Fallout 4 PC System Requirements

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Bethesda has released the PC system requirements for Fallout 4. It looks like you'll need a pretty healthy system to play on the recommended settings.

We’re almost there! In just over a month, the wait for Fallout 4 ends and you can finally explore its densely populated Wasteland on Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and PC. Until then, Vault-Tec was kind enough to provide us with some handy information to ready you for launch. PC Systems Requirements (Requires Internet Connection and Free Steam Account to Activate)

Minimum
  • Windows 7/8/10 (64-bit OS required)
  • Intel Core i5-2300 2.8 GHz/AMD Phenom II X4 945 3.0 GHz or equivalent
  • 8 GB RAM
  • 30 GB free HDD space
  • NVIDIA GTX 550 Ti 2GB/AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB or equivalent

Recommended
  • Windows 7/8/10 (64-bit OS required)
  • Intel Core i7 4790 3.6 GHz/AMD FX-9590 4.7 GHz or equivalent
  • 8 GB RAM
  • 30 GB free HDD space
  • NVIDIA GTX 780 3GB/AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB or equivalent
 
Interesting because there are many Intel CPUs that are slower than the i5-2300 and i7-4790 that are still faster than the corresponding AMD chips that are listed in those same categories.
 
interesting that VRAM is becoming more and more prevalent in system requirements.

well i guess not that interesting.
 
if the recommended is 3 or 4GB, i wonder what mods will push it to.

fallout3 had some great high res texture mods.

uugghhh i might need ~6GB now
 
I am still running an E8400 based system (although I just added a GTX 770) ... we'll see if it will run okay for me ... I do plan to upgrade to an i7 at the end of year once the company bonuses are issued
 
cinnamonandgravy said:
if the recommended is 3 or 4GB, i wonder what mods will push it to.

fallout3 had some great high res texture mods.

uugghhh i might need ~6GB now
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, Fallout New Vegas mods was the reason I bought a 2GB 6950, instead of the standard 1GB 6950, way back then. Mods for modern Bethesda games were the only gaming activities that were capable of using 2GB VRAM at the time. Now it looks like it will be Fallout once again pushing VRAM. But as I have said before, it will be completely unacceptable if they do not make Fallout 4 a full 64-bit game that also fully utilizes 4+ threads. Let's hope they do not cut corners this time around, like they did with Skyrim.
 
thats it I am done. I can't stretch this old c2d e6850 @ 3.8ghz abit ip-35 any longer. last game it ran fine was tomb raider. played that flawlessly along with my r9 285. played witcher 3 at 30fps but couldn't keep it up and would studder bad at times.

i have fallout fever so bad :(
 
Damn! My i7-3770K is 0.1 GHz short for the recommended specs. Oh well, I'll just set everything to minimum and enjoy the storyline and gameplay.


:p
 
MRAB54 said:
Requires internet connection? ::facepalm::
Click to expand...

Did you read the second part. Requires Steam account. So yeah at least for Activation it needs to be online. The real question is whether it has cloud based support services that need to run when playing the game. Nothing listed here will answer that.
 
Kind of surprised over the intel Core i7 on the high end, Games typically are not CPU bound even less so if they are multithreaded.
Have not seen anything take full use of the 8 threads of a normal i7 yet. and a faster (in Gz) i5 can be better then a slower i7 in varying amounts.
Wonder what's changed? or if this is just marketing.
 
ta_erog said:
Kind of surprised over the intel Core i7 on the high end, Games typically are not CPU bound even less so if they are multithreaded.
Have not seen anything take full use of the 8 threads of a normal i7 yet. and a faster (in Gz) i5 can be better then a slower i7 in varying amounts.
Wonder what's changed? or if this is just marketing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this stood out to me too.

The recommended CPU's seem pretty high. I wonder why they need all that power.

The only game I have played in recent years requiring that kind of CPU horsepower has been Red Orchestra 2, and then only because of the pseudo-realistic bullet physics on 64 player servers.
 
bluesynk said:
thats it I am done. I can't stretch this old c2d e6850 @ 3.8ghz abit ip-35 any longer. last game it ran fine was tomb raider. played that flawlessly along with my r9 285. played witcher 3 at 30fps but couldn't keep it up and would studder bad at times.

i have fallout fever so bad :(
Click to expand...

I just upgraded from an overclocked q6600.

Performance increase was absurdly massive even with the same GPU.

Pull the trigger, rise above.
 
bluesynk said:
thats it I am done. I can't stretch this old c2d e6850 @ 3.8ghz abit ip-35 any longer. last game it ran fine was tomb raider. played that flawlessly along with my r9 285. played witcher 3 at 30fps but couldn't keep it up and would studder bad at times.

i have fallout fever so bad :(
Click to expand...

Just go with a g3258 + z97 board for $100. Huge upgrade.
 
Going to have to brush off the dust from my gaming rig come November. I've been playing mgs 5 on my ps4 since release. Fallout 4 I pre-ordered on my pc. Looks like my 4790k + 32gb of ram and titan-x should have no issues though :).

I kind of miss the days when I could play more than 1-2days/week and more than 1 game at a time. Oh well, parenthood and demanding jobs will do that to you. My sage advice is to live in your parents basement and play video games until you die :).
 
Direkt said:
Fake realistic? I see... :p
Click to expand...

More like "sortof" realistic. No game is perfect, but the bullet physics are pretty damned good, taking into account adjusting sights for bullet drop over distances, and having to lead targets running side to side.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041899702 said:
More like "sortof" realistic. No game is perfect, but the bullet physics are pretty damned good, taking into account adjusting sights for bullet drop over distances, and having to lead targets running side to side.
Click to expand...

I know, I love RO2. I was just giving you a hard time. :)
 
According to this, my PC is going to struggle as it barely meets the cpu and flat out doesn't meet the gpu. Yet strangely I haven't had trouble running games that honestly look better...The requirements seem....off is what I'm trying to say.
 
That seems excessive, it's still the Creation Engine used in Skyrim but with an updated rendering pipeline for DX11.
 
Fallout/Skyrim games have a lot of physical objects. I'm guessing they enhanced their physics simulations and that's where the power is going.
 
How long before the internet is full of posts claiming that Fallout 4 is a terrible game that's incredibly unoptimized because my Q6600 with a Geforce GTS 250 and 4 GB of RAM can't run the game at max settings @ 1080p 60 fps?
 
Nytegard said:
How long before the internet is full of posts claiming that Fallout 4 is a terrible game that's incredibly unoptimized because my Q6600 with a Geforce GTS 250 and 4 GB of RAM can't run the game at max settings @ 1080p 60 fps?
Click to expand...

Happens ever time a popular title is launched.

I remember players on my CS servers complaing that there was something wrong with the server after I upgraded the main one to CS:Source when it launched.

I also remember people trying to blame the death of their GeForce 9800 GT's on Civilization 5 when it launched, even after Nvidia had their G92 solder issue :p

People are crazy sometimes.
 
Game with high system requirements indicate lazy developers and programmers who don't bother to optimize the game and are ruining your gaming experience.

Game with low system requirements indicate lazy developers and programmers who are pandering to the console crowd and are ruining your gaming experience.
 
I have to have a pc with pc hardware to play this pc game? This is an outrage. Fuck these guys for making me have a pc to play pc games. I should be able to play it on a piece of lint I pull out of my pocket.
 
GotNoRice said:
Interesting because there are many Intel CPUs that are slower than the i5-2300 and i7-4790 that are still faster than the corresponding AMD chips that are listed in those same categories.
Click to expand...

Interesting because there are many AMD GPUs that are slower than the Radeon HD 7870 2GB and Radeon R9 290X 4GB that are still faster than the corresponding Nvidia chips that are listed in those same categories.
 
Bandalo said:
Game with high system requirements indicate lazy developers and programmers who don't bother to optimize the game and are ruining your gaming experience.

Game with low system requirements indicate lazy developers and programmers who are pandering to the console crowd and are ruining your gaming experience.
Click to expand...

This is the gaming equivalent of the famous George Carlin description of driving ... if they are going slower than you then they are an idiot, if they are going faster then they are a maniac ... same rule with games and systems ... if the requirements or more than you have they did something wrong, if the requirements are less they did something wrong ... since there is no real Goldilocks zone for computers the developers might as well go high than low :cool:
 
Zarathustra[H];1041899702 said:
More like "sortof" realistic. No game is perfect, but the bullet physics are pretty damned good, taking into account adjusting sights for bullet drop over distances, and having to lead targets running side to side.
Click to expand...
"Quasirealistic" would be the not-quite-a-word I'd use there. :)
 
Topweasel said:
Did you read the second part. Requires Steam account. So yeah at least for Activation it needs to be online. The real question is whether it has cloud based support services that need to run when playing the game. Nothing listed here will answer that.
Click to expand...

I think his post was a joke.








At least it better have been..
 
The game could be decently optimized and there would still be posts on the Steam forums after the game is released: "GAME RUNS LIKE !@#$, LAZY PORT." No specs given anywhere in the post or if someone asks for specs the OP replies asking what "specs" are or how to find out what their system specs are. Then they post the dxdiag info and facepalm ensues.
 
shit.... I JUST bought a GTX970... the 4GB VRAM thing is kinda making wonder if I should have gone with a R380 w/8GB
 
Attila:TW has been pushing my 780 Ti's 3GB VRAM pretty hard. I hope I don't have any issues with this.
 
Bandalo said:
Game with high system requirements indicate lazy developers and programmers who don't bother to optimize the game and are ruining your gaming experience.

Game with low system requirements indicate lazy developers and programmers who are pandering to the console crowd and are ruining your gaming experience.
Click to expand...

You win the thread, sir.
 
i dont care about polygon count, or physics, or shaders, or texture size. I want mah 1080/60!!!!!
 
I really dislike system recommendations made in a vacuum like this. I'd prefer it if they broke it down a little farther by resolution and settings, similar to how HardOCP reviews video cards. There's a lot of us that are perfectly content to run at 1080p on our desktop, and just from a sheer number of pixels being pushed perspective, all things being equal, you get about a 77% performance boost at the lower resolution compared to, say, 1440p.

I'm slightly above the min recommended system with my venerable old Core i5 2500k and Radeon 7870 "Tahiti" card. Hopefully that can handle 1080p with decent but not excessive eye candy turned on without becoming a power point presentation...
 
I remember a long time ago while at Incredible Universe off Northwest Hwy in Dallas. I was reading the requirements for a game. Hard drive space required was 20MB and I thought, DAMN! Now even 30GB is no surprise.
 
I say we wait to see when it releases. System requirements like these are a joke. GTX-550ti and Radeon HD-7870 aren't even in the same league.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top