Predicted witcher 3 system specs? Can I run it .

[GuyNwah]

I'm still not quite convinced. Dying Light, another upcoming next-gen only game (made in Poland), also points at i5-2500 as a minimum CPU to run it. And according to CPUBOSS, i5-2500 is on par with my 3450... And frankly, I don't want to barely meet Witcher's minimum, especially if I buy a high end graphics card.

We don't know what the minimum is, though. We don't even know that the CPU will be carrying a heavy compute load. It may just be pushing data between RAM and the GPU. A Sandy Bridge does that as well or better than any later CPU. And games aren't written to take advantage of large numbers of hyperthreaded cores.

In the end, it's your money, not mine. But I cannot tell you to spend it on what more years of experience than most of the forum members have been alive tell me would be a waste.

 

[clst]

i don't think it's will be for ultra setting i think for ultra you will need a titan black or 780 gtx on sli or ati similar (with all the belly)

if you do a comparison by what they say about the console ps4 and xbox one that the game will do at 900 p on 30 fps you say it will be same on pc with a gtx 760 or radeon 7870 after for ultra i think on pc i m near the true with what i say earlier

 

[dasega]

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-gm200-titan-2-amd-fiji-380x-bermuda-390x-benchmarked/

We might have few cards coming soon...

 

[mavowar]

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-gm200-titan-2-amd-fiji-380x-bermuda-390x-benchmarked/

We might have few cards coming soon...

If that is a real leak I will dance naked at the North Pole on live television.
Data is all wrong. First there is no 20nm High performance node anywhere. They are all low power nodes(will not work for GPUs). Also, do you really believe one guy has 4 unreleased highly protected cards of 2 different companies that compete against each other? If you do I got beach front property and a bridge in the Sahara desert for sale.....I can let it go really cheap if you send $250,000 I will send you back 1 million dollars as I am a a Nigerian Prince in need of your help.......lol

 

[dasega]

If that is a real leak I will dance naked at the North Pole on live television.
Data is all wrong. First there is no 20nm High performance node anywhere. They are all low power nodes(will not work for GPUs). Also, do you really believe one guy has 4 unreleased highly protected cards of 2 different companies that compete against each other? If you do I got beach front property and a bridge in the Sahara desert for sale.....I can let it go really cheap if you send $250,000 I will send you back 1 million dollars as I am a a Nigerian Prince in need of your help.......lol

WCCF yes that's just a rumor so far but we can expect some new cards soon, we know about gm200 for good few months now and first info about pirate island is from April, are they going to be manufactured in 20nm process, this news has to be taken with grain of salt and there's no need to do silly things like froze off your willy on north pool just to deny/confirm it.

 

[randyrhoads]

I'd be upset if my 970 can't max out the game at a steady framerate.

 

[clst]

I'd be upset if my 970 can't max out the game at a steady framerate.

we're all the same we all hope your rig could play the game at a steady framerate but reality can be harsh sometimes , game evolve so do the rig have to do but it's always by money spend
we'll see at the moment they release the recommended config >> i never look at the minimum

 

[GuyNwah]

I'm still not quite convinced. Dying Light, another upcoming next-gen only game (made in Poland), also points at i5-2500 as a minimum CPU to run it. And according to CPUBOSS, i5-2500 is on par with my 3450... And frankly, I don't want to barely meet Witcher's minimum, especially if I buy a high end graphics card.

CPUBoss is as meaningless as the game manufacturer's recommendations. Anybody can pencil-whip a comparison of CPU features, which is bloody well all they do. Doesn't make it mean anything.

It depends on what you are using the CPU for. The only valid test of whether a CPU meets your performance requirements is to run it with the software you need to run.

 

[sidspyker]

CPU and GPU boss are pretty crap yeah.

 

[dasega]

FC4 - open world, next gen, etc. should be close to W3

MINIMUM

• Supported OS
  Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8/8.1 (64bit versions only)Processor
  Intel Core i5-750 @ 2.6 GHz or AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.2 GHz
  Memory
  4GB
  Video Card
  NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 or AMD Radeon HD5850 (1GB VRAM)
  Direct X
  Version 11
  Hard Drive
  30 GB available space
  Sound Card
  DirectX 9.0c compatible sound card with latest drivers

OPTIMAL

• Supported OS
  MS Windows 7 SP1, MS Windows 8/8.1 (64bit versions only)Processor
  Intel Core i5-2400S @ 2.5 GHz or AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz or better
  Memory
  8GB
  Video Card
  NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 or AMD Radeon R9 290X or better (2GB VRAM)
  Direct X
  Version 11
  Hard Drive
  30 GB available space
  Sound Card
  DirectX 9.0c compatible sound card with latest drivers

 

[sidspyker]

We all know that's not how it works though - "next-gen" means nothing here(also FC4 is on PS3 and 360 too) and neither does 'open-world' really make it a common denominator because there's a huge number of factors in rendering that will be different, not to mention the engine itself.

 

[GuyNwah]

Different engine, so no comparison. Not even within shouting distance of a valid comparison. The Red team has never used the same approach as other engine developers. Even the TW1 modified Aurora engine was very different from Aurora in other games.

Attempts to compare performance of TW2 on the original Red Engine to other games of its generation failed because it didn't use the same resources in the same way as other games and engines did.

TW3 on the new Red Engine will almost certainly cause comparisons to fail. You can't extrapolate from the so-called requirements of other games to this one.

 

[sidspyker]

Attempts to compare performance of TW2 on the original Red Engine to other games of its generation failed because it didn't use the same resources in the same way as other games and engines did.

This.

One example I can recall is TW2 on PC had a mix of forward and deferred rendering, forward for subsurface scattering IIRC while just about every other engine had switched to complete Deferred Rendering at the time.

The 360 port was changed to fully deferred rendering(with SSS most likely 'faked or removed) but that's obvious, forward is fucking expensive!

 

[dasega]

So the bottom line is expect much higher requirements because of red engine?

We all know that's not how it works though - "next-gen" means nothing here(also FC4 is on PS3 and 360 too) and neither does 'open-world' really make it a common denominator because there's a huge number of factors in rendering that will be different, not to mention the engine itself.

next gen= high res textures+normal maps
open world= double/triple amount of polygons

 

[GuyNwah]

So the bottom line is expect much higher requirements?

The bottom line is we do not know what to expect. I'm going to guess:
Heavy demand on memory bandwidth, due to larger detailed textures and more use of deferred rendering.
Heavy demand on output processors (ROPs), because they are the limiting resource in the original Red Engine, and they won't have reworked just everything.
More demand on shaders, because DX11 has to compute tessellation.
More CPU use, because more effects to be computed on the CPU, while the controls have to remain responsive.

So higher requirements, how much higher remains to be seen, and the devil is in the details. Setups that maximize the resources that the game actually requires, not just brute force big iron, will do best. But we don't know what resources those will be.

 

[dasega]

The bottom line is we do not know what to expect. I'm going to guess:
Heavy demand on memory bandwidth, due to larger detailed textures and more use of deferred rendering.
Heavy demand on output processors (ROPs), because they are the limiting resource in the original Red Engine, and they won't have reworked just everything.
More demand on shaders, because DX11 has to compute tessellation.
More CPU use, because more effects to be computed on the CPU, while the controls have to remain responsive.

So higher requirements, how much higher remains to be seen, and the devil is in the details. Setups that maximize the resources that the game actually requires, not just brute force big iron, will do best. But we don't know what resources those will be.

Sounds like gtx 970 I hope...

• CUDA Cores: 1664
• Base Clock: 1050MHz
• Boost Clock: 1178MHz
• Memory: 4GB GDDR5
• Memory Clock: 7000MHz
• Memory Bandwidth: 224GB/s
• Texture Mapping Units 104
• ROPs: 64
• L2 Cache Size: 2048MB

1920x1080 (1080p)	GTX 970
Battlefield 4, Ultra	77.3
Metro: Last Light, Very High, SSAA	47.7
Crysis 3, Very High	70.5

Can't be worst than those 3 games on 1080...

 

[randyrhoads]

I doubt a 970 would be able to do 60 fps on ultra even without ubersampling

 

[dasega]

I doubt a 970 would be able to do 60 fps on ultra even without ubersampling

1080p 40-50 fps on ultra without ubersampling is ok for me.

 

[randyrhoads]

1080 40-50 fps on ultra without ubersampling is ok for me.

I didn't say 40-50 fps

 

[dasega]

I didn't say 40-50 fps

i see