Origins of Assassin's Creed and its absurd prerequisites
Origins of Assassin's Creed and its absurd prerequisites
It shouldn't be expected that the assassin's creed origins comes from a simple design, thanks to the high CPU demand. But don't worry if you're a fan of this game; I found a straightforward fix for those complicated 30 layers of DMR from Ubisoft. Just upgrade to a processor with a higher price tag. On my older 6600, the CPU was always at full capacity—even the first city place felt rough at low settings on 1080p. With 8700k usage, it stayed under 50%, and even at maximum settings in Alexandria, it remained stable between 60 to high 50s. The main differences were the CPU and RAM (upgraded from DDR3 to 4 and 8GB to 16GB). The GPU is a 980Ti, which reached full usage at 8700k; those with better GPUs will see improved performance. If you have a Ryzen CPU and similar GPU, feel free to share your FPS results while playing in Alexandria, along with a screenshot of Task Manager showing CPU and GPU stats. I'm happy to check if the performance jump came from more cores and threads.
For high-quality playback at 1080p, 4c/4t doesn’t seem to work well. We’ve noticed this before—hyper-threading isn’t enough to compensate for the frequency drop already. I’ve been trying different CPUs, like i7 6700, i7 7700, i5 6600k and i5 7600k, but it’s clear performance hits quickly.
Despite recommendations, many continue to favor the Coffee Lake i3 chips instead of the Ryzen 5. However, features like 4C/4T and 8GB RAM are no longer sufficient for the most recent games in 2017/2018.
I never had a 7700 and didn’t know anyone who does, but what I’ve seen is it can max out its usage, which seems ridiculous
Several titles perform well on 8GB RAM, while demanding games like The Witcher 3 consistently reach full 1080p with only 8GB. Even Mirror's Edge Catalyst struggled heavily on that limit. The transition to such games is becoming noticeable, especially at higher settings. AC:Unity with NPC set to ultra was already quite taxing on the CPU, and my i7-6700 could hit 100% usage in crowded sections of Paris. However, the lowest settings—1% and 0.1%—with the i7 are significantly better than unlocked i5s because of the extra threads. Minimum performance is crucial, as it stops games from freezing during intense moments and dropping FPS too much.
Some machines feature various CPUs. The 8700k matches up with the Threadripper 1950x i3 8100, while the R7 1800X stands out. The key factor is the thread count.
The game appreciates strong cores, and you can throw anything at him, though speed seems to matter too.
This problem has existed for nearly fifteen years. The truth is, if parallel processing was truly valuable for consumer devices, dual-core or dual-chip solutions would have become widespread by around 1997. It’s no coincidence that the first consumer dual-core processors appeared shortly after performance hit a ceiling in the early 2000s. Intel’s Pentium chips rose from about 100MHz in 1995 to 4.0GHz by 2004 – a massive leap. CPU multithreading has evolved because it’s necessary, not because it’s the best path forward; this means progress will always be gradual in many areas. I’m sure if a major jump ever occurred again, boosting core or thread counts would remain confined to specialized equipment, just as it was in the 90s.