Bethesda has just revealed the official PC requirements for PREY. PC gamers will need at least an Intel i5-2400 or an AMD FX-8320 CPU with 8GB of RAM and an NVIDIA GTX 660 2GB or an AMD Radeon 7850 2GB graphics card.
Bethesda recommends an Intel i7-2600K or an AMD FX-8350 CPU with 16GB of RAM and an NVIDIA GTX 970 or an AMD R9 290 graphics card.
Bethesda has also unveiled the game’s PC advanced graphics settings. PC gamers will be able to adjust the quality of Object Detail, Shadow Quality, Texture Quality, Anisotropic Filtering, Anti-Aliasing, Horizontal Field of View, Screen Space Directional Occlusion and Screen Space Reflections.
PREY releases on May 5th and below you can find its full PC requirements.
PC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
Minimum
- CPU: Intel i5-2400, AMD FX-8320
- GPU: GTX 660 2GB, AMD Radeon 7850 2GB
- Memory: 8 GB
Recommended
- CPU: Intel i7-2600K, AMD FX-8350
- GPU: GTX 970 4GB, AMD R9 290 4GB
- Memory: 16 GB
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
For what 1080p 30fps CINEMATUKKKKK MUDDD ENGAGEDDD.
“with 16GB of RAM”
Dont you think you are overdoing it a bit?
Nah, man! I would even go as far as recommending 32 GB of RAM… bwahahahaha…. they can recommend anything 😀
For all those saying 16gb RAM makes sense, I’d love to see some details on the benefits of the game having all 16gb of RAM, rather than the minor excuse of “you can have more items running in the background”.
I’m talking for the game, not the OS and applications running in the background.
I’ve been watching benchmarks for multiple games that ask for 16gb RAM and in those benches, I’m not seeing huge gains that give to said requirement.
More room for the software to spread its digital schwong across, because it’s been badly coded, because “F*ck PC.”
Basically =P.
I really wish they would slap a reason why, for each game to simply state what benefits the game would get, outside of the normal “you can run more apps in the background”.
Oh my god, why do people who have no clue about what they are talking about spread misinformation.
16GB ram is just a safe requirement. Check the PREY system performance analysis. 8gb ram is just fine. PREY runs like a dream.
Please don’t tarnish a game before it even comes out by making baseless accusations that have nothing to do with the specific game at hand.
Speaking of schwong spreading…….
Agreed but 16GB of ram are not exclusively for the game, they recommend RAM for the entire system, it’s not like Prey will take all 16GB
Oh I’m aware, but 8gb should still be the norm, considering that SWBF ran fine on my setup with 8gb RAm and I was able to use a browser like Chrome in the background.
Devs need to be more precise and clear as to why you need the 16gb, especially when there is the odd case of a game actually truly benefitting from having more and faster RAM.
No, what they’re saying is “these are dev specs so we have to overkill in case people have problems”. The actual specs required are usually far lower.
This runs on Cryengine. No cryengine game has ever come close to needing 16GB of Ram to run. Thats something to back my claim up. Also, Dishonored is on a totally different engine.
Btw, this isn’t logic, it’s just industry practice. How about this, wait until the game comes out and we’ll see if it uses anywhere near 16GB of ram okay?
Has there ever actually been a CryEngine FPS-RPG before, though?
I mean, it’s fine & all to say that it’s worked great with the FPSs produced on it so far, but even so, that only means so much in regards to this specific project.
Especially considering how it’s the first time Arkane is using this engine, which they licensed from Crytek. Not to mention the known problems associated with licensing & using this tech, which means even if they did get some help from Crytek, I dare say problems are to be expected, regardless.
After all, it’s one thing to expect decent optimisation from Crytek when they’re using CryEngine, but it’s another thing entirely to expect it from a licensee “just because” Crytek has done a good job with it for the last near-10 years.
1. Presenting opinions as fact is disingenuous.
Ryse ran very well on a wide variety of systems despite being graphically superior to many other games of that year. Many other games ran well on Cryengine such as Evolve, Sniper Ghost Warrior, The Climb, etc.
I don’t know how you can claim that Cryengine itself is unoptimized while providing no evidence and then stating that as “fact”. Could you name me some specific areas where Cryengine is “horribly unoptimized”?
2. I never talked about optimization, I talked very specifically about RAM usage, which is a measurable figure.
I’ve looked up every modern Cryengine title (non-VR) and checked their RAM requirements on GameDebate, which lists both official Sys. Reqs. and “GD Adjusted Reqs” are made with the sole purpose of accounting for developer inflation of Sys Reqs.
Here are the titles I checked and their “Recommended” Level RAM requirements:
Crysis 3: 8GB
Ryse: 8GB, GD Adjusted: 6GB
Sniper Ghost Warrior 2: 8GB, GD Adjusted: 6GB
Homefront: The Revolution: 8GB
Evolve: 8GB
Titles without GD Adjusted numbers are games in which the gd adjusted RAM reqs. aren’t different from the normal requirements.
So there you have it, no Cryengine game in existence has ever used even close to 16GB of RAM.
And my bet still stands, wait till the game comes out and look at RAM usage. It won’t come near to 16GB unless gaming at above 1080p Resolution.
3. Not that you’re lying, but I heavily doubt you spoke with AMD/Nvidia that recommended requirements aren’t inflated, and even then, it’s entirely on the Dev’s to decide the system reqs. so I don’t see how speaking to GPU manufacturers adds any credibility.
As for speaking with actual developers, would you mind naming the person or studio they work for?
4. As for my industry standard practice comment, I agree that was a bit of a blanket statement but when it is practiced so widely (as exemplified by the data GD collects on users running games smoothly while having sys. specs well below the requirements) it’s kind of hard to specify all developers that do it.
Minimum system requirements:
CPU:
500 mhz processor
RAM:
96mb ram
GPU:
16mb video card
Network:
Internet Connection
Recommended peripheral: Mouse, Keyboard
Recommended system requirements:
CPU:
800 mhz processor
RAM:
128mb ram
GPU:
32mb+ video card
Network:
Internet Connection
No! It’s been like that for decades there are no words on resolution and quality presets!
They should mention it’s not that hard, also the most popular resolution few years ago was 1366×786 it keeps changing!
also it’s not always true recommenced specs for GoW4 were targeting 1440p
It’s not highly accurate but it’s far from being irrelevant!
Go and play demo on Xbox one or PS4, but remember your eyes can bleed…
– On PS4 is running in 1080p30fps no suprise here.
– Framerate drops below, but from what I see only in intense moments like cqc fight with enemies, then it was droping to around 20
– Texture poping, ofc why the hell not.
– On saving/checkpoint game catches a lag for 1-2 secs.
– Entering new room, area makes texture loads after some time
– Visuals are bad, c’mon it’s 2017, shadows looks like some from brush tool from paint.
NO MIRRORS! Every glass type in game has no reflections in 95% there is simple texture.
There are few glass type object that have a reflection, but its nothing that past gen can handle.
– Texture quality, is average, sometimes even very poor for example Helicopter from the start has bad quality, he’s glass objects from cockpit are just black texture, very low quality that you can see on close up green and purple shading ;/
– Lighting quality is awful
I know is PS4 but don’t expect anything super uber on PC
To play devil’s advocate, there have been more than a few CryEngine titles that ran like crap on consoles but had no PC performance issues (watch Digital Foundry’s videos on Lichdom Battlemage). But without a demo here, I’m going to guess it’s more down to a “console first” mentality, and we’ll have to wait months before the game runs properly, if they fix it at all that is.
I’m ok with the hardware requirements, tell me of the DRM requirements guys and gals. That’s where I will care.
Graphics are going backwards in some games but who cares, code it like something that a super computer bearly runs and slap some recommended 64GB Ram on it, don’t release a demo until weeks after launch when the game patched to alpha v0.8.1.
Also denuvo because you wouldnt want modders to fix it and optimize it.
This gen has been pretty stupid for badly optimized titles. Like, we’ve reached a point in the gen where we get clearly weak looking games that demand good hw, then the good hw can’t cut it. Then we get good looking titles that are meant to be demanding, yet they don’t demand much, some do but they require much more than what you already see.
Consoles can’t even get to that fine point and neither can PC. I’d hate if it took us another 100 years before someone out there did the job right and set the universal standard, I’d rather devs work towards that sooner rather than later. We are supposed to improve as a species, not regress.
Hey! here are some ridiculous requirements so when you run into issues, and you WILL, we can just say “Your PC is a toaster and can’t run it!” or “NOT ENOUGH MA….RAM!”(to handle leaks from the bad code) instead of acknowledge that we suck at programming and just plain don’t give a crap.
How are these requirements ridiculous?
16GB of ram for almost corridor game without open spaces. Even GTA V has little to no benefit from 16GB of ram, same for BF1.
This more looks like some excuse, rather than real hw demand of game.
Okay. So Prey, it runs on windows. Windows had its own tasks it runs using RAM. The user may be running tasks that use RAM, potentially large amounts. The 16 GB is typically a just in case measure. Its recommended you have that fir highest settings just in case the game may need whatever the required RAM amount is in addition to RAM that may or may not be in usage by various programs and/or windows. In practice 8 GB should work for most people, but in theory, 16 GB is the optimal amount. My source for this is my work in the industry the past 3 years as a technical artist.
Sure, but since when do developers factor in background tasks that &/or may not be running when they recommend system requirements, though?
You don’t exactly factor it in. Its more of just “it may happen that somebody is running AutoCAD in the background and then complain about poor performance, stick 16GB as the recommended.”
” almost corridor game without open spaces”
WRONG
Areas are nonlinear and you can go outside the station and explore.
You’re correct. This isn’t a real hw demand of the game. Which is why Prey runs like a dream on 8gb of ram and a gtx 1060.
After their Dishonored 2 performance is anyone really surprised by this.
Hmm, I wonder how accurate those requirements are. Maybe I could test it if I had a DEMO!
Wow, these are some of the laziest system requirements I’ve ever seen. No HDD space requirement or OS (though it’s probably given Win 7/8/10 x64). Between this and the lack of the PC demo, I’m predicting another Dishonored 2. Too bad, I was looking forward to this one.
Fair point. But just one minor thing. Bethesda isn’t developing it. Arkane Studios is. So Bethesda have no say over what system requirements are written.
Riddle me this. Who owns Arcane studios ?
You want to finish this quote ? “ZeniMax and Bethesda for all intents and purposes are ….”
still no mention of any dishonored DLC…
Or just pick up another stick of RAM.
I don’t understand why folks who build their own PCs elect to run at 8 GB. Even way back in 2011, while 8 GB was recommended, 16 GB (which was inexpensive) was pushed for “future proofing”. Maybe that “future” is now?
Well i certainly exceed the requirements, whether or not it leads to 60fps maxed out is another story.
– no demo for the PC version
– developed by Arkane Studios of Dishonored 2 notoriety
– surprisingly high recommended system requirements
Badly optimised console port incoming, then!
“developed by Arkane Studios of Dishonored 2 notoriety”
Diffirent studio actually
Hmm… I don’t think i’ll ever need 16gb RAM. There are no big apps running in background while i’m playing my games. I always open up my game client and close everything else that is irrelevant.
Still using GTX 970 and last year i thought that card is perfect for 1080p in next few years or so. Now it’s the 1070, then 2070 and then 3070 until all the older cards become obsolete.
Companies need to stop producing GPU like smart phones. Let the consumers save up some money in a few years before launching new line-ups in the market.
what do you mean by “PC gamers will be able to adjust the quality of Object Detail, Shadow Quality, Texture Quality, Anisotropic Filtering, Anti-Aliasing, Horizontal Field of View, Screen Space Directional Occlusion and Screen Space Reflections.” this isn’t new things. we could have done this a long ago.
I bet game willrun like crap and Bethesda will also slap Denuvo on it.
Ey, love that video. Didn’t realize Shamus was at The Escapist now! As for texture streaming, the game is running on CryEngine, so it doesn’t work the same as id Tech or VOID engines. And I can agree we haven’t completely eliminated it, but it’s much much better now. I played DOOM off a pretty mid range SSD (Crucial MX100 512GB), and the pop-in was very minor.
I think he left some years ago, idk, I haven’t visited the ES for around 4 years now.
The pop in is minor, but I’d love it if they perfected the tech on their own and fully implement it with commercial releases when we have better r/w drives.
$1000 pc just for Recommended…rip.dont even want to how how much ultra costs…lmao.
xbox scorpio cant get here soon enough..lol
It’s not funny, 16GB ram and a latest mid-range hardware to run a mediocre looking game good doesn’t say much and my statement is still standing, graphics are going backwards and system req are going up.
Next time try to defend your rights against s**t practices like what they did with D2 and their other games including this one (no pc demo, no review before launch and s**t drm) instead of defending their every move.
Again show my baseless statement in my original comment.
Okay first of all, where did you get the idea that I defend their “every move”? This is another baseless statement. I agree that D2 was a buggy mess, but I was talking specifically about PREY.
Secondly, “My statement still stands” LOL. If you think PREY is “mediocre” you need to get your eyes checked. Sure, it isn’t a photorealistic masterpiece but the art style of PREY is not meant to be super realistic. It has it’s own “oil paint” look to it.
Using the latest mid range 1060 to run the latest 2017 title is a fair comparison. I can’t fathom the mental gymnastics you must’ve done to reach the idea that a 1060 at 100fps “isn’t much”. It’s also clear that you struggle with reading comprehension because the benchmark shows that it ran at 100fps using 8GB ram and an i5. Try reading the source next time.
“Again show my baseless statement in my original comment.”
Right here: “code it like something that a super computer barely runs”.
Given that I was talking about PREY specifically, your statement holds absolutely ZERO merit if you look at PREY’s performance analysis.
“but I was talking specifically about PREY”
And i was talking about the industry as a whole. then you said blah blah Prey is well optimized so your statement is baseless.
“but the art style”
Art has nothing to do with horsepower or being demanding.
“the latest 2017 title”
Which looks likes a normal ~2012-14 title.
“Try reading the source next time”
Oh i did, read the comment section, many people have frp drops below 60.
“Right here”
Wrong, you just assumed i was talking about Pery which i was not, looks like you need to check your eyes and while at it scan that brain of yours too.
Our whole arguments are fundamentally incompatible if you’re talking about “the industry” and I’m talking about Prey. All my points about performance and art style are irrelevant if you’re talking about D2 (which by the way, doesn’t represent “the industry”).
Was I wrong to assume you were referring to Prey if you posted your OP in the comment section of a post about Prey? Why would you talk about something completely irrelevant to the game mentioned by the OP?
Secondly, you’re so full of bs. I read the comment section and there is a grand total of ONE comment saying he got drops to 55 fps AND, immediately underneath that comment, there is a link to a youtube vid of a guy with the same gpu running at 90 fps average. You’re being morally dishonest on purpose. Cut the crap. You say “many people have fps drops below 60”. Today I learned that a single person = many.
Thirdly, I don’t think you even know what the word baseless means. It means something that is not grounded in facts. Everything I said was factual. Even if I was referring to Prey and you were referring to the industry, my words would still be based on facts. The word you’re looking for is irrelevant. Again, you need to work on reading comprehension.
Lastly, you seriously need your eyes checked if you think this looks like a 2014 title. I added a comparison. Far Cry 4 (2014) vs Prey (2017)
https://s23.postimg.org/pmao7ibl7/prey.jpg
“which by the way, doesn’t represent the industry”
It is part of the industry and sadly most of AAA are doing the same.
“Why would you talk about something completely irrelevant”
It’s not irrelevant, it’s a topic about PC Requirements and my comment is related to the topic.
“90 fps average”
how and which part it was tested, it might still drop to mid 50s or below time to time.
“everything I said was factual”
lol, NO ?
“you need to work on reading comprehension”
Says the guy who is so blind and so offended by my original comment which wasn’t about only the Prey whom he loves and must defend.
“you seriously need your eyes checked if you think this looks like a 2014 title”
Yet you have to check that brain of yours, rather soon, because Crysis 3 came out in 2013 and beats both of them in technical level.
This is a topic about Prey’s system requirements. Therefore you should be talking about Prey. This isn’t that difficult.
“how and which part it was tested, it might still drop to mid 50s or below time to time.”
Jesus christ are you actively trying to be dense? It’s called a DROP because it happens very inconsistently and is not at all close to the average! You even say yourself that it happens from time to time which means infrequently! You’re literally pointing out ONE single user’s WORDS and ignoring the 2 proven (via video) benchmarks above and below that comment. The video directly underneath it has an fps drop to 67 fps a grand total of two times. How dishonest can you get?
“lol, NO?”
Tell me a single thing I said that wasn’t factual.
“Says the guy who is so blind and so offended by my original comment which wasn’t about only the Prey whom he loves and must defend.” Hahaha, you really don’t know what reading comprehension is do you? We’ve already discussed this. You’re talking about the industry in a post specifically about prey.
That’s why it’s irrelevant. And that’s why you still need to work on reading comprehension, you don’t understand the difference between relevance and facts.
“Yet you have to check that brain of yours, rather soon, because Crysis 3 came out in 2013 and beats both of them in technical level.”
For once in your life, please stop being so morally bankrupt. Everyone knows that Crysis 3 was an absolute beast of a game in terms of graphics.
You cherry picked the very best game of 2013 and compared it to a game that never tried to be a graphical masterpiece.
Do you know what a fair comparison is? Far Cry 4 was a mainstream title that wasn’t aiming to be a graphical benchmark like Crysis 3. That’s why I chose Far Cry 4 and Prey. The VAST majority of games that came out in 2012-2014 looked worse than Crysis 3.
For the love of god, stop being so disingenuous.
“Therefore you should be talking about Prey”
No, all PC game’s system requirements are related.
“ignoring”
I’m not.
“Tell me a single thing I said that wasn’t factual”
After you tell me why my original comment is wrong and i should not post baseless comments like that.
“you don’t understand the difference between relevance and facts”
What facts again ? so it runs OK and it looks dated, what a factual achievement.
“You cherry picked the very best game of 2013 and compared it to a game that never tried to be a graphical masterpiece.”
Yet you compared it with FC4 while it was graphic+performance from a 4 years old game.
“The VAST majority of games that came out in 2012-2014 looked worse than Crysis 3”
And somehow Vast Majority of them running worst than C3 while wanting more powerful hardwares, my point in my first comment.
“For the love of god, stop being so disingenuous.”
Ok mr know it all. read my first comment then your replay and stop, just stop.
“all PC game’s system requirements are related.” LOL are you serious?
“After you tell me why my original comment is wrong and i should not post baseless comments like that.”
That isn’t a matter of factuality, again, it’s a matter of relevance. We already discussed that I was talking about Prey and you were talking about an industry (which was irrelevant).
“What facts again ? so it runs OK and it looks dated, what a factual achievement.”
If 100fps is “OK” you’re mentally challenged.
“Yet you compared it with FC4 while it was graphic+performance from a 4 years old game.”
FC4 is a MUCH better example than Crysis 3
“And somehow Vast Majority of them running worst than C3 while wanting more powerful hardwares, my point in my first comment.”
That’s total BS and you know it. Again, stop blatantly lying. BioShock infinite, BF4, ME3, Metro: LL, War Thunder and soooo much more ran better than C3 even if they didn’t look as good.
Please, just stop. You’re only embarrassing yourself. Also, learn some honesty.
Indeed!
You’ve made it clear to me that you don’t understand basic english. You try to quote me as if you are refuting my points but you are matching up things that make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Stop it. This is getting embarrassing.
Ok babe, whatever makes you feel better, made a useless point to back at me but made a mistake and doubling down on that first mistake and call everything else irrelevant because reasons and throw some minor insults so you can sleep at night.
I never made a mistake. We’ve already discussed this. The fact that you brought up DH2 in the comments (which you never even explicitly cited) was just a bs cover up when you realized that Prey was optimized. Bringing up DH2 in an article about Prey was YOUR mistake. You honestly tried to justify it by saying “all pc reqs. are related” LOL. I’m done talking to idiots.
“DH2 in an article about Prey was YOUR mistak”
lol, next time try not to replay to my comments, i bring everthing i want whenever i want in any “related” article. End yourself or stop being a shill in every article about your beloved games. my point still stands as most new games needs more power but they don’t look as good as what they are asking, it’s a fact and deal with it, calling it irreverent doesn’t mean s**t it just shows how ignorant you are.
Here we go again, presenting opinions as facts. Like I said earlier, I’m done talking with idiots.
“presenting opinions as facts”
Well, does facts looks like opinions in your re*arded mind kido ?
I wouldn’t be calling other people “re*arded” when you can barely spell or put together a cohesive sentence. Toodaloo!
Still alive shill ? drink the da*n bleach son.
seriously, if you have nothing else to say just shut up and stop defending your re*arded comments everytime babe.