KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
UPDATE: These specifications have now been confirmed via an Ubisoft blog post. The AMD R9 290x recommended specification wasn't a mistake after all- suggesting that the game might have some optimization issues with AMD GPUs at launch.
Original story:
The Far Cry 4 PC system requirements have supposedly been spotted and unsurprisingly, they are fairly similar to that of Assassin's Creed Unity, which recommended that all players have an Nvidia GTX 680 graphics card or better. However, while GPU requirements remain fairly high, CPU requirements have been scaled back a bit.
To start off with, Far Cry 4 will take up 30GB of hard drive space, which is a bit less than the upcoming Assassin's Creed. A 64-bit OS is still required and the minimum specification requires that you have at least 4GB of RAM. The minimum CPU requirement includes an Intel Core i5-750 or an AMD Phenom II X4 995 and for graphics power you'll need at least a GTX 460 or an AMD Radeon HD5850.
The recommended requirements include 8GB of RAM, an Intel Core i5 2400S CPU or AMD's FX-8350. Just like with Assassin's Creed Unity, Ubisoft recommends at least a GTX 680 with 2GB of VRAM but the company doesn't seem to be spending much time testing AMD cards as the recommended Nvidia equivalent is the top of the line R9 290X, which is a much more powerful card.
It seems like the AMD GPU specification should be a mistake, hopefully Ubisoft provides an explanation some time before release.
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru Says: Ubisoft has officially announced the system requirements now. Comparing a GTX 680 to an R9 290x seems a bit silly, hopefully this doesn't mean that the game will run poorly on AMD hardware upon release.
High requirements. good graphics or unoptimized dogshit? Well it’s Ubisoft so we all know the answer here…
High requirements. good graphics or unoptimized dogshit? Well it’s Ubisoft so we all know the answer here…
High requirements. good graphics or unoptimized dogshit? Well it’s Ubisoft so we all know the answer here…
so costs incredibly a lot, unoptimized and not on steam? Do they want to not to sell at all?
so costs incredibly a lot, unoptimized and not on steam? Do they want to not to sell at all?
Ubisoft, the new nVidia bitch.
Ubisoft, the new nVidia bitch.
Looks like nVidia paid more than AMD this time :).
I don’t think that AMD Phenom II x4 995 exists, maybe 955
More? This time? Not just this time. Ubisoft stuff when retired will get pensions directly from Nvidia. If they change their name to Nvisoft, no one will notice.
More? This time? Not just this time. Ubisoft stuff when retired will get pensions directly from Nvidia. If they change their name to Nvisoft, no one will notice.
A 290x? That’s absolute bull. They better sort themselves out
A 290x? That’s absolute bull. They better sort themselves out
AMD MANTLE!!!!!
680/290x for “recommended” silky smooth 30fps? yeah right
I dont care, Nvidia > Radeon
I dont care, Nvidia > Radeon
Whatever you say… but: AMD > nVidia > Radeon :-p
… really?
… really?
In my book… yes ! And I don’t care if you think otherwise.
In my book… yes ! And I don’t care if you think otherwise.
uhhhhh… do you not know that Radeon IS AMD or are you trolling me?
uhhhhh… do you not know that Radeon IS AMD or are you trolling me?
Yes I know. But… do you know that nVidia is the name of a company and Radeon is the name of a product ? “are you trolling me?”
Yes I know. But… do you know that nVidia is the name of a company and Radeon is the name of a product ? “are you trolling me?”
… This conversation is stupid xD Sorry to have taken your time.
Yes, this conversation is stupid since the: “Nvidia > Radeon”
Yes, this conversation is stupid since the: “Nvidia > Radeon”
While i tried the 970 and was impressed for it’s price range. I wasn’t impressed with it’s overall performance. AMD GPUs handle DX9 much better than the new NVIDIAs. Great companies the both of them. But I would take a bullet for the either of them.
While i tried the 970 and was impressed for it’s price range. I wasn’t impressed with it’s overall performance. AMD GPUs handle DX9 much better than the new NVIDIAs. Great companies the both of them. But I would take a bullet for the either of them.
Ubisoft is stupid. While they sit there in awh companies all over the world have games running on PS4 full 1080p looking gorgeous with intense AI. BUT! Ubisoft. The problem is that they cut corners.
If money were no object (and you were fond of the color green) would you still prefer AMD? Just out of curiosity, I’m interested if people actually prefer the output of AMD or if they back it mainly because of the better pricing.
*ubishit