Predicted witcher 3 system specs? Can I run it .

[Vigilance.492]

@clst
I wouldn't stress. 780 is still a fairly top end card. You might not be able to run Ultra with all the bells and whistles, but high should be doable. Unless the game is either horribly optimized or even at High it looks so fucking good that it's still demanding as shit, I wouldn't see the issue with a 780 doing High/1080/60.

But this is all still heavy guesswork. Recommended specs should come out with plenty of time that if you think your GPU won't be able to handle the Graphics level you want, you'll surely be able to grab a new GPU before release. Or you could wait for release, and if it's not running to your liking then go out, grab a new GPU and swap 'em over, switching GPU's is just easy as pie these days.

 

[eskiMoe]

Imo, those FC4 requirements aren't half bad to be honest. And Far Cry 3 was a good PC port. Maybe there's still hope..

 

[sidspyker]

Those are the first sane Ubi requirments in quite a while, that said Far Cry 3 port was not done by Ubisoft Kiev, this one is so be cautious...

 

[tahirahmed]

@clst
I wouldn't stress. 780 is still a fairly top end card. You might not be able to run Ultra with all the bells and whistles, but high should be doable. Unless the game is either horribly optimized or even at High it looks so fucking good that it's still demanding as shit, I wouldn't see the issue with a 780 doing High/1080/60.

But this is all still heavy guesswork. Recommended specs should come out with plenty of time that if you think your GPU won't be able to handle the Graphics level you want, you'll surely be able to grab a new GPU before release. Or you could wait for release, and if it's not running to your liking then go out, grab a new GPU and swap 'em over, switching GPU's is just easy as pie these days.

Imho GTX 780 should be enough to go ultra with all the bells and whistles as long as you remain 1080p and don't go crazy on AA.

I am saying this because the development of game is almost done with optimization and final touch ups in progress (as far as I know), during all this time they only had GTX 700 series not 900 and in one interview they said that they carry out their tests on GTX Titan cards so keeping that in mind a GTX 780 is almost equal to GTX Titan gaming performance wise so it should be enough.

This is just what I figured out by connecting the strings together.

 

[Vigilance.492]

Guess it depends on how optimized all the 'bells and whistles' are... Maybe I'm expecting too much of CDPR and some part of my brain wants it to require some crazy rig even for 1080p because that would imply (Unless poorly optimized) the graphics are crazy.
However I get the feeling that stuff like Hairworks will probably end up pretty intensive, and CDPR have mentioned in interviews before that they wanted to have certain features (Like Ubersampling from TW2) that might even prove too much for a single top end current GPU (Which at the time of that being said the 9xx Series wasn't announced), something to "futureproof" the game beyond just higher resolutions.

Obviously none of us know yet, it's all just guesswork, but as I said chances are a 780 will do High/1080/60 (Especially if Consoles are running somewhere around PC high then fucking definitely), Ultra is always going to be a bit of a wild card and we'll have to wait and see.

 

[sidspyker]

Ubersampling is exactly that, just higher resolution.

 

[Vigilance.492]

Ubersampling is exactly that, just higher resolution.

:mean: Bah, you know what I mean.

 

[tahirahmed]

@Vigilance

Exactly those bells and whistles should be optimized as much as possible. Hairworks will certainly result in performance hits, what's more important is that how they keep performance consistent because in Tomb Raider we only had one Lara on screen with fixed amount of hair strands, in call of duty ghosts we only had one Riley with fixed amount of hair strands with exception of few levels where wolves attacked us but in TW3 what happens when a pack of wolves attack us out of nowhere, all in full hairworks glory, that could be a nightmare for our GPUs lol.

As for uber sampling, I won't be surprised if it reappear in TW3. With more games using super sampling its becoming a standard now. I just want it to be more controllable now instead of say brute force super sampling. We should be able to choose the amount like 1.5x or 2.0x.

With my single R9 290 I can use 1.5x super sampling with everything maxed out in games like Shadow of Mordor and Ryse while remaining in 40 - 50 fps zone though I have no intention to use it in TW3, just 2x MSAA is enough for me.

 

[Vigilance.492]

Well this is interesting, apparently Far Cry 4 PC is using Hairworks, I had no idea.

I know it's Ubisoft, so the PC Version will probably be awful, but even still it should give us some rough idea of how intensive Hairworks is and plenty of sites (Like Digitalfoundry) will also surely talk about it.

Has there been other games using Hairworks or is FC4 one of the first? Because I can't really think of any other games that have had it.

 

[ReptilePZ]

CoD did.

 

[Vigilance.492]

CoD did.

Ah true, I never went near Ghosts. Based on the video it looks very rough though, kind of like the first iteration of TressFX in Tomb Raider. I assume stuff like FC4 and TW3 will have improved versions of it.

Also hopefully in FC4 there might be a lot more stuff with Hairworks on the screen at once which could help determining the power cost of it.

 

[tahirahmed]

CoD Ghosts used very initial iteration of Hairworks and as far as I can say from my experience it was very bad (performance wise). You can see this video to get some idea, the person has same graphics card as I have but a better CPU, you can see that most of the time fps remain in 90 - 120 range but as soon as he look at the dog Riley it dips from 90 to 60 or even 45 so that's a huge hit considering only one character is using that technology.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6lpvK7SL6c

But since it was like beta version of Hairworks it probably wasn't optimized so we'll have to see Farcry 4 to get better idea but again it's a Ubisoft game so I don't have my fingers crossed.

EDIT:

I also got roughly same performance in CoD Ghosts but it was still quite playable since you don't have to look at your dog most of the time lol.

EDIT2:

So there was no mistake after all as confirmed by Ubisoft blog post that FarCry 4 indeed require an R9 290X. Well all I can say is *FACEPALM*. Anyway not going to waste my money on this bloatware.

http://blog.ubi.com/far-cry-4-pc-specs/

 

[jmanjf]

Hi. I'm new here and I've got a question. I've been using a four year old MacBook Pro with a Windows partition for PC gaming (I know) which finally imploded last week and I thought I'd use the opportunity to get a proper PC laptop. Does a relatively inexpensive laptop exist that could potentially run this game? Please say yes :wacko:

 

[GuyNwah]

Hi. I'm new here and I've got a question. I've been using a four year old MacBook Pro with a Windows partition for PC gaming (I know) which finally imploded last week and I thought I'd use the opportunity to get a proper PC laptop. Does a relatively inexpensive laptop exist that could potentially run this game? Please say yes :wacko:

I'm skeptical that there is, but I'd love to be proven wrong.

Clevo (Sager in the US) laptops are generally the best value in the high-performance laptops used with demanding games. I'd start with their catalog.

Below those (and even low-range Clevos are fairly spendy), I'd speculate that laptops with AMD APUs stand a better chance than laptops with Intel graphics.

 

[jediknight16]

If you want to buy a laptop for the witcher 3, you should look at Asus ROG gaming family. You should wait January / february before buying anything new, new generations of graphic cards, cpus etc just launched and prices should decrease a little in a few months. This could help http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html to select GPU.

 

[bars2012]

ASUS HD 7870 will be enough in VWVmake someone look fat for average adjustment

 

[jediknight16]

I'm skeptical that there is, but I'd love to be proven wrong.

Clevo (Sager in the US) laptops are generally the best value in the high-performance laptops used with demanding games. I'd start with their catalog.

Below those (and even low-range Clevos are fairly spendy), I'd speculate that laptops with AMD APUs stand a better chance than laptops with Intel graphics.

Integrated graphic cards doesn't provide enough power to run actual games, so for an upcoming title like witcher 3 I really doubt it would be enough

 

[GuyNwah]

Integrated graphic cards doesn't provide enough power to run actual games, so for an upcoming title like witcher 3 I really doubt it would be enough

Without foundation. AMD APUs are the equal of entry-level GPUs. Hell, the consoles that will run this game just fine are just souped-up APUs. Even Intel integrated GPUs are much improved over earlier generations, though not the equal of AMD.

 

[Doctalen]

I think the game may really well optimized going off the recent PS4 screenshots. The PS4 doesn't exactly have great specs and the game looks really good on it. Of course consoles are usually better optimized since it's 1 hardware config. Still, the new consoles are way closer to PCs than they have ever been. I think the PC version may not need a crazy set up to play the game at settings that look really good.

 

[BlackWolf500.298]

I think the PC version may not need a crazy set up to play the game at settings that look really good.

They stated at Gamescom that "mid-range" graphic cards could play the game without problems.
So there is hope.