Was just checking for the system requirements needed to play cyberpunk so I can make sure the build I'm doing for my daughters flat mate will do what is needed. Why do they never state the resolution these requirements are aimed at as it makes a massive difference surely? If the bench mark has moved away from 1920x1080 as a standard but moved higher up to say 2560 then using a gpu that's slightly lesser then recommended would most likely work great. The recommended is a Vega 64 or 1070 and I'm planning to use a 5600XT which I think should be fine but seeing as I'm building for someone else id feel pretty silly if he couldn't play the one main game he asked the pc to be built for (he plays a lot of wow too)
I don't think CD Projekt Red have actually released requirements themselves yet. Last I saw any specs listed have been guesswork so far. It may have changed, not checked for a while.
Yeh I was just going on off of other sites requirements list. My point is still relevant though, why do they not state resolution in the requirements or are we supposed to assume the default level is 1080P.
Because 1) it's a sliding scale, and 2) it's subjective to both a) the player and b) the developers. What you consider a minimum or recommended won't be someone else's interpretation, and might not be what the developers want to consider it as either. Some people will think recommended is 1080p @ 60 FPS, others will scoff and say that's more 1440p territory. And then at what graphics settings? Ultra? Medium? So many variables and there's no standard. Also one developer might put a minimum that really is a minimum (24 FPS on Low @ the lowest resolution possible), another would want to set it at something that would look and play good. As for Cyberpunk, you have to investigate and deduce. The requirements for the demo are a 6 core 12 thread CPU, an 11GB 1080 TI, and 32GB RAM. We know that's overkill, so you could assume that a 4-core CPU will be fine. You can also look at The Witcher 3's requirements and how 'hardcore' its specs were for its time, and similarly you can look at a Steam survey or just do a poll somewhere and see what everyone's using, and figure that they won't want to keep a large chunk of the market out. IIRC half of people are on 4-core CPUs, while an equal amount are on 4GB, 6GB and 8GB GPUs, while we're only now moving into 16GB RAM rather than 8. So even if I had a 2500K, a 970 and 8GB RAM, I wouldn't expect to be shut out by the game. If I was building now for Cyberpunk, which I kinda did, I'd figure a 6c 12t CPU with 16GB RAM will be more than enough headroom. GPU, who knows, but I'd expect a 6GB+ GPU like a 1070 or second-hand 980 TI to perform well. For people who aren't building and who already have a good one I'd advise them to worry about it when it comes out and upgrade then if necessary.
Looking at the graphics so far I think they are pushing much higher than that, a 1070 may be minimum with a 6c12t CPU. They appear to be simulating a lot of pedestrian people and traffic, so that'll eat up performance.
I don't watch trailers but I know about controversies in the past. If what you're watching is going to be the final product, they're only going to show you the ultra ultra version right? A very high pedestrian density might be a luxury setting for the NASA PCs, while for the rest of us on more normal ware will still look busy and fine on 1080p, even if it drops to close to 30 FPS.
Its PC it will generally be the case that a game on a new engine won't run maxxed on most hardware, it will scale though and will have been targetted to provide a good experience for a wide audience, I would not be too concerned, if you are, hold off the build until release at which point you know what you will be targeting and no doubt all parts will be cheaper/better and he will have a superior set up. I like to play most games maxxed 4k on my main PC but when I have to use my laptop I play the same games on a much lesser spec with tweaked settings, can't say it has hampered my enjoyment at any stage, things still look good and play well on a little 1050.
Looking at the witcher 3 for design direction, the minimum its a mid range 2 generations behind and the reccomended is a mid range 1 generation. So a 2060 would be a fair bet as a recomended spec. The CPU gets more interesting as core counlds really have surged, but if we apply the same thinkingThe min would be a mid-high 2 generations behind and the recomended is a high end 1 generation behind, so you're looking at 9700k area Even back in 2015 the witcher 3 was suggesting 6GB min and 8 recomended for RAM, so I expect it'll be pushing closer to 16 now. Think 10GB min and 16GB recomended. Going by the trends for most modern games, assume it'll be arounf 70-100GB install size. Hope this helps a bit, remember its all assumptions and speculation, so we won't really know till August.
Exactly! We don't know what those specs do, so it's not really a guide. How long is a piece of string? It'd be better to watch videos showing certain specs playing Witcher 3 and how much FPS it got at what resolution and what graphics setting (ultra, high etc.), then compare it to the requirements, then use that as a guide when Cyberpunk's specs come out. Or if you want to know right now, compare it to what was common back then if you can and have an educated guess.
The minimum and recommended is a fairly established for this. Sure, to get an exact system to perform exactly right benchmarks are useful, but if you use those spec's as a yard stick you'll often be fine. Someone asking for a recommended spec and the answer of 'we don't know as its not had benchmarks yet' isn't very useful
I generally go by the rule that in order for a game to look pretty then you need better specs than those recommended.
