what specs does your main pc have?

[CBM]

I often encounter low fps complaints for maps made for GZDoom

Even if I use an ancient potato netbook with puny specs then other often get complaints About unplayable fps on GZDoom maps that I make? Even if they run super fine on my netbook

Sometimes I suspect there is a Secret msdos version of GZDoom that everybody uses on old 386 computers

My netbook is a Lenovo yoga 510 from 2016 with a puny cpu, intel graphics and just 4 GB ram

Is this really a high end machine for GZDoom?

That netbook is by far the lowest specced pc that I still use for 'modern' stuff

I have several desktop and laptop computers with Much More power

[Matt]

I remember in 2017 when I had to finally give up on any further prospect of running GZDoom on my 2007 EeePC with 1G of ram / 1GHz processor. Sad times.

Main PC was built in 2011, Geforce 450, 8GB ram (forget what kind), 3.something GHz quad core Intel Sandy Bridge. Never had a problem outside of something stupid like HD on a slaughtermap or dynamic lights on ultra-detailed maps where you could see upwards of 100 linedefs onscreen or something.

[TheBeardedJedi]

Motherboard: ASUS PRIME X299-A
GPU: MSI RTX 2080
Processor: Intel i7-7820X @ 4.2 GHz (Turbo)
RAM: 128 GB DDR4 3200
Storage: M.2 970 Samsung EVO 2TB (boot)
Backup Storage: 860 Samsung EVO 1 TB SSD
Power Supply: EVGA Supernova 1300 G2

It's used for engineering applications moreso than gaming. It's also my work computer.

[Graf Zahl]

Is this really a high end machine for GZDoom?

No, contrary to some people's complaints most users use somewhat up to date hardware.
Of course the best hardware won't help when playing with unoptimized gameplay mods - they can easily drop the frame rate even on simple maps.

I have an i7-3770 CPU from 2012 with 3.4 GHz, and it really requires wide open scenes with a large amount of detail to render for the frame rate to drop.
A recent map that actually made fps drop below 60 was one spot in Hurt where the detail simply became too large.

GPU doesn't really matter anymore these days, if you got something semi-decent. Doom is simply not a game that can put a modern GPU under full load, unless you enable all postprocessing effects.

[Redneckerz]

I don't like GZDoom because Graf does not bother to optimize for my super deluxe PC.

What my super deluxe PC is? Oh, you know. Just a Athlon X2 213, 3 GB DDR2 and a Geforce 6150 IGP.

When they say GZDoom runs on a lot of hardware, they somehow forgot about mines!

Kiddin ofcourse. Its garbage. You know it is when even your office PC has a Core i5 and UHD 630 graphics. You know it even more when the thin clients at work have AMD GX-424 APU's with Radeon HD 8400E that have enough feature set support to run GZ with modern visuals. It will be slow as heck, but it can run.

Its depressing. A 3-4 year old thin client beats out my super deluxe PC. But a change will be a coming.

[SanyaWaffles]

Built this build in 2017 with the money my grandparents left me:

Motherboard: ASUS STRIX Z270E
CPU: Intel Core i7 7700K @ 4.20GHz
RAM: 16GB Dual Channel Corsair
Graphics: 4GB NVidia GeForce GTX 1080
Storage Array: 2x Samsung 960 EVO 500GB SSDs for booting and games, 3TB Toshiba HDD for main data and games, 2x 5TB Toshiba HDD for media, 4TB for auxillary/backup. I do alot of archiving of stuff and have alot of obscure media I've collected through the years, so this data storage is necessary.

GZDoom runs beautifully most of the time. It also ran beautifully on my previous 950 graphics card. It even ran decent on my previous really, REALLY low end NVidia graphics card as long as I didn't use really high end options, but that was quite a few years ago. The only lag I get with my project was not with the graphics, but when I tried to load up a 192khz sound file (I wasn't aware it was that) and since it wasn't precached at all it lagged upon loading it into memory. That and a few stutters probably due to my project not being optimized yet (probably related to gibs perhaps? Maybe me using really hi-res sprites GZDoom normally doesn't use?). Vulkan seems to improve performance majorly as well.

That's not the main bottleneck - the GPU isn't that is. If you have a decent recent graphics card chances are it can run GZDoom in some capacity. I have a friend who runs GZDoom on her 970 decently and that's a card that's quite a few years old.

I notice for alot of people it seems they really insist upon running it on low end CPUs that weren't meant for any sort of gaming. Like in this case, you're using a netbook that is in no way built for gaming.

Also they insist upon running it with certain mods that are really unoptimized and frankensteined together. Not saying that's what you're doing chief, but I've seen others do this and then blame GZDoom itself. This will bring GZDoom to it's knees not because of the graphics, but because of the amount of objects. I have theories to why this is and might try to test them in my own project.

Alot of people think that 'oh it's Doom, it can't be that complex to run on modern hardware' but they forget that they probably don't run straight up vanilla Doom anymore. They probably run some sort of modded version. And these modded versions cram alot of functionality into the 35 tics per clock cycle.

There are a few hiccups I've noticed with GZDoom on occasion, but they normally get ironed out. Like a friend of mine had trouble getting GZDoom to run on Linux, but after some troubleshooting and him compiling his own build he got it fixed.

That's why talk about the devs intentionally breaking things pisses me off. I doubt highly that's what's going on.

I'm sure things are gonna get messy when we inevitably drop x86 support in favor of x64 despite x86 being effectively dead and frankly holding back certain features of the engine like 64-bit integer support in the JIT/VM for one.

[Hellser]

Motherboard: MSI B450-A Pro
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 2600
RAM: Crucial Ballistix 4x4GB 2666MHz
Video: AMD Radeon RX 5500XT 4GB

Haven't had any real issues with this computer. Runs GZDoom fine and most of my games at high or near ultra settings - though most of my games tend to be older.

[CBM]

I look forward to gzdoom dropping 32 bit support since it will mean the minimum hardware requirements will increase

as I see it, GZDoom is meant to be the highend port for modern systems that can support complex maps

...

I plan on doing a megawad with maps that will require systems that are atleast on par with my old netbook

but how to communicate that when releasing alpha, beta and final versions of such a megawad?

I wont dare use one of my newer systems to build the megawad since it will likely push the hw req to levels that will exclude too many users

[Hellser]

That minimum hardware requirement you speak of isn't really going to change if people are using video cards that support Vulkan. Intel CPUs with x86-64 existed mainstream since the Pentium 4 E0 Revisions. Core 2 Duos/Quads came default with x86-64. That was back in 2004-2006. AMD had theirs since the Athlon 64 - back in 2003. Those computers will be choking any modern GPU severely.

[sinisterseed]

Is this really a high end machine for GZDoom?

No, contrary to some people's complaints most users use somewhat up to date hardware.
Of course the best hardware won't help when playing with unoptimized gameplay mods - they can easily drop the frame rate even on simple maps.

I have an i7-3770 CPU from 2012 with 3.4 GHz, and it really requires wide open scenes with a large amount of detail to render for the frame rate to drop.
A recent map that actually made fps drop below 60 was one spot in Hurt where the detail simply became too large.

GPU doesn't really matter anymore these days, if you got something semi-decent. Doom is simply not a game that can put a modern GPU under full load, unless you enable all postprocessing effects.

Was that the outdoor area at the end, by any chance? That's where my framerate got a hit when I played the map, but I was also using dynamic lights and there was quite a bit of action going on there, that's gonna come at a price, heh.

As for me, I'm rocking an ok machine for what I'm usually using, which is mostly retro games, Office, and some CAD programs, which are a bit heavy but mostly due to them running off a traditional hard drive, if I had an SSD I'm sure they'd load way faster, they're otherwise fine.

I'm running an:

ASUS H110M-K D3 motherboard.
6th Gen Intel i5-6402P @2.8GHz (up to 3.4GHz).
8GB of RAM DDR3 @1666mhz (or was that 2133mhz? Might have to double-check on this).
STRIX GTX 950 2GB OC.
1TB HDD @7200rpm.

Yeah, you read that right, 6th Gen Intel CPU running with DDR3 RAM, which yes, works, but isn't officially supported. That's the biggest mistake in this Frankensteinian build, and what makes me want to replace it altogether when I upgrade, DDR3 memories are hard to come by here nowadays, understandably so, since DDR5 enters mass-production next year and after that, it will surely be fully relegated to "legacy" status.

I got this PC in the summer of 2016, so it's four years old at this point. Not brand new, not too old . But a bit weak on the GPU side.

As about GZDoom dropping 32-bit support, come on, it's about damn time and it's literally holding some improvements back. You need to remember that x86 OSes are dead in the water nowadays, everything is so hardware demanding now that an x86 OS just won't cut it anymore, even if you have a beefy machine and use 32-bit for some inexplicable reason, it will only be able to use a fraction of its true potential, especially its RAM, 4GB doesn't cut it anymore and all your programs will run like crap. The only people who could seriously complain about this are those who are running heavily underpowered hardware and have not upgraded in many, many years, if not almost a decade.

[MFG38]

Core i7-7500U, 8GB RAM, GeForce GT 930MX. Runs GZDoom like a charm, but then, I'd expect it to.

[Chris]

I recently finally got a new system not too long ago, replacing my 10+ year old one.

Mobo: Asus TUF Gaming B550M-Plus
CPU: Ryzen 5 3600
RAM: 2x16GB 3200Mhz
GPU: Radeon RX580 8GB
Storage: 2x240GB SATA SSDs (also have a 512GB NVMe that I should install one of these days)

I purposely went with a slightly older video card (though it's still far better than what I had) since the next generation is coming out soon. So far it hasn't had any trouble with the things I've thrown at it (which, granted, is that much yet).

[Matt]

....wait what's all this about DDR3 not being supported? o_O D:

[SanyaWaffles]

The only people who could seriously complain about this are those who are running heavily underpowered hardware and have not upgraded in many, many years, if not almost a decade.

I like retro computers and such as much as the next person, but I have to realize there's some stuff that much older hardware isn't gonna be able to do without some serious workarounds. Especially if said retro device was never that powerful to begin with.

My mom has a really old, really underpowered laptop and has a bunch of bloat on it and she wonders why it performs so badly. It's because it was literally bottom of the barrel when she first got it, it won't do anything now. I imagine in a decade it won't even be worth showing off as vintage hardware. It can't even run games contemporary to it's time unless it's some shit facebook game. The only thing that might give it new life is if she buys a SATA SSD and I put it in there for her. Other than that... it's kind of a lost cause.

I doubt that thing can run GZDoom. And I don't even try because frankly it's stupid to try.

And it confuses me to why people insist upon running a modern high end port of Doom on low end, shitty hardware and then blame the devs.

....wait what's all this about DDR3 not being supported? o_O D:

Might be more implied than anything, but I haven't seen anything official from Graf or the other Dev's mouths.

[Hellser]

Sinisterseed isn't referring to GZDoom, but rather their processor. Which supports both DDR4 and DDR3 memory. Particularly, their RAM is running at a higher clock speed that the CPU doesn't really support.