Bethesda has revealed the system requirements for MachineGames’ upcoming remake to id Software’s classic FPS title, Wolfenstein. According to Bethesda, the following system requirements for Wolfenstein: The New Order are based on the game being a next-gen experience running at 60fps.
Wolfenstein: The New Order will require 4GB of RAM and 50GB of free HDD space, will not support 32-bit operating systems, will run on Windows 7/8 (and presumably Vista) and will require an Intel i7.
Here are the game’s system requirements:
-64-bit Windows 7/Windows 8
-Intel Core i7 or equivalent AMD
-4 GB System RAM
-50 GB free HDD space
-GeForce 460, ATI Radeon HD 6850
-High Speed Internet Connection
-Steam account and activation required
Wolfenstein: The New Order is powered by id Software’s id Tech 5, and it will be interesting to see whether the game will fully support four CPU cores or not. Is an Intel i7 required to overcome optimization issues or will this game stress even high-end systems? We’ll soon find out.
Kudos to our reader ‘John Vanitsidis’ for informing and PCGamer for spotting them!
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
Those requirements don’t make sense because putting an i7 with a mid-range 4 year old GPU is just silly anyway, unless the game is really CPU bound or they mean a 1st gen i7.
Not sure why these devs are saying i7 CPUs lately, when FX6300/i5’s are more than powerful enough to drive the latest mid-range GPU like 760/280.
Probably intel gives them a little something, so they can sell some more cpus. The desktop market isn’t doing too good.
yes. these days system requirements are more like a marketing campaign for nvidia,amd and intel.
I remember winning an i7 860 for an Intel mapping competition ~5 years ago. I think as long as its 4+4VCs or 8 core the game should run fine. Id expect this for most multi platform games released during this console generation. I think they do mean 1st gen i7.
propably some missinfromation error. There is no way xbone runs this 1080p 60 fps and you need a freaking i7
I think the i7 is just marketing crap because devs have used it a lot lately. But as for the requirements, the devs said that is what is required for 1080p 60fps I think because they said it’s what’s required for the “next-gen” experience and by that, they probably are referring to the PS4/X1.
“amd equivilant” equivilant to what? quadcore with 2ghz or 6 core with 4ghz?
Case and point this whole thing is missinformation.
Probably an 8 core such as the 8350. Besides the CPU, everything else is fine.
or propably they bullcrapping us becasue those requrments make no sense. As if this game gonna use 8 core cpus.
I just said that because that is supposed to be the equivalent.
Core i7 seems a bit much… Will probably run fine in i5’s
There is virtually no difference between an i5 and i7 in gaming and even CPU bound games there isn’t enough different to warrant the price difference. 5% difference in Skyrim max settings 1080p and that’s one of the most CPU bound games out there.
To be fair, the i7 has hyperthreading. If the engine would actually use hyperthreading, there would be a noticeable performance difference.
To be fair, I’ve seen noticeable difference only in Total War, probably because it’s one of the few games which actually requires a good processor for massive battles.
Well the i7s will get noticeably better performance than the i5s when devs start making use of 8 threads.
Hyperthreading =/= 8 cores, but yeah, you right, some of the games don’t even use 4 cores right now.
I know hyperthreading isn’t 8 cores. That’s why I said 8 threads.
Yay, you finally get what CPU bound means. Total War is another CPU bound game.
i3 is more than enough for 60 fps in Skyrim. Stop this boolsheet, please.
Yes because it’s CPU bound and an i3 has strong single thread performance. Why state the obvious?
Because it’s not CPU bound. Why state the obvious?
“This game clearly relies on CPU power”
“Skyrim doesn’t appear to be optimized for more than two threads”
“Skyrim is said to be a heavily CPU-dependent game and, as you are about to discover, this is true”
” Skyrim’s performance is CPU-bound to a ridiculous degree”
I remember you had low FPS in Whiterun. That’s why it’s CPU bound. I get it.
On a 4 year old CPU yeah. Bethesda even made about 3 patches with CPU optimisations to Skyrim.
You even counted the number of patches with CPU optimization for a game from 2011. I sense much butthurt in you.
Just shut up and admit you’re wrong, you just don’t like it. Come back when you can make a proper conversation.
There will be no proper conversation, until you heal your butthurt from Skyrim.
You said Skyrim isn’t CPU bound, I proved you wrong, it’s a fact that Skyrim is CPU bound, all the benchmarks prove it, hence why I quoted them for you. If you want to say that’s “butthurt” then let your simple mind think that.
The last time we argued, I posted you a benchmark from Solitude, which actually proved that it isn’t CPU bound. But it seems like all my proves are pointless, because we start from the beginning in each new thread.
And now you asking for a proper conversation. Kinda tired of casting my pearls.
Well, if you think what I quoted is wrong then you better email anandtech and such websites that clearly state Skyrim is CPU bound. Go read them yourself.
“While Skyrim is definitely demanding on the latest GPU’s, it’s CPU bound at this point. It seems even the fastest CPU’s cannot feed the GPU fast enough in this game. Therefore, you’re going to want a max CPU OC to squeeze the most performance out of your GPU in Skyrim. For example, TechSpot tested the game on an i7 2600K at 2Ghz and 4Ghz. They netted 44 fps at 2Ghz, but nearly doubled their performance to 81 fps when they OC’ed to 4Ghz. That’s some nice scaling!! Another surprising fact is that a stock 3960X offers 20% more performance in Skyrim versus a stock i7 2600K “
yeah just shut up and admit you are wrong, you still havent apologized for castlevania 2.
I am still waiting for him to apologize for accusing me on nonsense about castlevania 2, he wont admit he made a mistake.
50GB HDD space: using megatextures again?
Well to certain degree. of course. After all, its the same engine…
Looking back, I kinda wish they’d release an updated version of RAGE with 50gb of textures. I’ll have a huge hole in my drive when I get tired of Titanfall.
Great, now that next-gen consoles are here, expect i3 CPUs to be next to useless. *ponders upgrade*
minimum i7 is a bit of a overkill, besides newer i5’s are way more powerful than first i7’s
I’m pretty sure my 3.4ghz Q9550 and GTX 670 will suffice. Unless, for some reason the game NEEDS 4 cores and 4 virtual cores, which I doubt.
why would a single player game need high speed connection?!
Downloading updates via Steam I guess.
When they say: i7,gtx460-radeon 6850,its about minimum spec for high details. 😉
Yep I just read that the requirements are based on the “next-gen” experience from consoles.
horrible general shooter I am skipping this..
what?
lol…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEeT9Vixxf0