PC specs? (speculation)

https://help.bethesda.net/app/answers/detail/a_id/41842/~/what-are-the-system-requirements-for-rage-2-on-pc%3F

I am posting the PC specs for Rage 2 which is launching real soon.  It's described by IGN as if Doom & Just Cause had a baby.

Quote

 

The system requirements for RAGE 2 are as follows: 

 

Minimum System Requirements:
A 64-bit processor and operating system is required
OS: Windows 7, 8.1, or 10 (64-Bit versions)
Processor: Intel Core i5-3570 or AMD Ryzen 3 1300X
Memory: 8GB RAM
Graphics: Nvidia GTX 780 3GB or AMD R9 280 3GB
Storage: 50 GB available space

 

Recommended System Requirements:
A 64-bit processor and operating system is required
OS: Windows 7, 8.1, or 10 (64-Bit versions)
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770 or AMD Ryzen 5 1600X
Memory: 8GB RAM
Graphics: Nvidia GTX 1070 8GB or AMD Vega 56 8GB
Storage: 50 GB available space

 

The Doom 2016 recommended specs from Steam are:
 

Quote

 

RECOMMENDED:

OS: Windows 7/8.1/10 (64-bit versions)

Processor: Intel Core i7-3770/AMD FX-8350 or better

Memory: 8 GB RAM

Graphics: NVIDIA GTX 970 4GB/AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB or better

Storage: 55 GB available space

Additional Notes: Requires Steam activation and broadband internet connection for Multiplayer and SnapMap

 

I'm thinking the minimum specs will be:

CPU: Quad core CPU 3.5-3.7GHz

Memory: 8 GB RAM

GPU: GTX 1050 Ti/1650 (4GB VRAM)...I think 3GB VRAM GPUs should cut it since the GTX 1060 has a 3GB version.  AMD RX 470 4GB...maybe RX 460 4GB should be able to cut it and those GPUs are going for as low as $120 in some places.

Storage: 80GB+

It is all speculation but it is worth noting that Rage 2 requires 3GB VRAM so I'm thinking that applies for Doom Eternal as well.  Since it's going to run on the Switch as well (30 fps locked), the minimum specs might not be much higher than Doom 2016.  The Switch also has 4GB of RAM built in so I'm thinking 3GB VRAM minimum is just about right.

I was running Doom 2016 with a dual core Pentinum 3GHz CPU and GT 730 1GB GDDR5 GPU at like 40ish FPS with the settings turned all the way down.  Game still looked good tho so I'm thinking you might be able to get away with a GTX 750 Ti/1050 in this case but who knows?

I think the CPU is the one requirement that is going to change the least, Doom 2016 ran well on a Pentium 4 3GHz, so i'm assuming the new requirement would be a Dual-Core CPU at minimum for good framerates.

The GPU could be that though, maybe 3GB VRAM should be good enough.

80GB of available space for the game seems quite excessive to me, IMO it's not going to be much higher than 50GB.

I think you're right in that the specs will likely be not a huge jump from 2016. I picked up a 2080 TI and a 165hz monitor recently so I'm amped as fuck to see how beautifully smooth Eternal will look.

Well I have a 1050 ti and run Doom 2016 on ultra at about 120 fps, so I am just hoping Doom Eternal will play just as well on my current set up. 

dam now I'm kinda worried about my i5 3470 3.2GHz

I am guessing that it is probably close to Doom 2016 with maybe slightly higher recommendations.  If you can run Doom 2016 wthout much issue then you should be okay with Doom Eternal.

I am still in need of a 4k, 144hz monitor.  I seen one for 900 dollars now they are almost 2k.

@Zemini I'd recommend 1440p rather than 4k tbh. It's going to be a huge mission/cost to get games running at 4k at 144fps. Getting a 144/165hz with gsync at 1440p is much more viable. 1440p looks really good too.

On 4/29/2019 at 4:34 PM, -TDRR- said:

I think the CPU is the one requirement that is going to change the least, Doom 2016 ran well on a Pentium 4 3GHz, so i'm assuming the new requirement would be a Dual-Core CPU at minimum for good framerates.

  

 The GPU could be that though, maybe 3GB VRAM should be good enough.

  

80GB of available space for the game seems quite excessive to me, IMO it's not going to be much higher than 50GB.

When I replaced that Pentinum G3220 with an i5 4590, the game ran so much smoother with my GTX 1050.  The new 9th generation Intel Pentinum CPU that has the fastest clock speed (Pentinum G5620) has a clock of 4Ghz for just $86 MSRP.  No doubt that CPU would run Doom 2016 maybe even better than my i5 CPU.  That is why I really do love Direct X 11 graphics.  Even the i3 9100 cpus can turbo to 4.2 ghz and should be $122 MSRP.  I'm looking at Intel 9th gen and the upcoming Ryzen 3000 series for my new build and converting that current PC to a NAS storage of some type so less of my money goes to Comcast especially if I go above the bandwidth limit.

The GTX 1650 keeps growing on me but those leaked AMD Navi gpus are said to be based on the upcoming PS5 and even the budget RX 3060 is basically a 7nm version of the RX 580.  You might get GTX 1080 Ti level of performance for $250 from AMD as well.  The unveiling of those Navi gpus might be a few weeks away at Computex.  Those AMD gpus should work better thanks to Vulkan.  If not, those Navi gpus might force Nvidia to reduce the price of the GTX 1650-1660 Ti gpus which would be a win in my book.

I don't think I'm wrong about the 80GB+ requirement.  Doom 2016 was native 1080p and Doom Eternal is going to be native 4K which means the storage is going to go up.  It could be like Final Fantasy XV for the PC since it is native 4K unlike the consoles and requires 100GB of storage space.  The high res packs for that game adds maybe another 50-60GB so if you wanted the full package, you are looking at 150-160GB of necessary storage space for Final Fantasy XV.  I might even be understating how much storage space is necessary for Eternal as well.

On 4/30/2019 at 2:00 PM, fant0m999 said:

dam now I'm kinda worried about my i5 3470 3.2GHz

That cpu turbos to 3.6 ghz and I was running Doom on a dual core 3.0 ghz CPU at decent framerates.  I had to turn off hyperthreading on an i3-4130 so othe game runs better without hyperthreading.  I also ran that game on a 1GB VRAM GPU which had half the CUDA cores of a 1050 Ti so I think your CPU should be fine.  Eternal is coming out for the Switch so I think you are still good to go.  My CPU is just a tad bit faster at 3.7 ghz in turbo mode.  The real key is your GPU.  If you need a new one like me, just hold on until the new Navi GPUs come out.

I think keeping an eye on those Rage 2 performance videos would be a good idea because open world games require more horse power than closed world games similar to Doom.  Bethesda just mentioned that the Xbox One X and PS4 Pro will be able to run Rage 2 at 60 fps in 1080p while the older Xbox and PS4 consoles will be locked to 30 fps at 1080p.  Rage 2 and Doom Eternal are cross gen games as well so it is to be expected.

Edit: That cpu you have is very close to the recommended spec for the PC ports of PS4/XB1 games and those recommended specs should be the new minimum specs for the next gen game ports from the PS5/XB2.  I'd give that CPU a few more years before an upgrade will be necessary.

On 4/30/2019 at 2:59 PM, xvertigox said:

@Zemini I'd recommend 1440p rather than 4k tbh. It's going to be a huge mission/cost to get games running at 4k at 144fps. Getting a 144/165hz with gsync at 1440p is much more viable. 1440p looks really good too.

Agree with 1440p.  The Radeon VII gpu can push Doom 2016 4K to 120-130 fps.  Highest end Navi GPU besides the Radeon VII might be able to do the job for a decent price.

Meanwhile I'm here running Doom at 720p on 60fps and so happy about it.

People talking about running Doom on Pentium's (even the newer ones) and Dual Cores with high clock rates...what the hell? Is this 2006? I would never buy a Pentium for my main PC, no matter how high the clock rate rate is. Save up and buy a GOOD CPU. That was my mistake when i built my PC. You can't really future proof a PC but if you spend some money and you make sure the socket can support a few "higher" up ones as well, you may be good for a while. Also, what resolution and what graphics settings were you people running the game at? I doubt it was on High/Ultra at 1080p w/ 60FPS or above...

The only reason i haven't bought Doom 2016 yet (besides only having $0.05 cents in my steam account) is because i have the shitty stock AMD cooler w/stock paste on my FX-6300 and i can't work on my PC at the moment due to an injury. It's also getting pretty dusty and the paste is about 3/4 years old now so it gets quite hot with anything demanding unfortunately. I've been meaning to buy an aftermarket cooler from Newegg but like i said, working on it is just a pain for me currently.

Anyway's, I won't be running Doom Eternal at 1080p on High with an FX-6300 and a 4GB GTX-960. Maybe low but that's no fun tbh. Anything less then the native res tends to look like shit imo (unless it scales correctly). Not that i'm a graphics whore or anything, but i just feel like this game will be fairly demanding is all.

On 5/9/2019 at 3:43 AM, CyberDreams said:

People talking about running Doom on Pentium's (even the newer ones) and Dual Cores with high clock rates...what the hell? Is this 2006? I would never buy a Pentium for my main PC, no matter how high the clock rate rate is. Save up and buy a GOOD CPU. That was my mistake when i built my PC. You can't really future proof a PC but if you spend some money and you make sure the socket can support a few "higher" up ones as well, you may be good for a while. Also, what resolution and what graphics settings were you people running the game at? I doubt it was on High/Ultra at 1080p w/ 60FPS or above...

 

The only reason i haven't bought Doom 2016 yet (besides only having $0.05 cents in my steam account) is because i have the shitty stock AMD cooler w/stock paste on my FX-6300 and i can't work on my PC at the moment due to an injury. It's also getting pretty dusty and the paste is about 3/4 years old now so it gets quite hot with anything demanding unfortunately. I've been meaning to buy an aftermarket cooler from Newegg but like i said, working on it is just a pain for me currently.

 

Anyway's, I won't be running Doom Eternal at 1080p on High with an FX-6300 and a 4GB GTX-960. Maybe low but that's no fun tbh. Anything less then the native res tends to look like shit imo (unless it scales correctly). Not that i'm a graphics whore or anything, but i just feel like this game will be fairly demanding is all.

With Direct X version 11, you can pretty much run almost any PS4/XB1 port game with a dual core CPU.  With Direct X version 12 which is also in the Xbox One, you pretty much need a quad or six core CPU because it uses as many cores as there are available.  Doom 2016 is a DX11 game and Doom Eternal probably will be the same way.  I was able to run that game on a Pentinum G3220 (3.0 ghz) and Core i3-4130 which are dual core CPUs.  The 4130 has a base clock of 3.4ghz but you would need to turn off hyperthreading to make the game work at its best.

I was able to run that game in 720p low settings on my 1080p monitor and the game still looked good even at low settings.  I'm thinking the low graphics settings might be similar to the console settings especially the Xbox One.

For the next generation of consoles, we might not be able to get away with lower cpu core counts like with the PS4/XB1 generation.  Those consoles could even get beat by an i3 4130 and GTX 750 Ti combo.

This year's E3 is going to be real important since the XB2 console is to be unveiled and possibly a new Direct X engine...maybe DX13 which would be important for PC gaming on Windows.   There is also strong rumor that the next Windows 10 update will allow you to play any Xbox 1 game native on the PC.

And you know there is a demo for Doom 2016 available on Steam?  Just download that demo and see if your PC can handle that game.  Your PC's specs indicate to me that it is doable at 1080p 60fps especially the gpu since it matches the GTX 1050's bandwidth at 112 GB/s and your GPU has 1,024 CUDA cores compared to 640 in the 1050.  I think your gpu will also be able to handle Doom Eternal as well since it meets the 3-4 GB minium VRAM as well.

Someone has similar specs to you and did just fine:

On 5/8/2019 at 4:34 PM, TheRedTide said:

Meanwhile I'm here running Doom at 720p on 60fps and so happy about it.

I was able to run FFXV in 720p as well but it didn't look as nice so Doom Eternal at 720p might be not as good as Doom 2016 at 720p.

And I love gaming at 720p since I don't have to spend as much money on more expensive cpus & gpus. :)

On 4/30/2019 at 1:59 PM, xvertigox said:

@Zemini I'd recommend 1440p rather than 4k tbh. It's going to be a huge mission/cost to get games running at 4k at 144fps. Getting a 144/165hz with gsync at 1440p is much more viable. 1440p looks really good too.

But not as good as 32 inch 4k 144hz sexiness ...  I just need a fatter wallet since I am already a fool.

7 minutes ago, Zemini said:

 

But not as good as 32 inch 4k 144hz sexiness ...  I just need a fatter wallet since I am already a fool.

It'd be hard to hit 144+fps at 4k though. I'm running an i7 6700k atm and am gonna upgrade soon but I doubt it would make that much difference ? Gsync/freesync rules tho

This video shows how you could get 60 fps in Rage 2 with a GTX 1050 Ti.  Even the game in low settings still looks good much like Doom 2016.  I'm feeling better about my i5 4590 CPU + 8GB DDR3 1600 RAM after this video and I'm still thinking that I need to replace the GTX 1050 GPU since it only has 2GB VRAM.

Just took a look at ebay prices for the GTX 1050 Ti...I'd say $85-105 used right now if not lower/higher.  GTX 1650 is $150 MSRP.

AMD RX 570 is about the same price new if not cheaper used and would blow the GTX 1050 Ti & 1650 out of the water when it comes to Vulkan performance.  The rumored AMD RX 3060 4GB version is supposed to be more on par with the RX 580 and is said to be $129.99 MSRP.  Will Nvidia counter with a price cut for the GTX 1650?  Could they counter with a new GT 1030-like GPU with 768 CUDA cores which would be essentially a low power GTX 1050 Ti?

Again, all of this is pure speculation.

Going to post Rage 2 performance for the AMD Ryzen 2200G and 2400G APUs.  Pretty impressive performance and I'm planning on doing a Ryzen 3600G APU build since it will have nearly double the CUs of the 2400G...rumors are saying 20 CUs (3600g) versus the 2400G's 11 CUs.  Doom 2016 was getting 45-60 fps on the 2400G but I didn't see the same Youtuber mention Dynamic Resolution in that video.

*bump*

Any news on the PC requirements?  I'm prepared to go the PS4 Pro route due to possibly not having the $ for a new GPU.

48 minutes ago, Jalapen0 said:

Any news on the PC requirements?

No official specs have been revealed yet to my knowledge. If they had, they'd likely be up on the Steam store page, which they're not. The only thing Steam is saying at the moment is that a 64-bit OS and CPU are required.

Doom Eternal is designed to run on the XBone and Switch, so it's not going to require any higher specs than Doom 2016.

3900x and 2070 Super ready and waiting 

is rage on the same engine as doom 2016? If it isn't, throw everything out the window that you posted. different engines, different games, even if they look similar in their graphical intensity, the performance can be different given the fact that its built on an entirely different engine. IE: wolf games and doom games are more comparable than doom and rage

41 minutes ago, sleepiii said:

is rage on the same engine as doom 2016?

No, Rage 2 uses the Apex engine. 

id is great with optimization in recent years, so I'm not too worried. Playing it on my old i5 2500k, a gtx 970, etc. If it's the last hurrah for this particular rig of mine, it'll be one HELL of a hurrah.

On 10/2/2019 at 9:03 AM, Linguica said:

Doom Eternal is designed to run on the XBone and Switch, so it's not going to require any higher specs than Doom 2016.

Right.  The only question for me is the GPU VRAM.  I have a GTX 1050 2GB GPU that runs Doom very well.  And it's on a newer id Tech engine as well so it's possible the minimum specs rise a bit.  I'm guessing 4GB VRAM would be needed in this case but I ran Doom 2016 on a GT 730 1GB GDDR5 GPU so I might still be in luck.

I'm really hoping the requirements are similar to Doom 2016 because my poor Gt640 could barely handle it even after dicking around in the console.

From what i've heard id Software say in some interview that i don't remember, the engine looks better than Doom 2016 and isn't exactly the same but i'm going to assume that the minimum requirements should still be relatively "decent". I'm just hoping its not Windows 10 only (yikes!). It's not that i don't want to upgrade (well...kinda) but i just don't have the means to at the moment and i probably won't until sometime next year as i use my PC daily and i only have one.

^{Technically i have an old laptop (Dell Precision M6400) but i would hate to use it as it hasn't been updated in ages and it doesn't sit on a desk very well without the battery inside. I had to take it out since it was overheating whilst plugged in and it wasn't holding a charge anymore either (200 watt AC Adapter for this mother!).}

Might as well put my oven on for 400 Degrees °F; and throw my pc in for 30mins. 

I would assume the pc i bought for doom 2016 should be ok still

i7 6700k 4ghz

16 gb ram

GTX 980Ti

Gaming 5 Asus z170x