The Division 2's PC System Requirements Are Now Available

[Dicehunter]

They really need to optimize their stuff, rather than suggesting otherworldly specs. The same happened with 1, for example steam areas tanked performance etc.

Having said that, alpha performance on my system was lackluster and needed serious graphical down tuning to achieve playability. It might improve with the final product, of course.

They did show the game at minimum settings and maximum settings and just like the first one there isn't that much difference so running at max settings is only really useful for screenshots IMO.

 

[Damien c]

My system will not run this at 1440p 60FPS at high

This is the game that, is going to cause me to probably switch my systems around and put my 1700x in my main machine, and look at overclocking it because the 7700K is not enough.

I will be pre-ordering this at the end of the month, because I will be playing this on day 1, difficult to say anything without breaking rules

 

[looz]

1700x will not run games better than the 7700K.

 

[AlienALX]

1700x will not run games better than the 7700K.

Depends. There were certain levels in Crysis 3 that had the FX 8320 trounce the 2500k.

If a game calls for cores and they are not there it runs like dog doo, no matter how fast those four cores are. It's like trying to run RT on hardware without Tensor/RT cores.

 

[looz]

No it doesn't depend, 7700k will not get choked like 4c/4t i5 CPUs.

 

[Damien c]

1700x will not run games better than the 7700K.

The issue is that the Snowdrop engine prefers cores over core speed, but I will be able to test it when the game releases as all I need to do is swap GPU's.

 

[TheF34RChannel]

Me and you Fear. Tearing it up in washington!

Okay, I more or less caved and will likely pick this up shortly after launch so yeah, let's tear it up!

The issue is that the Snowdrop engine prefers cores over core speed, but I will be able to test it when the game releases as all I need to do is swap GPU's.

What will you get?

 

[AlienALX]

No it doesn't depend, 7700k will not get choked like 4c/4t i5 CPUs.

HT "cores" provide about 30-35% of the grunt of a real core by all accounts.

So I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Damien c]

What will you get?

At the moment I have 2 systems.

One has a 7700k with a 1080ti, the other has a 1700x with a 1060 3Gb.

If the 1700x and 1080ti offer more fps than the 7700k and 1080ti then I will look at getting a 2700x for my main machine, and give my dad my 7700k as he needs a upgrade.

However if the 7700k and 1080ti offers more fps then I will just leave the systems as they are, and wait till AMD release the 3000 series of cpu's.

 

[Dicehunter]

1700x will not run games better than the 7700K.

While the 7700K is still a decent chip it is still only a quad core and more and more games now prefer as many cores as they can get their hands on.

I believe it was the latest BFV that showed this as well as several AC games when comparing quad cores to newer hex and octo cores, I know in The Division with my 2700X I get a much MUCH smoother experience than I did when I tested a 6700K which is basically nearly identical to a 7700K.

 

[AlienALX]

There is a small handful of games that do like more cores. It will be a long slog, but we will get there in the end.

 

[trawetSluaP]

The main thing I've noticed is the game world looks to be a lot more open a varied so I'd imagine it's gonna more more taxing on hardware.

Ultimately The Division is a fantastic looking game anyway so if it is similar that's not a bad thing imo.

 

[grec]

Battlefield has made use of 8 cores since BattleField4(Bulldozer parts held up very well), it also got Mantle (Later games used DX12 instead) to allow the API to use multiple cores effectively, a lot of games can effectively use 6-cores well nowadays thanks to the consoles and now proliferation of this setup in the sub-£200 PC space, but DX12 & Vulkan are also important parts as DX11 will always over load a single thread.