[YO MAma]

I do not know how exactly that utility takes to accound that you are using a laptop GPU, and a laptop CPU. !!!

According to game debate: your GPU tops at 77% on recommended settings. However your CPU scores at 90%

So:

Can i run it - Game debate

CPU: 81% 90%

GPU: 83% 77%

[Danny Blight]

umm that chip will fry and melt if you don't liquid cool it you need 240mm rad or higher buy a I7-4790k its alittle more than 9590+130$ liquid cooler but you don't have worry about pump failing and computer burning up in hour or 2 im a hardcoe amd guy but yeah thats chip is way too hot if something goes bad it burns

on gpu side i would get AMD MSi r9 390x 8gb http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127872

its destroys 970 in performance and comes close too 980 without extra cost https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31jGGOH5Wjg

[I’m my own]

We will see if the game comes out. It uses a modified Creation Engine, exactly as Skyrim do.

But with real time shadows, more detail to distant objects, physically based rendering (so photorealistic rendering), better volumetric lighting, bla bla bla....

Therefore it should be heavier, so more processing power. !!!

[candice keenan]

So, I'm really seeking for help!
Will my Laptop run at least smoothly the game?

Specs are

i7-4702HQ @2.20
Nvidia GeForce GT750M GDDR5

16 GB RAM

the gpu is really my bottleneck, i guess.. i mean, isn't it under minimum requirements?

Thanks for the answers!

p.s. the detect tool tells me the problem is the CPU, not the GPU.. really? i mean, i7 2.2 is worse than i5 2.8? I don't get it...

[Ezekiel Macallister]

It all depends on how well HT carries dual-cores. Your single-core performance beats the i5 2300 and your max turbo 2-core and 1-core speeds exceed those of the i5 2300 by .3GHz. You can look for desktop i3 benches after release to find out for sure, but my guess is leaning towards yes, though the GPU isn't going to like a lot of bandwidth intensive work ...so that's a mix of med/high and maybe FXAA.

Again ...it's educated guessing.

[Bereket Fekadu]

High at 1080p is a fair assessment imo.




Of course they arent going to test every gpu and cpu ever made, but that doesnt excuse the huge gaps in performance with the miniminum hardware. The phenom x4 945 and gtx 550ti is well below the ranks of a i5 2300 and radeon 7870 setup. It becomes a range in itself.

It would make sense to determine equivalents to the phenom and 550ti....like intels Q9300 and the radeon 5770.

Still think verdict is out on whether dual core chips can or cannot run the game. We'll see...





Gpu is boederline ok. I feel the cpu should be too. It is dualcore but with 4 threads sort of making it a wannabe quadcore. Having a true quad is always better, but your chip can already outperform a lot of amd quads.

Low settings maybe if the game doesnt tax heavily on your cpu.

Id imagine high is doable

These detect tools hardly get the rankings correct. Frequencies should only be compared between cpus in the same model line and family. They are merely playing high/low number comparisons. Theres no understanding there of architecture.

With that said, you probably get low settings at least.0.

And i still think the verdict is out whether a dual core chip can or cannot run the game. We shall see...




Gpu is boederline ok. I feel the cpu should be too. It is dualcore but with 4 threads sort of making it a wannabe quadcore. Having a true quad is always better, but your chip can already outperform a lot of amd quads.

Medium settings maybe if the game doesnt tax heavily on your cpu.

Id imagine high is doable

These detect tools oftentimes get the rankings incorrect. Frequencies should only be compared between cpus in the same model line and family. They are merely playing high/low number comparisons. Theres no understanding there of architecture. Your cpu should be fine being an i7

With that said, maybe low-medium settings due to gpu

[Elisha KIng]

Yep unfortunately those tools are not the most accurate way to compare. You are correct, it is your GPU that's below the minimum spec.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-750M.90245.0.html is weaker than desktop 550Ti (and a LOT weaker than 7870), but your laptop's http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-4702HQ-Notebook-Processor.93265.0.html is a bit better than a desktop i5-2300 processor. The developers have not elaborated on which settings correspond to the minimum spec, hopefully minimum requirements deliver at least 1080p 30fps, low/med settings or so with no AA.

[Phillip Brunyee]

Thanks for the input.

Unfortunately my options are limited since I'm customising a computer and having it put together for me. It seems that Intel processors are pretty expensive.

I've put together another prospective spec below. I've reined the CPU in a bit and spent the money I saved on a better cooler. I've also swapped the Nvidia card for the AMD one since they're the same price. I've also dropped the PSU down to 650W.

CPU:

AMD FX 8350 Black Edition (8x4.00GHz, 16MB, 64 bit)

CPU Cooler:

Corsair H55 Water Cooler (120mm fan)

RAM:

16GB Corsair 1600mhz Vengeance (2x8GB) (1600Mhz)

Graphics card:

AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB (DDR5, DX12)

Motherboard:

Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 (32GB)

PSU:

650W Corsair VS

Sound Card:

Creative SoundBlaster Audigy FX PCI-E (5.1 Channels)

[Lily]

The gaps are so huge it makes you wonder if they even bothered to do any benchmarks at all. You can almost imagine them saying:

"Well now... the FX 9590 is the top of the range chip AMD has so we'll make that the Highest recommeded chip for them, and the i7 4790 is the highest for Intel so we'll go for that. The GTX 780... well we use those so we know they work. R9 290x.. well no idea but thats the top of the range at the time of going to press so we'll just go with that I guess."

"Whats that? Benchmarks? Screw that, we'll go with what looks good on paper. Don't want to offend the AMD/Intel folks now do we?"

[Kate Schofield]

Hi Guys,

How do you think my PC will fare and on what settings while playing

The Vanilla Fallout 4

and a Heavily Modded Fallout 4

Here is my current PC Specs

Processor - Intel? Core? i5-4670K CPU @ 3.40GHz

Video Card - AMD Radeon R9 290 tri X
Memory - 16 GB
Operating System - Microsoft Windows 10 (build 10240), 64-bit

Thanks everyone, us noobs really appreciate your expertise and replying back to help us out

Thank you

[Mr. Allen]

I recently bought a i3-4160 and a gtx96. Will the CPU be able to run fallout 4? (as in it will run slow) or it won't even start? (since it only have 2 cores)

Comparing them, they look pretty similar:

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-2300-vs-Intel-Core-i3-4160

http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/409/Intel_Core_i3_i3-4160_vs_Intel_Core_i5_i5-2300.html

This is my first PC, so i don't really know if you can play a game with less than minimum CPU (in this case im scared it requires the 4 cores and it wont even start )

[Emilie M]

I'm skeptical regarding the recommended CPU requirement. In terms of what a game needs from a CPU, I don't understand there being a huge difference between various quad core processors all running at very similar frequencies.

There isn't a mainstream CPU from Sandy Bridge onward that is going to throttle a good graphics card, even two in SLI. So with that worry out of the way, in terms of the non-graphical computations needed from the CPU, I don't think you'll see a drastic difference in gameplay between say, a 2nd or 3rd gen i5 running at ~3.5GHz and a much newer 5th gen running at ~3.5GHz. And if you have a K-designated chip and can get a stable 4.0GHz, I especially don't see how this will differ from a Haswell or something in terms of video games. Let's remember that some of what differentiates CPU's are things that really don't effect games. PCI-E 2.0 vs PCI-3.0 support for instance is nearly meaningless since the bandwidth is enormous for both. The only real difference between an i5 and an i7 is hyperthreading. Will this game take advantage of it? Maybe?

I think if you have a relatively recent quad-core running at a frequency comparable to the 5th/6th gen intel's you'll be fine and not notice a big difference at all.

[Samantha Pattison]

That's what I get out of the recommended as well.

Tell them they need the highest stuff available because AMD/INTEL/NVIDIA pays us to sell their stuff.

[Melanie]

Hey there folks, guess I have been away from the forums longer than I had first thought.

Was hoping that someone might have insight on how my laptop might handle Fallout 4, and any help or insight would be appreciated.

Processor: I7-5700HQ Quad Core CPU @ 2.7 GHZ, Turboboosts reliably to about 3.5 GHZ

Video Card: Nvidia GTX 980M 4 GB

Memory: 16 GB

OS: Windows 10 (64 Bit)

Screen resolution is 1920x1080.

[Stace]

There is not a huge difference with most games, but considering the likely large number of persistent objects, scripts running on loaded actors, etc., I would not be surprised if FO4 turns out to be roughly as CPU-intensive as something like http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Grand_Theft_Auto_V_-test-2-GTA5_proz.jpg, which had lower recommended CPU spec (i5-3470 / FX-8350).

Your laptop's http://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graphics-Cards.13849.0.html?type=&sort=&deskornote=2&or=0&search=&month=&benchmark_values=&gpubenchmarks=0&professional=0&archive=0&dx=0&multiplegpus=0&showClassDescription=1&itemselect_5062=5062&itemselect_5964=5964&itemselect_3271=3271&itemselect_2593=2593&condensed=0&showCount=1&showBars=1&showPercent=1&gameselect%5B%5D=336&gameselect%5B%5D=332&gameselect%5B%5D=329&gameselect%5B%5D=316&gameselect%5B%5D=314&gameselect%5B%5D=112&gpu_fullname=1&codename=1&architecture=1&pixelshaders=1&vertexshaders=1&corespeed=1&shaderspeed=1&boostspeed=1&memoryspeed=1&memorybus=1&memorytype=1&directx=1&opengl=1&technology=1&daysold=0is faster than recommended spec desktop 780 (weaker than R9 290X, though). However, http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmark-List.2436.0.html?type=&sort=&deskornote=2&restrict_architecture=&maxTDP=&or=0&search=&month=&benchmark_values=&gpubenchmarks=0&archive=0&dx=&itemselect_6772=6772&itemselect_6829=6829&condensed=0&condensed=0&showCount=1&showBars=1&showPercent=1&3dmark06cpu=1&cinebench10_s=1&cinebench10_m=1&cb11_single=1&cb11=1&cinebench_r15_single=1&cinebench_r15_multi=1&superpi1m=1&superpi2m=1&superpi32m=1&wprime_32=1&wprime_1024=1&dhrystone=1&whetstone=1&winrar=1&x264_pass1=1&x264_pass2=1&truecrypt_aes=1&truecrypt_twofish=1&truecrypt_serpent=1&geekbench2=1&geekbench3_single=1&geekbench3_multi=1&passmark_cpu=1&sunspider=1&cpu_fullname=1&codename=1&series=1&l2cache=1&l3cache=1&fsb=1&tdp=1&mhz=1&turbo_mhz=1&cores=1&threads=1&technology=1&architecture=1&64bit=1&daysold=1, and might also suffer from CPU thermal throttling depending on how good the cooling is in whichever laptop model you have. I suppose it should run around whatever level of settings correspond to meeting the recommended spec (hopefully ~1080p med/high 30-60fps?)

[Hannah Barnard]

I don't even know what to think about the strange gap between the Nvidia and AMD graphics card requirements. I have a GTX 660, which easily outperforms the GTX 550 ti that is listed as a minimum req for Nvidia. This implies I should be in pretty good shape. But, the GTX 660 is comparable to the 7870 listed as bare minimum on the AMD side, which suggests that I may be scraping the bottom of the barrel performance-wise.

Is the game particularly unfriendly to older AMD cards or better optimized for older Nvidia ones? If so I'm probably in pretty good shape.

Are the reqs wrong? If so, which? If the listed Nvidia card is wrong then my rig may end up struggling if the actual required card is more powerful. I hope that's not the case.

On the other hand, the Radeon 7870M is more http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-7870M-vs-GeForce-GTX-550-Ti to the Nvidia 550 ti. Could they have left the 'M' off the system req listing? That would be a good thing, but the 7870M looks far too weak in certain areas.

Even knowing the reqs I'm not quite sure where my system stands with this game.

EDIT: I notice that while the 7870 tends to blow away the GTX 550 ti in most tests, the 550 severely http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-7870-vs-GeForce-GTX-550-Ti the 7870 on the 3DMark 11 test. Could it be that the older AMD cards had issues with DirectX 11?

[Suzy Santana]

What do you guys think about fallout 4's 4k resolution system requirements?

[Solène We]

Processor: Intel® Core™ i5-4670 CPU @ 3.40 GHz

Installed memory (RAM): 8 GB

Operating System: Windows 7 64-bit

Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 4GB

I'm pretty sure that I'm good for Fallout 4, but I'm unsure as to whether I need a new processor for it.

[Marina Leigh]

Pair of GTX 970's in SLI? Maybe a GTX 980 Ti? If you're already running a 4K set-up, you probably have a reasonable idea of how much extra load that high of a resolution adds to the GPU.

[Sophie Miller]

Its a new system so I really have no idea .

[Gwen]

Even if it's not the same engine, you best bet is to go to youtube and search let's say "The Witcher 3 4k setup"

The high requirements from those two games, are more or less the same.

So, see what's going on there...

The first very promising video, that makes sense, is this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2M9Pct5v3JY

System:

- Intel I7 5820K @ 4.2GHz
- Asus X99-A Motherboard
- G.SKILL Ripjaws 4 series 16GB DDR4 2666MHz
- Samsung Pro SSD
- 750HX Corsair Power Supply
- EVGA GTX 980ti SC ACX 2.0+
- Creative Sound Blaster Z

FPS: between 30-35 !!!

Judging from this, don't except higher fps on Fallout 4 with a lower system. But as i said: Almost the same recommended settings, but different engines. So...

[Soku Nyorah]

Wow, how somenone can keep up with all those questions...lol (don't have that much time)

[Assumptah George]

Ah, I see from your sig you've got two 980 Ti's. I don't imagine you'll have a problem, at least once Nvidia releases an SLI profile for Fallout 4.

Aside: With that kind of cash invested in your video cards and overall system, I would have sprung for a larger SSD, or more of them. I put a 1 TB SSD plus a 3 TB HDD in my rig. Most games go on the HDD, but I've got enough room on the SSD that it can take some of the more performance-intensive games.

[Vincent Joe]

I'm totally skeptical. Its been proven time and again with many current games that there is either no difference or a very small difference between an i5-4690k and i7-4790k in FPS. Also, an i5-4690k can almost always wipe the floor with an FX-9590 in gaming. If Bethesda doesn't screw up on compiling the code (like they did with Skyrim at launch and didn't discover for months) I'd wager I can get Ultra out of my i5-4690k & GTX 780 @ 1920x1200.

[Mark Churchman]

I have roughly the same the amount of memory on my old system and I havent even used half of it.

Im very conscientious about what I put on the pc, If I dont use it, it usually gets scrapped. So the amount of memory (for me) is enough I would say.