a known problem at this point, that’s why I made a topic to discuss a problem that don’t directly affect me.
I myself have a 4gb laptop and the game was running fine (900+ on benchmarck) in the beta and at release, but then the first patch just prevented me from playing the game until the 4th patch 11 (ok I wasn’t feeling 11 at all then, especially with a TEN benchmark). After this the game was pretty much fixed, but for some reason my benchmark refuses to give anything else than 300ish or 600ish. All of this makes me feel it’s pretty random and depends on wich components you have among the thousands existing.
Wich patch was that? The December Update or some other patch near to the launch?
I feel nice that you can get to play now, but 300~600 score seems rather low. I’m also curious to know in what game modes and game settings you use to play (campaign, single-player skirmish, unranked multiplaye0r, 1v1, 2v2, etc.) and more details about performance (average fps, etc.)
I think it was this one https://www.ageofempires.com/news/aoe2de-update-32911/ Basically it first made random maps unplayable, and the next day campaign where KO as well. Still no idea what happened lol. I mostly play versus AI and campaigns, but I jump in a casual game once in a while, and it has been handling some dumb stuff like 4v4 blackforest with 300 pop quite well. I think the fps (according to the Steam fps meter) his like 50-60 ish, BUT loading times for single player stuff can be quite loooooong and I basically have to go do something else when I start a campaign scenario, but the only one which refused to start for some reason was my second attempt at completing the achievement for Bannyaung 1
16 GB (2x8) ram cost me $25 (at least in my country). 8 GB (2x4) is practically free, since they’re so abundant. tbh i would just buy it if you can afford it.
But I would agree that developers are falsely advertising lower required specs for minimum/recommended. ‘Recommended’ should definitely be more than 8 GB, I noticed significant performance improvements after upgrading from 8 to 16 GB (no stutter at start of each game, menu lag is gone)
This is not a matter of acquiring more RAM, why people keep coming with that?!? I myself don’t need to enhance my setup to properly run the game, as I already have a setup that exceeds the minimum requirements (read the discussion!!!).
The discussion is about how the game is performing on machines that the people responsible for it say it should run.
And please, don’t be close minded like that to assume that others live in your region, have your purchasing power, etc. While in regions such as the US this pack of RAM you mentioned costs about 2% of a montlhy earning (40h/week at minimun wage), here on my region it costs about 40% of a monthly earning (same labour scheme). It is not as simples as “just buy it, it’s almost free”.
Anyway, I don’t want to take further on that, let’s stick to the actual discussion.
The recommendend being 8 seems fine, to be honest. The game have been reported to run fairly well on 8GB setups. Problem is, again, the minimum recomendations, they have been a lie, sort of.
I have 16gb RAM and 4gb VRAM. I fixed the issue by free up 40gb memory on my hard disk. The game uses this space when you have too few VRAM.
Before that my game crashed after 20 minutes of playing.
Are you using ultra HD or something? Cuz on my almost-potato laptop (for DE) it runs fine and besides the first update ruining stuff I amost never crash
Yeah, the pagefile is important to run the OS and applications propperly. When your storage drive gets much full and/or fragmented you should expect things to work clogged. Always look after storage disks health and remember to defrag your HDD from time to time.
I just got an idea of why the requirements look to low: Steam got its huge update not so long before DE’s release and (at least in my experience) the new Steam is more taxing on your computer and even after lowering all settings it’s still heavier than the old Steam. So basically when they tested DE’s requirements they had a ligther Steam running in the background. To see if that’s true I guess we should ask to someone playing the game on the MS store.
