Tuesday, September 10th 2013

Battlefield 4 MSR Largely Identical to Battlefield 3, RSR Interesting

Battlefield 4 minimum system requirements (MSR) lists released to the web show them to be largely identical to those of Battlefield 3, with a few changes in the GPU requirements. The RSR (recommended system requirements) list is interesting. There's no support for Windows XP, much like Battlefield 3, but contrary to rumors, Battlefield 4 doesn't mandate 64-bit platforms. It includes 32-bit executables, even if it can take advantage of over 4 GB of system- and over 3 GB of video-memory. Battlefield 4 needs at least a Windows Vista 32-bit installation, with Service Pack 2 and KB971512 update. An AMD Athlon X2 processor clocked at 2.80 GHz or Core 2 Duo 2.40 GHz processor, 4 GB of RAM (which 32-bit platforms don't fully make available anyway), and 2009-class DirectX 10 graphics cards, are part of the MSR.

Moving on to the recommended system requirements list, EA-DICE recommends 64-bit Windows 8, making us wonder why not Windows 7 64-bit, and if it has something to do with the fact that Windows 8 supports DirectX 11.1, which Windows 7 doesn't. Any six-core AMD CPU, and any Intel quad-core CPU will do. 8 GB of RAM is recommended. The developer recommends at least Radeon HD 7870 or GeForce GTX 660 graphics cards with at least 3 GB of video memory, which strangely disqualifies the Radeon HD 7870 from the RSR list, as there's no known HD 7870 variant with ≥3 GB of video memory. Hard drive space is consistent between the two lists, at 30 GB. It was 25 GB for Battlefield 3. In all, we expect Battlefield 4 to be another eye-feast, which rewards faster hardware, and perhaps even upgrading to Windows 8.

Source: The Examiner
Add your own comment

54 Comments on Battlefield 4 MSR Largely Identical to Battlefield 3, RSR Interesting

Shaitan said:
You are absolutely wrong. I had BF3 installed on a mechanical drive and I saw micro stutters. I switched to an SSD and it was much better with NO micro stutters. I only game on SSDs after seeing that! (also my rig has 8gb RAM, GTX 670, Intel 3570k, etc)
Is the stupid swap file man. I have 16GB, and Windows still needs this crap, and (some) games wont run if is disabled. I had the same issue with stuttering, then I decide to create a virtual drive of 2GB of RAM, put the swap file there and guess what? EVERYTHING is blazing fast, INCLUDING load times, no stuttering, everything is incredibly fast.
So try this. Even if the guys will say is stupid, and Windows doesn't work like that, trust me. Talking 100% from experience ;)
Posted on Reply
I find setting the page file settings to range from 512 to 1024MB is enough when you have a large amount of system memory. Still, I usually set the page file to something that isn't my SSD as the page file performs a lot of unnecessary writes on the SSD.
Posted on Reply
With 8/16GB I force mine to 2048MB. :)
Posted on Reply
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
Solidstate89 said:
You drive has jack and all to do with micro stuttering. Once the level is loaded it's located in your system RAM and your vRAM. That's why your storage medium makes exactly no difference in the running performance of your game. All it affects is load times - if that. If you don't have enough system RAM and/or vRAM for the game/level, than you run into the issue of swap. But that still doesn't affect your frame rates in any way what-so-ever. That more has to do with slowing down load times and texture pop-ins.
sure, if you are not paging/swapping then your storage media has nothing to do with game performance. however, you will see a drop in frame rate in game if you are paging/swapping as the OS offloads data to the HDD for access later.
Posted on Reply