Yes the latest driver lets you play. I made it quite a few missions in before I started getting engine crashes

only made it to mission 3 before starting to ge UE live error crashes.

actually might have found a fix. Game hasn't crashed yet after I used "-clearPSODriverCache" in launch options (will let you know if I do crash afterwards tho.)

Keeps crashing like a drunk driver with a vengeance. I hate this game by now. I can start it, I can play a little bit and I have to restart my PC multiple times when trying to play.

I keep hoping for a new driver or some update from the devs but everyone seems to be sitting on the issue and going "Eh, enough people are able to play. Why bother fixing it let alone doing it properly in the first place."

You can't tell me that noone spotted this during testing. You just can't.

-usehyperthreading -DisableAsyncCompute -dpcvars="r.D3D12.AllowAsyncCompute=0"

I havent played the game in a couple days now since the game crashes on me when starting into a mission or online.
To think before the day one patch, even though I have a 2080 super with 16GB's or RAM. I was able to load up the game and play it normally, then the day one patch hits, then I get frame stutters, audio cuts and everything loading in on the fly. And now as mentioned, cant even play the game anymore. Takes over 10 minutes to start up but can't even get online to play, let alone play free missions on campaign.

Originally posted by RAmen:

-usehyperthreading -DisableAsyncCompute -dpcvars="r.D3D12.AllowAsyncCompute=0"

Not a solution, only a workaround. This lets me start the game beyond the Prologue, I will still crash eventually. I have been using this since launch day pretty much.

Not do be a *ick or an *ss but a sub $300 GPU is going to run this game without issue?

"Intel Arc graphics cards typically cost anywhere from $140 to $400 for consumer gaming models"

AC8 is one of the most demanding games to ever exist.
There is no skirting the real physical world.

My 5080 RTX was just under $2000 with taxes.
I got over 60hrs, no issue.

Finally, I doubt there is a patch that can turn a turd into a diamond.
Still, happy to be wrong.

Originally posted by NairBoT:

Not do be a *ick or an *ss but a sub $300 GPU is going to run this game without issue?

"Intel Arc graphics cards typically cost anywhere from $140 to $400 for consumer gaming models"

AC8 is one of the most demanding games to ever exist.
There is no skirting the real physical world.

My 5080 RTX was just under $2000 with taxes.
I got over 60hrs, no issue.

Finally, I doubt there is a patch that can turn a turd into a diamond.
Still, happy to be wrong. :ac8_CentralUsea:

I get 70-90 FPS on Ultra settings without issue. The B580 does some very spiffy raytracing. The equivalent is a 4060 I believe... with the caveat that the 4060 GTX has 8 GB RAM and the Arc B580 comes with 12 GB. Also the Arc is about 50-80 bucks cheaper. It's honestly a brilliant card for the price, pretty much top dog in its price segment, beating more expensive cards in some aspects.

I mean sure, you enjoy your 5080 I guess. Above a certain FPS threshold you don't really get any benefits except more heat and power used but maybe if you're running triple screens or extreme resolutions it would have an actual performance to cost benefit.

I can play anything in my library at maxed settings and I didn't pay 2000 bucks for that. Just saying.

Originally posted by NairBoT:

Not do be a *ick or an *ss but a sub $300 GPU is going to run this game without issue?

"Intel Arc graphics cards typically cost anywhere from $140 to $400 for consumer gaming models"

AC8 is one of the most demanding games to ever exist.
There is no skirting the real physical world.

My 5080 RTX was just under $2000 with taxes.
I got over 60hrs, no issue.

Finally, I doubt there is a patch that can turn a turd into a diamond.
Still, happy to be wrong. :ac8_CentralUsea:

From what I have seen on the Intel Arc subreddit and whatnot, the B580 handles AC8 on decently high settings fairly well its just that there are currently driver issues with it. The power of the GPU is not the problem really, any modern GPU should be able to run it decently. On my Arc Pro B70 (An admittedly $1000 GPU) I have been running it on Ultra just fine up until Mission 28 (after using the parameter changes) where I encountered the driver issues again.

The B580 should be comparable in power to somewhere between the minimum and recommended settings, but with the VRAM benefit over the 3070 should be able to handle AC8 just fine.

Originally posted by SnowDrakE:

Originally posted by NairBoT:

Not do be a *ick or an *ss but a sub $300 GPU is going to run this game without issue?

"Intel Arc graphics cards typically cost anywhere from $140 to $400 for consumer gaming models"

AC8 is one of the most demanding games to ever exist.
There is no skirting the real physical world.

My 5080 RTX was just under $2000 with taxes.
I got over 60hrs, no issue.

Finally, I doubt there is a patch that can turn a turd into a diamond.
Still, happy to be wrong. :ac8_CentralUsea:

I get 70-90 FPS on Ultra settings without issue. The B580 does some very spiffy raytracing. The equivalent is a 4060 I believe... with the caveat that the 4060 GTX has 8 GB RAM and the Arc B580 comes with 12 GB. Also the Arc is about 50-80 bucks cheaper. It's honestly a brilliant card for the price, pretty much top dog in its price segment, beating more expensive cards in some aspects.

I mean sure, you enjoy your 5080 I guess. Above a certain FPS threshold you don't really get any benefits except more heat and power used but maybe if you're running triple screens or extreme resolutions it would have an actual performance to cost benefit.

I can play anything in my library at maxed settings and I didn't pay 2000 bucks for that. Just saying.

Addendum for honesty, I get 70-90 FPS during normal gameplay on Ultra settings, however in cutscenes I drop to 40-50. I have no idea what they did with the cutscenes to warrant that amount of dip because it doesn't look any better, but there you go.

I don't get it, same people who said it crashes are now saying it runs fine?
Just because I posted a reply?

Cutscenes run worse than gameplay for everyone since UE5 switches to Cinematic graphics preset for cutscenes.
Cinematic is not meant for gameplay and is above Ultra graphics preset.
Note: This is default UE5 behavior for all UE5 games.

Originally posted by NairBoT:

I don't get it, same people who said it crashes are now saying it runs fine?
Just because I posted a reply?

Cutscenes run worse than gameplay for everyone since UE5 switches to cinematic graphics preset for cutscenes.
Cinematic is not meant for gameplay and is above Ultra preset.

The crash is largely like I said, a driver issue and not a hardware power issue. The card has its issues, but it is also just generally due to lack of support/market share that a lot of those issues happen. The card runs other modern games just fine usually, its just Ace Combat 8 specifically is having driver issues with UE5/DirectX12 I believe. I could absolutely be wrong though

Originally posted by NairBoT:

I don't get it, same people who said it crashes are now saying it runs fine?
Just because I posted a reply?

Cutscenes run worse than gameplay for everyone since UE5 switches to Cinematic graphics preset for cutscenes.
Cinematic is not meant for gameplay and is above Ultra graphics preset.
Note: This is default UE5 behavior for all UE5 games.

Nope, it runs smooth until it crashes. The crashes freeze up the whole PC, not even a bluescreen. Gotta cut the power to recover from the crash. The crash happens at random intervals but most rumours point to the shader cache being handled incorrectly. It's basically a timebomb with issues.

Yeah this is why I wanted a demo. Intel Arc + Linux let me get a modern PC on a budget (and keep my sanity with no more M$ bs) to play all the usual stuff I want, but stuff like this I don't want to bet on.