-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Watch Dogs PC specs (x64 only, Quad Core minimum, recommended 8-core and 2GB VRAM)
- Thread starter angular graphics
- Start date
Especially if you also drop the resolution to console levels.
diffusionx
Gold Member
There is no such thing as "future proofing" or "getting through fine." I could have told you that. The rate of improvements is going up, not down. A 8800GT might have been fine for most of this gen but I am very confident that a 780 will not hold up in the same way - especially if stuff like "Steam Machines" take hold and more and more developers target the platform instead of just prettying up console ports.
PC gaming is more expensive than console, it's just the way it is. It's better to just spend the money now and save a bit for upgrades later than stretch in a futile attempt to "future proof."
Cotton McKnight
Member
Welp, I have:
i7 2600K
GTX560ti x2 (sli baby) but 1gb each
and 16gb of ram.
So minimum it is for me unless I decide to do another build early next year.
i7 2600K
GTX560ti x2 (sli baby) but 1gb each
and 16gb of ram.
So minimum it is for me unless I decide to do another build early next year.
Nice official info.
But according to Your 'official site', its 1.6ghz
http://www.vgleaks.com/world-exclusive-orbis-unveiled-2/
------------
Also tell why Microsoft would get 1.6ghz version of Jaguar in better cooled box and Sony took 2ghz?
JonathanPower
Member
Just like the Xbox ONE was supposed to be 1.6Ghz according to them. That's the point. We have no official info on the PS4 clock speed and OS reservation.
Cooling is not the issue. Jaguar already runs at 2Ghz in the A6-5200 notebook APU. The issue is power consumption.
FloppyDelux
Member
my monster machine and i are ready.
PHOENIXZERO
Member
No surprise, high end PC gamers should get ready to rejoice that their hardware is finally going to really be taken advantage of.
Except it was 1.6GHz until a relatively last minute bump in the clock speed.
Except it was 1.6GHz until a relatively last minute bump in the clock speed.
Maybe on the GPU side. I doubt anything from AMD in the next couple of years will beat even a standard Haswell i7 (both at stock clocks).
chickdigger802
Banned
And people freaking out. don't go run off to newegg right now. You pc should run this fine, and do remember... this is still a ubisoft game no matter how much money you throw at it (you play one you played them all climb this tower! unlock the map!). At least crysis 1 was a hella of a game.
Also remember that no matter how much money you throw at your rig, Chicago will still look like chicago ;P
Also remember that no matter how much money you throw at your rig, Chicago will still look like chicago ;P
What has Crysis got to do with Ubisoft?
According to one of the devs, those are not the official specs. The real specs will be revealed soon and will require less than these.
chickdigger802
Banned
Just comparing the last real 'workout for your gaming rig'.
watch_dogs looks like 'ubisoft open world game' #... what is it now? I mean, it could turn out great, but its all starting to feel like they are all variations of the same 'ubisoft game' cake with different icing.
Crysis at least at its time was original neat stuff and only on pc too.
so yeah, i don't think watch_dogs is worth going to the bank to withdraw stuff just yet. maybe wait for witcher 3
Just comparing the last real 'workout for your gaming rig'.
watch_dogs looks like 'ubisoft open world game' #... what is it now? I mean, it could turn out great, but its all starting to feel like they are all variations of the same 'ubisoft game' cake with different icing.
Crysis at least at its time was original neat stuff and only on pc too.
so yeah, i don't think watch_dogs is worth going to the bank to withdraw stuff just yet. maybe wait for witcher 3
I see what you mean. Crysis didn't only push pc's for years after release, it was a great open-ended world that really showed what the pc could do - it's a shame that Crytek were bitching about sales and thus brought the sequels to the consoles because the games became much less open and more like moving down invisible corridors... indicative of the 360 and PS3's lack of ram. The new consoles certainly come with plenty of it, but I wonder how long it'll be until they're constraining the pc again... I mean, not even close to all of that 8gb is freed up for games and ram is cheap enough as it is.
But yeah, Witcher 3 is looking like it might fill that gap!
So much truth, I love it!
Looks like the party is over then.
fatgamecat
Member
8 CPU threads and 3-4GB VRAM seems like the new standard for Ultra settings.
Can probably get away with 2GB VRAM on Ultra if you turn off AA.
Can probably get away with 2GB VRAM on Ultra if you turn off AA.
If you do it mid-gen it's possible.
At this point unless you're just looking to tackle everything that came before along with future lower end indie stuff it simply won't cut it.
Reassuring, though baffling.
Nah, OC to 3.2ghz if you can and if you're still running a single GPU my bet is you are GPU bound primarily still. =) Anand has an interesting article update on CPU's for gaming.
http://anandtech.com/show/7189/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-september-2013
I came to the conclusion that my neither my i7-930 or q9450 while ancient are really a problem coupled to a 7870 @ 1080p. Even a single 7970 looks more GPU bound most of the time then CPU bound. Hell, the often denegrated AMD's look just damn fine.
It's almost looking like I can hold out until Skylake with just GPU upgrades. But then, I don't feel the need to run Ultra settings, 1080p@60fps. I'm willing to cut down the graphics quality if necessary provided it still looks decent.
Felix Lighter
Member
I followed the link yesterday and noticed that the specs were not posted on the uPlay store. I assumed it was because I was going through the US store. Was anyone else here actually able to see those specs posted on the site?
banjoted
Member
Enhance your calm folks - a bit of common sense will tell you all should be fine.
Even an "entry-level" gaming PC should easily surpass what PS4/Xbox One have to offer for their entire lifespan. Kit yourselves out with an i5-3570 and 7950 or some such and you'll be fine for beating next-gen no issues and keeping up with Ultra specs for a year or two.
Even an "entry-level" gaming PC should easily surpass what PS4/Xbox One have to offer for their entire lifespan. Kit yourselves out with an i5-3570 and 7950 or some such and you'll be fine for beating next-gen no issues and keeping up with Ultra specs for a year or two.
I just find this funny, because that is absolutely me.
sertopico
Member
https://twitter.com/SebViard/status/385815285116063744
Did you read this? Looks like those requirements are not reliable.
Did you read this? Looks like those requirements are not reliable.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Requirements will be lower? I'm more than ready then.
It's a stock Dell build. Can't OC it. Plus, I've been stuck with 3GB of RAM and 32bit Vista for the past six years. Going forward I'd at the very least have to buy some RAM and re-install Windows.
As for upgrading, I was thinking of going with an i5-3570k and a GTX 760. Might go up to Haswell though. Don't know how a mid-range GTX 700 series card stacks up against a high-range 600 series.
Leks
Member
Specs are still visible in the Digital Deluxe Edition pre-ordre page at UbiShop France.
Same with Assassin's Creed IV.
velociraptor
Junior Member
You've got a great rig. That should last you a long, long time.
That'll get you way above PS4.
Music to my ears. I was afraid, that CPU might be a little luckluster, but I hope to be proven wrong.
Pjsprojects
Member
360 version will be horrific!
angular graphics
Banned
Me. (I am the OP).
Well that changes everything... Go ahead and build yourself a gaming PC good sir. =)