Spec requirements for SSF4 AE vs Vanilla SF4


#1

Hi everyone I was wondering if the computer spec requirements of SSF4-AE PC is the same as vanilla SF4? I don’t have a gaming computer, so I was just using my laptop to play vanilla SF4 on low settings. If the specs got higher then there’s no point getting it. Thanks.


#2

AE is optimized better so you might get higher fps. The hardware requirements are the same


#3

You could check the exact requirements. With that said, there’s nothing in the game which would call for a raise in requirements.


#4

Street Fighter 4
Minimum
OS:
[LIST]
[LIST]Windows XP
[/LIST]
[/LIST]
CPU: Intel Pentium 4 2.0GHz or higher
RAM: 1 GB or higher
HDD: 10 GB of free space or more
Video Card: DirectX 9.0c/Shader3.0 or higher compatible, NVIDIA GeForce 6600 series, ATI Radeon™ X1600 or higher or higher, VRAM :256MB or higher
Sound: DirectSound compatible, DirectX 9.0c (or higher) compatible
Input Devices: Mouse, Keyboard
Maximum
OS:
[LIST]
[LIST]Windows Vista
[/LIST]
[/LIST]
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0 GHz or higher
RAM: 2 GB or higher
HDD: 10 GB of free space or more
Video Card: DirectX 9.0c/Shader3.0 or higher compatible, NVIDIA GeForce 8600 series or higher, ATI Radeon™ X 1900 or higher, VRAM :512MB or higher
Sound: DirectSound compatible, DirectX 9.0c (or higher) compatible
Input Devices: Gamepad - Xbox 360 Controller for Windows

SSF4AE
**Minimum Requirements
**
[LIST]
[]OS: Windows XP/Vista/Windows 7
[
]Processor: Intel Pentium 4 2.0 GHz and up
[]Memory: 1 GB RAM
[
]Graphics: DirectX 9.0c/Shader3.0 and up supported (operation on-board is not guaranteed)
[]Video: NVIDIA GeForce 6600 and up (except for NVIDIA GeForce 7300), VRAM: 256MB and up (operation sharing with main memory is not guaranteed) or ATI Radeon X1600 and up VRAM: 256MB and up.
[
]Hard Drive: 4.5 GB free hard drive space
[]Sound: DirectSound, DirectX9.0c Compatible Audio
[
]Other Requirements: Online play requires software installation of and log-in to Games For Windows – LIVE
[/LIST]

Recommended hardware
[LIST]
[]OS: Windows Vista/Windows 7
[
]Processor: Intel Core2 Duo 2.0 GHz and up
[]Memory: 2 GB RAM
[
]Graphics: DirectX 9.0c/Shader3.0 and up supported (operation on-board is not guaranteed)
[]Video: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 and up, VRAM: 512MB and up (operation sharing with main memory is not guaranteed)
[
]Hard Drive: 4.5 GB free hard drive space
[*]Sound: DirectSound, DirectX9.0c Compatible Audio
[/LIST]


#5

They fucked up with the HD requirement or something. The game itself is nearly a 9 GB install.


#6

With everything o the lowest settings the performance will be worse that Vanilla. I can confirm this personally, being that I play with everything on minimum o a slow computer.


#7

Thanks, the framerates did improve actually. Now I can actually turn the backgrounds on and still have a playable FPS. On vanilla SF4 I could never have the background turned on.


#8

Just throwing these questions in here since it seems like the best place…

I purchased AE since I believed the spec requirements would be the same as vanilla SF4. I noticed however that lowering the character detail in AE and the character detail in vanilla result in different outcomes. Vanilla’s character models at that setting look a lot more simplistic than AE at that setting (hence better performance), is this true? Basically AE isn’t running as good as SF4 did for my PC, and I’m a little frustrated at that.

Also, is there any way to display my in-game FPS? I can’t seem to find the option to do so.

EDIT: I just ran both the benchmark tests on vanilla SF4 and AE:

For SF4, at 800x600 resolution with all settings on the lowest except background which is on high, I maintain a consistent 55-60 FPS and get a B grade. Note that turning off backgrounds OR lowering the resolution a notch would allow me to play the game at 60 FPS and get an A grade.

For AE, at 800x600 resolution with all settings INCLUDING background on lowest, the benchmark produces 30-40 FPS at best and receive a C grade. (although it seems to run a lot faster during actual play time, probably at 50 FPS but that’s just my guess). Unfortunately, unlike SF4, these are the lowest settings possible for AE and I get less than optimal performance, especially compared to SF4.

So should I conclude that AE requires better specs than SF4 and I might’ve wasted 40 bucks on a game I thought my PC could run smoothly? =(


#9

It seems every configuration has its own performance issues. Settings have no impact on performance on my machine. I get 30-45fps whether I have it maxed out on the highest resolution and highest settings, or all settings to low/off and 640x480. The only thing that seems to make a difference is AA/AF.


#10

SSF4/AE does seem to be more PC-intensive for some reason… although I was able to have backgrounds on, my laptop’s fan was reaching its limit when playing this game, every two minutes or so it would make a high pitched screeching noise like the fan is dying or something that lasts for 20 seconds, meaning it’s much more intensive work than SF4, where my fan would blow rather loudly but perfectly normally.


#11

You’re cpu-limited.


#12

You’re absolutely right. My CPU is very slow. The funny thing is that with my old GF8400, I would actually get close to 60FPS in vanilla SF4 on low settings, and about 5fps on high settings, so I could play the game fine, but it looked like Dreamcast.
Now, with my GF9500GT, the game never reaches 60fps on any setting, but I can get 45 even on the highest settings. AE seems about the same.