The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt - PC System Requirements are here!

+
Intel core i5 4690k @ 3.50 GHZ
RAM 8 GB
Windows 7 64 bit
Nvidia GTX 760 4GB VRAM

With this I shouldn't have a problem running it on medium,right? I hope for high graphics because recommended is 770 which is not much too better than mine and if recommended is for ultra, I should be able to play on high. But the GTX 980 30 fps on high is kinda scaring me. I will be getting the game any way,downgrade or not, but I really want to experience it as best as I could
 
So is the GTX980 i7 4790K the current best setup for a new gaming rig?

That's the build i am going with to play TW3 with. Lot of people said to wait for TW3 and see it's performance and benchmarks to see how it runs. But the truth is TW3 is more Nvidia compatible than AMD so why not get the best single Nvidia GPU on the market the GTX 980 and a very good and not too expensive CPU is the i7 4790K. I have a FX-8350 at the moment and i'm disappointed with it's results. MGS Ground Zeros runs at 60FPS constantly on just a GTX 970 and i have a GTX 980 and sometimes i get 55 to 50fps and that's just because of my CPU. So i would say the CPU is very important as well.
 
750 watts is way more than enough, if that power supply is a solid performer. Thermaltake has a wide range of quality. Which Thermaltake model is it?
(The Toughpower models are all good to very good. Some of the Smart or Lite models are crappy, and that 750 watts is an imaginative fiction.)

Yes its a Smart M Series 750
 
Intel core i5 4690k @ 3.50 GHZ
RAM 8 GB
Windows 7 64 bit
Nvidia GTX 760 4GB VRAM

With this I shouldn't have a problem running it on medium,right? I hope for high graphics because recommended is 770 which is not much too better than mine and if recommended is for ultra, I should be able to play on high. But the GTX 980 30 fps on high is kinda scaring me. I will be getting the game any way,downgrade or not, but I really want to experience it as best as I could
Yeah the GTX 980 30 fps on high scares me to buddy. I said once this game would be very demanding on PC and they were people who thought we were just to worried. Well it seems this game being very demanding is true it may be more demanding than Crysis 3 and i think that game is one of the most if not the most demanding game on the planet.
 
No one can tell before release and optimization process has come to an end. Nothing personal but worrying about performance with a 980 (the best card available now for gaming) is just something not to do IMHO. :D
 
Will the witcher 3 be affected by the 970 vram issue or can i still run it close to ultra settings 1080p with a gtx 970.
 
Well, the recommended GPU requirements point you towards a GTX 770 which only has 2GB of VRAM. So even if the GTX 970 only has ~3.5GB of high speed VRAM, that is still well above the 770's 2GB.

That being said, I really doubt the recommended requirements are for Ultra settings, so you'd probably have to wait for benchmarks to get a definitive answer.

The hands-on event from last week involved a 980 running on high at what attendees described as ~ 30 FPS, so even if optimization is taken into account, I doubt we'll go from 980 on high at 30 FPS to 970 on Ultra at 60 FPS (assuming you want 60 FPS of course).
 
Last edited:
Will the witcher 3 be affected by the 970 vram issue or can i still run it close to ultra settings 1080p with a gtx 970.

It would require testing directed at exposing the VRAM issue with the game running. I don't think anybody has reported any attempts to do this.
 
The Smart M's are good. You're fine. You probably have 250 watts headroom with that power supply.

Well on the cards website it says it needs 600 watts. If you add the 125 watts needed from the FX 8350 that's pretty close to 750. Am I missing something because I would have thought the cards TPD would be around 250 or so and surely not 600.
 
Well on the cards website it says it needs 600 watts. If you add the 125 watts needed from the FX 8350 that's pretty close to 750. Am I missing something because I would have thought the cards TPD would be around 250 or so and surely not 600.

First, the 600 watts are for the entire system, not the card itself. The card itself draws only 145 watts (TDP spec) to 161 watts (overclocked, measured).

Second, the manufacturer is playing CYA. They don't want to hear from people who are running with crappy power supplies. So they set a fictitious high number that they can use to cut support calls short.

I would be surprised if a system with an FX-8xxx and a 970 even drew 400 watts with all the hamsters in full gallop.
 
Well, the recommended GPU requirements point you towards a GTX 770 which only has 2GB of VRAM. So even if the GTX 970 only has ~3.5GB of high speed VRAM, that is still well above the 770's 2GB.

That being said, I really doubt the recommended requirements are for Ultra settings, so you'd probably have to wait for benchmarks to get a definitive answer.

The hands-on event from last week involved a 980 running on high at what attendees described as ~ 30 FPS, so even if optimization is taken into account, I doubt we'll go from 980 on high at 30 FPS to 970 on Ultra at 60 FPS (assuming you want 60 FPS of course).

Im hoping i can at least get high settings 60fps on 970.
 
No, but I do hope that they allow usage of what is available on all aspects of gaming and hardware relations on a PC..... Would be nice to see a company develope for something that is potentially possible in a configuration. Not just to what is "feesible" when regarding hardware and possible configurations.

---------- Updated at 06:10 PM ----------

Unless you want to go for a pair of GTX 980's in SLI :)

And plenty of RAM. RAM's cheap. Get 16 GB. And an SSD. 250GB SSDs have come way down in price.

So what you are saying here is that there is guaranteed support for multi card configs and that one will benefit with a much larger RAM footprint......?.....?......?
 
No, but I do hope that they allow usage of what is available on all aspects of gaming and hardware relations on a PC..... Would be nice to see a company develope for something that is potentially possible in a configuration. Not just to what is "feesible" when regarding hardware and possible configurations.

---------- Updated at 06:10 PM ----------



So what you are saying here is that there is guaranteed support for multi card configs and that one will benefit with a much larger RAM footprint......?.....?......?

No, I'm not saying that. I don't speak for CDPR. What they have said is that you won't get "plus ultra" performance with anything short of an SLI setup. I would NOT take that to mean that you _will_ get it with an SLI setup. That depends on whether there is a suitable SLI implementation at release. I'm sure they're working on it. I'm not convinced it will happen until I see it.
 
Well I posted this a while ago when the specs were first released, but I think now that we have seen some updated footage it might be worth a slightly more "updated" opinion. My specs are

Core 2 Quad Q9950 2.8 GHZ
EVGA Geforce GTX 750 TI 2GB GDDR5
Ram 6 GB

Do you think I will be able to pull off a low 60 FPS to medium 30 FPS? Higher? Lower?
 
No, I'm not saying that. I don't speak for CDPR. What they have said is that you won't get "plus ultra" performance with anything short of an SLI setup. I would NOT take that to mean that you _will_ get it with an SLI setup. That depends on whether there is a suitable SLI implementation at release. I'm sure they're working on it. I'm not convinced it will happen until I see it.

SLI support will take time (weeks after release) and SLI itself is only for people who have enough money to invest in a 1440p monitor, better PSU and still huge patience because SLI, afer all the money spent, often bring problems. For 1080p I expect smooth performance with everything or nearly everything on with a 980, as developers have stated to be their goal. Everything less is to consider lazy optimization by CDPR, also bearing in mind that the game was realized with the past generation of GPUs in mind. If everything goes well, 970 owners will play quite smoothly (this may not equate to 60 fps) at nearly ultra settings. I repeat if CDPR are not meeting their goal, leaving alone enthusiasts, they will be literally diggin the grave for everyone which doesn't have an incredibly strong rig

---------- Updated at 02:20 AM ----------

@truthinoneword you are below stated minimum requirements, still I invite you to wait for benchmarks at release because you may play it smoothly at low settings. Impossible to speak about fps now. We're still in the dark like before requirements were out, many contradictory statements and the current state of the game make difficult to predict what to expect. Still hoping in a decent optimization
 
SLI support will take time (weeks after release) and SLI itself is only for people who have enough money to invest in a 1440p monitor, better PSU and still huge patience because SLI, afer all the money spent, often bring problems. For 1080p I expect smooth performance with everything or nearly everything on with a 980, as developers have stated to be their goal. Everything less is to consider lazy optimization by CDPR, also bearing in mind that the game was realized with the past generation of GPUs in mind. If everything goes well, 970 owners will play quite smoothly (this may not equate to 60 fps) at nearly ultra settings. I repeat if CDPR are not meeting their goal, leaving alone enthusiasts, they will be literally diggin the grave for everyone which doesn't have an incredibly strong rig

---------- Updated at 02:20 AM ----------

@truthinoneword you are below stated minimum requirements, still I invite you to wait for benchmarks at release because you may play it smoothly at low settings. Impossible to speak about fps now. We're still in the dark like before requirements were out, many contradictory statements and the current state of the game make difficult to predict what to expect. Still hoping in a decent optimization

No offense, but I am specifically wanting to hear from Guy N'nah, or one of the other forum experts opinion based on the recent footage. I know I am just on the cusp of the minimum coming in 11% short on the card, but I am wondering just how the games present running performance, and assets seem to be stacking up on high in relationship to the potential minimum. In short I want to hear a bunch of crazy theorizing as to what we are all possibly dealing with.
 
First, the 600 watts are for the entire system, not the card itself. The card itself draws only 145 watts (TDP spec) to 161 watts (overclocked, measured).

Second, the manufacturer is playing CYA. They don't want to hear from people who are running with crappy power supplies. So they set a fictitious high number that they can use to cut support calls short.

I would be surprised if a system with an FX-8xxx and a 970 even drew 400 watts with all the hamsters in full gallop.

Ahh that makes me feel a bit better...
Thanks!
 
Top Bottom