gta4 official requirements, holy crap.

The traffic slider thingy is ridiculous. Just imagine your CPU unable to cope with the traffic and you have to move the slider all the way to minimum. And the result is a complete ghost town-no pedestrians,no vehicles. That will be surely funny to do missions.

 

Its been stated that the PC version will have more traffic than the console versions. My guess is if you set the amount of traffic to the lowest setting, then it will have the same amount as the console versions at the minimum.

 

Will this run it?
Core 2 duo P9500
Geforce 9800M GTS
4GB DDR3 RAM
320GB 7200RPM HDD
Vista 64bit.

Thanks guys.

 

Hell to the yea it will run it.

Not at max but with todays games you can find settings for almost any decent computer to run it at a decent quality/performance balance...what's to worry about? I don't get it...

 

Thanks.
Alright so not max but it'll atleast run it at (or above) the quality it is on the PS3 and Xbox 360, correct?

 

Btw, it did get delayed till Dec? No more early Nov? Darn.

 

Aha great username.

 

Wonder if someone has I♥HardDrive
Sounds really wrong doesn't it?
Ha anyway back on topic.
Someone answer my question? :]

 

Ya confirmed to December 2nd. I think I saw it over at Joystiq

 

Ouch that sucks.
How bout the other question? Will that setup run it as well, or better than the consoles? (PS3/Xbox360?)

 

The console version is pretty darn enjoyable, you barely stop to say, "Hey, that graphic sucks" since everything from the story to the personalities of characters are top-notch.

It's hard to say will it run better than the consoles, or not, until someone has actually tried it. Judge for yourself, here are the XBOX360 specs, stolen from teamxbox.com:

* 500 MHz
* 10 MB embedded DRAM
* 48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader pipelines
* Unified shader architecture
* 16 gigasamples per second fillrate using 4X MSAA
* 48 billion shader operations per second
* 22.4 GB/s memory interface bus bandwidth
* 256 GB/s memory bandwidth to EDRAM
* 21.6 GB/s front-side bus

# 3 symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each
# 2 hardware threads per core; 6 hardware threads total
# 1 VMX-128 vector unit per core; 3 total
# 128 VMX-128 registers per hardware thread
# 1 MB L2 cache

* 512 MB GDDR3 RAM
* 700 MHz DDR
* Unified memory architecture

 

Yeah i barely understand how to compare those specs to the specs i listed lol.
But obviously the processor in the 360 murders the processor i listed, correct?
Hope it isn't as CPU demanding as it seems..

 

the graphics looked great on the 360 but the game lagged a lot and had a lot of glitches so hopefully the pc version fixes a lot of that

 

cool, Im golden

 

you've got the gateway with the Quadcore? cool!

 

i really dont think those are the final requirements

 

Finally a game (I like) that promises to use all 4 cores of my CPU.

 

Maybe so, assassin's creed got 3gb of ram recommended then switched to 2gb, remember?

 

The answer to your question is yes. Remember that the consoles only run the game at 1280x720 and barely 30fps. "Max settings" on the PC is well beyond what the consoles could ever dream of running.

 

Well of course I know the game will run alot better, but the question is, will the 9800M GTS graphics card run it better, or will I have to jack the settings to the point where its even worse than the consoles?

 

It will likely run better at comparable graphics settings the console version have (which are not maxed obviously), but at this point, who knows? In about a month we will not have to speculate any longer.

 

Darn, thats really high requirements, when will it coming out anyways?

 

It would come out at the 21th of November in Europe. But that isn't correct anymore, the new launchdate is 4 december.

And about the requirements: yes, they're correct

 

hmmm looks about right to me. core and core2 models have been out for a long time, any one with a semi recent PC will be fine. to me it looks like it is more CPU heavy than GPU, to me it was an utterly disgusting game on my PS3 so that doesnt suprise me. I hope they revamp the graphics for this release.

 

my mate has the PS3 and i have the 360 and i have to say the game looks nicer on the 360, we tried both on his HDTV. the graphics were a bit of a let down for me though on both, they were supposed to be really good, hopefully this new graphic improvement will give me what i wanted ^^

 

That is if you can play it at all. The requirements are pointing to desktop cards ight?

 

yeah thats true

 

yea, doubt i'd be able to play it on here, but once i get some money i am building a new desktop with a Q6600 and a 4850HD

 

The Requirements are high because of the the physics engine

 

And what will explain the 7900GT in minimum specs and the 8600GT in recommended? So a less powerful GPU can max it whereas the high end will struggle.

 

It's not that bad for desktop um k!

 

I don't think those specs are correct. They basically exclude the majority of PC gamers! What fraction of PC owners actually have quad-core CPUs or ATI 3870s? The minimum specs are much more appropriate as the recommended specs, ffs!

 

Thats some hardcore requirements.

 

Of course you know it will run better, but will your card run it better? Did I not say yes?

 

this game looks so much better on PC than on console! I wish I had a better machine to run it! With a 8600m gt, it'll probably come off looking similar to console versions =/

 

I think rockstar overstated the cpu requirements so that people play their game right... and not complain about surprising performance drops.

 

but still if thats so, they should have placed that for OPTIMAL requirements, not recommended

 

might be DX10 optimized, and then the 8600GT could pull ahead of the 7900GT

 

1) Lost planet doesnt pull ahead in DX10, actually DX10 for it is pathetic in performance.

2)assassin's creed is only better in all low with DX10, otherwise, if you try it maxed out, performance is a bit lower than Dx9, the requirements for the game are still confusing.

 

well, looks like I'ma dropping in a quad-core to my to-be 7811 or g50vt.

 

Wow, those are some incredible "requirements", I am glad that my NP9262 passes, but they are too overkill.

 

In my eyes, 'recommended' should = 'OPTIMAL'

 

Holy Christ, those settings must really kill a lot of hopes around.
Although the CPU requirements indeed do NOT make sense. A quad? For what?

 

read above, for the bloody ALL MIGHTY car explosions. lol

 

I don't know why everyone always makes a such fuss about "Recommended" settings, because what "recommended" means seems to vary from game to game so esentially dosn't mean a **** thing - I never pay any heed to settings requirements quoted by the producer, I'll usually just wait and then take a look at user (and therefore "real world") benchmarks when the game is released, and figure it out from there. "Required" settings are nearly always that of machines that are like 5 years old so they are never of any concern either (although I suppose that's a generalisation limited for top/medium tier gaming laptops; but then again if you've got and integrated / bottom end graphics solution I'm fairly sure you wouldn't even bother checking out the specs for new games, because you'll already know how they're going to run ).

 

Hey guys im planning to buy this game when it comes out: i got

Duo 2 Core T9400 @ 2.53Ghz
4GB RAM
9600m GT 512mb DDR2
320GB HD
Vista 32-bit

will that be able to run it? caz i mean Quad-core, lol

thx.

 

No, you will not be able to even load the game.

 

Not worth it imo anyway

 

Yes, your system is better than the minimum requirements. You will want to overclock your 9600M GT if you care for decent speeds at all.

 

why would you need to overclock a 9600M if an 8600 is the recommended requirement? I know its refering to an 8600 desktop card but still