I'll wait til the game comes out and then I'll read the forums. MGR: Revengeance's specs showed over 20 GB space required. The majority of that was uncompressed cutscene...
Thief PC Requirements Revealed
- Thread starter MarlaDesat
- Start date
Recommended Videos
My PC just about hits the recommended in most areas.
Hopefully I'll have a nice 60fps at high settings but I guess I'll have to turn down a few things to make that happen. And screw playing at 30fps anymore.
This is all if I even get the game, I'll wait for some reviews I think.
Hopefully I'll have a nice 60fps at high settings but I guess I'll have to turn down a few things to make that happen. And screw playing at 30fps anymore.
This is all if I even get the game, I'll wait for some reviews I think.
I guess I'll find out when/if I pick it up. At this point my computer is showing its age but even for games where I don't quit hit the recommended specs they run fine on the default settings (e.g. Tomb Raider or Bioshock: Infinite). While for some games I meet or exceed the recommended specs and the games run like ass or not at all (Witcher was playable-ish; Witcher 2 is not).
Yeah, you should do just fine.DarkhoIlow said:
Matthi205 said:
No, it is just poorly optimized, then. Look, few people -even hardcore PC gamers- upgrade their CPU that often. They likely wanted to cut out first-gen i5s from the recommended specs, but were too lazy to give a more detailed req sheet. Some of the early "core" series motherboards were also compatible with DDR2 RAM, so they likely did not want an i5 with 800 speed RAM on their recommended specs.albino boo said:
Still, listing the i7 as recommended is simply ridiculous, and shows a lack of optimization. No i7 gives any real gaming advantage over a same-gen i5, except perhaps 2-4 frames/sec in heavy loads. i7s are designed for heavy threading or multitasking, with workstation or graphic design loads. They are not designed for gaming use so much as light industry or other applications.
In some cases even the i5 doesn't give all that much extra performance per £££, in games like Assassin's Creed 4 benchmarks [http://www.hardwarepal.com/assassins-creed-4-black-flag-benchmark-cpu-gpu/8/] show only a tiny increase in performance with the i5 and i7 over the i3 (all Haswell).Ryan Hughes said:
Its only in more cpu intensive multiplayer games you would really notice any improvement, games that just look pretty like Crysis 3, Ass Creed and probably Thief 4 as well need a hefty GPU and the CPU takes a backseat.
Im just under on the recommended spec cause of My 6970 Oh well, I think I'll wait and upgrade later and not buy the game till then.
OS: Windows Vista with platform update
Ok, I'm safe here
CPU: High-performance dual core CPU or quad core CPU
Intel i3? I have no idea what that means
RAM: 4 GB
I have 3GB...
Graphics Card: AMD Radeon 4800 series / Nvidia GTS 250
GeForce GT 240, does that mean I fail?
DirectX: DirectX 10
What even is this?
HDD/SSD: 20 GB
Well I don't have a SSD but at least I have plenty of space to spare!
So, I'm guessing I probably wouldn't be able to play this. And that I have no knowledge whatsoever of computer firmware/hardware, huh.
Ok, I'm safe here
CPU: High-performance dual core CPU or quad core CPU
Intel i3? I have no idea what that means
RAM: 4 GB
I have 3GB...
Graphics Card: AMD Radeon 4800 series / Nvidia GTS 250
GeForce GT 240, does that mean I fail?
DirectX: DirectX 10
What even is this?
HDD/SSD: 20 GB
Well I don't have a SSD but at least I have plenty of space to spare!
So, I'm guessing I probably wouldn't be able to play this. And that I have no knowledge whatsoever of computer firmware/hardware, huh.
my current system cant handle even the minimum specs, however the system i plan to buy next month and got most of the money for already will outperform recommended by a generation. Good, means i can once again use it for 5 years without trouble and run anything i want.
Not to mention most hardware manufacturers dropped driver support for XP quite a while ago.
i3 is a new like of Intel CPUs that are pretty much controlling the market (well i3/i5/i7). They use different architecture which allows them to actually do more while remaining at same power. i3 is the dualcore variant, i5 is quad-core variant and i7 is 6-8 cores usually. thing to notice about the "i" variant is that they are more pwoerful than regualr cores, meaning for example a i3 with 2 cores would actually work as fast as 3 regular cores, and due to less number of cores its easier to code for. AMD only solution was to increase amount of cores (you can find 16 core CPUs from them), which didnt work that well since noone wanted to program for so many cores. the i generations also offer variuos increase (and problems) but i wont get into that now)
tl;dr you need a powerful CPU for that, preferably intel one.
3 GB of ram likely wont be enough and cause you problems, thought if it is a 32 bit program (can maximum use 3.6 GB due to technical limitation) you may not be in that bad of a shape here.
Sadly yes, that means you fail as far as graphical card requirement goes. But do not despare, requirements are sometimes not precise and the difference isnt that big, so it may just run afterall.
directx is, to put simply, a helper program. You said you are good in OS department so you will have directx 11+ very likely already, which supports diretx 10 programs (the game likely runs both anyway). the people that have to worry about that are people running XP or old Vista versions.
You dont NEED a SSD to run any game. SSD will make game load faster and textures stutter less in some games, but every game is definatelly playable on a HDD.
you really want to upgrade from XP if you are using your PC for gaming. Dont get me wrong, i love XP and i still thing it was the best looking OS ever made, but it simply is no longer supported. It cant do DirectX 10-11.1. This is why this game cannot run on XP - it no logner supports the legacy DirectX 9 and runs on a more powerful 11 variant (hence why vista upgrade packet, as pre-upgrade vista can only run 10). and more games are going this way. Most games released from now will no longer support XP i fear so you really should think about upgrading. I suggest 7, takes a while to get used to but its quite comfortable. I dont suggest 8, rather wait for 9 instead as that seems to be "8 except fixed".Xan Krieger said:
Not to mention most hardware manufacturers dropped driver support for XP quite a while ago.
Ill try to provide some explanation.Snowbell said:
i3 is a new like of Intel CPUs that are pretty much controlling the market (well i3/i5/i7). They use different architecture which allows them to actually do more while remaining at same power. i3 is the dualcore variant, i5 is quad-core variant and i7 is 6-8 cores usually. thing to notice about the "i" variant is that they are more pwoerful than regualr cores, meaning for example a i3 with 2 cores would actually work as fast as 3 regular cores, and due to less number of cores its easier to code for. AMD only solution was to increase amount of cores (you can find 16 core CPUs from them), which didnt work that well since noone wanted to program for so many cores. the i generations also offer variuos increase (and problems) but i wont get into that now)
tl;dr you need a powerful CPU for that, preferably intel one.
3 GB of ram likely wont be enough and cause you problems, thought if it is a 32 bit program (can maximum use 3.6 GB due to technical limitation) you may not be in that bad of a shape here.
Sadly yes, that means you fail as far as graphical card requirement goes. But do not despare, requirements are sometimes not precise and the difference isnt that big, so it may just run afterall.
directx is, to put simply, a helper program. You said you are good in OS department so you will have directx 11+ very likely already, which supports diretx 10 programs (the game likely runs both anyway). the people that have to worry about that are people running XP or old Vista versions.
You dont NEED a SSD to run any game. SSD will make game load faster and textures stutter less in some games, but every game is definatelly playable on a HDD.
I intend to build a new computer this year, I know I'm behind the times but getting the money to build a new one is hard when you're too disabled to work. It killed me this weekend when I saw both Company of Heroes 2 and Saints Row 4 having a free weekend on steam and I couldn't play either. It's actually why I hope to get Assassins Creed 4 on the xbox 360 for my birthday next month, I'd prefer it for the PC but again I'm using XP so I'm screwedStrazdas said:
So either this thing runs like garbage to justify these settings or it is eye wateringly beautiful and they've made a game engine that utilizes multicores like a boss.
or they just released random specs for recommended that they think would indicate to PC gamers that this is a graphically intensive game.
I'm going with the last option myself I expect the recommended settings is something someone just threw together rather than test it on a wide range of computers to determine the actual recommended specs to run the game at it's highest settings.
or they just released random specs for recommended that they think would indicate to PC gamers that this is a graphically intensive game.
I'm going with the last option myself I expect the recommended settings is something someone just threw together rather than test it on a wide range of computers to determine the actual recommended specs to run the game at it's highest settings.
i can understand that. I spent the last 7 months saving for a new PC as well and its going to be bought next month only.Xan Krieger said:I intend to build a new computer this year, I know I'm behind the times but getting the money to build a new one is hard when you're too disabled to work. It killed me this weekend when I saw both Company of Heroes 2 and Saints Row 4 having a free weekend on steam and I couldn't play either. It's actually why I hope to get Assassins Creed 4 on the xbox 360 for my birthday next month, I'd prefer it for the PC but again I'm using XP so I'm screwed
One thing to note is that perhaps you should hold your Xbox purchases if you want to buy a PC, because as you are aware games for PC is cheaper and will make up the difference easily. Unless you know where to buy Xbox games for 10 dollars. Especially considering you know full well you need that upgrade and you prefer it as you say.
Judging from past events its likely the last option, thought we saw plenty of the first option. As far as the second one goes, crytek are the only ones i saw pull that off.synobal said:
