Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Estimated PC SpecsFollow

#1 Dec 10 2009 at 1:15 PM Rating: Good
26 posts
I realize beta could come out any week now. Just wondering if anyone is able to estimate how good a PC needs to be to play on PC with high quality graphics.

Thanks
#2 Dec 10 2009 at 1:39 PM Rating: Good
I plan on playing FFXIV on PS3, so I'm not 100% certain what the PC requirements will be. However, my best guess is this:

Windows XP/Vista/7
2.6GHz or higher
2GB RAM or higher
30GB HDD space available
256MB video (recommended 512+)
____________________________
FFXI-Garuda 2003-2009; Lakshmi 2011-8/20/13 (retired)
FFXIV: ARR - Ghost Bear, Balmung server
#3 Dec 10 2009 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
656 posts
Pentium II 800Mhz
Windows 95
500MB HD space
128MB PC100 Ram
64MB video card

____________________________
モスタル


#4 Dec 10 2009 at 2:35 PM Rating: Excellent
**
394 posts
Mostaru wrote:
Pentium II 800Mhz
Windows 95
500MB HD space
128MB PC100 Ram
64MB video card


Whoa there, Deep Blue. Do you really need more than 30fps in Doom?

Edited, Dec 10th 2009 3:40pm by TraumaFox
#5 Dec 10 2009 at 3:12 PM Rating: Good
***
1,822 posts
Well, you have to use common sense on this issue. I'm sure you will need to have a decent PC to play it, but not everyone is going to nor can they afford to go out and get a brand new high end PC between now and when FFXIV comes out. You have to look at it from a marketing standpoint. If they make the system requirements too high, then they are cutting out a lot of potential buyers. I think whatever is a "high end" PC right now, should be able to play FFXIV just fine, because by the time it comes out I think they'll want a "decent" gaming PC to be able to run it.

Personally I've got a custom built PC:

Gigabyte Motherboard
AMD Phenom II Quad Core 3.0ghz
2TB HDD
4GB of DDR2 1066mhz Ram
CD/DVD-R High speed disc drive (Not sure the exact specs on it)
and a Galaxy Nvidia GTS250 1GB DDR3 Graphics Card

Now, if my system can't run FFXIV there will be some big problems about how many people will be able to play it. Again, I think it will require a decent enough PC but not something that is completely top of the line. I don't think it's going to be as requiring as games like Crysis.

I'm guessing any graphics card that is a Nvidia 9800 or above, or ATI 4350 or above should run it fine. I'm also not positive that it will require windows 7, we'll just have to wait and see. And as we know, it's going to run off of DX9. So take all that info how you will, it's my best educated guess.
____________________________
Long Live Vana Diel.
#6 Dec 10 2009 at 3:57 PM Rating: Good
Sage
*
121 posts
Being an MMO I don't see the requirements being overly harsh. I expect something like..

XP (Min/Rec)
Core 2 Duo @1.8 GHZ / Intel Quad Core@2.4 (AMD processors would require more)
1.5 Gigs of RAM / 3 Gigs of Ram
128 MB video / 512 MB video

Vista/7 (min/Rec)
Core 2 Duo @2.4 GHZ / Quad Core @2.6ish)
2 Gigs of Ram / 4 Gigs of Ram
256 Mb video/ 512 Mb video

Now it all depends if by Min requirements they mean barely playable, or the least you can have to enjoy the game.
#7 Dec 10 2009 at 6:12 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
350 posts
Litie,

I think your guesses at the min specs are pretty good. One thing though, for your recommended specs, is quad core really going to make a difference? I doubt that SE is going to take advantage of quad core architecture. I expect that the majority of the game processing will be running on a single thread.
#8 Dec 10 2009 at 6:24 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,089 posts
Considering the white engine was built for the PS3 (cell uses 7 cores) and then optimized for PC and 360, I'm pretty sure they'll be using multi-cores.
#9 Dec 11 2009 at 2:21 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
270 posts
Well, my guess is that its not going to differ much from the specs of a PS3, though with more RAM because windows is a b*tch.

So something like... MIN 8800 Nvidia, REC 240 Nvidia (or watever the gaming-specific equivalent is)
Maybe MIN 2GIG RAM, REC 3.4(4)GIG RAM
As for processor, i think it'd be fairly flexible.
But the major factor would probably be MIN 10Mps broadband, REC 15Mps
____________________________
Refreshed ¦ Reborn
Shori Ohrensztein ¦ Ragnarok ¦ ACN
Reebie Baramnesra ¦ Midgardsomr ¦ MRD
#10 Dec 11 2009 at 11:05 AM Rating: Good
**
394 posts
I think this was mentioned before in other threads, but the recommended specs for FFXIV will likely be very similar to those for The Last Remnant, which are as follows:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo (2.4 GHz) / AMD Athlon X2 (2.4 GHz)
RAM: 2GB
GPU: Nvidia GeForce 8800 VRAM 512

For all intents and purposes, that's already a budget machine, and those parts will be even cheaper come FFXIV's release. I don't see why a 3.0GHz CPU and GF 9800+ or ATI equivalent wouldn't run FFXIV smoothly, so I'm sure you could get away with less. I'm positive you won't need a GTX series or higher to get a smooth framerate out of it.
#11 Dec 12 2009 at 1:37 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,801 posts
If your computer can play the latest games without struggling on decent settings, you'll have no issues.

If, however, it cannot then you MAY have to dial back the settings for FF14. Generally speaking, companies tend to be more lenient with this kind of thing for MMOs as you're paying a monthly fee. In order to keep you playing every month, it has to run decently well. So, the specs you need for FF14 should be less than what you'd need for today's games. Time will tell, though.
____________________________
WoW -- Zaia -- Dragonmaw -- Mage 80 BABY! Alchemy 450
Also... Hunter 62, Rogue 52, Warrior 66, Warlock 43, Death Knight 70, Shaman Who Cares? ;)

FFXI -- Caia -- Retired/Deleted -- Blm 75, Alchemy 97
Pandimonium server - Rank 10 - Bastok

Zaela Rdm -- 35, Alchemy 45 -- Forced into retirement because I didn't have the right kind of credit card. Hope it was worth 18 bucks a month, SE.

#12 Dec 12 2009 at 4:53 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
Because FFXIV is being released for the PS3, it's not hard to guess the specs required. A quad core PC with a decent graphics card with at least 512 RAM or more will run FFXIV just fine. The better your system, the higher frame rate at maxed resolution. I'm sure Windows 7 will work better than Vista but then again, so does everything.
#13 Dec 12 2009 at 8:56 AM Rating: Good
***
1,508 posts
Litie wrote:
Core 2 Duo @1.8 GHZ / Intel Quad Core@2.4 (AMD processors would require more)


Why would AMD require more? The last time I did research on AMD vs Intel CPUs (which, admittedly was a good while ago) AMD consistently clocked faster than Intel at same specs; which is to say that 2.4 GHZ AMD performed better than a 2.4 GHZ Intel, as a function of base design that had AMDs going from point A to B, whereas Intels had to go from point A to B to C for the same process.

Cyiode wrote:
I doubt that SE is going to take advantage of quad core architecture. I expect that the majority of the game processing will be running on a single thread.


I would expect it to make use of dual cores, but I agree that I would be surprised to see them make use of quad core. Very few games on the market today utilize quad core. Most programs that do are graphic design minded, or science related.
____________________________
.:Seraph:.
Blu90/Drg90/Dnc90/Mnk90/Nin90/Rng75/Sam75/Bst66
Pld64/Cor50/Rdm50/War45//Thf38

Square Enix when ToAU first went live wrote:
The TP information included in "physical" blue magic spells is
only applicable when using the job ability "Chain Affinity."
#14 Dec 12 2009 at 12:46 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,089 posts
Quote:
But the major factor would probably be MIN 10Mps broadband, REC 15Mps


LOL WHAT

We don't live in Korean, Europe, or Japan. Yea some places in America get that but you drastically over estimate the infrastructure in this country.
#15 Dec 12 2009 at 9:49 PM Rating: Good
I know my comp cant play it.
But I bought a ps3 a few years back..and I think im getting a HDTV for xmas..so yea..im ready!
____________________________
Sandinmyeye | |Tsukaremashi*a |
#16 Dec 12 2009 at 10:37 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
737 posts
It's just to soon. The new 2009 stuff is old in 2010... CPU wise. ATI right now is killing it. However when Nvidia release their new GPU's who knows. Technology travels to fast. Wait and a custom PC by FFXIV release will be extremely cheaper then now.

Patience will save you alot of money.
____________________________
#17 Dec 13 2009 at 4:18 AM Rating: Decent
******
22,699 posts
FFXIV will require eyefinity use as a minimum requirement, obviously.
____________________________
Dear people I don't like: 凸(●´―`●)凸
#18 Dec 13 2009 at 8:54 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,439 posts
I think the main factor for me will be that I've got both PC and PS3, my PC being a little older (even though I have decent RAM, graphics card etc) will mean that instead of upgrading/buying new PC I'll just stick to PS3.

plus - and this was a big factor in my decision to buy a PS3 [believe it or not] - I played FFXI on PC and never got off it - at least the PS3 uses the family TV so I CAN'T play it as much as I would on a PC!

Don't think my wife has cottoned on to this fact yet - roll on beta!
____________________________
Esuna Forums

#19 Dec 13 2009 at 11:45 AM Rating: Decent
26 posts
I have a PS3 and I'm thinking about building a new computer in februrary when I get my student loan money. Gotta decide between Intel i5 or AMD Phenom II quad core...
#20 Dec 13 2009 at 12:22 PM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
xjbrownx wrote:
I have a PS3 and I'm thinking about building a new computer in februrary when I get my student loan money. Gotta decide between Intel i5 or AMD Phenom II quad core...


I don't know anything about AMD but if you see at any point in time in the future of upgrading your processor I wouldn't go with the i5. From what I hear the 1156 is pretty much only going to be used for the i5 and a few of the i7s, the 1366 is what will be used for chips from here on out. Sad, I know, the 1156 boards are so much cheaper.

Plus i5 processors don't support triple channel memory...which I suppose isn't that important but still something to think about.
#21 Dec 13 2009 at 12:39 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
*
224 posts
Quote:
But the major factor would probably be MIN 10Mps broadband, REC 15Mps



mpmaley wrote:
LOL WHAT

We don't live in Korean, Europe, or Japan. Yea some places in America get that but you drastically over estimate the infrastructure in this country.



10 - 15 Mps would mean 2 things, 90% of online gamers would not be able to play, second, that SE had fired their network engineers and hired poorly trained monkeys instead. I work in networking, dealing with a lot of area's throughout NA, and that would just not be a reasonable expectation.

Also, FFXI ran at 54 kb/s so people with dial up would be able to play the game, now with FFXIV it is unlikely they will program it to run that low, I would be very surprised to see traffic need to go much higher then 256kb/s
____________________________
75 blm, 75 nin, 75 brd, 64 bst, 57 pld, 53 rdm
NPC 65
RotZ= Complete
CoP= 8.1
Retired from FFXI.
Retired from LOTRO
Retired from Rift
#22 Dec 13 2009 at 1:26 PM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
Most mmos don't need that much bandwidth to run on. As the previous person said, FFXI worked well on dial up (I know from experience) and WoW worked ok on dial up (used to...though, I think that has changed).

Anyway, probably the most important component in being able to play the game well is keeping your rig clean (dust free) and well ventilated. Being hot is the #1 performance inhibitor.

...that sounds kind of odd now that I think about it...
#23 Dec 13 2009 at 6:59 PM Rating: Decent
38 posts
If you are curious about your system's ability to run the game, when the specs are released, go here: http://cyri.systemrequirementslab.com/srtest

Although not 100% reliable, it can give you a good idea of what you should look at upgrading, if anything.
#24 Dec 14 2009 at 3:00 PM Rating: Default
*
132 posts
Quote:
LOL WHAT

We don't live in Korean, Europe, or Japan. Yea some places in America get that but you drastically over estimate the infrastructure in this country.


You don't need to live in Korea, Japan to experience high speed internet connection.

We are not over estimating anything, the technology is available in most major U.S. cities now, there is a difference between being able to afford something and something does not exist.

As I made a post a few months back already, I got FIOs (fiber) for almost half a year now and the lowest speed rating on Verizon Fios puts me at 15mb/down and supposedly 10mb up but I'm getting symmetric results of 15MB up as well. By all honesty, I'm not paying that much extra either. I had the option to go with AT&T 1MB/sec down for $19.99, Verizon 2MB/sec down for $29.99, or TimeWarner Roadrunner cable 6MB/sec down for $49.99. In the end I chose Verizon FIOS 15MB/down 10MB/up for $59.99 a month.

I take it that you don't know anyone from Korea nor Japan.The average speed Japanese citizens and Korean citizens experience is 60MB/sec download speed. That is average. Funny part is U.S. citizens pays the same amount of money (or even more) for less service.

Google the article, Korea is also deploying the 1GB/sec internet service by 2012. They will also increase the speed and efficiency of wireless connection as well.

In response to the Estimated PC Specs, I have no idea how to answer that. Perhaps it is because I never look at a game's "minimum hardware requirements". I always overkill my new rig's specs, just so it can last me a bit longer before some parts in it becomes obsolete. Generally I change a new PC rig every 3 to 5 years. So to me, spending $2000 for a top of the line lan party rig every 3 to 5 years is a affordable investment.

I'd like to spend $2000 every 3 to 5 on a machine that is versatile. Rather than spending $500 every year building a budget rig that might or might not work with the next best thing.
____________________________
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer
German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

#25 Dec 15 2009 at 10:57 AM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,099 posts
15/10 for $60 a month? They saw you coming a mile away! Fibre Optics (FTTH) are capable of much more than that. Virgin broadband do a 50 meg connection for £28 per month using FTTH, Japan offers 1Gb FTTH for about the same price, bog standard ADSL2+ (which would be copper and not fibre) offers 24Mb download speeds at around £15 a month.

If you're using Fibre and only getting 15Mb download speeds then I'd seriously consider switching to an ISP that can use that fibre.

As for the specs, no one really knows, you can't compare the PS3 to a PC the same way you can't compare 11 on the PS2 to 11 on the PC. Windows XP is gone, MS will pull support for it pretty soon so there is no advantage for 14 (which lets face it, has to last several years) using technology that's around 10 years old for a cutting edge game, in 2015 it'd be using technology from 2000.

SE stated that they want 14 to run on average systems in 5 years time, so you can expect the requirements to be pretty steep for a PC, they won't require more than 3Gb RAM unless they make it 64 bit only (not likely), Dual Core is a fair requirement as they are pretty ubiquitous, video card, DX10 compatible and a minimum of Windows Vista (DX10, get Windows 7 instead).

Of course, they could surprise us and make an x64 bit version instead, which would make use of my RAM.
____________________________
A strange obsession, mine. But better to be addicted to smartphones and gismos than cocaine or ***, I suppose. Well, I don’t know, the result is the same after all, very little sleep, great expense and horrific mess everywhere.

-- Stephen Fry
#26 Dec 15 2009 at 1:16 PM Rating: Good
Bandwidth != latency.

lrn2networking

Having an increase in bandwidth to even the most basic 512k broadband will be plenty for any MMO.

Unless they're going to stream the entire game while you play which just isn't feasable.
____________________________
RotZ: Complete | CoP: Complete | ToAU: Complete | ACP: Complete | MKE: Complete | ASA: Complete | WotG: Complete
#27 Dec 15 2009 at 2:30 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
Why would AMD require more? The last time I did research on AMD vs Intel CPUs (which, admittedly was a good while ago) AMD consistently clocked faster than Intel at same specs; which is to say that 2.4 GHZ AMD performed better than a 2.4 GHZ Intel, as a function of base design that had AMDs going from point A to B, whereas Intels had to go from point A to B to C for the same process.


It's the front side bus I think. More bandwidth to play around with on Intel mobos, more information gets passed between the chipset, devices, and the like and the CPU much much faster. There are some crazy things going on in their CPUs too, the latest Xeons outperform even the latest i7 CPUs. Xeons were designed with the ability to have multiple numbers of them installed on a mobo so twinned with other Xeons you have a seriously powerful machine. Cooling it becomes a problem however.

I'm a Phenom II x4 940 owner, and while it's bloody quick, I can't help but think that I'd get more performance out of an i7. If only I had that sort of money.

Running a Radeon HD4890/1Gb RAM, 8Gb 800Mhz RAM, 2x WD Velociraptor striped on a quad-core Phenom II x4 940 processor. I found that air cooling isn't sufficient enough to keep it cool (liquid cooling system failed! Using air cooling for now).

Modern Warfare 2 and Last Remnant runs with all settings maxed out at 60fps (The latter 300fps for some silly reason, fps isn't locked. The heat that pours out the back of the graphics card when playing that is freakin' crazy). I think I'll be able to run FFXIV on here, ahah.

Can get a much better rig now. Technology changes fast.
____________________________
[ffxisig]196499[/ffxisig]
#28 Dec 16 2009 at 5:41 PM Rating: Decent
*
132 posts
Wait wut? FSB as in Front Side Bus?

It doesn't exist on the newer model CPUs you've mentioned :)

FSB = bClock now :)




Edited, Dec 16th 2009 3:56pm by AliensAreHere
____________________________
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer
German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

#29 Dec 16 2009 at 7:45 PM Rating: Decent
I was always under the impression that AMD chips ran more instructions per cycle (i believe AMD ran 16 bit and intel 8 bit instruction) than intel. That is why Amd chips usually out performed pentiums of the same level. I'm not sure if that is true anymore though.

I seriously doubt that the min req will require a multi core cpu though. I'm thinking:


Windows XP/Windows Vista/ Windows 7 (x32, x64)
CPU 1.0 ghz or higher. 2.0 ghz dual core or above recommended.
Gpu 256mb. 512 or higher recommended.
mem 2gb 4gb or higher recommended.
HD space. 8Gb required.

Edited, Dec 16th 2009 8:50pm by Tenfooterten

Edited, Dec 16th 2009 8:51pm by Tenfooterten
#30 Dec 19 2009 at 10:34 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
34 posts
I foresee the min specs to be slightly higher then FFXI. Lets be honest, MMO's aren't breaking any grounds here. They make them so most PC users can enjoy the game, whether you are using a manufacture PC or Custom Build.

I for one know I'm good.

Win7
XFX 780i MoB
3Ghz Core 2 Duo
1TB HDD
4GB DDR2 RAM
2x XFX 9800GTX+ SLI

Or I can use my Vista 160GB HDD.
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 23 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (23)