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

[M4xw0lf]

If I recall it was stated that ps4 will be at high on PC.Now I can see on req that ps4 is at minimum for pc .It is dissapointing CD Red . Almost is a Lie . A shity statement .

Where is the lie in that? Due to closed hardware configuration and low level API, optimization on consoles will always be superior to the PC, where no machine is exactly the same.Therefore the consoles can make more efficient use of their hardware and get more performance per processing power.
If the consoles will really compare with the PC 'high' setting remains to be seen; there will surely be trade-offs to be made.

 

[MUPPETA]

And sayng that witcher 3 is the epic dream for every rpg player is another shity statement.

um...

 

[truthinoneword]

If I recall it was stated that ps4 will be at high on PC.Now I can see on req that ps4 is at minimum for pc .It is dissapointing CD Red . Almost is a Lie . A shity statement . And a gtx 660 will perform at reasonable fps , another shity statement .
I do have a gtx 660 direc cu II and i5 3350p and i am a bit depressed that I am on minimum maybe under. I played unity at 900p. I do hope until may they will optimize better . Think I will buy a PS4 .
What is bothering me that farcry 4 from Ubishiet is well optimized. Witcher 3 , Acreed unity and Farcry 4 are quite the same type of games and they are so different optimized for pc port.
All in all Cd red deserve respect , Shadow of mordor and farcry 4 are better optimized than Witcher 3 Wild Hunt .
And sayng that witcher 3 is the epic dream for every rpg player is another shity statement.

Keep in mind the minimum could mean up to high settings. We don't know how "accurate" there recommendations are just yet. Game companies almost always error on the side of caution when making min/rec hardware. Also it doesn't really fill in the answers like "well what about this card that is a little weaker than min, or what does min equal in actual game settings, or what is the actual ram being used, what about this card from another brand that is stronger in a different way, etc." In all likely hood your computer will be able to run it at good level if you are at least in the ball park of the min requirements; hard limits like DX 11,and 64 bit OS excluded of course.

 

[wolfheart14]

I mean no harm to CD RED team or to this forum . CD Red worked hard and i really repect that .I am dissapointed because i did not succed better upgrade for my cpu , marginally I have a ps4 as pc . And I do not know if I want to upgrade further or just to buy a ps4 and keep my desktop and in time i will enjoy both .I am at hard limits with optimism .Really I played unity on these specs at 900p medium tweak .I really hope that those req are for 1080p resolutions. I will not complain if I will have to play at 900p at least high .I have dx 11 windows 7 64 . If I recall dx 12 will be compatible with os 7.

 

[GuyNwah]

Whether Windows 7 will get DirectX 12 is still the subject of speculation. AMD's Richard Huddy stuck his foot very deep in his mouth by claiming it would not. Microsoft chewed him out for it but has made no statement. I would doubt that this game will get DirectX 12 treatment, though. At some point, it's got to make a profit and quit chewing up R&D capital so we can get Cyberpunk 2077 in good time.

 

[Pranitdd]

When you say minimum requirements, are those the specs needed to run this game at 720p lowest settings or 1080p or what? Because I just meet the minimum requirements and would like to know what settings I will be playing this game at.

 

[wolfheart14]

Verry good question . I would love that if someone can answear to your question.With my specs I played Unity at 900p tweak medium.Maybe with witcher 3 will be the same . I5 2500k is the same cpu from minimum of Unity .I have i5 3350p so I was able to play despite the requirement of cpu and gpu , which was gtx 680 , and I have a gtx 660 direct cu ii.

 

[KingHochmeister]

And i hope that this minimum sys. requirements is a joke!?

What the hell did you think this game will run on, seriously?

 

[SilverFox07]

People are never happy. There is nothing wrong with these specs, and i didn't expect anything lower on recommended simply due to the scale and complexity of the game, as well as ALL the eye-candy we're been shown and told about.

Many people complaining that specs are too high. Well, what did you expect? You don't get graphics and scale like this without needing some power to back it up. We're in 2015 now. The 2500K was released back in Jan 2011. The GTX660 in Aug 2012.
I'd say it's pretty good that a 4yo PC is able to run a game of this magnitude. It's a big-ass game this. Not only in map size, but in the sheer amount of detail on screen. We've been told about NPCs actually having lives of their own, and doing their own thing, the enviroment changing around you... etc... I imagin all this will make your PC work.
I doubt CD will have NPCs all glitching and bugging in the same way, as other games do.

I think it's a little silly to be angry at CD saying the specs are too high, and they are aweful developers, etc, because you can't play it at max on your old PC.
As every PC gamer knows, that's the problem we face. If you want the best, you need to upgrade.

Developers want to push the most out of their products to show what they can do. And why not? Next gen is here, and it's only going to keep developing. Unfortunetly, we're not all in next gen yet, i think we have a way to go still. Many people still have old hardware, and devs need to decide who to support more, the 'next gen' crowd, or reduce the number of things they could add to also support older hardware.

And so what if a PS4 now looks like PC's min? Isn't that a good thing? When we got news that PS4 was PC's 'high', people accused CD of downgrading because of consoles. Now it's the other way around, and it's still bad?
I want to use all my eye-candy if i have it. So PS4 at min is fine by me. If i understand that right, that just means that there is a whole lot of settings that PC will be able to tweak. To me that says that haven't downgraded it. If fact, i understand it to mean they've added a lot of things to account for what a PC can do.

The one thing i will say though, is that CD really does need to clarify the current list, and provide a 'high' specs list. There are a LOT of people upgrading for this game, and i feel many will spend more than they need to, simply because the specs are a little vague, which i feel is unfair. I understand that the specs given are industry standard and all that. What i'm saying is that CD owe it to their customers to give them a little more information, especially clarification on the i5, i7 thing. Because if an i7 isn't really going to make that much difference, then save your money i'd say.
Even if they gave us a basic graphic setting for the minimum and recommended specs they've listed, that would help.

At this stage, i'd be inclined to to wait, get the game, stick it into the PC, and see what you get. If it's aweful, then upgrade. Because at the moment, we really don't know what's what. Wait for more info. Prices should go down with time, and you can save up in the mean time, and might just be able to afford something better in a few months. Be patient.

Edit - and omg, seriously guys, stop comparing CD and Witcher to Ubi and Unity/Watch Dogs... the 2 don't belong on the same page, let alone the same paragraph.

 

[HarelMor]

In the withcer 2 few graphical settings used a lot of power some game nice eye candy like ubersampeling and some almost unnoticed like shadows. As the poster above me said we better wait and see which settings will consume a lot of power and what will be the trade off. some settings will be able to get ini tweaks like ubersampeling 1 in the witcher 2 that gave nice graphical upgrade without a noticeable fps drop.
I am going disable AA and ubersampeling, i guess that it will give me some extra power for textures.

My computer is at the middle ground here and i think i will be able to enjoy the game.

intel i5 4670 3.4 GHz, 8 gb ram, AMD 7870. i have a small 19" monitor with a resolution of 1440 x 900.

 

[truthinoneword]

People are never happy. There is nothing wrong with these specs, and i didn't expect anything lower on recommended simply due to the scale and complexity of the game, as well as ALL the eye-candy we're been shown and told about.

Many people complaining that specs are too high. Well, what did you expect? You don't get graphics and scale like this without needing some power to back it up. We're in 2015 now. The 2500K was released back in Jan 2011. The GTX660 in Aug 2012.
I'd say it's pretty good that a 4yo PC is able to run a game of this magnitude. It's a big-ass game this. Not only in map size, but in the sheer amount of detail on screen. We've been told about NPCs actually having lives of their own, and doing their own thing, the enviroment changing around you... etc... I imagin all this will make your PC work.
I doubt CD will have NPCs all glitching and bugging in the same way, as other games do.

I think it's a little silly to be angry at CD saying the specs are too high, and they are aweful developers, etc, because you can't play it at max on your old PC.
As every PC gamer knows, that's the problem we face. If you want the best, you need to upgrade.

Developers want to push the most out of their products to show what they can do. And why not? Next gen is here, and it's only going to keep developing. Unfortunetly, we're not all in next gen yet, i think we have a way to go still. Many people still have old hardware, and devs need to decide who to support more, the 'next gen' crowd, or reduce the number of things they could add to also support older hardware.

And so what if a PS4 now looks like PC's min? Isn't that a good thing? When we got news that PS4 was PC's 'high', people accused CD of downgrading because of consoles. Now it's the other way around, and it's still bad?
I want to use all my eye-candy if i have it. So PS4 at min is fine by me. If i understand that right, that just means that there is a whole lot of settings that PC will be able to tweak. To me that says that haven't downgraded it. If fact, i understand it to mean they've added a lot of things to account for what a PC can do.

The one thing i will say though, is that CD really does need to clarify the current list, and provide a 'high' specs list. There are a LOT of people upgrading for this game, and i feel many will spend more than they need to, simply because the specs are a little vague, which i feel is unfair. I understand that the specs given are industry standard and all that. What i'm saying is that CD owe it to their customers to give them a little more information, especially clarification on the i5, i7 thing. Because if an i7 isn't really going to make that much difference, then save your money i'd say.
Even if they gave us a basic graphic setting for the minimum and recommended specs they've listed, that would help.

At this stage, i'd be inclined to to wait, get the game, stick it into the PC, and see what you get. If it's aweful, then upgrade. Because at the moment, we really don't know what's what. Wait for more info. Prices should go down with time, and you can save up in the mean time, and might just be able to afford something better in a few months. Be patient.

Edit - and omg, seriously guys, stop comparing CD and Witcher to Ubi and Unity/Watch Dogs... the 2 don't belong on the same page, let alone the same paragraph.

Clarification for the low ballers like myself just reaching the minimum, and clarification for the people aiming for the recommended and beyond would be nice. As it currently stands I am aiming for about three games running on this old bird of mine this year; with Witcher 3 being on top of the list.

 

[Ancient76]

Well, okay, let's look at this.

1) Do you know these disrespectful developers include CDPR? Do you have reason to suggest that?

2) Most games are unoptimized - witness the many post-release patches. On the other hand, you can come up to min. spec with some pretty cheap hardware, depending on your location. At a certain point, though, consoles do become a distinct option for economy. Which isn't to say that consoles haven't had issues, of course.

3)The minimum requirements are not a joke. It's a big, big, BIG game and it's going to rock your world. There may be some sacrifice necessary to get -into- that game, however. Quality - and quantity - have their price. Before you despair, remember that CDPR and fellow players have a vested interest in making W3 a great game, as well as a game that as many people as possible who want to, can try. So try it before you upgrade, see what patches are released, what fellow fans and the REDs come up with to help you past initial bumps.

I have explained everything, but you people never read posts. Or you read it how you want.
i5 2500k in games is one of the fastest CPUs on the market. Between i5 2500k and i7 3770 you will not notice difference. So how then i5 2500k can be minimum!? Also i5 2500k is much faster then Phenom II X4 940?
So what is this? Does this make sense to you?

And please don't talk how game is big. I know how engines work and what optimization is. I work with this. Ok?

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt's system requirements are brutal:

http://www.polygon.com/2015/1/7/7508059/the-witcher-3-system-requirements-pc

I agree with this.

 

[eskiMoe]

i5 2500k in games is one of the fastest CPUs on the market. Between i5 2500k and i7 3770 you will not notice difference. So how then i5 2500k can be minimum

Most likely TW3 is going to be one of the very few games out there that take advantage of more than 4 CPU threads.

Also i5 2500k is much faster then Phenom II X4 940?

This is a bit odd. I agree.

 

[RivianNomad]

So when did the bombs fall on Spain? It was around 2077 here in the US when everything went to hell...

It was not the Bombs yu arrogante hipocrita!
It was de Bulls, they rebelled!
They were replaced by machines so they had plenty of time to plot against the espanish population!!

But yes, it was way before yer 2077 Giant Donught and Hot Dogs Bombing... So yu can't probably remember.

 

[GabrieI]

The spec is normal, we need this game for future graphic cards too. If I were CDPR the minimun card should be GTX 770, we dont want rip of some effects coz it should work on gtx660 or older cards. Even I have a GTX 680, and its not even recomanded card, but I'm happy for future performance when I get better card.

 

[wolfheart14]

First of all I did not complain for the missunderstood downgrade . I had had been so happy if it had been downgraded . And you are right if you want a gaming pc for witcher 3 you need to invest. But it is realy stupid now .And the minimum req is a brutal joke.Ok it is CDRed sales .It is in their favour to have a product which will work suitable for every machine (pc ps4 xbox). But when you take the brick and hit your chest "there will be sistem parity"", PS4 is at high req. of PC , gtx 660 will work on reaonable FPS"" Than is your word that matters and you should better achieve those statements. The market is full of games that are not proper optimized for pc but ...hey !!! I have a monster gpu and cpu sbecause i sacrificed a lot to have a moster PC and fuck the rest.Remember when ubi official said that if you have the req of black flag it won't be a problem with Unity?well...shity statement.
So maybe it did not bother you if wild hunt had the req of Unity because in the end this is the future sky requirements for unoptimized games for PC ports.Not an oficial Cd Red ever will gona state they optimized the shit for ps4 and xbox one and they will not have time for optimizing for pc because witcher 3 wild hunt is the one next gen game of next gen of ps4 .I'll be damn the req and the game itself sounded like unity which ubishit officials told us that ps4 and xbox one capabilities are not enough for the game but they succide to optimize for ps4 and xbox one at 900p .And for pc the minimum is i5 2500k and gtx 680 .And they will say you need a brutal PC to play .I don't care cause you all have the pc ready to play. But you can undestand others who will not play because they do not meet the req????Remember the first req of Middle earth as minimu gtx 560 ti and everybody yelled that req are brutal????and Monolith downgrade the req and now everybody cheers Monoliyth!

 

[clst]

that 's amusing how many people rage about the minimum or the recommended requirement , when crysis 1 come out no rig run it on ultra and nobody rage . if you dont have the rig upgrade it , if you don't have the money play on console , if you don't have the money wait to have it . it's always the same

the post of mouse earlier resume well the debate nice post.

don't compare a game like witcher 3 to a game like world of warcraft <<( every pc could run it )
it's game industry every each game player ask for better graphic , better world , better gameplay ect but when you put under their nose what you need to play it ( oh the shit )
for my part when the game was annonce i begin to save money for a pc to play it so now i have it ( every one a little wise will have to the same )

so to the player who cannot play on pc ( sad for you ) , play on console if you can if you can't sad for you

 

[Geralt_of_bsas]

The only moment when you can see if the game is more or less well optimized or not is when its running on your PC, its that simple. So until then it doesn't make much sense to bash the devs or praise them.

I bet the game would easily run at medium or low settings in 720p with much much less powerful components that the minimums that were announced, system reqs take into account many general factors while leaving out exceptions that might still work, and they also just tend to be safe rather than precise, they are more like suggestions and guides, not technical specifications,, so no one can later say "WHAT?!!! YOU SAID THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM WAS THIS AND I HAVE THAT AND IT DOESNT RUN WELL ENOUGH".

Just try to take them as a recommendation for a nice experience, something abstract and subjective. they are not the Laws of Physics.

 

[Ancient76]

that 's amusing how many people rage about the minimum or the recommended requirement , when crysis 1 come out no rig run it on ultra and nobody rage . if you dont have the rig upgrade it , if you don't have the money play on console , if you don't have the money wait to have it . it's always the same

the post of mouse earlier resume well the debate nice post.

don't compare a game like witcher 3 to a game like world of warcraft <<( every pc could run it )
it's game industry every each game player ask for better graphic , better world , better gameplay ect but when you put under their nose what you need to play it ( oh the shit )
for my part when the game was annonce i begin to save money for a pc to play it so now i have it ( every one a little wise will have to the same )

so to the player who cannot play on pc ( sad for you ) , play on console if you can if you can't sad for you

Crysis 1 was 8 hours engine demonstration. TW3 is something completely different.

When you say The Witcher you mean great story, quests, atmosphere... But when you say Crysis you mean graphics!

Apples and Oranges!

 

[clst]

Crysis 1 was 8 hours engine demonstration. TW3 is something completely different.

When you say The Witcher you mean great story, quests, atmosphere... But when you say Crysis you mean graphics!

Apples and Oranges!

yes, you're right but i mean all of it ( the game itself graphic gameplay ect ) . i m a rpg fan i finish almost all of it by that i mean ( all famicom , super famicom, megadrive , ps1,ps2,ps3 , xboxone,xbox 360 and half of the pc >> 200 -250 RPG .