How well does Doom 64 run? Do I need what the system requirements list in order to play it?

[Murdoch]

1 hour ago, Boaby Kenobi said:

It is a remaster. Higher resolutions and a smoother framerate make it a remaster instead of a straight port.

 

It is really not. Doom ports were doing this since not long after the source was released back in 1998. I would classify none of them as remasters. Remaster implies improved assets such as textures. This is not the case with the Doom 64 rerelease.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Murdoch

[Dweller Dark]

Update for everyone who helped me figure Doom 64 out:

 

It runs very well on my system, no lag that I could see. It IS 92MB, both on the pre-install window and when it's being downloaded. 

 

I'm so glad you guys helped me figure it all out, I'm definitely going to enjoy playing this for sure. (And I hope the system requirements on Steam get changed to reflect how well it can actually run, because high system requirements deterred me from getting it until now.)

[Edward850]

2 minutes ago, DavetheDoomguy said:

(And I hope the system requirements on Steam get changed to reflect how well it can actually run, because high system requirements deterred me from getting it until now.)

But the system requirements matched your hardware, what would there be to change? After all, it asked for 8GB RAM, and you have 8GB RAM. So far, all is within expectations.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Edward850

[Dweller Dark]

Just now, Edward850 said:

But the system requirements matched your hardware, what would there be to change?

 

Maybe I'm reading the system requirements wrong, but I always look for games that run on 4GB RAM or less because that's how much available RAM I can actually use (8GB total, but half used to run the laptop). So I think of that when it comes to looking at system requirements. But maybe the hard disk space needed should be listed, since it's not listed at all and it's only 92MB.

[Murdoch]

5 minutes ago, DavetheDoomguy said:

 

Maybe I'm reading the system requirements wrong, but I always look for games that run on 4GB RAM or less because that's how much available RAM I can actually use (8GB total, but half used to run the laptop). So I think of that when it comes to looking at system requirements. But maybe the hard disk space needed should be listed, since it's not listed at all and it's only 92MB.

 

As long as you are not running anything in the background ridiculous like say Chrome with half a dozen tabs, then RAM is not going to be a problem. You can safely take minimum system requirements of 8GB as exactly that - 8GB in your system. Not 8GB free at a given point in time.

 

[Edward850]

Nah, for various technical reasons listing how much RAM the game actually physically uses isn't practical or even possible: On a PC, we simply don't know how much RAM the application actually uses due to drivers and aspects of dynamic allocation (we aren't in charge of all the memory it allocates). So instead a hardware spec is listed of what it's assumed that you would have physically installed in your PC, and thus includes background elements such as your OS and drivers. So in turn this is suggesting you have 8GB of physical RAM, not that the game uses 8GB RAM. We'll assume some of that is already in use by other things.

 

System requirements are sort of a listing of "here is a computer we built, aim for that". Anything short of actual API support needed such as a Vulkan or DirectX version number (which is the only thing we can accurately indicate) is more a reading suggestion.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Edward850

[Dweller Dark]

2 minutes ago, Murdoch said:

 

As long as you are not running anything in the background ridiculous like say Chrome with half a dozen tabs, then RAM is not going to be a problem. You can safely take minimum system requirements of 8GB as exactly that - 8GB in your system. Not 8GB free at a given point in time.

 

 

I've always read it as the game requiring 8GB RAM, so I never realized it was the hardware being 8GB. It's good to know that it's more about the hardware than the game itself, though.

[Dweller Dark]

1 minute ago, Edward850 said:

Nah, for various technical reasons listing how much RAM the game actually physically uses isn't practical or even possible: On a PC, we simply don't know how much RAM the application could use due to drivers and aspects of dynamic allocation. So instead a hardware spec is listed of what it's assumed that you would have physically installed in your PC, and thus includes background elements such as your OS and drivers. So in turn this is suggesting you have 8GB of physical RAM, not that the game uses 8GB RAM. We'll assume some of that is already in use by other things.

 

I get that now, I'm surprised I always thought of it wrong with me knowing the processor speed and disk space I'd need quite easily.

[Redneckerz]

6 hours ago, Edward850 said:

Assuming that's this thing: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-r7-graphics.c2533

That's an amazingly weird GPU. It's from 2014, EOL, yet apparently has Vulkan 1.2 somehow. That's odd to see. Explains the 512MB though, as it's system allocated. Seemingly that should be fine then.

Hold up:

Radeon R7 Graphics is actually a brand name used by several APU's of several generations and can thus differ significantly in performance. I believe a Piledriver one had 384 cores, but later versions have 512 and DDR4 (Bristol Ridge). Same name, different GPU.

 

All AMD APU's have the ability to set shared memory to 2 GB max in the BIOS. By default, its 512 MB (which is the readout by OP).

 

Just want to point this out.

 

6 hours ago, DavetheDoomguy said:

 

Yep, that must be it. Though the IGP Variant appears to be "A8 PRO-8650B: 758 MHz" as it matches what I can find about my GPU. So, it would actually work?

That's the APU name.

 

Funny enough, your R7 has 384 cores - an A10 variant would likely have 512 cores, and still be called Radeon R7. Do we still follow? ;)

[Dweller Dark]

2 hours ago, Redneckerz said:

Hold up:

Radeon R7 Graphics is actually a brand name used by several APU's of several generations and can thus differ significantly in performance. I believe a Piledriver one had 384 cores, but later versions have 512 and DDR4 (Bristol Ridge). Same name, different GPU.

 

All AMD APU's have the ability to set shared memory to 2 GB max in the BIOS. By default, its 512 MB (which is the readout by OP).

 

Just want to point this out.

 

That's the APU name.

 

Funny enough, your R7 has 384 cores - an A10 variant would likely have 512 cores, and still be called Radeon R7. Do we still follow? ;)

 

I found it under my CPU listing for some reason, but it's apparently this: https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-A12-Series A12-9720P.html

 

So it turns out it's an A12 variant instead of an A10.

 

Edit: Screenshot

 

 

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by DavetheDoomguy
Needed to add screenshot

[Redneckerz]

1 hour ago, DavetheDoomguy said:

 

I found it under my CPU listing for some reason, but it's apparently this: https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-A12-Series A12-9720P.html

 

So it turns out it's an A12 variant instead of an A10.

 

Edit: Screenshot

 

 

 

So that's the top end part then (Later APU generations introduced the A12 series)

 

And that Radeon R7 has 512 cores (Which is nice :) )

 

You also have DDR4 memory, which is also nice. However, its still limited to 512 MB. In the BIOS, you can increase this to 2 GB. This helps with games that use hi quality textures, as less swap has to occur (System memory gets marked as video memory in Windows vs Windows has to do a swap. Its a subtle but changing difference.)

 

Here is how to increase UMA size to 2 GB. Because you have 8 GB main RAM, this should not be an issue for games.

[Boaby Kenobi]

11 hours ago, Murdoch said:

Remaster implies improved assets such as textures. This is not the case with the Doom 64 rerelease.

 

Okay if you want to be completely pedantic about it then it should be called an improved port?

 

It's not a remake, and it's not a straight port of the original game otherwise it would have the same framerate as the N64 original. I think remaster is easier and quicker to say.

[Murdoch]

3 hours ago, Boaby Kenobi said:

 

Okay if you want to be completely pedantic about it then it should be called an improved port?

 

It's not a remake, and it's not a straight port of the original game otherwise it would have the same framerate as the N64 original. I think remaster is easier and quicker to say.

 

Yes its an improved port.

[Edward850]

On 12/30/2020 at 12:45 PM, Nevander said:

The bigger problem you might have could be dependencies, versus just running it well. It won't run on my PC because I don't have D3DCompiler_47.dll and I don't know where that particular DLL comes from.

I just notice I now have answered this question for you twice[1][2]. Could you please follow the advice given and install the Windows Update provided? I find you ignoring me on this to be extremely rude when you are seemingly spreading that into multiple Doom64 tech support threads.

Edited January 4, 2021 by Edward850

[Swordofdanu]

I don't use Steam, but if a game doesn't work can't you just get a refund? 

[Jello]

1 hour ago, Swordofdanu said:

I don't use Steam, but if a game doesn't work can't you just get a refund? 

You're pretty much guaranteed a refund if you've played less than two hours and it's within two weeks. You can even select "It wasn't fun" as a reason, with no additional explanation.

 

If you've played over two hours, or it's been over two weeks, then your odds of getting a refund are slim, but you can still request one.

 

So yeah, if a game doesn't work, just refund it. I could see how it could be an issue if someone spends more than two hours trying to get something to work, but then you would just have to detail the issue when you request the refund and have it reviewed. As opposed to the more or less automated 2 hour/ 2 week refund, which I've usually gotten an approval within 10 minutes when I've used it in the past.

[Swordofdanu]

Thanks @Jello

Seems like a pretty decent refund policy. Wish Sony had one like this, I've bought a few games that didn't click with me and now just sit in my download library. 

[Nevander]

21 hours ago, Edward850 said:

I just notice I now have answered this question for you twice[1][2]. Could you please follow the advice given and install the Windows Update provided? I find you ignoring me on this to be extremely rude when you are seemingly spreading that into multiple Doom64 tech support threads.

I've posted it multiple times because it's a valid issue someone else could encounter, and it's very frustrating to look up something you are having problems with and finding no answer. If someone were to search for that same issue with the same DLL in regards to Doom 64 on Steam, they will find the same solution you've posted.

[Edward850]

1 hour ago, Nevander said:

I've posted it multiple times because it's a valid issue someone else could encounter, and it's very frustrating to look up something you are having problems with and finding no answer. 

Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining; your exact words are "because I don't have D3DCompiler_47.dll" the second time you posted this, and you posted it twice in a situation where nobody actually asked at all and didn't even provide the actual tips to fix the issue either which you would have done if you were actually providing incidental advice on the issue. Generally if you were providing an answer to someone, you provide the actual answer, not just the question.

In addition, had you followed the advice the first time, it'd have been fixed, and you wouldn't have been talking about the situation in the present tense. So, are you going to follow the support I've provided or not, because if you aren't, I would ask that you please stop posting in Doom64 tech support threads.

Edited January 5, 2021 by Edward850

[Nevander]

1 hour ago, Edward850 said:

situation where nobody actually asked at all and didn't even provide the actual tips to fix the issue either which you would have done if you were actually providing incidental advice on the issue. Generally if you were providing an answer to someone, you provide the actual answer, not just the question.

In addition, had you followed the advice the first time, it'd have been fixed, and you wouldn't have been talking about the situation in the present tense. So, are you going to follow the support I've provided or not, because if you aren't, I would ask that you please stop posting in Doom64 tech support threads.

They didn't have to ask. I was pointing out a dependency the game requires. It doesn't matter if they asked or not. Given that I was the one with said issue, how could I offer the answer? I know what you posted. I'm not ignoring it, I am not currently in a position to address it but since OP was asking how it runs I decided to point out this dependency again but didn't remember where it came from. In addition, I can post wherever I please. Could I ask that you stop being condescending for five minutes?

[Edward850]

1 hour ago, Nevander said:

Given that I was the one with said issue, how could I offer the answer? I know what you posted. I'm not ignoring it, I am not currently in a position to address it but since OP was asking how it runs I decided to point out this dependency again but didn't remember where it came from.

The problem with this is I already gave you the answer to this 3 months ago and have had that long to address it, so at the very least you ignored me then because otherwise you'd have already had the answer. And then you posted it again, but not as a question but as another statement of "the game is broken for me" as some kind of weird pre-emptive strike.

The further issue with this is, what exactly was your end goal here, because all I'm so far seeing you are somehow deciding that your own issues were somehow important enough to post them again in another thread as you somehow deem it important to tell someone about them, but not research or post any kind of actual guide to resolve the issue. Or to even ask. All you come off as is wanting to threadshit rather than be helpful or inquisitive.

 

Want me to believe otherwise that your intentions were actually what you keep claiming them to be? Follow it up, install the update I've linked you to. Instead of this coming up yet again in the next thread, where I'll then have to come up again and say a third time that I already told you the answers when you will inevitably also not post the solution again despite already being told twice now.

Edited January 5, 2021 by Edward850