Battlefield 1 System Specs

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by HardOCP News, Sep 19, 2016.

  1. HardOCP News

    HardOCP News [H] News

    Messages:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1969
    The official Battlefield website has listed the minimum and recommended PC specs for Battlefield 1. Overall the "recommended" system specs look pretty beefy requiring 16GB of memory, an Intel i7-4790 and 50GB of hard drive space. Here's the complete specs (both minimum and recommended):
     
  2. bboynitrous

    bboynitrous 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,503
    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    6600k is the mininum cpu? Does the game actually use more cores or what? I just upgraded to a 6600k and now it's considered bottom of the barrel?
     
  3. blkt

    blkt Gawd

    Messages:
    666
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Yarrr, should have bought the 6700K or 4790K.
     
  4. Iching

    Iching [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,805
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    I would sell it asap and buy a real CPU.;) The game runs great on a hexa core CPU and it uses all cores. This has always been a case with EA games.
     
  5. chameleoneel

    chameleoneel 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,798
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    If the beta is any indication, the minimum CPU is overstated. I ran the beta with an i3 6100 cpu, 16gb of ram, and an overclocked 7870. 1080p, all "high" settings. 60fps average.
     
    Armenius and bboynitrous like this.
  6. Baker_God

    Baker_God [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,317
    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    I'm running a slightly faster GPU with a much more powerful CPU and got similar frames. The game definitely seems to be more GPU dependent.
     
  7. IxGOxSOLO

    IxGOxSOLO Agent of [H] Chaos

    Messages:
    3,545
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2002
    Yay. The specs work for me.
     
  8. SnowBeast

    SnowBeast [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,200
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    This is the first Battlefield game I won't be buying. Just not my thing after playing the Beta. Would really like 1942 with todays graphics. 1942 and the original Unreal were the only games that made me feel like "I have to get home from work now!!!!" and play. :D Oh well, hope you guys enjoy it.
     
    alxlwson and Kwaz like this.
  9. jbean7457

    jbean7457 Gawd

    Messages:
    588
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    I think my 3570k @ 4.4 will be fine.. just upgraded to a 1070 as well. Bring it on
     
  10. KazeoHin

    KazeoHin [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,766
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    I wonder how a 2.5Ghz 14 core will fare...
     
  11. Blista

    Blista n00b

    Messages:
    25
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2014
    I keep wondering when my i5 2500K will be out of date for gaming.
     
    Stev3FrencH, jbltecnicspro and Ur_Mom like this.
  12. Prisoner849

    Prisoner849 Gawd

    Messages:
    683
    Joined:
    May 5, 2016
    4770k here...guess it's back to Call of Minesweeper.
     
    Kwaz, Armenius and NukeDukem like this.
  13. Shintai

    Shintai [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,691
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2016
  14. nysmo

    nysmo Gawd

    Messages:
    945
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    I'm starting to think game devs have been in bed with GPU devs by making phony recommendations for a long time. BF1 ran absolutely FINE on my i7-4790k with GTX 970 and 8GB of ram on ULTRA at 1080p. Consistent 50-60fps which is totally playable. If I want to squeeze out 144fps I'd probably have to settle for medium-high, maybe tinker with some AA stuff, same for 1440p.
     
  15. htpc_user

    htpc_user [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,419
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    I was using a 955BE at stock with 8GB RAM and a 380 4GB. It ran fine for me. Now I'm wondering about these other games I've been interested in that recommend higher specs than what I have and I'm holding off on.
     
  16. M76

    M76 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,002
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Maybe the recommended specs are for 1440p? Also the 1060 is much newer and has similar performance as the 970, so no point in recommending an 970 I think.

    I believe this to be one of the more reasonable recommendations in recent times.
     
  17. mnewxcv

    mnewxcv [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,269
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Played 1600p all settings on ultra with my 780ti. So I can't imagine what's needed for 1080p on low.
     
  18. Derfman

    Derfman [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,216
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    My Geforce 780M chewed through the beta like a hot knife through butter.

    Didn't have my wife take it out on the ol'580 GTX though. I'm probably replacing that with a 1070 anyway.
     
  19. macksomerville

    macksomerville [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,970
    Joined:
    May 18, 2000
    Ditto, well overclocked to 4.4 on cpu and around 2120mhz on the 1070
     
  20. Simmonz

    Simmonz 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,506
    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Guess you should have bought an FX-8350 ;)

    or you could just assume that minimum and recommended specs are usually way off and not typically accurate like many of us.
     
  21. Bankie

    Bankie [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,507
    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Stock clocked 6600k and 4GB GTX670 and hovered around 60fps on High settings; Ultra settings gave around 45fps IIRC.
     
  22. verbatim81973

    verbatim81973 [H]Lite

    Messages:
    103
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2016
    Pretty beefy recommended specs.
     
  23. OEM

    OEM [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    19,977
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Whats amazing is, I think its the only one since 2 that I will buy. It seems that EA has finally started putting out games that actually work and launch. Although, the constant DLC and basically 2 year shelf life have me on the fence.
     
    SnowBeast likes this.
  24. killianss

    killianss [H]Lite

    Messages:
    126
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2010
    I wonder how playable my 6500 and 1070 will be
     
  25. Dwango

    Dwango Gawd

    Messages:
    682
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    I'm not sure what the person who put together these "minimums" was smoking but the beta ran fine on much, much less spec'd hardware. Aside from the glitches that everyone experienced no matter what they brought to the party that is. I honestly hope they put some work into fixing the springy rubber appendages that was all over the place in every BF1 game I played. But knowing EA it won't be and there will be a day one patch half the size of the game itself.
     
    killianss likes this.
  26. Armenius

    Armenius I Drive Myself to the [H]ospital

    Messages:
    16,826
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
  27. JDon

    JDon [H]Lite

    Messages:
    120
    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2015
    I think the "minimum" was set so high just to have an "I TOLD YOU SO!" for anyone who whines about how "bad" something looks on their i3... Also, I like "Quotes."
     
  28. Reimu

    Reimu [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,625
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    So this is telling us that it's finally time to seriously consider moving up and embrace Skylake/Kaby Lake? I've been on Sandy Bridge for so long!
     
  29. Comixbooks

    Comixbooks Ignore Me

    Messages:
    12,681
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    16 GB of Ram is starting to be the Norm for alot of X-Box to PC games so I went with 32 GB a few months back. Just like a year ago everyone was saying 8 GB is more than enough.
     
  30. Activate: AMD

    Activate: AMD [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,985
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Damn, I'm only on a 4770k. I thought when I built this rig I'd be above the minimum specs for years, but now I'm 20 short!

    These specs are pretty hilarious though, how are they going to say "minimum" is 6600k and then that recommended is a CPU thats probably slower than it (or maybe equal-ish due to HT)
     
  31. Schmave

    Schmave [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,719
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    The minimum CPU is way off. I ran the beta with a 2500K and RX 480 and it runs great for me. At max settings at 1080p I'm getting around 60 fps unless I'm looking at a huge part of the map, but then it only drops to ~50 fps. Someone was smoking something really good when they came up with those specs.
     
  32. GotNoRice

    GotNoRice [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,110
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2001
    Seems kind of silly, having Intel CPUs listed right along side much slower AMD CPUs. There are many Intel CPUs that are faster than the recommend AMD CPUs but slower than the recommended Intel CPUs. How does that work?
     
    Kwaz likes this.
  33. Reimu

    Reimu [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,625
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    If that's the case, then maybe we can look forward to Zen chips really being good in the future. I'd switch up when games really scale to multiple cores well.
     
  34. MrWrong

    MrWrong [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,364
    Joined:
    May 3, 2013
    Yeah something doesn't seems right here. I ran the beta on the rig in my sig with just fine at 1080p on high settings locked in @ 60fps. I think I had one or town brief drops otherwise I was at a constant 60fps.
     
  35. nysmo

    nysmo Gawd

    Messages:
    945
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    well then you wasted your money because 8GB is still perfectly fine lol. Especially if you have a SSD to mitigate any swapping issues that might incur with games that try to spool more than 8GB for map cache.
     
  36. Converge

    Converge [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,254
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    I averaged 50fps on medium settings, 1080p. MSI laptop GS60 ghost. Older i7 @ 2.4, 12gb ddr3, GTX 860m, installed on my SSD. Hooked up to a 144hz 24" monitor, running at 120hz. I wouldn't put much into these specs. It ran wonderfully for me given I'm running a mobile gtx860m.
     
  37. Comixbooks

    Comixbooks Ignore Me

    Messages:
    12,681
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    I had games max out at 9 gigs already so it's out there I forget what game it was I think Deus EX MD
     
  38. nysmo

    nysmo Gawd

    Messages:
    945
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Well sure they might max out at 8+ but depending upon how your system is configured it might be irrelevant. If you have an SSD chances are the engine can spool in map data without any perceptible hitching and make due with 7GB or so allocated to the game. You are taxing your harddrive in doing so but I'm just saying you may already have a system than can perform the game just fine without investing a single penny. 16GB is fine, 32 is just pointless.
     
  39. Armenius

    Armenius I Drive Myself to the [H]ospital

    Messages:
    16,826
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    640KB ought to be enough for anybody.
     
    alxlwson likes this.
  40. DPI

    DPI Nitpick Police

    Messages:
    10,955
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    Error was made in the min spec. Nothing to hyperventilate about, the game/engine is EXTREMELY well optimized, my friend played the beta fine on an i7-920 and a GTX680.
     
    jbltecnicspro likes this.