Fallout 76 B.E.T.A. System Requirements Are Available

cageymaru

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
22,086
The PC system requirements for the Fallout 76 B.E.T.A. are now available and the minimum spec is pretty tame. A 64 bit processor and Windows based OS are required. Windows 7, 8, and 10 are supported. An Intel Core i5-6600k 3.5GHz or AMD Ryzen 3 1300X 3.5 GHz or equivalent CPU is necessary. An older NVIDIA GTX 780 3GB or AMD R9 285 2GB video card will allow you to play. 8GB of ram and 60GB of storage space will be necessary for the game.

The recommended system spec is as follows. Same OS restrictions as above. An Intel i7-4790k or AMD Ryzen 5 1500X will meet the recommended CPU specs, while an NVIDIA GTX 970 4GB, or AMD R9 290X 4GB video card should be plenty for hunting creatures. Again the same 8GB of ram and 60GB of storage space are necessary to play the game.

Q: WHEN DOES THE B.E.T.A. START?

The B.E.T.A. begins first on Xbox One on Tuesday, October 23, and on PlayStation 4 and PC on October 30. The B.E.T.A. can only be accessed by players who pre-ordered Fallout 76 from participating retailers.
 
"I won't be buying this at launch, I've seen a ton of tech issues on pc. If you wanted to purchase it on pc I'd wait, it's rough" -James (guy on the left)

(Mitchell is the one that went into his inventory when 4 mutants were chasing him only to die promptly.)

Game has a lot of issues, being released too soon. Keep supporting games/studios that ship unpolished works in progress at launch and this is all you will ever get. Rushed, unfinished money grabs, enjoy kiddos!
 
doublejack said:
I strongly suspect an i5 2500k with a typical overclock will suffice. The legend continues.
Click to expand...

i5 2500k is not even enough at 4.5ghz for fallout 4, it should be totally insufficient for a much more intensive online version even on the same engine..
 
Nothing enhances the mood of a fog-laden, creepy and atmospheric post-apocalyptic world like exploring its dangerous, foreboding locations.....with a dozen Leroy Jenkins randos all barnstorming the same doors and spraying-and-praying every single enemy and swarming the loot areas. Bethesda just turned the Wasteland into a Frat Party.
 
Fairly modest requirements. I wonder what that jumps up to for 3840x1600 with high settings?
 
Araxie said:
i5 2500k is not even enough at 4.5ghz for fallout 4, it should be totally insufficient for a much more intensive online version even on the same engine..
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you are not correct. My wife has an i5 2500k in her gaming PC. She played through fallout 4 the first time with that and a 550 Ti, granted with really low graphics settings. She played through a second time when she got upgraded to an RX 480 8gb so she could max the settings and enjoy the beauty of the game (she has a 24" 1080p display). The 2500k did awesome.
 
cageymaru said:
The PC system requirements for the Fallout 76 B.E.T.A. are now available and the minimum spec is pretty tame. A 64 bit processor and Windows based OS are required. Windows 7, 8, and 10 are supported. An Intel Core i5-6600k 3.5GHz or AMD Ryzen 3 1300X 3.5 GHz or equivalent CPU is necessary. An older NVIDIA GTX 780 3GB or AMD R9 285 2GB video card will allow you to play. 8GB of ram and 60GB of storage space will be necessary for the game.

The recommended system spec is as follows. Same OS restrictions as above. An Intel i7-4790k or AMD Ryzen 5 1500X will meet the recommended CPU specs, while an NVIDIA GTX 970 4GB, or AMD R9 290X 4GB video card should be plenty for hunting creatures. Again the same 8GB of ram and 60GB of storage space are necessary to play the game.

Q: WHEN DOES THE B.E.T.A. START?

The B.E.T.A. begins first on Xbox One on Tuesday, October 23, and on PlayStation 4 and PC on October 30. The B.E.T.A. can only be accessed by players who pre-ordered Fallout 76 from participating retailers.
Click to expand...


I suppose all of these requirements are for max settings at 4K ? :sneaky:
 
doublejack said:
Sorry, but you are not correct. My wife has an i5 2500k in her gaming PC. She played through fallout 4 the first time with that and a 550 Ti, granted with really low graphics settings. She played through a second time when she got upgraded to an RX 480 8gb so she could max the settings and enjoy the beauty of the game (she has a 24" 1080p display). The 2500k did awesome.
Click to expand...


My 6600k @4.5 and a highly OC'd 980Ti barely managed smooth play, although it was playable completely, at 1440p. Get near larger settlements and other areas with a lot of assets to load and it would fall on its face.
 
So much debate about Fallout 4 performance here.

A literal potato can play 90% of FO4 at 60fps but not even an i9-9900K could break 5fps in that one part of the city when you exit the Railroad hideout.
 
tunatime said:
um yes it is...a 2500k at 4.5 should be close to 60fps most of the time in fo4
Click to expand...

doublejack said:
Sorry, but you are not correct. My wife has an i5 2500k in her gaming PC. She played through fallout 4 the first time with that and a 550 Ti, granted with really low graphics settings. She played through a second time when she got upgraded to an RX 480 8gb so she could max the settings and enjoy the beauty of the game (she has a 24" 1080p display). The 2500k did awesome.
Click to expand...

both wrong. in open areas? sure it could sustain 60fps, go to big cities, lexington, diamond city, go to all surrounds of goodneighbor, financial district, boston itself and I can be 100% sure it will tank the performance in that CPU to the realm of 30 - 40fps at best if using 2400mhz+ RAM worse when start modding. (which I highly doubt). fallout 4 is one of those few rare games where RAM speed make a HUGE difference (20+FPS) and DDR3 won't simply cut for it. it was the game that forced me to upgrade from [email protected] with 2133mhz memory as it was insufficient to keep a playable fallout 4 experience with mods.
 
alxlwson said:
My 6600k @4.5 and a highly OC'd 980Ti barely managed smooth play, although it was playable completely, at 1440p. Get near larger settlements and other areas with a lot of assets to load and it would fall on its face.
Click to expand...

That is because the game is coded poorly, like most Bethesda titles. The problem is with the use of godrays & also because the engine renders the entire scenes shadows, even the ones that the player cannot see or are off camera, this becomes a problem mainly in the downtown area of the game which can severely affect framerates even on the most powerful of CPU/GPU combinations. There are mods to fix those issue though & once installed propery can totally eliminate the performance loss, which I have installed and can testify that they do fix the issue.

Install this mod and compare, <---This will fix 99% of your performance issues.
https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/15211
 
Last edited:
Krenum said:
That is because the game is coded poorly, like most Bethesda titles.
Click to expand...

Hopefully a shift to using id's engines will address this going forward...

OWRPGs/MMOs with twitch-shooter responsiveness and smoothness? Yes please!

[please know that I do not actually hold out hope of Bethesda actually doing this]
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Hopefully a shift to using id's engines will address this going forward...

OWRPGs/MMOs with twitch-shooter responsiveness and smoothness? Yes please!

[please know that I do not actually hold out hope of Bethesda actually doing this]
Click to expand...

I really hope they start using another engine, these engines they've been using built upon Gamebryo are too old. Although at this point I do find it kind of fun to root around in the .ini files, its almost as though I'm working on the game at this point & have memorized the structure. I sometimes joke that is the game within the game.

New Bethesda game out? Lets have a looksee in the .ini file and see how bad it is :p
 
Krenum said:
That is because the game is coded poorly, like most Bethesda titles. The problem is with the use of godrays & also because the engine renders the entire scenes shadows, even the ones that the player cannot see or are off camera, this becomes a problem mainly in the downtown area of the game which can severely affect framerates even on the most powerful of CPU/GPU combinations. There are mods to fix those issue though & once installed propery can totally eliminate the performance loss, which I have installed and can testify that they do fix the issue.

Install this mod and compare, <---This will fix 99% of your performance issues.
https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/15211
Click to expand...

worse mod ever for "performance fixes".. it almost force you to disable godrays if you can't just enable ultra, as it decrease dramatically the Godrays quality in order to be "playable". it reduce Godrays rim, grid and scales, so it produce terrible pixelation around character, edges and corner (worse if you play 3rd person). so, ok it may save 5fps at the expense of terrible image quality, only acceptable at ultra quality God Rays, anything lower and is better to just turn it off.

there are better mods to fix FPS as:

Insignificant object remover and Boston FPS Fix

I've been playing and modding fallout 4 basically since was possible to mod it and one of the things I care about modding is to increase image quality and realism yet still sustaining playable performance. few mods help to achieve that, those above are a very good ones.
 
Araxie said:
worse mod ever for "performance fixes".. it almost force you to disable godrays if you can't just enable ultra, as it decrease dramatically the Godrays quality in order to be "playable".
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. It allows you to enable ultra without the performance loss. The mod changes the render paths of the rays. I could not tell the difference in image quality. The pixelation you're talking about is due to Anti-Alaising. But I agree, those other two are great also.
 
Last edited:
Would love to see how these old CPUs handle Fallout 4 with 100x more AI than vanilla. That is partly why 76 seems so boring.

Wow, look, 8 ghouls on screen at once.... oh no, my console CPU is struggling to maintain 30fps.

76 feels like a console port. I hate the concept of an enemy that takes way too many bullets to kill instead of way more enemies with realistic health; just to keep performance up.

Seeing a horde of nearly 500 ghouls is terrifying, and I can't go back.
 
Smdh at more betas being pre order only now. The gold version is all but assured to be a buggy mess and now they're requiring everyone to pay to sample an even worse version of it.
 
Yeah, I might have given the game a chance if I did the beta and found it to be less terrible than I'm imagining. Limiting the beta to pre-purchase only is a flashing sign that reads "Got your money, suckers!" No thanks.
 
runudownquick said:
Smdh at more betas being pre order only now. The gold version is all but assured to be a buggy mess and now they're requiring everyone to pay to sample an even worse version of it.
Click to expand...

You can pre-order the beta on Amazon, and once you receive the beta key just cancel your preorder.

Not ideal, but it's an option.
 
alxlwson said:
My 6600k @4.5 and a highly OC'd 980Ti barely managed smooth play, although it was playable completely, at 1440p. Get near larger settlements and other areas with a lot of assets to load and it would fall on its face.
Click to expand...

I'm talking 1080p, not 1440p. Huge difference there.

Araxie said:
both wrong. in open areas? sure it could sustain 60fps, go to big cities, lexington, diamond city, go to all surrounds of goodneighbor, financial district, boston itself and I can be 100% sure it will tank the performance in that CPU to the realm of 30 - 40fps at best if using 2400mhz+ RAM worse when start modding. (which I highly doubt). fallout 4 is one of those few rare games where RAM speed make a HUGE difference (20+FPS) and DDR3 won't simply cut for it. it was the game that forced me to upgrade from [email protected] with 2133mhz memory as it was insufficient to keep a playable fallout 4 experience with mods.
Click to expand...

Nope. Maybe what you say is true at higher resolutions, but at 1080p there were no major performance problems anywhere. Like I said, she played through the game completely, so I'm not making stuff up. I can't guarantee the FPS was pegged at 60 the entire time, I doubt it was, but when it dipped it was never to the point of a perceptible issue. She plays in third person perspective and is far more of an RPG player than shooters. This could be just a difference of opinion in regard to what constitutes good performance, or maybe you lack a display with freesync / gsync.

I'm not going to get Fallout 76 for myself, but I'll pick up a copy for the wife when it goes on sale at 30% off or better. I'll come back to confirm that it runs great.
 
doublejack said:
I'm talking 1080p, not 1440p. Huge difference there.



Nope. Maybe what you say is true at higher resolutions, but at 1080p there were no major performance problems anywhere. Like I said, she played through the game completely, so I'm not making stuff up. I can't guarantee the FPS was pegged at 60 the entire time, I doubt it was, but when it dipped it was never to the point of a perceptible issue. She plays in third person perspective and is far more of an RPG player than shooters. This could be just a difference of opinion in regard to what constitutes good performance, or maybe you lack a display with freesync / gsync.
Click to expand...

As I recall, when wandering in downtown Boston (especially near the places like the Railroad base or Goodneighbor), the FPS takes a good-sized dip, unless you have fast ram (3000 or over) -- the faster, the better. This is a known and proven issue (having been covered by the gaming press numerous times, and I have personally experienced that myself), and also seems to occur regardless of what mods (or no mods) you install in Fallout 4. One of the more awkward parts of a very good (but incomplete feeling, w/o various mods) game. That's the issue that Araxie is referring to -- downtown Boston was a pain to me in my old computer with 1600 RAM, until I got my new rig w/2666 speed RAM, which helped greatly. I've played Fallout 4 on my friend's rig w/4600 RAM, and downtown Boston is nice and smooth ...
 
Shadowed said:
Would love to see how these old CPUs handle Fallout 4 with 100x more AI than vanilla. That is partly why 76 seems so boring.

Wow, look, 8 ghouls on screen at once.... oh no, my console CPU is struggling to maintain 30fps.

76 feels like a console port. I hate the concept of an enemy that takes way too many bullets to kill instead of way more enemies with realistic health; just to keep performance up.

Seeing a horde of nearly 500 ghouls is terrifying, and I can't go back.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen, 76 definitely feels like more of an attempt to capture a particular gaming market segment quickly across multiple platforms, rather than a true, fully-fleshed-out Fallout game. It's why I'm not picking it up on release (unlike FO3, NV, FO4).
 
Araxie said:
both wrong. in open areas? sure it could sustain 60fps, go to big cities, lexington, diamond city, go to all surrounds of goodneighbor, financial district, boston itself and I can be 100% sure it will tank the performance in that CPU to the realm of 30 - 40fps at best if using 2400mhz+ RAM worse when start modding. (which I highly doubt). fallout 4 is one of those few rare games where RAM speed make a HUGE difference (20+FPS) and DDR3 won't simply cut for it. it was the game that forced me to upgrade from [email protected] with 2133mhz memory as it was insufficient to keep a playable fallout 4 experience with mods.
Click to expand...

GamersNexus did a FO4 CPU benchmark in Diamond City to expose CPU bottlenecks.

fallout-4-cpu-benchmark-1080-u.png


IMO, if an i3 4130 can sustain a 53 fps average in Diamond City at 1080P Ultra, then the i5 2500K should be able to walk right past that. Can't say for certain if FO 76 will have densely populated AI areas akin to the NPC-rich areas like Diamond City, Good Neighbor, etc. as I suspect a lot of the CPU hit comes from managing AI behaviors, their routines, and animations in those areas. If there are hoards of mobs in FO 76, then I can imagine an older i5 would struggle to sustain 60 fps at all times... but it's a far cry from stating an i5 2500K would provide an unplayable experience.
 
1 thing people are missing is FO4 was VERY sensitive to memory timings and memory speed as well. I can't remember where I read it, but I do remember faster CAS latency helped FPS performance.
 
And all this only if you can get past the day one issues with the always online model. Good luck with that.
 
SPARTAN VI said:
GamersNexus did a FO4 CPU benchmark in Diamond City to expose CPU bottlenecks.

View attachment 114954

IMO, if an i3 4130 can sustain a 53 fps average in Diamond City at 1080P Ultra, then the i5 2500K should be able to walk right past that. Can't say for certain if FO 76 will have densely populated AI areas akin to the NPC-rich areas like Diamond City, Good Neighbor, etc. as I suspect a lot of the CPU hit comes from managing AI behaviors, their routines, and animations in those areas. If there are hoards of mobs in FO 76, then I can imagine an older i5 would struggle to sustain 60 fps at all times... but it's a far cry from stating an i5 2500K would provide an unplayable experience.
Click to expand...

I can't say for certain that the fps was over 50 the entire time, but it was definitely at playable fps. Also we're just talking about one particular area of a game. To condemn a game as "unplayable" because of an optimization issue in one area is some mighty spin (and I'm not accusing you of doing that). This guy did a video testing a 2500k with a GTX 1080 and mentions the problematic location in Boston.



My wife's PC has 16gb of 2133mhz memory. The cpu did not appear to bottleneck her RX 480 at all. That's really all I can say.
 
cageymaru said:
The PC system requirements for the Fallout 76 B.E.T.A. are now available and the minimum spec is pretty tame. A 64 bit processor and Windows based OS are required. Windows 7, 8, and 10 are supported. An Intel Core i5-6600k 3.5GHz or AMD Ryzen 3 1300X 3.5 GHz or equivalent CPU is necessary. An older NVIDIA GTX 780 3GB or AMD R9 285 2GB video card will allow you to play. 8GB of ram and 60GB of storage space will be necessary for the game.

The recommended system spec is as follows. Same OS restrictions as above. An Intel i7-4790k or AMD Ryzen 5 1500X will meet the recommended CPU specs, while an NVIDIA GTX 970 4GB, or AMD R9 290X 4GB video card should be plenty for hunting creatures. Again the same 8GB of ram and 60GB of storage space are necessary to play the game.

Q: WHEN DOES THE B.E.T.A. START?

The B.E.T.A. begins first on Xbox One on Tuesday, October 23, and on PlayStation 4 and PC on October 30. The B.E.T.A. can only be accessed by players who pre-ordered Fallout 76 from participating retailers.
Click to expand...

Min Requirement: i5 6600 @ 3.5ghz

Recommended: i7 4790k?

Why is the recommended two generations older than the minimum? That seems weird to me.
 
Guarana [BAWLS] said:
Min Requirement: i5 6600 @ 3.5ghz

Recommended: i7 4790k?

Why is the recommended two generations older than the minimum? That seems weird to me.
Click to expand...

High clocked 8 threads and extra 2mb cache all of which make huge differences in that kind of game.
 
The problem with the game the Fallout series is suppose to be desolate and bringing Co-op in the mix doesn't really help. If you want to evolve the series you have to stick basically to the same Mentos and Nuka Cola design which doesn't add much mystery to the game. Which is why I stick to fantasy games before anything modern or post apocalyptic just keeps the curiosity going.

Don't get me wrong it could be a good game but the overall theme of the Fallout series is depressing hopelessness which makes the game fun actually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top