Quick News

Need For Speed PC reccomended specs and wheel list

source

Its quite a demanding game it seems. I'm a bit worried that my rig is below 108060p high settings and I have a 1440p screen...
Minimum Requirements for 720p30 at low settings:

OS: 64-bit Windows 7 or later
Processor: Intel Core i3-4130 or equivalent with 4 hardware threads
Memory: 6GB RAM
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB, AMD Radeon HD 7850 2GB, or equivalent DX11 compatible GPU with 2GB of memory
Hard Drive: 30 GB free space
Recommended Requirements for 1080p60 at high settings:

OS: 64-bit Windows 7 or later
Processor: Intel Core i5-4690 or equivalent with 4 hardware threads
Memory: 8GB RAM
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB, AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB, or equivalent DX11 compatible GPU with 4GB of memory
Hard Drive: 30 GB free space
 
A single card of that power doesn't need more than 3GB and neither should games, GTA V runs ultra at 4k (no AA) with 3GB. And yeah the same heat but a better cooler :eek:

JR

If the standard was 32GB VRAM, games would play a lot smoother and look a lot nicer.
Maybe then GTAV wouldn't have such crappy ground/terrain textures.
 
If the standard was 32GB VRAM, games would play a lot smoother and look a lot nicer.
Maybe then GTAV wouldn't have such crappy ground/terrain textures.

There are games which look worse, run worse and use more resources. Fallout 4 immediately comes to mind. Meanwhile off the chain like Ethan Carter runs fine with 3GB.

No doubt having 32GB and storing the entire game on the VRAM would be better but in the real world, now, even Titan X's run out of power long before memory.

JR
 
A single card of that power doesn't need more than 3GB and neither should games, GTA V runs ultra at 4k (no AA) with 3GB. And yeah the same heat but a better cooler :eek:

JR

I like AA.I also play ARMA 3 which goes to 2.9+GB on the settings I use at 1440p. Why would I want to have a sweaty card that will be useless at my resolution/settings?
 
I like AA.I also play ARMA 3 which goes to 2.9+GB on the settings I use at 1440p. Why would I want to have a sweaty card that will be useless at my resolution/settings?

I said 4k :mellow:

If your life is that bad why not just get a 290? or a 390, then you can have all the VRAM and slightly less performance.

JR
 
Last edited:
I know, but unlike you I'm having vram issues at a lower resolution.

No AMD atm because bad blower coolers innit.

Bad coolers on the 290/290x yeah but the new ones are very good. Was impressed by my 390x XFX unit I had a while back, was quiet and kept it from going over 77C in games. The extra vram would help you a lot though if you are having trouble at 3GB which is a plus. I'd probably wait it out till Polaris or Pascal though. Seeing as they are not that far away and with 14/16nm finfet heat probably won't be bad with either company.
 
Bad coolers on the 290/290x yeah but the new ones are very good. Was impressed by my 390x XFX unit I had a while back, was quiet and kept it from going over 77C in games. The extra vram would help you a lot though if you are having trouble at 3GB which is a plus. I'd probably wait it out till Polaris or Pascal though. Seeing as they are not that far away and with 14/16nm finfet heat probably won't be bad with either company.

Was the 390 a blower style cooler or the normal DD card? I can't run a non blower style card in my case unless said card is low-ish TDP.

If things go well I'm going dual GPU tbh. I'm hoping the FuryX2/980x2 are going to be good cards as I think that is the next way forward for me.
 
Was the 390 a blower style cooler or the normal DD card? I can't run a non blower style card in my case unless said card is low-ish TDP.

If things go well I'm going dual GPU tbh. I'm hoping the FuryX2/980x2 are going to be good cards as I think that is the next way forward for me.

I wasn't aware they made blower style cards for the 300 series..:huh:
 
Back
Top