Can't run my brand new C1 23: CPU specs do not meet minimum requirements
Hi.
Just payed to upgrade to 23 and installed flawlessly on my 4_years_old notebook.
Then installed on my much more powerful desktop (Win10, AMD Phenom II X4 965 CPU, 16GB RAM, 4 SSDs, GPU on a dedicated Graphic card) and...
...BANG! It does NOT even starts!
All I got is a dialog box saying:
ImgCoreDll.dll can't be initialized. Your current CPU specifications do no meet the minimum requirements.
That's insane!
I ALWAY used it without a glitch with Rel 22 and previous.
And I can assure that everything worked at an higher pace compared to my laptop (i7 gen 8th, 12GB RAM and NO dedicated graphic).
Anyone had the same problem?
I'm ashtonished.
I just use the laptop to view and select the images, because I do the real work on the desktop, connected to a calibrated EIZO ColorGraphic monitor.
Is there a way to overcome this issue?
How can a perfectly working CPU became useless for an upgrade?
Sure my PC is not the youngest, but I can't afford to change it only to use C1...
I'ts absurd.
Support: please help me!
-
You need to contact them here:
0 -
Thank you, BeO.
I've already posted a request ;-)
0 -
Hi.
The new release 16.1.0 DONT solve the issue.
Hope the Support remove this bug soon...
0 -
Hi.
Got the reply from the Support, and it is as follows:
Unfortunately, your processor meets the minimum speed requirements, but it doesn't support SSE 4.2 which is the problem here and this is why you cannot run Capture One to this machine. There is nothing we can do regarding this one.
Am I blind, or NOTHING about that "minimum requirement" was listed on the release notes (https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/articles/9341571775645-Capture-One-23-16-1-release-notes) or in the system requirements? (https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/articles/360002466277-Capture-One-system-requirements-and-OS-support).
I've payed for an "improved release" that I can't even run on my PC.
Nice!!!I have no words... :-/
0 -
Thank you, John.
Frankly I can't afford a system change right now.
My PC run flawlessly with C1 22 and with a lot of application (including 4K video editing).
You're right: it is all but young, but also far from retirement :-D
It has an AMD Phenom II X4 965 CPU.
The i7 Gen 8 is mounted on my (old) laptop.
On it I can run 23, but it has'nt a dedicated graphic card and it's slower than Desktop.Have a nice evening! :-)
0 -
Here the reply from Support:
I can understand what you are saying and your disappointment but unfortunately this is how it is. Your processor is 14 years old and the minimum requirements for Capture One 23 is the AMD Jaguar family and on, which was released at 2014.
OK.
I saw that the System Requirements for 21 & 22 were identical, and in Rel 23 appeared as mandatory Win10. And that they introduced Intel Core i3 & AMD Jaguar instead of generic CPU specs.I thought this as a normal evolution.
But also that my CPU, while "a little" old, was still superior to any i3 gen 1 (in power & other specs).Now I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to install a newer CPU on mine motherboard, while minimizing the expense.
I hope to improve the hardware and finally use the new version, but I'm afraid that's not possible-The question is another:
why didn't they CLEARLY write that, compared to previous versions, some features of the "older" CPUs could have made even the application start IMPOSSIBLE?I understand that some new features in C1 23 may be limited or even unavailable, if your CPU does not support it, but that the whole program doesn't start seems absurd to me...
0 -
Thank you for the reply, John.
I completely agree with your analysis, especially with
"They need to outright state that C23 will not run on any CPU before the Jaguar family and should probably provide more info than just Jaguar as many regular users won't even know what that is".The point, in fact, is this: why didn't they write it?
My PC is a custom build, and that's why I'm investigating for a CPU swap.
The problem is that even the motherboard is not newer, and it is not immediate to understand which CPU I could mount on it to solve the problem.
Then it won't be easy... find it and buy it :-/The most radical solution would certainly be to change M/B, CPU and RAM, but it is also the most expensive.
Had I known this before, I wasn't spending money on the 23.
Not now...Until the possible H/W updates, I will use the 22.
0 -
Here the motherboard
0 -
And the CPU
0 -
It seems to have SSE 4.A, not 4.2 :-(
Some clocks & the Graphic Card
How may be a Phenom less than a Jaguar? :-)))
0 -
Apparently, the developers decided to compile the application using compiler optimization flags that assume SSE2 instructions are available in the CPU. They presumably did that because they wanted to improve performance on newer generation processors without having to do the extra work of making it also run on older generation processors (essentially compiling two versions of critical code and dynamically selecting which one to use).
No, that's simply not true.
First - SSE2 is a mandatory instruction set for any x64 CPU, and is supported by all of them.
They are requiring SSE4.2, not SSE2, which is not mandatory.
And your assumption about extra work is also false.
I've looked at their code a lot in the debugger, and basically they have 3 implementations for all performance critical functions optimized for AVX2, SSE4.2 and Reference.
Available CPU instructions are detected at runtime and appropriate implementation is called.So infrastructure is alredy there!
The only difference between CO22 and CO23 is that in CO22 Reference was built for SSE2 which will run on any x64 CPU, and in CO23 it's built for SSE4.2.
Which limits hardware available to run CO23 to CPUs with SSE4.2 support only.
Which is PLAIN STUPID, because now in CO23 they have following optimized functions: AVX2, SSE4.2 and Reference, and now taking into account that Reference is built for SSE4.2 they have two implementations for SSE4.2 (which is pointless), and no generic implementation!
I've also had communication with support (at that time requirements was the same as for CO22 at all), and as a result instead of changing this very debatable requirement they just changed information on system requirements page.
Also, if you think it's related to CPU being old and that they care about performance, then why Intel Celeron N2805 with 2 cores @1.46GHz from 2013 which does have SSE4.2 is considered ok, and AMD Phenom II x6 with 6 cores @3.3GHz from 2011 which does not have SSE4.2 - is not?
I can assure you that CO22 run on AMD Phemon much faster than on Intel Celeron.
This is nonsence and needs to be changed!Unfortunately I don't think this would ever happen...
PS: @... - your motherboard have Socket AM3, AMD CPUs for this socket with support of SSE4.2 simply does not exist. Trust me, I've checked - I'm in the same situation as you...
0 -
The Capture One developers have decided to remove support for processors that don't support those instructions. They have presumably done so because they want to use the newer instructions without doing the extra work and testing to ALSO support the older instructions. I'm not defending them at all here. I think it's terrible that they would just sunset support for processors like this.
They were already using newer instructions (SSE4.2, AVX) previously, if present.
And that's what I dont get - why breaking things that are already implemented and working just fine.
There is no performance benefit for doing this: if SSE4.2 is present - it is used (in CO22 too), if not - then reference implementation is used.
The only difference is that reference implementation is now built with SSE4.2 requirement, and that's just a matter of changing compiler options.If they don't want to provide support and perform testing for older CPUs - then just state that if you have CPUs older then model X you are not eligible for support.
Some people may find this ok.That's just shows how various companies are treating their customers.
I had similar issue with PTGui Pro (which is developed by much smaller company compared to Phase One), and after being reported this issue was acknowledged as a bug and fixed in the next release.
And companies like Phase One and Adobe (yes, they did same stupid thing) are just silently changing hardware requirements for the new release.
And then when customers complaints are starting to grow they are just updating system requirements instead of actually changing them because they stubbornly protecting their own not very wise decisions.0 -
Hi Alexander & John!
Thank you very much for your active support and in-deep analysis :-)
The only difference between CO22 and CO23 is that in CO22 Reference was built for SSE2 which will run on any x64 CPU, and in CO23 it's built for SSE4.2.
I have this suspect, actually...
I thought they set an overly and unnecessarily restrictive startup check.
. . .because now in CO23 they have following optimized functions: AVX2, SSE4.2 and Reference, and now taking into account that Reference is built for SSE4.2 they have two implementations for SSE4.2 (which is pointless), and no generic implementation!
. . .
The only difference is that reference implementation is now built with SSE4.2 requirement, and that's just a matter of changing compiler options.
That's why I'm angry:
it seems to me that they have added a limit despite it not offering any benefits.From what you explained, removing the lock would allow CO23 to start and run without any problems.
At the limit - perhaps - with performance (but not functional) limitations.That's insane...
I can assure you that CO22 run on AMD Phemon much faster than on Intel Celeron
I can confirm that CO22 run faster on my AMD than it doees on the i7 Gen8 in my Laptop.
There's not a huge difference, but it's noticeablePS: Marco A. Scalco - your motherboard have Socket AM3, AMD CPUs for this socket with support of SSE4.2 simply does not exist. Trust me, I've checked - I'm in the same situation as you...
This is very sad... :-(
A friend told me that I could try to mount an AMD FX-8150 which, although not formally certified, seems to be supported in Beta mode. It has SSE4.2 and is twice as fast as mine 965
I find it refurbished on eBay for around 50 Euros, but I don't know if it's wise to risk that money.
What do you suggest me?
The alternative is to change MainBoard, CPU and RAM, keeping only storage, power supply & case.
At the very least add a NVMe for the system.It wouldn't be cheap but, more than the expense, the HUGE problem would be to reinstall every single program from scratch.
To find the installation CD/files and activation keys… the time it will take you… A nightmare!My friend says he migrated already installed Win10 PC to new hardware, but only with UEFI M/B.
I can't tell if mine is or not.You know what baffles me?
That support, instead of asking its developers "could you please remove the restriction?", only replied "I will ask the team to update the page with more details if needed"."IF NEEDED"!!! :-|
Thank you!
0 -
A friend told me that I could try to mount an AMD FX-8150 which, although not formally certified, seems to be supported in Beta mode. It has SSE4.2 and is twice as fast as mine 965
AMD FX-8150 is Socket AM3+, while your motherboard has Socket AM3.
They differs in one pin actually, and designed to be kinda compatible, but in a way that you could insert AM3 CPU into AM3+ Motherboard and it would work.
But you actually need the opposite - insert AM3+ CPU into AM3 motherboard, which will leave that additional pin unconnected.
While there is a chance that it will work (it actually depentds on motherboard), but there is a huge risk that it wouldn't.
If I would go this route I'd at least buy it from seller where you can return it if it will refuse to work.0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
14 comments