Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4
This Forum is Read Only

[Official] FFXIV Minimum/Recommended System RequirementsFollow

#1 Jul 20 2010 at 2:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
602 posts
Source: http://www.finalfantasyxiv.com/media/recom/na/pc.html. Note: This is not the minimum system requirements.

 
 
The following PC specifications are required to run the game smoothly with our stipulated in-game settings. 
 
Window Size and Display Mode 		1280x720 (Windowed) 
Ambient Occlusion 		        OFF 
Depth of Field 		                ON 
Shadow Detail 		                Standard 
Multisampling 		                4x MSAA 
Buffer Size 		                Window Size 
Texture Quality 		        High 
Texture Filtering 		        High 
 
OS 	                    Minimum: Windows XP SP3, Windows Vista 32-bit/64-bit Windows 7 32-bit/64-bit* 
                        Recommended: Windows 7 32-bit/64-bit* 
 
CPU 	                    Minimum: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0Ghz or higher 
                            Minimum: AMD Athlon X2 2.0GHz or higher 
                        Recommended: Intel Core i7-920 2.66GHz or higher 
                        Recommended: AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 2.8 GHz or higher 
 
RAM 	                    Minimum: Windows XP: 1.5GB or higher 
                            Minimum: Windows Vista 32-bit/64-bit, Windows 7 32-bit/64bit: 2GB or higher 
                        Recommended: Windows 7 32-bit/64-bit: 4GB or more 
 
HDD/SDD   Installation: 15GB of free space 
              Download: 6GB of free space on the drive containing "My Documents" 
 
Graphics Card 	            Minimum: nVidia GeForce 9600 or better with VRAM 512MB or more 
                            Minimum: ATI HD 2900 or better with VRAM 512MB or more 
                        Recommended: nVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 or better with VRAM 768MB or more 
                        Recommended: ATI HD 5830 1GB or better 
 
Sound Card 	        DirectSound compatible sound card (DirectX 9.0c or higher) 
 
Internet Connection 	Broadband or better (always-on) 
 
Resolution 	        1280x720 (32-bit) or higher 
 
DirectX          	DirectX 9.0c 
 
Others 	                Mouse, Keyboard, Gamepad 
 
* On a 64-bit OS, the software will run via WOW64 ( Windows 32-bit On Windows 64-bit ). 
Microsoft, Windows, and Microsoft DirectX are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the 
United States and/or other countries. Other company and product names are trademarks or registered  
trademarks of their respective owners. 
 
NOTE: 
-	Please contact the relevant manufacturer for product information. 
-	Even if your PC meets these requirements, compatibility issues with certain hardware,  
software, and driver combinations may prevent the game from running acceptably. 
 
 
 
 
Recommended AMD Build Specs and Cost: 
 
        CPU: Phenom II x6 1055T                  $200.00 
Motherboard: DDR2 1200, PCI-E 2.0 1 x16 slot      $70.00 
     Memory: DDR2* 1200 4GB (2x2GB)              $125.00 
       Case: Any Mid Tower ATX Case               $50.00 
        PSU: 600w+ 12V Rail: 25amps+ required     $50.00 
        GPU: ATI 5830 1GB                        $200.00 
             * DDR3 Route may cost more. 
 
Total: $695.00 (Minimum Build Estimate: $400.00) 
 
Recommended Intel Build Specs and Cost: 
 
        CPU: i7-920                              $300.00 
Motherboard: DDR3, PCI-E 2.0 2 x16 slot          $150.00 
     Memory: DDR3 any 6GB (3x2GB)                $125.00 
       Case: Any Mid Tower ATX Case               $50.00 
        PSU: 600w+ 12V Rail: 25amps+ required     $50.00 
        GPU: nVidia GeForce 460 GTX              $200.00 
 
Total: $ 875.00 (Minimum Build Estimate: $600.00) 


This is missing DVD drive, HD, etc. Assume you would use the old stuff off your other computer, if not; then add this into costs. Plus some could reuse their power supply, case, memory etc to save even more money so this is just a crude estimation really with NewEgg prices. And you are at least looking at a bare minimum of a $500.0 investment into building a new system from what I can see. Prices are subject to change and may vary by store.

Good luck to everyone out there!

Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 11:18pm by Excenmille

Edited, Jul 22nd 2010 11:20pm by Excenmille
#2 Jul 20 2010 at 2:38 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
158 posts
Cheers for this. I'm up to spec but still running XP, might upgrade to Windows 7 if it's going to be beneficial.
#3 Jul 20 2010 at 2:40 PM Rating: Decent
*
242 posts
Overshot, in a "cover your ***" type way so that people who only get 45 FPS on low settings can't be "like, WTF mate?"
____________________________


#4 Jul 20 2010 at 2:41 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,001 posts
I will be able to run this game - but I think the required system specs are already going to limit its player base by a huge amount.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 4:42pm by Nyu
____________________________
FFXIV: Lord Atomsk - Lalafell on Lindblum
FFXI: Nyu 75 SAM (retired)
------------------------------------
#5 Jul 20 2010 at 2:43 PM Rating: Good
***
3,443 posts
Quote:
Cheers for this. I'm up to spec but still running XP, might upgrade to Windows 7 if it's going to be beneficial.


It can't hurt. If the cost of upgrading your OS isn't a burden for you, it's worth moving from XP to 7. They fixed a lot of issues with Vista and actually put out a good OS. With 7 you also get the benefits of the current version of directx (dx11) rather than XP's dx9.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 3:43pm by Callinon
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#6 Jul 20 2010 at 2:49 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
47 posts
I meet all of these except for the CPU. I have an Intel Core i5 540M 2.53GHz. I hope it doesn't hinder performance TOO bad...
#7 Jul 20 2010 at 2:52 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
602 posts
Hmm. I would love to see a XP screen shot versus a 7 screen shot with the Beta client to see if you can tell the differences. If anyone has the ability to do that take two screenshots of roughly the same spot in XP and 7, PM me. Would be glad to see the subtle differences in lighting/shadows/etc.

Funny thing is, Windows XP support has been extended to 2020 recently, full updates. And I believe XP Professional 64-bit is support until 2014 still, security updates only.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 4:53pm by Excenmille
#8 Jul 20 2010 at 3:03 PM Rating: Good
***
2,120 posts
My system meets none of those, confirming what I expected...I could go the route of upgrading my vid card & power supply, hoping to meet the bare minimum requirements or just get an all new system...the latter sounds more fun...
#9 Jul 20 2010 at 3:09 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,010 posts
Recommended is a hexacore? Really?

I agree with some of the other posters in here - they are going to find they have a very small playerbase at launch as it is without a Ps3 and Xbox360 option; this is just going to cut that small number down even more. Dual cores are more of the norm among average people, with general gamers coming in at the quad core mark and enthusiasts rawking the latest hexas.

Good luck with that, SE.
#10 Jul 20 2010 at 3:12 PM Rating: Good
Torrence wrote:
Recommended is a hexacore? Really?

I agree with some of the other posters in here - they are going to find they have a very small playerbase at launch as it is without a Ps3 and Xbox360 option; this is just going to cut that small number down even more. Dual cores are more of the norm among average people, with general gamers coming in at the quad core mark and enthusiasts rawking the latest hexas.

Good luck with that, SE.


The i7-920 and the Phenom II X6 currently cost almost exactly the same on newegg.com ($1 difference)

I'm sure that's why they went with that.

Also, for being almost exactly the same price, the X6 is scoring 1,000 points higher on passmarks bench.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 2:14pm by Osarion
#11 Jul 20 2010 at 3:16 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
630 posts
You also have to realize that this is running the game with higher settings and no lag. They specifically stated this isn't the minimum specs and this is a system that will run you the game with NO HICCUPS! SE isn't being unreasonable, this is what you should have expected for an MMO that will last 5+ years.
#12 Jul 20 2010 at 3:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
****
5,587 posts
Excenmille wrote:

The following PC specifications are required to run the game smoothly with our stipulated in-game settings.

Window Size and Display Mode 1280x720 (Windowed)
Ambient Occlusion OFF
Depth of Field ON
Shadow Detail Standard
Multisampling 4x MSAA
Buffer Size Window Size
Texture Quality High
Texture Filtering High
I think the bold is the key phrase here. If you want the game to look nice like their demo videos, this what you'll need. Doesn't mean we won't be able to adjust the settings to something else. Just look at the settings they list there.
____________________________
Harri
80BLU/80BST/76RNG/75THF/75WHM/60SCH
100+3 Bonecraft
#13 Jul 20 2010 at 3:17 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,443 posts
Torrence wrote:
Recommended is a hexacore? Really?

I agree with some of the other posters in here - they are going to find they have a very small playerbase at launch as it is without a Ps3 and Xbox360 option; this is just going to cut that small number down even more. Dual cores are more of the norm among average people, with general gamers coming in at the quad core mark and enthusiasts rawking the latest hexas.

Good luck with that, SE.


If you tried to play FFXI at launch you'll remember there being a very similar problem with the system requirements for that game.

SE isn't terribly interested in building a game that can be played on the average system, they've made that pretty clear with the FFXI and now FFXIV requirements. I believe it has something to do with not wanting to "compromise the experience."

Oh, for the record, the i7 920 is a quad-core not hexa-core processor
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#14 Jul 20 2010 at 3:28 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
630 posts
Callinon wrote:
Torrence wrote:
Recommended is a hexacore? Really?

I agree with some of the other posters in here - they are going to find they have a very small playerbase at launch as it is without a Ps3 and Xbox360 option; this is just going to cut that small number down even more. Dual cores are more of the norm among average people, with general gamers coming in at the quad core mark and enthusiasts rawking the latest hexas.

Good luck with that, SE.


If you tried to play FFXI at launch you'll remember there being a very similar problem with the system requirements for that game.

SE isn't terribly interested in building a game that can be played on the average system, they've made that pretty clear with the FFXI and now FFXIV requirements. I believe it has something to do with not wanting to "compromise the experience."

Oh, for the record, the i7 920 is a quad-core not hexa-core processor


quad core hyper-threaded = hexa-core ya digg??
#15 Jul 20 2010 at 3:29 PM Rating: Decent
**
465 posts
Does anyone know of a high and/or low Benchmark score for a system closest to what they recommend here? Might lend some perspective as to what exactly they mean by "recommended."
____________________________
Lodestone
#16 Jul 20 2010 at 3:30 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,443 posts
burtonsnow wrote:
Callinon wrote:
Torrence wrote:
Recommended is a hexacore? Really?

I agree with some of the other posters in here - they are going to find they have a very small playerbase at launch as it is without a Ps3 and Xbox360 option; this is just going to cut that small number down even more. Dual cores are more of the norm among average people, with general gamers coming in at the quad core mark and enthusiasts rawking the latest hexas.

Good luck with that, SE.


If you tried to play FFXI at launch you'll remember there being a very similar problem with the system requirements for that game.

SE isn't terribly interested in building a game that can be played on the average system, they've made that pretty clear with the FFXI and now FFXIV requirements. I believe it has something to do with not wanting to "compromise the experience."

Oh, for the record, the i7 920 is a quad-core not hexa-core processor


quad core hyper-threaded = hexa-core ya digg??


You win this round.... but I'll be back!
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#17 Jul 20 2010 at 3:35 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
630 posts
Coyohma wrote:
Does anyone know of a high and/or low Benchmark score for a system closest to what they recommend here? Might lend some perspective as to what exactly they mean by "recommended."


Not my system, but taken from here:

http://www.bluegartr.com/forum/showthread.php?t=94743


I would say


Low: 5300+

High: 3300+

I do have a similar system that hits 6200 and 4900 respectively (i7 930 & 5870)



LOL sounds good callinon :)

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 5:36pm by burtonsnow
#18 Jul 20 2010 at 3:58 PM Rating: Good
**
349 posts
It's kinda akward...I though I would do at least the recommanded spec with a i5-750 >.>
#19 Jul 20 2010 at 4:09 PM Rating: Decent
*
126 posts
Wow those are some high specs but I wonder how far you can push the resolution without the 4xMSAA. But only 720p smooth on high settings requiring a 460 or 5830 or higher, yikes!
#20 Jul 20 2010 at 4:11 PM Rating: Good
**
349 posts
I actually wonder if the fact the recommanded requirement are so close to the i5-750 range that the difference will be small.
#21 Jul 20 2010 at 4:13 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
630 posts
The difference between an i7 930 and i5 750 are very minimal, especially since the 750 overclocks so well.


I've been using this a lot to compare different products:

http://www.bluegartr.com/forum/showthread.php?t=94743
#22 Jul 20 2010 at 5:21 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
A hexacore and a 460/5830?

And here I was suggesting people buy a quad core and a GTX 2XX/5770 just to make the game "playable". Hah.

Perhaps this should help with the "Hey, I'm buying these parts so that my system will just barely meet the minimum requirements, so I should be able to play the game on max settings, right?" things.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 7:25pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#23 Jul 20 2010 at 5:29 PM Rating: Good
***
3,443 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
A hexacore and a 460/5830?

And here I was suggesting people buy a quad core and a GTX 2XX/5770 just to make the game "playable". Hah.

Perhaps this should help with the "Hey, I'm buying these parts so that my system will just barely meet the minimum requirements, so I should be able to play the game on max settings, right?" things.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 7:25pm by Mikhalia


Unfortunately, nothing ever really stops that
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#24 Jul 20 2010 at 5:34 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Callinon wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
A hexacore and a 460/5830?

And here I was suggesting people buy a quad core and a GTX 2XX/5770 just to make the game "playable". Hah.

Perhaps this should help with the "Hey, I'm buying these parts so that my system will just barely meet the minimum requirements, so I should be able to play the game on max settings, right?" things.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 7:25pm by Mikhalia


Unfortunately, nothing ever really stops that


Hence the "perhaps". Wishful thinking on my part.

At least it gives me something to copypasta when people say "omg you're exaggerating! My quad core and GT series card will be fine!"
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#25 Jul 20 2010 at 5:35 PM Rating: Default
*
230 posts
i7 920 quad core > hyper theaded= octocore yah digg?


#26 Jul 20 2010 at 5:42 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
784 posts
burtonsnow wrote:
Callinon wrote:
Torrence wrote:
Recommended is a hexacore? Really?

I agree with some of the other posters in here - they are going to find they have a very small playerbase at launch as it is without a Ps3 and Xbox360 option; this is just going to cut that small number down even more. Dual cores are more of the norm among average people, with general gamers coming in at the quad core mark and enthusiasts rawking the latest hexas.

Good luck with that, SE.


If you tried to play FFXI at launch you'll remember there being a very similar problem with the system requirements for that game.

SE isn't terribly interested in building a game that can be played on the average system, they've made that pretty clear with the FFXI and now FFXIV requirements. I believe it has something to do with not wanting to "compromise the experience."

Oh, for the record, the i7 920 is a quad-core not hexa-core processor


quad core hyper-threaded = hexa-core ya digg??


Um, no.

You take a quad core (4 physical cores) with HT and you get 8 logical cores (octocore)

Hexa = 6

Hexa cores with HT =12 logical cores
____________________________
Amazing linkshell/guild hosting

#27 Jul 20 2010 at 5:56 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
350 posts
How much money is AMD, Intel, Nvidia and ATI paying SE???? Seriously... :P
#28 Jul 20 2010 at 6:01 PM Rating: Good
***
3,443 posts
Cyiode wrote:
How much money is AMD, Intel, Nvidia and ATI paying SE???? Seriously... :P


Not sure what you're implying here.

AMD and Intel are the accepted standard for personal computer CPUs

ATI and nVidia are the accepted standard for personal computer GPUs

While there are other manufacturers out there.. these are the standard and what 90% of the people looking to check their system against the requirements are going to have (or are able to compare against)
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#29 Jul 20 2010 at 6:02 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
784 posts
Cyiode wrote:
How much money is AMD, Intel, Nvidia and ATI paying SE???? Seriously... :P


When filling out the registration on new computer components, they should include a section titled "Why did you decide to buy this component" with a check-box listing "To run FFXIV better" and then pay SE for every person who ticks the box.

Then SE could use the extra money to further improve the game :P
____________________________
Amazing linkshell/guild hosting

#30 Jul 20 2010 at 6:02 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
784 posts
Callinon wrote:
Cyiode wrote:
How much money is AMD, Intel, Nvidia and ATI paying SE???? Seriously... :P


Not sure what you're implying here.

AMD and Intel are the accepted standard for personal computer CPUs

ATI and nVidia are the accepted standard for personal computer GPUs

While there are other manufacturers out there.. these are the standard and what 90% of the people looking to check their system against the requirements are going to have (or are able to compare against)


I'm pretty sure they were joking.
____________________________
Amazing linkshell/guild hosting

#31 Jul 20 2010 at 6:44 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,300 posts
Just as an aside, in the beta you can actually set your graphical settings higher. You can turn multisampling to 8x, and buffer size to "double."

Edit:

You can also set shadow detail to "High" or even "Highest." And obviously Ambient Occlusion can be turned on. All of these things obviously rape your framerate.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 8:46pm by Mase
____________________________
That which exists in creation without my knowledge, exists without my consent.
#32 Jul 20 2010 at 7:42 PM Rating: Good
*
198 posts
Quote:
OS Windows® 7 32-bit/64-bit*
CPU Intel® Core™ i7-920 2.66GHz or higher
# AMD Phenom II X6 1055T
RAM 4GB or more
HDD/SDD Installation: 15GB of free space
Download: 6GB of free space on the drive containing "My Documents"
Graphics Card NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 460 or better with VRAM 768MB or more
# ATI HD 5830 1GB or better.


All my stuff is just under that.

Windows XP 32bit
CPU Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @2.40GHz
Ram 3GB
Radeon HD 5750 1GB GDDR5

Hopefully i should be fine with little lower setting without to much lag. If not I guess i'll have to update at some point.
Edit: Upgrade as in, if able to get stuff cheap, or ps3 ver. Mostly ps3 ver(which i wanted to start on anywho) be best.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 9:44pm by Zalongamer
#33 Jul 20 2010 at 7:44 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,801 posts
Quote:
I will be able to run this game - but I think the required system specs are already going to limit its player base by a huge amount.


Yup.

Makes one wonder if SE is making to actually make money or not.
____________________________
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.

#34 Jul 20 2010 at 7:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Mase wrote:
Just as an aside, in the beta you can actually set your graphical settings higher. You can turn multisampling to 8x, and buffer size to "double."

Edit:

You can also set shadow detail to "High" or even "Highest." And obviously Ambient Occlusion can be turned on. All of these things obviously rape your framerate.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 8:46pm by Mase


I wonder if these things will become the hidden registry settings of FFXI.
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#35 Jul 20 2010 at 8:45 PM Rating: Good
***
2,614 posts
The hexacore processor and ATI graphics card suggestions were added by the OP... they're not actually recommended by SE.

My hunch is that an X4 965 would be a better analogue for AMD. I haven't heard anything that suggests the game makes use of six cores.
#36 Jul 20 2010 at 8:55 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Borkachev wrote:
The hexacore processor and ATI graphics card suggestions were added by the OP... they're not actually recommended by SE.

My hunch is that an X4 965 would be a better analogue for AMD. I haven't heard anything that suggests the game makes use of six cores.


According to passmark, the Phenom X6 1055T is the closest in terms of performance to the 920. Ditto for the 5830 being rated the closest Radeon to the GTX 460.

Edit: I'm also rather annoyed that for such a high end game, they're using DX9C still. One would think that they would be using 10/11. Even the minimum spec GPU supports DX10 IIRC. What the **** is the point of a shiny new GPU that supports DX11 if the highest-spec game (soon to be) on the market doesn't support DX11.

Anyone know any good games that -do- support DX11?

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 11:00pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#37 Jul 20 2010 at 9:04 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,448 posts
Intel is cutting prices on a few of it's CPU's for the "back to school" season.

AMD is/will be rolling out Bulldozer soon, a brand-new CPU architecture. We will likely see bulldozer chips available on the market by the time PS3 users are able to play in march.

I forget what is on the road map for Intel but I believe Sandy Bridge was recently pushed up a bit so it will release sooner as well.

Quite frankly there's just a lot of new CPU power coming around the corner from both companies. That's good too, because right now the i7-920 and the 1055t are the enthusiast' choice for overclocking. That means we won't be seeing outdated graphics in 5 years. I don't see why anyone should be complaining about the steep requirements. We've had plenty of time to be saving up for a new PC.


Also,
burtonsnow wrote:
quad core hyper-threaded = hexa-core ya digg??

*facepalm*
____________________________
Currently Playing: FFXIV:ARR
Lacaan Vasiim:Cactuar
Free Company:Cactuar Corp<CCorp>
catwho wrote:
If you need a bard to get "good exp" in a merit party, you're the weakest link.
#38 Jul 20 2010 at 9:09 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
**
393 posts
Great. I just finished paying for my system and now I have to upgrade already. Fortunately I probably only need to switch out the graphics card, and upgrade to Windows 7 if I have extra money left over.
#39 Jul 20 2010 at 9:20 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
FenrirXIII wrote:
I don't see why anyone should be complaining about the steep requirements. We've had plenty of time to be saving up for a new PC.


The complaints are because for the past year, SE has told us "This game will have high requirements" and everyone's thoughts were "psh, no it won't; my FFXI system should be able to run FFXIV at max."

Then a year later when SE actually gives us the numbers, people **** bricks because SE was actually telling them the truth, and then some.

Here's the summary of this month's news:

If SE says they are thinking about something, assume that this is a 100% guarantee that this feature WILL be added to the game in 1 month or less. Probably less.
--If they take too long, point out how SE's updates are horrible.
--If they end up not doing it, remind everyone how SE are filthy despicable liars and no one should ever buy their products. Continue playing anyway.
--If they actually release it, complain that it didn't turn out the way you had hoped.
-----If it did turn out the way you had hoped, try to find something they could have done differently and complain that they didn't do that instead.

If SE has a goal, assume that it will be reached and hold them to their word.
--If they reach their goal early, complain that you took the wrong day off of work because they lied to you.
--If they reach their goal on time, complain that they didn't reach it sooner, insisting that (despite the fact that you have no development or programming knowledge), you could have done it faster and/or better.
--If they will be late on their goal, call them horrible, disgusting liars who are blights on humanity for even existing and insist that no one buy their products any longer. Continue buying their products anyway.

If SE tells you something and you don't like it, ignore it. Assume they said whatever you like.
--If they were wrong, you point out that SE was wrong and you're glad you didn't listen to them.
--If they were right, point out how SE sucks for not informing you, or not being specific enough.
--If they were partially wrong and partially right, point out everything that was wrong, no matter how insignificant the detail.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#40 Jul 20 2010 at 9:33 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
770 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
FenrirXIII wrote:
I don't see why anyone should be complaining about the steep requirements. We've had plenty of time to be saving up for a new PC.


The complaints are because for the past year, SE has told us "This game will have high requirements" and everyone's thoughts were "psh, no it won't; my FFXI system should be able to run FFXIV at max."

Then a year later when SE actually gives us the numbers, people sh*t bricks because SE was actually telling them the truth, and then some.

Here's the summary of this month's news:

If SE says they are thinking about something, assume that this is a 100% guarantee that this feature WILL be added to the game in 1 month or less. Probably less.
--If they take too long, point out how SE's updates are horrible.
--If they end up not doing it, remind everyone how SE are filthy despicable liars and no one should ever buy their products. Continue playing anyway.
--If they actually release it, complain that it didn't turn out the way you had hoped.
-----If it did turn out the way you had hoped, try to find something they could have done differently and complain that they didn't do that instead.

If SE has a goal, assume that it will be reached and hold them to their word.
--If they reach their goal early, complain that you took the wrong day off of work because they lied to you.
--If they reach their goal on time, complain that they didn't reach it sooner, insisting that (despite the fact that you have no development or programming knowledge), you could have done it faster and/or better.
--If they will be late on their goal, call them horrible, disgusting liars who are blights on humanity for even existing and insist that no one buy their products any longer. Continue buying their products anyway.

If SE tells you something and you don't like it, ignore it. Assume they said whatever you like.
--If they were wrong, you point out that SE was wrong and you're glad you didn't listen to them.
--If they were right, point out how SE sucks for not informing you, or not being specific enough.
--If they were partially wrong and partially right, point out everything that was wrong, no matter how insignificant the detail.


hmm reminds me of an X gf...
____________________________
I do not suffer from insanity.. I rather enjoy it.

{retired} Devalynn Mithra WHM extrodinare -Garuda (gives everyone a high paw! yeah!)

Church OF Mikhalia
#41 Jul 20 2010 at 9:37 PM Rating: Default
*
230 posts
no no no . the person said that they recommend a hexacore but i7920 is a quad core. and hyper-thread gives u octocore.

not that hexacore isnt 6 with hyperthreading 12.


@_________@
#42 Jul 20 2010 at 9:43 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
geotrick wrote:
no no no . the person said that they recommend a hexacore but i7920 is a quad core. and hyper-thread gives u octocore.

not that hexacore isnt 6 with hyperthreading 12.


@_________@


No hexacore for computer, system tower with 60 fps, but is it for 30 like 60 fps when you overclock be it for game, for 60 fps instead? or half is 30 for 60 fps?
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#43 Jul 20 2010 at 9:44 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
Beautiful post Mikhalia. Absolutely fantastic.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#44 Jul 20 2010 at 9:57 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
185 posts
So I was going to buy a new computer next week after I get access to the rest of my money. Should I get it with the 1090T (I will be doing video encoding on occasion, among other things, though not all the time.) like I planned? or wait for the octocores? I also don't overclock, not my thing.

Last thing I remember seeing was the octocores would be out in 2011, but that was a while ago, or maybe I'm delirious or something and it was a dream.

I don't care about playing at max setting, I played 11 for the first 3 years on low setting with 15 fps average, yeah, computer was old and crappy.
____________________________

Dranio - FFXI Tarutaru BLM/BLU

#45 Jul 20 2010 at 10:11 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,448 posts
Dranio wrote:
So I was going to buy a new computer next week after I get access to the rest of my money. Should I get it with the 1090T (I will be doing video encoding on occasion, among other things, though not all the time.) like I planned? or wait for the octocores? I also don't overclock, not my thing.

Last thing I remember seeing was the octocores would be out in 2011, but that was a while ago, or maybe I'm delirious or something and it was a dream.

I don't care about playing at max setting, I played 11 for the first 3 years on low setting with 15 fps average, yeah, computer was old and crappy.


I am about to do the same. I suggest either going with an i5-750 from Intel or, if you are interested in a bit of future-proofing, pick up a higher end 890GX or 890FX AM3 motherboard with a phenom II x3 or x4 processor. This will give you the 'umph' for FFXIV and allow you to upgrade to AMD's Bulldozer CPU when it comes out within a year or so. Or at least upgrade to an x6 phenom if the prices drop after bulldozer/sandy bridge release.

Personally I am staying away from intel because they are burning through sockets so you can't really upgrade the CPU down the road without getting a new motherboard. =/



**edit**
Mik, dude. Asian guy speaking to tom cruise in the last samurai couldn't have said it better.

TOO MANY MIND.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 11:13pm by FenrirXIII
____________________________
Currently Playing: FFXIV:ARR
Lacaan Vasiim:Cactuar
Free Company:Cactuar Corp<CCorp>
catwho wrote:
If you need a bard to get "good exp" in a merit party, you're the weakest link.
#46 Jul 20 2010 at 10:40 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
66 posts
Even with this official system reqs. I will wait til the game is actually released and experience the gameplay on my rig to make any decisions on upgrades. If it is stuttering and unplayable with the specs I have then an upgrade is needed. But I do like the fact that SE is thinking about the future of the game rather than the now. If they had designed the game to be played on max settings with the current hardware then in 3-4-5 years the game will be lacking. But with the specs required now, people will eventually have the PCs to run the game on max settings. It will just be a progression of PC gaming.

From what I have read, PS3 version MIGHT be giving SE problems as to trying to fit the game specs so the PS3 can actually play the game. PC gamers will have the full game the way SE has designed it. All we need is to upgrade when we can. I'll take that over a slightly minimized version.
____________________________
Phoenix Server, Final Fantasy XI (Retired)
Etoh 75 Warrior, 75 White Mage, 75 Black Mage, 75 Summoner
37 Ninja, 37 Red Mage, 37 Samurai, 37 Thief, 37 Monk, 37 Blue Mage, 37 Dark Knight

Volkmar Server, Warhammer: Age of Reckoning (Retired)
Diabolos Nox R40/RR80 Sorcerer
Greasuss R40/RR68 Choppa
Rhra R40/RR63 Zealot
#47 Jul 20 2010 at 11:23 PM Rating: Good
***
2,614 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
Borkachev wrote:
The hexacore processor and ATI graphics card suggestions were added by the OP... they're not actually recommended by SE.

My hunch is that an X4 965 would be a better analogue for AMD. I haven't heard anything that suggests the game makes use of six cores.


According to passmark, the Phenom X6 1055T is the closest in terms of performance to the 920. Ditto for the 5830 being rated the closest Radeon to the GTX 460.

For whatever reason, Passmark's ratings heavily favor multi-core CPUs. I don't think there's a single reviewer who would say the 1055T is on par with the 920, except at a few highly threaded tasks. For gaming, the 1055T is pretty much identical to the 965.

The HD 5830 holds up pretty closely to the GTX 460, though.

Quote:
Edit: I'm also rather annoyed that for such a high end game, they're using DX9C still. One would think that they would be using 10/11. Even the minimum spec GPU supports DX10 IIRC. What the **** is the point of a shiny new GPU that supports DX11 if the highest-spec game (soon to be) on the market doesn't support DX11.

I think so too. I've heard rumblings from people that the beta actually already supports a few DX10 features, but I can't confirm that. And I think SE has said they plan to add DX11 support in the future, but to believe that we have to count on them doing a **** of a lot more for FFXIV's PC port than they ever did for FFXI.
#48 Jul 20 2010 at 11:37 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
I'm not surprised by these specs one bit. I stated in a previous thread that anyone not benchmarking at least 4000 should either upgrade or wait for the PS3 version. It appears I was right on the money. Well on the plus side, I'll be playing with a lot of PS3 players this time around.
#49 Jul 21 2010 at 12:20 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
784 posts
Borkachev wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
Borkachev wrote:
The hexacore processor and ATI graphics card suggestions were added by the OP... they're not actually recommended by SE.

My hunch is that an X4 965 would be a better analogue for AMD. I haven't heard anything that suggests the game makes use of six cores.


According to passmark, the Phenom X6 1055T is the closest in terms of performance to the 920. Ditto for the 5830 being rated the closest Radeon to the GTX 460.

For whatever reason, Passmark's ratings heavily favor multi-core CPUs. I don't think there's a single reviewer who would say the 1055T is on par with the 920, except at a few highly threaded tasks. For gaming, the 1055T is pretty much identical to the 965.

The HD 5830 holds up pretty closely to the GTX 460, though.

Quote:
Edit: I'm also rather annoyed that for such a high end game, they're using DX9C still. One would think that they would be using 10/11. Even the minimum spec GPU supports DX10 IIRC. What the **** is the point of a shiny new GPU that supports DX11 if the highest-spec game (soon to be) on the market doesn't support DX11.

I think so too. I've heard rumblings from people that the beta actually already supports a few DX10 features, but I can't confirm that. And I think SE has said they plan to add DX11 support in the future, but to believe that we have to count on them doing a **** of a lot more for FFXIV's PC port than they ever did for FFXI.


I should hope so, considering that even WoW is going to be using DX11 in Cataclysm to some extent.
____________________________
Amazing linkshell/guild hosting

#50 Jul 21 2010 at 1:48 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
516 posts
This is a bit of a shock for me. I just ordered the Phenom II X6 1055T, ATI 5830 and 8GB of ram last week. I don't know what I was expecting, but I'm wondering what it would run like with everything turned up.
#51 Jul 21 2010 at 2:57 AM Rating: Decent
*
165 posts
So how is this compared to the FFXIV Computer Building Guide? Are the recommended specs the Easy Prey or Even Match build?
____________________________
Yay, I got me a signature! ^.^b
« Previous 1 2 3 4
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 16 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (16)