Diablo 3 Recommended Video Card Settings

[Grooveriding]

Some folks have been datamining the Diablo 3 beta client and have found Blizzard's recommended settings that will be applied depending on what card is found in your system.

The list is huge: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...G5IX0N0S09DX0RrcTlidlRSNnFvbHc&hl=en_US#gid=0

Cliffs notes is basically they feel any DX11 card will run this game on high.

edit Needed to revise my statement about there being support for Anti-aliasing at release. Per Blizzard comments, their plan is to get a DX11 pathway added to the game after release and this will allow FSAA to be enabled. So looks like under DX9, Diablo 3 will be like Starcraft 2, AMD & Nvidia are going to have to brute-force AA via drivers for the title. So expect AA to be a big performance hog under DX9.

 

[Silverforce11]

And they've been saying PC gaming is dead.. I am eagerly awaiting D3, BF3 and eventually SW.

Having a blast with DeusEx and SC2 atm.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

To be expected since it is Blizzard. They generally don't push the envelope in graphics, they care about lots of people being able to play their games.

 

[tviceman]

I think I am in the extreme minority in anticipating torchlight 2 more than diablo 3. Mods, off line play, and the $20 price point make it more attractive to me.

 

[Silverforce11]

To be expected since it is Blizzard. They generally don't push the envelope in graphics, they care about lots of people being able to play their games.

This is very true. But what they manage to do is make games look amazing considering the low requirements. They have a very talented art team.

D3 is going to be a blast, team up with a few buddies and have long co-op sessions. I did play torchlight but after a few days it felt dull without the interaction with other players.

 

[Fallengod]

I was just going to say, Blizzard is smart, they arnt going to make a game only playable on top tier systems. Blizzard isnt huge on high quality graphics anyways. Keep in mind, this is third person rpg type game, not a first person shooter. Also, every game has quality settings so there is nothing to worry about.

Id guess even lowly 9600GT's with maybe settings lowered would run the thing perfectly fine.

Its completely pointless to "worry" about graphic card performance for a game like D3.

 

[PrayForDeath]

This is very true. But what they manage to do is make games look amazing considering the low requirements. They have a very talented art team.

I agree. Just look at WC3, which looked brilliant when released despite the extremely low poly counts and low-res textures.

 

[Rifter]

as long as they dont lock it in at 800x600 his time ill be happy.

 

[TheUnk]

I just wish Blizzard would support Eyefinity/NvSurround. WSGF had members that made hacks to make it work but I think it resulted in bans.

It's like reliving the whole 16:9 vs. 4:3.

OMG you are using you peripheral vision!! HAX0R!

 

[WMD]

This is very true. But what they manage to do is make games look amazing considering the low requirements. They have a very talented art team.

D3 is going to be a blast, team up with a few buddies and have long co-op sessions. I did play torchlight but after a few days it felt dull without the interaction with other players.

Low requirements for video yes. Starcraft 2 is quite heavy on the cpu.

 

[GotNoRice]

It looks like it will require a DirectX9c / SM3.0 capable videocard at an absolute minimum, although i'm not sure why there are Radeon X1800 cards listed as unsupported because those should be DirectX9c capable.

Unfortunately I know at least one friend who is really looking forward to this game and was hoping he would be able to continue using his old X800 (DX9b / SM2.0b only)

 

[Plimogz]

Low requirements for video yes. Starcraft 2 is quite heavy on the cpu.

Having it use only 2 cores was in itself a pretty light requirement.

I'd say it was a definite concession to casual gamers; trading off better performance or a more elaborate game for a larger potential customer base.

 

[Spjut]

I hope they will have fixed better multicore support, slower quads like the Q6600/Athlon II X4 were really hurt by SC2 only supporting 2 cores

 

[Anubis]

as long as they dont lock it in at 800x600 his time ill be happy.

it was 640*480 untill LOD came out

 

[IGemini]

At least I'll be able to run the game on high. I missed the boat on the first two games, might give this one a try.

It looks like it will require a DirectX9c / SM3.0 capable videocard at an absolute minimum, although i'm not sure why there are Radeon X1800 cards listed as unsupported because those should be DirectX9c capable.

Unfortunately I know at least one friend who is really looking forward to this game and was hoping he would be able to continue using his old X800 (DX9b / SM2.0b only)

My guess is not enough pixel shaders. I have an X1900XT lying around.

 

[RussianSensation]

It looks like it will require a DirectX9c / SM3.0 capable videocard at an absolute minimum, although i'm not sure why there are Radeon X1800 cards listed as unsupported because those should be DirectX9c capable.

Unfortunately I know at least one friend who is really looking forward to this game and was hoping he would be able to continue using his old X800 (DX9b / SM2.0b only)

With cards like HD5670, HD4650 and even HD4850 often on sale for $40-50 in the last 12-15 months, there is no need for Blizzard to go so low as to provide playability for such an ancient card as the 2004 year X800. Unless your friend is stuck on AGP, then surely he can increase his GPU performance 3-5x by just getting a $30 to $40 GPU. However, with such a slow GPU, chances are his CPU is a huge bottleneck anyway for Blizzard games.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

I just built a buddy a D3 box and assumed a 6750 would be sufficient to minimally push it on medium settings at 1080p. Blizzard does not make demanding games. Hope I'm right, otherwise I'll have to upgrade him out of my own pocket!

 

[PrayForDeath]

I just built a buddy a D3 box and assumed a 6750 would be sufficient to minimally push it on medium settings at 1080p. Blizzard does not make demanding games. Hope I'm right, otherwise I'll have to upgrade him out of my own pocket!

That should be plenty for D3

 

[Grooveriding]

Edited the op with some updated information regarding FSAA support in D3. It's planned for after release under the DX11 path, but at release there will be no support for DX9. So AMD & nvidia will have to add support via drivers like Starcraft 2 for DX9 AA.

 

[PrayForDeath]

Edited the op with some updated information regarding FSAA support in D3. It's planned for after release under the DX11 path, but at release there will be no support for DX9. So AMD & nvidia will have to add support via drivers like Starcraft 2 for DX9 AA.

I'm not sure why AA has become such a luxury all of a sudden. Witcher 2, Deus Ex: HR, GTA IV, SC2 all have trouble with traditional (and sometimes control-panel enabled) AA, and only support post-processing enabled AA (GTA IV doesn't even have that.)

And now Diablo 3 has the same issue. WTF is up with that?

 

[Cuular]

With DX11 it's allowed them to do AA in the post-process phase, where apparently it's easier to do.

 

[SHAQ]

So Blizzard is going to release an unfinished game? That's a first. I guess I'd rather have it this year and wait for DX11 I suppose.

 

[darckhart]

@shaq: lol all their games are released unfinished. the sheer number of patches that come out in such a short time frame (after months of beta) to "balance" things is ridiculous. unless you are referring to other things like bugs or features that are missing, which i guess blizz does a pretty good job at.

re d3 in general, no one really expected a SPECTACULAR looking game anyway. imo, AO did a lot more for SC2 than AA. i expect the same for d3 with dungeon crawls.

in any case, with the (recent) changes (online only, in house auction) to the game, i feel less excited and am debating purchasing. gw2 is looking better by the day.

 

[Insomniator]

I think I am in the extreme minority in anticipating torchlight 2 more than diablo 3. Mods, off line play, and the $20 price point make it more attractive to me.

I played and beat torchlight but honestly given the choice I'd take Diablo 2 over that any day. Much better game overall and with online play its not even close.

Torchlight really needs online play... these kinds of games are so stale without it.

 

[gmaster456]

I think I am in the extreme minority in anticipating torchlight 2 more than diablo 3. Mods, off line play, and the $20 price point make it more attractive to me.

I guess I'm in that minority too. Although I have to get through Torchlight 1 first. But so far I'm enjoying it a lot.