News - Warzone 2. 0 With No Graphics Card
For this article, I'm using my trusty AMD Athlon 3000g with integrated Vega 3 graphics overclocked to 1600 MHz. The CPU segment of this chip is a 3.5 gigahertz, two-core, four-threaded, socket AM4 part, and somehow it still manages to play even the most modern of games, albeit slowly. With some massively significant sacrifices, sometimes in terms of visual settings and resolution, there probably was never an AMD processor intended for gaming, and if anyone from AMD is watching this, they're probably just as surprised as I am that this thing a) still works and b) can still launch and play 2022 games like Warzone.
20 is no exception, but we've got to go as low as possible here while ignoring all the in-game upscaling options. The minimum render resolution of 710 by 400 is what's needed for the absolute best performance, and even then, well, take a look. We can apply some sharpening though with the Fidelity Cass sharpening.
The scale slider thingy at 50 will have no impact on performance whatsoever starting with the warm-up period here, and this is a sign of things to come. I didn't expect much from this processor, and I'm sure you didn't either, so anything over 30 frames per second is a bonus in my opinion, and that was actually possible here.
Most of the time. I found the game sitting between 30 and 40 frames per second on this PC, except for inside the gulag, which generally runs a lot better but has much less going on screen, and the idea is to try and not spend any time in here, so this is a further bittersweet result. 30 to 40 FPS probably isn't a high enough frame rate margin to be considered acceptable in a competitive gaming environment, but hey, this thing is giving it a good go, and I think I'll upgrade the memory at a later date.
32 gigs of higher-speed RAM to see if that helps with the 3000G; however, we are going to find ourselves limited more and more by the two physical cores and Vega 3i GPU as time goes on. I wanted to test the 3000g again today to give you a worst-case scenario type experience with modern integrated graphics because I think this highlights that Warzone 2.0 isn't particularly difficult to run, which I think is very important as far as free-to-play multiplayer games are concerned.
The more inclusive the game is towards its potential player base, the better, and considering this is a free game, you want as many people playing it as possible, and the more that can do that with a low-end PC, of course, the better it is. Just to finalize, be sure to wait for these shaders to optimize to 100 before jumping into any game like this.
Is probably obvious yes, but it can take a long time with hardware like this, so you might think it's stuck at 50 or something, but it hasn't, and not waiting for the shaders to optimize, compile, or whatever it's called will cause all sorts of stutter and frame drops with the 3000G. I didn't wait the first time around and wondered why I was getting about eight frames per second and a frame time of about, well, it's not even worth thinking about the game eventually just freezing and then closing, so yeah, the 3000g with its integrated Vega 3 Graphics somehow manages to run this game, but most of you probably aren't going to find the result playable, but I think that's probably the idea or the result with most of these articles.
We're not necessarily demonstrating playability, but rather the fact that it can start and run these games no matter how bad the frame rate might be with all that said and done.
