Witcher 3 PC specs announced!

[escrow4]

Oopsie AMD, an 8350 once again can't crack 60FPS minimums . . . . . in a 2007/2008 game.

 

[D DoUrden]

Itches need to be scratched, and we all get the upgrade itch. For all we know, he had an extremely dated system before and wanted to upgrade regardless. TW3 would just have been a catalyst. Been watching people in /r/buildapc and /r/witcher do this the past month, but it happens before any big powerhouse eye candy game gets ready to launch.

This was mostly it. I was running an i5-2500k with xfire 7950's so I would have survived but that itch though!!

 

[skipsneeky2]

Oopsie AMD, an 8350 once again can't crack 60FPS minimums . . . . . in a 2007/2008 game.

God just wait for it seriously,there is gonna be some golden responses to your comment coming up shortly.

900mhz slower i3 2100 still pulls way ahead of the 8350 is downright stupid,i think the benchmark is broken lol.This game came out BEFORE the C2Q 9000 series.

I would love to see where the Q9450 landed in this review,damn shame it wasn't included but hell you only had like the Q6600 mostly back in late 2007 to work with.

 

[Omar F1]

Yeah, I'm highly skeptical a game from 2007 running on the same engine as the original Neverwinter Nights would use that much memory. If anything, the game probably isn't large address aware and ran out of memory supported by the engine, not the total memory on your graphics card/system.

Gladly I didn't uninstall the game, just launched it and confirm that it takes only 2.8GB
Sorry for earlier misinformation, I'm sure it was the multiple Internet Explorer tabs which running along with it, when I checked for the ram usage.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

I'm so glad we're seeing games push the envelope again, 8Gb recommended RAM is nice and there appears to be enough visual fidelity to give my GTX 980 a run for its money, that's a great thing, can't wait.

Let's hope the gameplay isn't quite as bad this time around, I've taken significant issues with both the Witcher 1 and 2 most of the time borderline not fun at all.

 

[tential]

Gladly I didn't uninstall the game, just launched it and confirm that it takes only 2.8GB
Sorry for earlier misinformation, I'm sure it was the multiple Internet Explorer tabs which running along with it, when I checked for the ram usage.

It's ok. I don't like to close my redtube tabs either before I game.

 

[RussianSensation]

Oopsie AMD, an 8350 once again can't crack 60FPS minimums . . . . . in a 2007/2008 game.

Not trying to promote FX8150 as a foundation for a modern gaming rig today, but given that this is an enthusiast forum, you should know better. FX8150 can be overclocked to 4.6-4.8Ghz where it would hit 60 fps as it approaches FX9370 performance level, while in some games, an i3 is an absolute dog against a 4.7Ghz FX!

I realize that the FX8000/9000 even @ 4.7Ghz are inferior to an i5/i7 but boy an i3 is even bigger pile .... . For modern games, it's i7 OC > i5 OC > FX9000/8000 OC > i3 OC. Did you ever try playing BF4 multi-player on an i3 OC vs. FX8000/9000 @ 4.7Ghz?

 

[escrow4]

This is about Witcher 1, not more modern gaming, not FX vs i3, this is an 8350 that can't crack 60FPS minimum in a 7yr old game and engine.

 

[lupi]

Not trying to promote FX8150 as a foundation for a modern gaming rig today, but given that this is an enthusiast forum, you should know better. FX8150 can be overclocked to 4.6-4.8Ghz where it would hit 60 fps as it approaches FX9370 performance level, while in some games, an i3 is an absolute dog against a 4.7Ghz FX!

I realize that the FX8000/9000 even @ 4.7Ghz are inferior to an i5/i7 but boy an i3 is even bigger pile .... . For modern games, it's i7 OC > i5 OC > FX9000/8000 OC > i3 OC. Did you ever try playing BF4 multi-player on an i3 OC vs. FX8000/9000 @ 4.7Ghz?

I have no idea what we're discussing, but happy to see my old 2600's still so high on the list.

 

[Red Hawk]

Oopsie AMD, an 8350 once again can't crack 60FPS minimums . . . . . in a 2007/2008 game.

2007/2008 games are a lot less multithreaded than modern games. That goes doubly for Witcher 1, which runs on BioWare's Aurora engine, which was sorely dated even back then. As Russian showed, AMD processors do hold up better in more multithreaded modern games. I'm actually a little taken aback that the 8150 matched the 2500K and the 8350 surpassed it in some of the benchmarks he showed. I'd bet that the 2500K has a lot more overclocking headroom though, just going by personal experience.

Gladly I didn't uninstall the game, just launched it and confirm that it takes only 2.8GB
Sorry for earlier misinformation, I'm sure it was the multiple Internet Explorer tabs which running along with it, when I checked for the ram usage.

No worries, we all have our moments of PEBKAC. :biggrin:

 

[Bateluer]

This is about Witcher 1, not more modern gaming, not FX vs i3, this is an 8350 that can't crack 60FPS minimum in a 7yr old game and engine.

Granted, the Aurora/Electron engines weren't exactly well optimized engines, but I would think an FX 8350, when paired with a decent video card, should easily hit 60fps at 1080p and maximum settings in TW1. I was doing that on my very old C2D E6600 and Radeon 4870. I don't think I started using the high resolution texture mods until well after I bumped up to an E8500.

 

[Red Hawk]

Granted, the Aurora/Electron engines weren't exactly well optimized engines, but I would think an FX 8350, when paired with a decent video card, should easily hit 60fps at 1080p and maximum settings in TW1. I was doing that on my very old C2D E6600 and Radeon 4870. I don't think I started using the high resolution texture mods until well after I bumped up to an E8500.

It does hit over 60 FPS average, it's the minimum that is below 60 FPS.

 

[RussianSensation]

Tomorrow CDPR should reveal 15 min of new gameplay and screenshots for TW3!

http://gamegpu.ru/igrovye-novosti/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-novye-skrinshoty.html

 

[SLU Aequitas]

Awesome, thanks for the heads up RS!

 

[Midwayman]

I have no idea what we're discussing, but happy to see my old 2600's still so high on the list.

Me too. Kinda shocking how little progress has been made with CPUs. Next upgrade will probably be when ddr4 becomes cheap.

 

[RussianSensation]

In all honesty I can truly accept that it's very difficult and complex to code a modern game the size of the Witcher 3. But come on, the developer estimates that the game is only at 85% completion as of today. We have less than 3 months to go before launch, which means even less time before it goes gold.

http://gamegpu.ru/igrovye-novosti/gotovnost-the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-85.html

For anyone who missed it, here is the new gameplay footage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LKP2dO3T0Q

IMO, if CDPR is only at 85% completion, just delay it another 2-3 months. I would much rather them do that like Rockstar is doing with GTA V than try to finish the remaining 15% under crunch time conditions that will require patches after release date. I mean really the last 15% could add a lot of polish and optimization to the game. By now they should have been at 91-93% completion with just 3 months to launch date because I would presume someone needs to play the entire game to check for all the bugs and the last 7-9% should be focused on performance optimizations and minor details that take the game above 9/10. I am not a game developer but it certainly is alarming to me to spend > 2 years on a massively open world RPG game and end up at "only" 85% completion with less than 80 days from launch. Since the game will have to be manufactured for consoles in physical form too, that means they likely have just 55-60 days to finish everything before going into full scale manufacturing.

What do you guys think?

 

[Carfax83]

CDPR themselves have said the content is 100% locked, so I presume the 85% is referring to squashing bugs and polishing, and between that time and the release date, they have plenty of time to completely finish everything.

Witcher 3's content is locked, delay is for bug squashing