System requirements

[4b33r]

Hello,

Greetings,

I know,i know the game isn't even half done yet but still I think it would be a good topic of discussion.What are the system requirements of SC?I think the game would be very cpu intensive right?I mean it has to be because of all dem ships and asteroids flyin round,and what about the gpu,I am building a rig for playing SC in late 2016 and I am thinking of either putting 2 R9 270x in crossfire or a 970.But there will be new gpus by then so I will have to see,I want to know if my current choices will give me 60 fps,1080p on ultra.Also for the cpu I will be going for the new gen intel ones,my cpu budget is round 350 bucks,that should be more than enough right?

Thank you.

[Jobobee]

To run it at max, they will be crazy.

Unfortunately it's too early to say anything concrete.

[DtrollMC]

One thing is for sure; you might want a seperate SSD for Star Citizen. Loading times are pretty bad without an SSD, and the game will be ~100GB when completed.

[rentaspoon]

I would go for a 970 if I was you and an i5, I'll be updating by the end of the year and the 970 i will be getting in march at the latest so I will keep you posted.

[DtrollMC]

I would go for a 970 if I was you and an i5, I'll be updating by the end of the year and the 970 i will be getting in march at the latest so I will keep you posted.

That's gonna be a nice upgrade from the 270!

[CommanderFett]

Hello,

Greetings,

I know,i know the game isn't even half done yet but still I think it would be a good topic of discussion.What are the system requirements of SC?I think the game would be very cpu intensive right?I mean it has to be because of all dem ships and asteroids flyin round,and what about the gpu,I am building a rig for playing SC in late 2016 and I am thinking of either putting 2 R9 270x in crossfire or a 970.But there will be new gpus by then so I will have to see,I want to know if my current choices will give me 60 fps,1080p on ultra.Also for the cpu I will be going for the new gen intel ones,my cpu budget is round 350 bucks,that should be more than enough right?

Thank you.

My current rig is more than enough to run the current version at max settings.

 

For reference, I use an i7-4790k and a GTX 780, neither of them overclocked.

[rentaspoon]

That's gonna be a nice upgrade from the 270!

Yes it will, TBH graphics don't bother me and on low/medium settings it's still very pretty but I want something that is fairly smooth running on a 40" screen

[Napper198]

Yes it will, TBH graphics don't bother me and on low/medium settings it's still very pretty but I want something that is fairly smooth running on a 40" screen

 

TBH I don't think that the graphics settings change much at all since the difference from low to very high is only 3%  :lol:

 

@4b33r

My Strix 970 runs my 1200p screen on very high at 58 fps so it should be fine.

[rentaspoon]

TBH I don't think that the graphics settings change much at all since the difference from low to very high is only 3% :lol:

You notice it on a 270

[PerfectTemplar]

One thing is for sure; you might want a seperate SSD for Star Citizen. Loading times are pretty bad without an SSD, and the game will be ~100GB when completed.

No it wont. They've said the game will be not much bigger than it is now. A lot of data will be stored on their servers and assets will be more compressed (without degrading quality). Game will probably be about 65GB installed.

[DtrollMC]

No it wont. They've said the game will be not much bigger than it is now. A lot of data will be stored on their servers and assets will be more compressed (without degrading quality). Game will probably be about 65GB installed.

That's still enough to mandate an Ssd

[ZTech]

well right now an SSD makes no sense for this game, I've timed loading times on both my HDD and SSD and theres no difference, it still takes forever.

[CommanderFett]

I'll be picking up a 120gb SSD for SC when it releases the PU

[DtrollMC]

I'll be picking up a 120gb SSD for SC when it releases the PU

I'll be buying another SSD later on and will def use my current one for SC

[rentaspoon]

well right now an SSD makes no sense for this game, I've timed loading times on both my HDD and SSD and theres no difference, it still takes forever.

Actually its quicker for me by about 20 seconds but the game doesn't benefit by it anyway. It's slower than an 4690k +SSD by about 10 seconds and a few seconds then on a HDD.

But as I said the game doesn't benefit being on an SSD and strangely performance is worse on a dedicated SSD.

And TBH the load times aren't that bad it's just when the game freezes for 15 seconds I think its crashed when it hasn't

[Humbug]

atm r9 290 and geforce 780 seem to do it justice. Even 770 and 280x if You don't mind slightly lower framerates.

[CommanderFett]

atm r9 290 and geforce 780 seem to do it justice. Even 770 and 280x if You don't mind slightly lower framerates.

I think the 770 and 280x would get just fine framerates if you dialed the settings down from max. I run it at max on my 780 and I get 60 frames

[Maciek]

I think the 770 and 280x would get just fine framerates if you dialed the settings down from max. I run it at max on my 780 and I get 60 frames

 

I'm on 780Ti and the fps is good until like wave 11 when more ships come in. That's where things get worse. I have fps dips and I'm nit sure if it's the lack of vram (only 3gb) or the processor hits the limit (4770k)

[CommanderFett]

I'm on 780Ti and the fps is good until like wave 11 when more ships come in. That's where things get worse. I have fps dips and I'm nit sure if it's the lack of vram (only 3gb) or the processor hits the limit (4770k)

I didn't notice any FPS drops when I hit 11. I run a 780 and a 4790k. That may change the further I get. I also have 16gb of RAM, and its on an SSD, if any of that matters. Do you perhaps have any background programs running?

[rentaspoon]

. I have fps dips and I'm nit sure if it's the lack of vram (only 3gb) or the processor hits the limit (4770k)

It has a limit?

Fun Fact: I found out the Aurora uses 20% more of my 8350 then the mustang.

[Wauthar]

I have 60 FPS in the hangar with my R9 290 and 2500k on High graphics. I just tried it, but the VRAM used on my GPU maxes out on ~3200MB

[Napper198]

I'm on 780Ti and the fps is good until like wave 11 when more ships come in. That's where things get worse. I have fps dips and I'm nit sure if it's the lack of vram (only 3gb) or the processor hits the limit (4770k)

I didn't notice any FPS drops when I hit 11. I run a 780 and a 4790k. That may change the further I get. I also have 16gb of RAM, and its on an SSD, if any of that matters. Do you perhaps have any background programs running?

 

I actually have the same issue despite more VRAM and CPU cores but I do think too, that it is either background programs or Windows (8.1 for me)

[CommanderFett]

I actually have the same issue despite more VRAM and CPU cores but I do think too, that it is either background programs or Windows (8.1 for me)

Oh, I'm still on good old 7. I think I may have to upgrade to 10 though, if it's free.

[g-man84]

thoughts on my old i7-940 (oc'd to 3.5) and a GTX 760 (2 GB)?

 

I'm thinking medium-high settings (1080p) would hit 60 fps, but very high - ultra would probably drop me down to 30-45 fps.

[rentaspoon]

I have 60 FPS in the hangar with my R9 290 and 2500k on High graphics. I just tried it, but the VRAM used on my GPU maxes out on ~3200MB

Reference @ixi_your_face does your GPU max out your vram? Otherwise I might go for the stupid option of an 8gb R9 290... just because