Friday, October 20th 2023

Alan Wake II System Requirements Released, Steep RT Requirements Due to Path Tracing

Alan Wake II by Remedy Entertainment promises to be the year's most visually intense AAA title. The publisher put out the various tiered system requirements lists that highlight just what it takes to max the game out. As with most publishers these days, the company put out separate lists for RT and non-RT experiences. The common minimum requirements across all tiers include 90 GB of SSD-based storage, Windows 10 or Windows 11, and 16 GB of main memory. At the bare minimum, you'll need a quad-core Intel Core i5-7600K or comparable processor. For all other tiers, Remedy recommends at least an AMD Ryzen 7 3700X or Intel equivalent processor (which would mean at least a Core i7-10700K), or an 8-core/16-thread processor that's as fast as the 3700X.

The bare minimum GPU requirement calls for an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 or Radeon RX 6600. With this, you can expect 1080p @ 30 FPS, and can use the "quality" setting with DLSS 2 or FSR 2. The non-RT "Medium" list, is either 1440p @ 30 FPS or 1080p @ 60 FPS. For 1440p @ 30 FPS, you'll need a GPU at least as fast as a GeForce RTX 3060 or Radeon RX 6600 XT. 1080p @ 60 FPS requires at least a GeForce RTX 3070 or Radeon RX 6700 XT. The "Ultra" non-RT preset with 4K @ 60 Hz, which is the best experience you can possibly have without ray tracing, demands at least a GeForce RTX 4070 or Radeon RX 7800 XT. Ray tracing is a whole different beast.
The "Low" ray tracing tier, which is medium raster graphics settings with low ray tracing, for 1080p @ 30 FPS, demands at least a GeForce RTX 3070 or Radeon RX 6800 XT. The "Medium" ray tracing tier, which is medium raster graphics settings with medium ray tracing and path tracing enabled, for 1080p @ 60 FPS gameplay, demands at least a GeForce RTX 4070. There's no AMD Radeon GPU with the ray tracing performance of an RTX 4070 in its price-range, so Rockstar didn't recommend an AMD option. The "High" ray tracing preset, which combines high raster graphics with high ray tracing, and path tracing; for gameplay at 4K with 60 FPS; requires a GeForce RTX 4080.
Add your own comment

157 Comments on Alan Wake II System Requirements Released, Steep RT Requirements Due to Path Tracing

#151
TechHalp
ChomiqAt least if it will run like ass with all the RT features on there will be a valid reason for it.

Nowadays even shitty Unity games opt for DLSS to cover up lack of any performance optimization and look the same as the stuff released 10 years ago.
Growing pains for the technology, in a couple generations no one will be able to tell the difference between any upscaling and native
john_Oh my. You are so happy supporting Nvidia, you don't even want to hide it. Of course you avoid giving a real answer to what I wrote.

So, you just bypass that Nvidia is pushing developers to optimize their games in a way that not only makes other cards, even older Nvidia models, look bad, but also make games look much worst visualy in anything not supporting a specific Nvidia feature. In the past it was PhysX, then Hairworks and Gameworks, then RayTracing, now Path Tracing and off course we got pretty fast in a situation where developers are unable to optimize a game and Frame generation is absolutely necessary for smooth...... 1080p gaming with an RTX 4090. This is something happening the last 15 years. When Nvidia promoted PhysX, developers "$$$forgot$$$" how to code physics effects in games and they where totally depended on PhysX. Then they stop knowing how to build their own libraries that work great everywhere, and they where totally depended on Gameworks. Then they decided that moving hair means Hairworks only. They could implement their own solution, they didn't know how. Then we had the tessellation fiasco with a full tessellated ocean under a city!!! Then we got RayTracing that was promoted as a breakthrough, but here we are in today where every tech site out there calls even DLSS 3.0 as mediocry without ray recostraction. Developers are starting forgeting how to code lighting without raytracing. Then Frame Generation is here to make RTX 3000 and below and anything non Nvidia look bad, so optimization just died.
Off course when AMD had DirectX 10.1 and Nvidia didn't, Nvidia pushed for the removal of a patch supporting DX10.1 from a specific game, because Radeon cards where getting a 20% boost in a specific area and that was bad for Nvidia of course.

Anyway, having conversation with someone who finds security and feels superior by supporting the strongest brand and playbacking their marketing messages, probably with a smile in their face, certain that the other person "must be sweating hard" is pointless. And It is long ago I was 15 years old to enjoy conversations with a 15 years old mentallity.

Have a nice day.

PS Modders don't need to offer support, so they can throw anything they want from day 1. Still you avoided the fact that if AMD really wanted to block DLSS they could lock the game on FSR libraries. Nvidia was locking the CUDA and PhysX use by disabling those in case the primary card wasn't an Nvidia one. If someone really wants to block something, they can.
At the highest end of the stack, I definitely am, because who would ever buy a 7900xtx over a 4090?

Holding path tracing back because lil timmy has to turn if off is timmy's problem. Where's FSR 3 support AMD? Only on 2 terrible games. Where's anti-lag+ AMD? Delayed. I have a 6800 in my living room that's been RMA'd twice until I got a working one. My 5700xt was garbage for like 2 years before it had a decent driver. My 7900x3d and 5800x are great!... When they boot, otherwise they cycle restarts for 30 minutes straight.

Whose fault do you think these issues are? It's mine for buying them lmao
Posted on Reply
#152
Vya Domus
TechHalpbecause who would ever buy a 7900xtx over a 4090?
You are being a troll/fanboy. 7900XTX and 4090 are no where near the same price, there is like a 600-700$ price difference between them, people always compare these cards seemingly ignoring the ludicrous price delta between them, the 7900XTX is cheaper even than the 4080 by a good amount. That alone would be a good reason for someone to pick the 7900XTX.
Posted on Reply
#153
john_
TechHalpGrowing pains for the technology, in a couple generations no one will be able to tell the difference between any upscaling and native


At the highest end of the stack, I definitely am, because who would ever buy a 7900xtx over a 4090?

Holding path tracing back because lil timmy has to turn if off is timmy's problem. Where's FSR 3 support AMD? Only on 2 terrible games. Where's anti-lag+ AMD? Delayed. I have a 6800 in my living room that's been RMA'd twice until I got a working one. My 5700xt was garbage for like 2 years before it had a decent driver. My 7900x3d and 5800x are great!... When they boot, otherwise they cycle restarts for 30 minutes straight.

Whose fault do you think these issues are? It's mine for buying them lmao
Oh my. All planets align to offer you great experiences with Nvidia cards and things go bananas when you try to use AMD hardware.
Thanks for the comedy.
Posted on Reply
#154
Solaris17
Super Dainty Moderator
Lets try and keep it on topic people thanks!
Posted on Reply
#155
AusWolf
TheoneandonlyMrKThat misses the POINT.

Dlss3.5 increase performance 500%


This shitcake is batman, Crysis all over again.

You needed physx or it looked less good.
Or the tesselation power for a hidden sea.

Now we Need an RTX 4090 to hit 1080p native.


My two finger salute for this game is infinite.


Not even in a sale is this turdburger being bought.

I hope only 4090 owners buy in at best and the dev sinks out of existence for this Shit.

Bought fools.
I'm currently on AMD hardware, but I'll buy it anyway, as I love the first game. My list of games to play is so long that by the time I actually get to play it, I'll probably be able to run it at 4K with RT on at 120 FPS. :laugh:

I don't know what's wrong with people wanting to play everything on Ultra graphics straight after release. Like there isn't any other game, or graphics setting to play at. I remember when the Witcher 2 came out, I had to play it at 900p with medium-ish graphics and I wasn't whining.
Posted on Reply
#156
sLowEnd
Vya DomusYou are being a troll/fanboy. 7900XTX and 4090 are no where near the same price, there is like a 600-700$ price difference between them, people always compare these cards seemingly ignoring the ludicrous price delta between them, the 7900XTX is cheaper even than the 4080 by a good amount. That alone would be a good reason for someone to pick the 7900XTX.
Obviously he's one of those people who thinks products should be compared based on their position in the company's product stack (e.g. Company A's highest end vs Company B's highest end), rather than on a price basis. By such logic, we should be pitting the A770 against the 7900 XTX and RTX 4090 because the A770 is Intel's best card, right? Completely reasonable. /s
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jun 12th, 2024 06:41 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts